我对地震学的了解仅限於大学程度，期待其他有兴趣的板友加入提供看法。 EARTHQUAKE PREDICTION: State-of-the-Art and Emerging Possibilities 发表在Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 2002. 30:1–33 作者是Vladimir Keilis-Borok 里面许多资料来自於International Institute of Earthquake Prediction Theoryand Mathematical Geophysics, Moscow. 我节录引言部分，欢迎有兴趣的其他版友索取电子档。里面的英文还蛮简单的， 但还是希望能陆续翻成中文让更多人能了解并讨论。 1. Earthquake prediction is pivotal both for reduction of the damage from earthquakes and for fundamental understanding of lithosphere dynamics. That twofold goal, usual for prediction research, brings up the key questions considered here: (a) What predictions are already possible? (b) How can damage from earthquakes be reduced on the basis of such predictions, given their limited accuracy? (c) What fundamental knowledge has been gained in earthquake prediction research? Thecommon underlying question is, what comes next? 2. This problem is of urgent practical importance because earthquakes pose a rapidly growing threat to survival and sustainable development of our civilization. This is due to the well-known interrelated developments: proliferation of radioactive waste disposals, high dams, nuclear power plants, lifelines, and other objects whose damage poses an unacceptable risk; self-destruction of megacities; destabilization of the environment; and growing socio-economic volatility of the global village. For all of these reasons, seismic risk has escalated also in numerous regions of low seismicity. Today, a single earthquake may take up to a million lives, cause material damage up to $1.0E+12, raze a megacity, trigger a global economic depression, render a large territory uninhabitable, and destabilize the military balance in a region. Earthquake prediction is necessary to undertake disaster preparedness measures, reducing the damage from the earthquakes. This requires that the accuracy of prediction be known, but, contrary to common belief, a timely prediction of low accuracy may be very useful. 3. Earthquake prediction is necessary also for fundamental understanding of the dynamics of the lithosphere, particularly in the timescales of 100 years and less. So far, this problem is in the same stage as the theory of gravity was between T. Brahe and J. Kepler: the study of heuristic regularities (启发原则) that are necessary to develop a fundamental theory. 4. Here we review the research that extends to formally defined prediction algorithms and to their tests by advance prediction. Being a part of much broader efforts in earthquake prediction, this is presently most essential both for damage reduction and for understanding the lithosphere. Methodologically, this research integrates theoretical modeling and analysis of observations. 5. Why was this topic suggested for the prefatory chapter of the Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences? First, as the reader will see, the earthquake prediction problem is connected, one way or another, with most of the solid Earth sciences, tying together an immense variety of fields and processes in the wide range of time- and space scales. Algorithmic prediction, if successful, provides one of the major hopes for bringing internal order in that diversity of topics and methods. Indeed, since the times of Galileo, if not through the whole history of science, prediction has been a major tool of fundamental research, a source of heuristic constraints and hypotheses, and the final test of theories. Second, the earthquake prediction problem happens to be closely relevant to what I believe is a current frontier of the solid Earth sciences: emergence of a fundamental concept that would succeed plate tectonics, provide a fundamental base for prediction and (with luck) control of geological and geotechnical disasters, and establish links with“universal" scenarios of critical transitions in nonlinear (complex) systems. 6. The earthquake prediction realm still exhibits a striking gap in mutual awareness. This gap is amazingly large even for such a huge conglomerate of problems and professions; for earthquake preparedness it bodes ill— the chance to undertake preparedness measures should not be missed. 7. This gap might be partly due to the lack of a common language. To reach a possibly wider audience, I wrote this review in qualitative terms (retaining, I hope, a reasonable precision), although the studies considered here are entirely quantitative, with a substantial (to put it gently) mathematical component. 8. The following topics are covered by this review. (a) Structure of the earthquake-prone fault network: hierarchy of blocks and faults, and nucleation of earthquakes in mosaic nodes at the faults' intersections and junctions. (b) Fault networks as a stockpile of instability: a multitude of mechanisms that destabilize the strength stress field and turn the network into a complex system with earthquakes for critical phenomena and the predictability of that system. (c) Prediction algorithms: premonitory seismicity patterns and the performance of the algorithms in advance prediction worldwide. (d) Error diagrams—a tool for validation of prediction methods. (e) Four paradigms in earthquake prediction: basic types of precursors, long-range correlations in the fault network, partial similarity of precursors worldwide, and their dual origin—some precursors are common for many complex systems, others are Earth-specific. (f) Earthquake prediction and earthquake preparedness. (g) Emerging possibilities, yet unexplored. 9. This paper is a preview to the monographic treatise on earthquake prediction, now in preparation, by a team from the International Institute of Earthquake Prediction Theory and Mathematical Geophysics, Russian Academy of Sciences. Most of the specific findings discussed here were obtained in that Institute as well as in the following institutions: in France, the Institute of the Physics of the Earth (Paris) and Observatory of Nice; in the United States, Cornell and Purdue Universities, University of California, Los Angeles, University of Southern California, Massachussetts Institute of Technology, and U.S. Geological Survey; in Italy, the Abdus Salam International Center for Theoretical Physics, Universities of Rome (“La Sapienza”) and Trieste. -- --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.116.161.237 ※ 编辑: singerpro 来自: 140.116.161.237 (12/06 10:05)