Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of earthquake location parameters determined using grid search and manta ray foraging optimization

  • Research Article - Applied Geophysics
  • Published:
Acta Geophysica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study compared earthquake location estimation using grid search and manta ray foraging optimization algorithm for synthetic and real earthquakes data from Van, Turkey. Both locating methods worked well, and they achieved similar results. The horizontal coordinates (latitude and longitude) of the earthquake were obtained successfully with both methods, from the inversion of the arrival times calculated from the noisy and noise-free synthetic earthquake data. However, there was some deviation in depth parameter for the noisy data. The location parameters obtained from the inversion of the real earthquake data using grid search and manta ray foraging optimization methods were in accordance with the solutions presented in previous studies. The depth parameters for the Van earthquakes did not fully match those in the previous studies, possibly due to differences in crustal velocity models. The depth parameters obtained for both Van earthquakes using both methods performed in this study are self-consistent at around 24 km. In addition, Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency and German Research Centre seismology centres also reached depth solutions near those in this study. The grid search method has some disadvantages compared with the manta ray foraging method, as it must be applied gradually, and delays reaching a solution. The manta ray foraging method is an easy, fast way to determine the kinematic location of earthquake hypocentres.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Coordinates and other data of seismology stations can be downloaded from https://deprem.afad.gov.tr/stations. The real earthquake data and travel times used in the study can be downloaded from Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency (DEMP) https://deprem.afad.gov.tr/event-detail/277668.

References

  • Akkoyunlu MF (2019) Van gölü ve civarinin üç boyutlu hiz yapisi ve sismotektonik özellikleri. Dissertation (in Turkish), Kocaeli University

  • Asokan A (2023) A self-adaptable Manta ray optimized Gabor filter for satellite image enhancement. Earth Sci Inform. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-023-00963-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Başokur AT (2003) Inversion of linear and non-linear problems. Chamber of the geophysical engineers publications, Turkey

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben UC, Akpan AE, Enyinyi EO, Awak E (2021a) Novel technique for the interpretation of gravity anomalies over geologic structures with idealized geometries using the manta ray foraging optimization. J Asian Earth Sci X 6:100070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaesx.2021.100070

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben UC, Akpan AE, Mbonu CC, Ebong ED (2021b) Novel methodology for interpretation of magnetic anomalies due to two-dimensional dipping dikes using the manta ray foraging optimization. J Appl Geophys 192:104405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billings SD (1994) Simulated annealing for earthquake location. Geophys J Int 118:680–892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DEMP (2011) Van earthquake report. Ankara. https://www.afad.gov.tr/afet-raporu---van-depremi. Accessed 10 Oct 2022

  • Ekinci YL, Balkaya C, Göktürkler G (2019) Parameter estimations from gravity and magnetic anomalies due to deep-seated faults: differential evolution versus particle swarm optimization. Turk J Earth Sci 28(6):860–881

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekinci S, Izci D, Hekimoğlu B (2021) Optimal FOPID speed control of DC motor via opposition-based hybrid manta ray foraging optimization and simulated annealing algorithm. Arab J Sci Eng 46:1395–1409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elaziz MA, Hosny KM, Salah A, Darwish MM, Lu S, Sahlol AT (2020) New machine learning method for image-based diagnosis of COVID-19. PLoS ONE 15:e0235187

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gökalp H (2021) Determination of locations of local and regional earthquakes by grid search methods. Pamukkale Univ J Eng Sci 27:393–409. https://doi.org/10.5505/pajes.2020.69922

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallo M, Oprsal I, Asano K, Gallovic F (2019) Seismotectonics of the 2018 Northern Osaka M6.1 earthquake and its aftershocks: joint movements on strike-slip and reverse faults in inland Japan. Earth Planets Space 71:34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hemeida MG, Ibrahim AA, Mohamed AAA, Alkhalaf S, El-Dine AMB (2021) Optimal allocation of distributed generators DG based Manta ray foraging optimization algorithm (MRFO). Ain Shams Eng J 12:609–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irmak TS, Dogan B, Karakaş A (2012) Source mechanism of the 23 October, 2011, Van (Turkey) earthquake (Mw = 7.1) and aftershocks with its tectonic implications. Earth Planets Space 64:991–1003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karasözen E, Karasözen B (2020) Earthquake location methods. Int J Geomath 11:13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13137-020-00149-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Y, Chegn CH, Toksöz MN (1998) Seismic monitoring of the growth of a hydraulic fracture zone at Fenton Hill, New Mexico. Geophys 63:120–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moro M, Cannelli V, Chini M et al (2014) The October 23, 2011, Van (Turkey) earthquake and its relationship with neighbouring structures. Sci Rep 4:3959. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep03959

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Özyalın Ş (2022a) Determination of the location information of the Sisam/Samos island earthquake by particle swarm optimization method. DEUFMD 24(71):613–630. https://doi.org/10.21205/deufmd.2022247125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Özyalın Ş (2022b) Determining the epicenter of an earthquake with particle swarm optimization: ayvacik earthquake example. Turk J Earthq Res 4(1):1–25. https://doi.org/10.46464/tdad.1033302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pınar A, Honkura Y, Kuge K, Matsushima M, Sezgin N, Yilmazer M, Öğütçü Z (2007) Source mechanism of the 2000 November 15 Lake Van earthquake (Mw= 5.6) in Eastern Turkey and its seismotectonic implications. Geophys J Int 170(2):749–763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodi W, Toksöz MN (2000) Grid-search techniques for seismic event location, In: Proceedings, 22nd Annual DoD/DOE Seismic Research Symposium, New Orleans.

  • Růžek B, Kvasnička M (2001) Differential evolution algorithm in the earthquake hypocenter location. Pure Appl Geophys 158:667–693. https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00001199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sambridge M, Gallagher K (1993) Earthquake hypocenter location using genetic algorithm. Bull Seismol Soc Am 83:1467–1491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sambridge MS, Kennett BLN (1986) A novel method for hypocentre location. Geophys J R Astr Soc 87:679–697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selem SI, Hasanien HM, El-Fergany AA (2020) parameters extraction of PEMFC’s model using manta rays foraging optimizer. Int J Energy Res 44:4629–4640. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.5244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tunçel A, Özyalın Ş (2022) Determination of earthquake location parameters by using manta ray foraging optimization. In: DEU International symposium series on graduate researches-2022 GeoScience December 8–9 Izmir-TÜRKİYE, pp 322–332

  • Turgut OE (2021) A novel chaotic manta-ray foraging optimization algorithm for thermo-economic design optimization of an air-fin cooler. SN Appl Sci 3:3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-04013-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao W, Zhang Z, Wang L (2020) Manta ray foraging optimization: An effective bio-inspired optimizer for engineering applications. Eng App Artif Intell 87:103300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2019.103300

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The comments and suggestions raised by associate editor and two anonymous referees improved the early version of the manuscript considerably. The author thanks Dr. Şenol Özyalın from Dokuz Eylul University, Turkey, for his comments and suggestions. The author also thanks Dr. Weiguo Zhao for the MRFO code and thanks Dr. Miroslav Hallo for the GS code being used in this study. The MRFO and GS algorithms were implemented using the MATLAB®, the software for the numerical computation (http://www.mathworks.com/).

Funding

This paper does not require financial support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geophysical Engineering, Engineering Faculty, Dokuz Eylul University, 35160, Izmir, Turkey

    Aykut Tunçel

Authors
  1. Aykut Tunçel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Author 1 contributed to conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, visualisation, writing, and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aykut Tunçel.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author does not have any conflict of interest.

Additional information

Edited by Prof. Gaetano Festa (ASSOCIATE EDITOR) / Prof. Gabriela Fernández Viejo (CO-EDITOR-IN-CHIEF).

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tunçel, A. Comparison of earthquake location parameters determined using grid search and manta ray foraging optimization. Acta Geophys. 72, 2581–2596 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11600-024-01359-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11600-024-01359-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation