EGU24-9728, updated on 08 Mar 2024
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-9728
EGU General Assembly 2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Ground motion prediction using Physics-Informed Symbolic Learning (PISL)

Xianwei Liu1, Su Chen2, Lei Fu1, Xiaojun Li2, and Fabrice Cotton3,4
Xianwei Liu et al.
  • 1Institute of Geophysics, China Earthquake Administration, Laboratory of Strong-Motion Seismology, Beijing, China (liuxianwei97@163.com)
  • 2Key Laboratory of Urban Security and Disaster Engineering of the Ministry of Education, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing, China
  • 3Helmholtz Centre Potsdam, GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Potsdam, Germany
  • 4Institute of Geosciences, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany

Ground Motion Models (GMM) are an essential component in seismic hazard analysis. In recent years, Machine Learning (ML) methods have made significant progress in advancing GMM research. However, their effectiveness is hindered by certain limitations. Firstly, some ML methods, such as neural networks, lack interpretability, which poses challenges for researchers and engineers. Secondly, these methods may have limited extrapolation capabilities and may struggle to accurately capture data distribution characteristics when predicting scenarios beyond the scope of the training data. To address these shortcomings, we propose a physics-informed symbolic learning (PISL) approach for constructing GMMs. Symbolic learning extracts an interpretable expression from data using sparse regression. To tackle sparse data issues in the near-field of large earthquakes, we have introduced a near-field saturation factor into the model. This factor contains physics information and guides the model to accurately capture near-field saturation properties even with limited data. We used the NGA-West2 database to develop GMMs for Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA), Peak Ground Velocity (PGV), and Pseudo-Spectral Acceleration (PSA) within the period range of 0.01s-10s. The study conducted comparative analyses using Mw-scaling, RJB-scaling, and VS30-scaling cases with empirical regression models. Model stability was assessed through residual calculations and standard deviation analysis. The results indicate that our model predictions are comparable to those of classical empirical models, with no significant differences in residual distribution and standard deviations. The extrapolation ability of the symbolic learning approach was validated using seismic events outside the training data, including the Wenchuan earthquake and Turkey earthquake. In conclusion, the method described above integrates physical knowledge and data-driven approaches, simplifying the equations while achieving similar results. Symbolic learning methods then provide a new perspective for the application of ML in engineering seismology.

How to cite: Liu, X., Chen, S., Fu, L., Li, X., and Cotton, F.: Ground motion prediction using Physics-Informed Symbolic Learning (PISL), EGU General Assembly 2024, Vienna, Austria, 14–19 Apr 2024, EGU24-9728, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-9728, 2024.