Abstract
The seismo-electrical coupling is critical to understand the mechanism of geoelectrical precursors to earthquakes. A novel seismo-electrical model, called Chen–Ouillon–Sornette (COS) model, has been developed by combining the Burridge–Knopoff spring-block system with the mechanisms of stress-activated charge carriers (i.e., electrons and holes) and pressure-stimulated currents. Such a model, thus, can simulate fracture-induced electrical signals at a laboratory scale or earthquake-related geoelectrical signals at a geological scale. In this study, by using information measures of time series analysis, we attempt to understand the influence of diverse electrical conditions on the characteristics of the simulated electrical signals with the COS model. We employ the Fisher–Shannon method to investigate the temporal dynamics of the COS model. The result showed that the electrical parameters of the COS model, particularly for the capacitance and inductance, affect the levels of the order/disorder in the electrical time series. Compared to the field observations, we infer that the underground electrical condition has become larger capacitance or smaller inductance in seismogenic processes. Accordingly, this study may provide a better understanding of the mechanical–electrical coupling of the earth’s crust.
Highlights
Earthquake prediction and forecasting has been vigorously debated; so far, scientists have developed no practical methodology [1,2,3,4,5,6]
To understand the temporal dynamics of the COS model, we investigated several time series of voltages simulated under diverse electrical conditions
We investigated the FS information of the voltages simulated through the diverse electrical conditions of the COS seismo-electrical model
Summary
Earthquake prediction and forecasting has been vigorously debated; so far, scientists have developed no practical methodology [1,2,3,4,5,6]. The precursory mechanisms are still argumentative owing to undecided seismo-electromagnetic theories, inconsistent precursory phenomena, and shortage of objectively testable models [24,25,26,27] Despite these reasons, scientists have significantly observed several electromagnetic anomalies within a few days or weeks before large seismic events [28,29,30,31,32] and proposed various relevant mechanisms, including solid-state physics, piezoelectric effects, electrokinetic effects, contact electrification [33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45]. Certain models [42,43,44,45] have solely simulated co-seismic electromagnetic phenomena rather than preseismic electromagnetic signals
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
