Natural Hazards

, Volume 50, Issue 3, pp 519–537 | Cite as

On-chip earthquake simulation model using potentials

  • I. G. Georgoudas
  • G. Ch. Sirakoulis
  • E. M. Scordilis
  • I. Th. Andreadis
Original Paper

Abstract

A two-dimensional (2-D) Cellular Automata (CA) dynamic system constituted of cells-charges has been proposed for the simulation of the earthquake process. The CA model has been calibrated with the use of real data. The calibration incorporates major seismic characteristics of the area under test. The simulation results are found in good quantitative and qualitative agreement with the recorded Gutenberg–Richter (GR) scaling relations. The model is enriched with a powerful multi-parameter interface that enables the user to load real data from different regions. This paper examines the on-chip realisation of the model and its instrumentation. The CA model hardware implementation is based on Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) logic. It utilises an array of 32 × 32 cells. Parameters that construct the local CA rule constitute the input data. The initial seed, which to some extent corresponds to the seismic features of the area under test, is loaded in a semi-parallel way and the process is completed in a certain number of time steps. The automatic response of the processor provides the corresponding GR scaling law of the area under study. The hardware implementation of the CA-based earthquake simulation model is advantageous in terms of low-cost, high-speed, compactness and portability features. It can operate as a preliminary data-acquisition filter that accelerates the evaluation of recorded data as far as its origin time, spatial and magnitude completeness and quality are concerned. Software that performs reliable automatic phase picking, as well as data elaboration, can be assembled next to the earthquake recording instruments (the whole network) output to assure a quick and reliable iteration of the focal parameters of a recorded earthquake (epicentre coordinates, focal depth and magnitude). The dedicated processor can be accommodated right after this stage (before any manual elaboration) focusing on the near real-time development of a reliable qualitative dynamical seismic record and a mapping of the seismic characteristics of the area.

Keywords

Cellular automata Earthquake Modelling LC analogue Potential Seismic features mapping Instrumentation FPGA 

References

  1. Alparone S, Andronico D, Sgroi T, Ferrari F, Lodato L, Reitano T (2007) Alert system to mitigate tephra fallout hazards at Mt. Etna Volcano, Italy. Nat Hazards. doi:10.1007/s11069-007-9120-7
  2. Bak P, Tang C (1989) Earthquakes as a self-organised critical phenomenon. J Geophys Res 94:15635–15637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bak P, Tang C, Wiesenfield K (1987) Self-organised criticality: an explanation of 1/f noise. Phys Rev Lett 59:381–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bialynicki-Birula I (1994) Weyl, Dirac, and Maxwell equations on a lattice as unitary cellular automata. Phys Rev D 49:6920–6927Google Scholar
  5. Burridge R, Knopoff L (1967) Model and theoretical seismicity. Bull Seismol Soc Am 57(3):341–371Google Scholar
  6. Carlson JM, Langer JS (1989) Mechanical model of an earthquake fault. Phys Rev A 40:6470–6484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chopard B, Droz M (1998) Cellular automata modelling of physical systems. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  8. Chopard B, Masselot A (1999) Cellular automata and lattice Boltzmann methods: a new approach to computational fluid dynamics and particle transport. Future Gener Comput Syst 16:249–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crisci GM, Di Gregorio S, Rongo R, Spataro W, Nicoletta F (1999) Analysing lava risk for the Etnean area: simulation by cellular automata methods. Nat Hazards 20:215–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. D’Ambrosio D, Di Gregorio S, Gabriele S, Gaudio R (2001) A cellular automata model for soil erosion by water. Phys Chem Earth Part B 26(1):33–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. D’Ambrosio D, Spataro W, Iovine G (2006) Parallel genetic algorithms for optimising cellular automata models of natural complex phenomena: an application to debris flows. Comput Geosci 32:861–875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Di Gregorio S, Rongo R, Siciliano C, Sorriso-Valvo M, Spataro D (1999) Mount Ontake landslide simulation by the cellular automata model SCIDDICA-3. Phys Chem Earth Part A 24(2):97–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dimitriu PP, Scordilis EM, Karacostas VG (2000) Multifractal analysis of the Arnea, Greece seismicity with potential implications for earthquake prediction. Nat Hazards 21(2–3):277–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. El Yacoubi S, El Jai A (2002) Cellular automata modelling and spreadability. Math Comput Model 36(9–10):1059–1074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. El Yacoubi S, El Jai A, Jacewicz P, Pausas JG (2003) LUCAS: an original tool for landscape modelling. Environ Model Softw 18(5):429–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Feynman RP (1982) Simulating physics with computers. Int J Theor Phys 21:467–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Georgoudas IG, Sirakoulis GCh, Andreadis I (2007a) Modelling earthquake activity features using cellular automata. Math Comput Model 46(1–2):124–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Georgoudas IG, Sirakoulis GCh, Scordilis EM, Andreadis I (2007b) A cellular automaton simulation tool for modelling seismicity in the region of Xanthi. Environ Model Softw 22(10):1455–1464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gutenberg B, Richter CF (1944) Frequency of earthquakes in California. Bull Seismol Soc Am 34:185–188Google Scholar
  20. Gutenberg B, Richter CF (1956) Magnitude and energy of earthquakes. Ann Geophys 9:1–15Google Scholar
  21. Halbach M, Hoffmann R (2004) Implementing Cellular Automata in FPGA Logic. Paper presented at the 18th International Parallel and Distributed Processing SymposiumGoogle Scholar
  22. Hernandez G (2002) Parallel and distributed simulations and visualizations of the Olami-Feder-Christensen earthquake model. Physica A 313:301–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Iovine G, Di Gregorio S, Lupiano V (2003) Debris-flow susceptibility assessment through cellular automata modelling: an example from 15 to 16 December 1999 disaster at Cervinara and San Martino Valle Caudina (Campania, Southern Italy). Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 3:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jaumé SC, Sykes LR (1996) Evolution of moderate seismicity in the San Francisco Bay Region, 1850–1993: seismicity changes related to the occurrence of large and great earthquakes. J Geophys Res 101(B):765–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Karafyllidis I, Thanailakis A (1997) A model for predicting forest fire spreading using cellular automata. Ecol Model 99:87–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Malamud BD, Turcotte DL (1999) Self-organised criticality applied to natural hazards. Nat Hazards 20:93–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mingarelli AB (2006) A study of fuzzy and many-valued logics in cellular automata. J Cellular Automata 1(3):233–252Google Scholar
  28. Miyamoto H, Sasaki S (1997) Simulating lava flows by an improved cellular automata method. Comput Geosci 23(3):283–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mogi K (1962) Magnitude-Frequency relation for elastic shocks accompanying fractures of various materials and some related problems in earthquakes. Bull Earthq Res Inst 40:831–853Google Scholar
  30. von Neumann J (1966) Theory of self-reproducing automata. Edited by Burks AW. University of Illinois Press, Urbana and LondonGoogle Scholar
  31. Olami Z, Feder HJS, Christensen K (1992) Self-organized criticality in a continuous, nonconservative cellular automaton modelling earthquakes. Phys Rev Lett 68(8):1244–1247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Papazachos BC, Comninakis PE, Scordilis EM, Karakaisis GF, Papazachos CB (2007) A catalogue of earthquakes in the Mediterranean and surrounding area for the period 1901–2006. Publication Laboratory of Geophysics, University of Thessaloniki, ThessalonikiGoogle Scholar
  33. Preston EF, Sá Martins JS, Rundle JB, Anghel M, Klein W (2000) Models of earthquake faults with long-range stress transfer. IEEE Comput Sci Eng 2:34–41Google Scholar
  34. Sheridan MF, Bloebaum CL, Kesavadas T, Patra AK, Winer E (2002) Visualisation and communication in risk management of land slides. Risk Analysis III. WIT Press, SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
  35. Sirakoulis GCh (2004) A TCAD system for VLSI implementation of the CVD process using VHDL. Integration, the VLSI J 37(1):63–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sirakoulis GCh, Karafyllidis I, Thanailakis A (2000) A cellular automaton model for the effect of population movement and vaccination on epidemic propagation. Ecol Model 133(3):209–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sirakoulis GCh, Karafyllidis I, Thanailakis A (2003) A CAD system for the construction and VLSI implementation of Cellular Automata algorithms using VHDL. Microprocess Microsyst 27(8):381–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Toffoli T (1984a) Cellular automata as an alternative to (rather than an approximation of) differential equations in modelling physics. Physica 10D:117–127Google Scholar
  39. Toffoli T (1984b) CAM: a high-performance cellular automaton machine. Physica D 10(1–2):195–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tomoyoshi K, Maruyama T, Yamaguchi K, Konagaya A (2000) A cellular automata system with reconfigurable hardware: towards a whole cell simulation. Genome Inform 11:462–463Google Scholar
  41. Ulam S (1952) Random processes and transformations. In: Proceedings of the International Congress on Mathematicians, vol 2, pp 264–275Google Scholar
  42. Vichniac GY (1984) Simulating physics with cellular automata. Physica D 10(1–2):96–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Weatherley D, Jaumé SC, Mora P (2000) Evolution of stress deficit and changing rates of seismicity in cellular automaton models of earthquake faults. Pure Appl Geophys 157:2183–2207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wolfram S (1986) Theory and applications of cellular automata. World Scientific, SingaporeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • I. G. Georgoudas
    • 1
  • G. Ch. Sirakoulis
    • 1
  • E. M. Scordilis
    • 2
  • I. Th. Andreadis
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Laboratory of ElectronicsDemocritus University of ThraceXanthiGreece
  2. 2.Department of Geophysics, School of GeologyAristotle UniversityThessalonikiGreece

Personalised recommendations