Advertisement

A Bayesian multiple changepoint model for marked poisson processes with applications to deep earthquakes

  • Lu ShaochuanEmail author
Original Paper
  • 66 Downloads

Abstract

A multiple changepoint model for marked Poisson process is formulated as a continuous time hidden Markov model, which is an extension of Chib’s multiple changepoint models (J Econ 86:221–241, 1998). The inference on the locations of changepoints and other model parameters is based on a two-block Gibbs sampling scheme. We suggest a continuous time version of forward-filtering backward-sampling algorithm for simulating the full trajectories of the latent Markov chain without utilizing the uniformization method. To retrieve the optimal posterior path of the latent Markov chain, i.e. the maximum a posteriori estimation of changepoint locations, a continuous-time version of Viterbi algorithm (CT-Viterbi) is proposed. The set of changepoint locations is obtainable either from the CT-Viterbi algorithm or the posterior samples of the latent Markov chain. The number of changepoints is determined according to a modified BIC criterion tailored particularly for the multiple changepoint problems of a marked Poisson process. We then perform a simulation study to demonstrate the methods. The methods are applied to investigate the temporal variabilities of seismicity rates and the magnitude-frequency distributions of medium size deep earthquakes in New Zealand.

Keywords

Multiple changepoint models Marked temporal point process Continuous-time forward filtering backward sampling Continuous-time Viterbi algorithms Deep earthquakes b-Values 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Two referees’ suggestions are acknowledged.

References

  1. Barry D, Hartigan JA (1992) Product partition models for change point problems. Ann Stat 20:260–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bebbington MS (2007) Identifying volcanic regimes using Hidden Markov Models. Geophys J Int 171:921–942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chib S (1998) Estimation and comparison of multiple change-point models. J Econ 86:221–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Daley DJ, Vere-Jones D (2003) An introduction to the theory of point processes. Elementary theory and Methods, vol 1. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Elliott RJ, Siu TK, Yang H (2007) Insurance claims modulated by a hidden marked point process. Am Control Confer 2007:390–395Google Scholar
  6. Fearnhead P (2006) Exact and efficient bayesian inference for multiple changepoint problems. Stat Comput 16:203–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fearnhead P, Sherlock C (2006) An exact Gibbs sampler for the Markov-modulated Poisson process. J R Stat Soc B 68(5):767–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Frick K, Munk A, Sieling H (2014) Multiscale change point inference. J R Stat Soc B 76(3):495–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Frohlich C (2006) Deep earthquakes. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fryzlewicz P (2014) Wild binary segmentation for multiple change-point detection. Ann Stat 42(6):2243–2281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Galeano P (2007) The use of cumulative sums for detection of changepoints in the rate parameter of a Poisson process. Comput Stat Data Anal 51:6151–6165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Green PJ (1995) Reversible Jump Markov Chain Monte Carlo computation and Bayesian model determination. Biometrika 82:711–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harchaoui Z, Lévy-Leduc C (2010) Multiple change-point estimation with a total variation penalty. J Am Stat Assoc 105:1480–1493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kagan YY (2017) Worldwide earthquake forecasts. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 31:1273.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-016-1268-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kehagias A (2004) A hidden markov model segmentation procedure for hydrological and environmental time series. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 18(2):117–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lavielle M, Lebarbier E (2001) An application of MCMC methods for the multiple change-points problem. Signal Process 81:39–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lu S (2012) Markov modulated Poisson process associated with state-dependent marks and its applications to the deep earthquakes. Ann Inst Stat Math 64(1):87–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lu S (2017) Long-term b value variations of shallow earthquakes in New Zealand: a HMM-based analysis. Pure Appl Geophys 174:1629–1641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lu S, Vere-Jones D (2011) Large occurrence patterns of New Zealand deep earthquakes: characterization by use of a switching poissn process. Pure Appl Geophys 168:1567–1585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nanjo KZ, Hirata N, Obara K, Kasahara K (2012) Decade-scale decrease in b value prior to the M9-class 2011 Tohoku and 2004 Sumatra quakes. Geophys Res Lett 39:L20304.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052997 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nuannin P, Kulhanek O, Persson L (2005) Spatial and temporal b value anomalies preceding the devastating off coast of NW Sumatra earthquake of December 26, 2004. Geophys Res Lett 32(11):L11307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ogata Y (1988) Statistical models for earthquake occurrences and residual analysis for point processes. J Am Stat Assoc 83(401):9–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ramesh NI, Thayakaran R, Onof C (2013) Multi-site doubly stochastic poisson process models for fine-scale rainfall. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 27(6):1383–1396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rao V, Teh YW (2013) Fast MCMC sampling for Markov jump processes and extensions. J Mach Learn Res 14:3295–3320Google Scholar
  25. Schorlemmer D, Wiemer S (2005) Microseismicity data forecast rupture area. Nature 434:1086.  https://doi.org/10.1038/4341086a CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Scott SL (2002) Bayesian methods for hidden Markov models: recursive computing in the 21st century. J Am Stat Assoc 97:337–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Shen JJ, Zhang NR (2012) Change-point model on nonhomogeneous Poisson processes with application in copy number profiling by next-generation DNA sequencing. Ann Appl Stat 6(2):476–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Stephens DA (1994) Bayesian retrospective multiple-changepoint identification. Appl Stat 43:159–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wiemer S, McNutt S, Wyss M (1998) Temporal and three-dimensional spatial analyses of the frequency magnitude distribution near Long Valley Caldera, California. Geophys J Int 134(2):409–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Yang TY, Kuo L (2001) Bayesian binary segmentation procedure for a Poisson Process with multiple changepoints. J Comput Graph Stat 10:772–785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yip CF, Ng WL, Yau CY (2018) A hidden Markov model for earthquake prediction. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 32:1415.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-017-1457-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zhang NR, Siegmund DO (2007) A modified Bayes information criterion with applications to the analysis of comparative genomic hybridization data. Biometrics 63(1):22–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of StatisticsBeijing Normal UniversityBeijingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations