Tectonic faults fail in a spectrum of modes, ranging from earthquakes to slow slip events. The physics of fast earthquakes are well described by stick–slip friction and elastodynamic rupture; however, slow earthquakes are poorly understood. Key questions remain about how ruptures propagate quasi-dynamically, whether they obey different scaling laws from ordinary earthquakes and whether a single fault can host multiple slip modes. We report on laboratory earthquakes and show that both slow and fast slip modes are preceded by a cascade of micro-failure events that radiate elastic energy in a manner that foretells catastrophic failure. Using machine learning, we find that acoustic emissions generated during shear of quartz fault gouge under normal stress of 1–10 MPa predict the timing and duration of laboratory earthquakes. Laboratory slow earthquakes reach peak slip velocities of the order of 1 × 10−4 m s−1 and do not radiate high-frequency elastic energy, consistent with tectonic slow slip. Acoustic signals generated in the early stages of impending fast laboratory earthquakes are systematically larger than those for slow slip events. Here, we show that a broad range of stick–slip and creep–slip modes of failure can be predicted and share common mechanisms, which suggests that catastrophic earthquake failure may be preceded by an organized, potentially forecastable, set of processes.
Your institute does not have access to this article
Open Access articles citing this article.
Nature Communications Open Access 16 December 2021
Pure and Applied Geophysics Open Access 16 November 2021
Scientific Reports Open Access 27 October 2020
Subscribe to Nature+
Get immediate online access to the entire Nature family of 50+ journals
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $8.25 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
The data are available from the Penn State Rock Mechanics laboratory (www3.geosc.psu.edu/~cjm38/).
Ide, S., Beroza, G. C., Shelly, D. R. & Uchide, T. A scaling law for slow earthquakes. Nature 447, 73–76 (2007).
Peng, Z. & Gomberg, J. An integrated perspective of the continuum between earthquakes and slow-slip phenomena. Nat. Geosci. 3, 599–607 (2010).
Rowe, C. D. & Griffith, W. A. Do faults preserve a record of seismic slip: a second opinion. J. Struct. Geol. 78, 1–26 (2015).
Shelly, D. R. Complexity of the deep San Andreas fault zone defined by cascading tremor. Nat. Geosci. 8, 145–151 (2015).
Ide, S. Characteristics of slow earthquakes in the very low frequency band: application to the Cascadia subduction zone. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 121, 5942–5952 (2016).
Wallace, L. M. et al. Large-scale dynamic triggering of shallow slow slip enhanced by overlying sedimentary wedge. Nat. Geosci. 10, 765–770 (2017).
Frank, W. B., Rousset, B., Lasserre, C. & Campillo, M. Revealing the cluster of slow transients behind a large slow slip event. Sci. Adv. 4 (2018).
Brace, W. F. & Byerlee, J. D. Stick–slip as a mechanism for earthquakes. Science 153, 990–992 (1966).
Scholz, C. H. The Mechanics of Earthquakes and Faulting (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2002).
Veedu, D. M. & Barbot, S. The Parkfield tremors reveal slow and fast ruptures on the same asperity. Nature 532, 361–365 (2016).
Obara, K. & Kato, A. Connecting slow earthquakes to huge earthquakes. Science 353, 253–257 (2016).
Radiguet, M. et al. Triggering of the 2014 M w7.3 Papanoa earthquake by a slow slip event in Guerrero, Mexico. Nat. Geosci. 9, 829–833 (2016).
Svetlizky, I., Bayart, E., Cohen, G. & Fineberg, J. Frictional resistance within the wake of frictional rupture fronts. Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 234301 (2017).
Kato, A. et al. Propagation of slow slip leading up to the 2011 M w9.0 Tohoku-Oki earthquake. Science 335, 705–708 (2012).
Gomberg, J., Wech, A., Creager, K., Obara, K. & Agnew, D. Reconsidering earthquake scaling. Geophys. Res. Lett. 43, 6243–6251 (2016).
Rouet-Leduc, B. et al. Machine learning predicts laboratory earthquakes. Geophys. Res. Lett. 44, 9276–9282 (2017).
Rouet-Leduc, B. et al. Estimating fault friction from seismic signals in the laboratory. Geophys. Res. Lett. 45, 1321–1329 (2018).
Marone, C. Laboratory-derived friction laws and their application to seismic faulting. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 26, 643–696 (1998).
Johnson, P. A. et al. Acoustic emission and microslip precursors to stick–slip failure in sheared granular material. Geophys. Res. Lett. 40, 5627–5631 (2013).
Kaproth, B. M. & Marone, C. Slow earthquakes, preseismic velocity changes, and the origin of slow frictional stick–slip. Science 341, 1229–1232 (2013).
Leeman, J., Saffer, D., Scuderi, M. & Marone, C. Laboratory observations of slow earthquakes and the spectrum of tectonic fault slip modes. Nat. Commun. 7, 11104 (2016).
Scuderi, M., Marone, C., Tinti, E., Di Stefano, G. & Collettini, C. Precursory changes in seismic velocity for the spectrum of earthquake failure modes. Nat. Geosci. 9, 695–700 (2016).
Leeman, J. R., Marone, C. & Saffer, D. M. Frictional mechanics of slow earthquakes. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 123, 7931–7949 (2018).
Rivière, J., Lv, Z., Johnson, P. & Marone, C. Evolution of b-value during the seismic cycle: insights from laboratory experiments on simulated faults. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 482, 407–413 (2018).
Friedman, J. et al. Additive logistic regression: a statistical view of boosting (with discussion and a rejoinder by the authors). Ann. Stat. 28, 337–407 (2000).
Rouet-Leduc, B., Hulbert, C. & Johnson, P. A. Constant chatter of the Cascadia megathrust revealed by machine learning. Nat. Geosci. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0274-6 (2018).
Karner, S. L. & Marone, C. The effect of shear load on frictional healing in simulated fault gouge. Geophys. Res. Lett. 25, 4561–4564 (1998).
Scott, D. R., Marone, C. J. & Sammis, C. G. The apparent friction of granular fault gouge in sheared layers. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 99, 7231–7246 (1994).
We thank Institutional Support (LDRD) and DOE Fossil Energy for funding the work at Los Alamos, and the National Science Foundation and the LANL-CSES program for funding the work at Penn State. We thank J. Gomberg, A. Delorey, I. McBrearty, R. Guyer, C. Lee and J. Leeman for discussions and comments.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Hulbert, C., Rouet-Leduc, B., Johnson, P.A. et al. Similarity of fast and slow earthquakes illuminated by machine learning. Nature Geosci 12, 69–74 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0272-8
Journal of Mountain Science (2022)
Pure and Applied Geophysics (2022)
Application of machine-learning algorithms for tephrochronology: a case study of Plio-Quaternary volcanic fields in the South Aegean Active Volcanic Arc
Earth Science Informatics (2022)
Nature Communications (2021)
Scientific Reports (2020)