SIGNS OF AN UPCOMING SEISMIC EVENT ON THE BISHKEK GEODYNAMIC TEST AREA ACCORDING TO THE TRANSIENT ELECTROMAGNETIC MONITORING DATA

The RAS Research Station conducts geodynamic research on the Bishkek geodynamic test area (BGTA) using on-power time-lapse measurements of an unsteady electromagnetic field produced by a grounded electrical line.

In order to relate the electromagnetic monitoring signals to the recorded seismic events, the authors proposed the following characteristics (indicators):

1. a) time of arrival of a maximum value signal at the observation point;
2. b) voltage-time characteristics of the pulse;
3. c) confidence interval for the average daily values of a signal.

The sensitivity of these indicators to seismic events was illustrated by the example of a swarm of seismic events (K>8) recorded near the village of Kegety at the BGTA in April 2017. It has been found that, in the period of April 1–17, 2017, the time series of the three indicators contained no temporally synchronized anomalies. However, on April 18–20, 2017, all indicators showed the distinct temporally synchronized anomalies, which can be considered as precursors of the Kegety earthquake swarm whose main shock was recorded on April 21, 2017.

The paper substantiates the possibility of using the above-mentioned indicators for medium-term prediction of seismic events. In order to automate the processing of the time series, it is proposed to create a digital platform to analyze a long-term array of electromagnetic monitoring data from all observation points.

This paper starts a series of publications on the diffusion kinematics of non-stationary sounding in relation to the problems of electromagnetic monitoring of seismotectonic processes.

1. Abdrakhmatov K.E., Berezina A.V., Pershina E.V., Mozoleva E.L., 2014. System of Seismic Monitoring of the Territory of Kyrgyz Republic. Bulletin of the Institute of Seismology NAS KR 2 (4), 14–21 (in Russian)

2. Barsukov O.M., Sorokin O.N., 1973. Apparent Resistivity Changes of Rocks in the Garm Seismoactive Area. Bulletin of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Physics of the Earth 10, 100–102 (in Russian)

3. Barsukov P., Fainberg E., 2019. New Interpretation of the Reduction Phenomenon in the Electrical Resistivity of Rock Masses Before Local Earthquakes. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors 294, 106279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pepi.2019.106279.

4. Bataleva E.A., Mukhamadeeva V.A., 2018. Complex Electromagnetic Monitoring of Geodynamic Processes in the Northern Tien Shan (Bishkek Geodynamic Test Area). Geodynamics & Tectonophysics 9 (2), 461–487 (in Russian) https://doi.org/10.5800/GT-2018-9-2-0356.

5. Bogomolov L.M., 2012. Response of the Emission Signals to the Effects of Electromagnetic Fields and Vibrations Inside the Geologic Media. PhD Thesis (Dr. Sc. Phys.-Math.). Moscow, 359 p. (in Russian)

6. Bogomolov L.M., Sycheva N.A., 2022. Earthquake Predictions in XXI Century: Prehistory and Concepts, Precursors and Problems. Geosystems of Transition Zones 6 (3), 145–164 (in Russian) https://doi.org/10.30730/gtrz.2022.6.3.145-164.164-182.

7. Bragin V.D., Sverdlik L.G., 2020. Estimates of Relationship Between the Dynamics of Geophysical Parameters and the Stress-Strain State of Geoenvironment. Geodynamics & Tectonophysics 11 (2), 352–364 (in Russian) https://doi.org/10.5800/GT-2020-11-2-0479.

8. Cortés-Arroyo O.J., Romo-Jones J.M., Gómez-Treviñ E., 2018. Robust Estimation of Temporal Resistivity Variations: Changes from the 2010 Mexicali, Mw 7.2 Earthquake and First Results of Continuous Monitoring. Geothermics 72, 288–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geothermics.2017.11.012.

9. Dashevsky Yu.A., Martynov A.A., 2002. Inverse Problem of Electrical Sounding in Seismoactive Areas. Study Guide. Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk, 52 p. (in Russian)

10. Dobrovolsky I.P., 1984. The Mechanism of the Tectonic Earthquake Generation Process. Institute of Physics of the Earth of the USSR Academy of Science, Moscow, 189 p. (in Russian)

11. Dobrovolsky I.P., 2004. The Mathematical Theory of Generation and Prediction of a Tectonic Earthquake. Fizmatlit, Moscow, 204 p. (in Russian)

12. Dobrovolsky I.P., 2010. On the Tectonic Earthquake Prediction. Geophysical Research 11 (1), 35–46 (in Russian) [Добровольский И.П. О проблеме прогноза тектонического землетрясения // Геофизические исследования. 2010. Т. 11. № 1. С. 35–46].

13. Dyminsky I.I., Smolensky I.V., Imashev S.A., Evmenova D.M., 2024. Digital Platform for Analyzing Geoelectromagnetic Monitoring Data. In: The Geospatial Ecosystem as a Basis for Digital Transformation of the Society. Proceedings of the XX International Scientific Congress Interexpo GEO-Siberia-24 (May 15–17, 2024). Vol. 6. SSUGT, Novosibirsk, p. 56–61 (in Russian) https://doi.org/10.33764/2618-981X-2024-6-56-61.

14. Gordeev V.F., Zadergilova M.M., Konovalov Yu.F., Malyshkov S.Yu., Biltaev S.Kh.D., 2018. Monitoring Method for Predicting Seismic Danger. A Patent on Invention № RU 2672785 C1 of July 03, 2018. ROSPATENT, Moscow (in Russian)

15. Knyazev B.A., Cherkassky V.S., 1996. Introduction to the Experimental Data Processing. Electronic Textbook and Data Processing Program for the Beginners. Study Guide. Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk, 93 p. (in Russian)

16. Kozlova I.A., Biryulin S.V., Yurkov A.K., Demezhko D.Yu., 2021. Volume Radon Activity Changes and Thermal Variations in the Well During Earthquake Preparation. Geoecology. Engineering Geology, Hydrogeology, Geocryology 6, 37–46 (in Russian) https://doi.org/10.31857/S0869780921060059.

17. Li M., Jianmin Ch., Qifi Ch., Guiping L., 1995. Features of Precursor Fields Before and After the Datong-Yanggao Earthquake Swarm. Journal of Earthquake Prediction Research 4 (1), 1–30.

18. Mori T., Ozima M., Takayama T., 1993. Real Time Detection of Anomalous Geoelectric Changes. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors 77 (1–2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9201(93)90029-9.

19. Park S.K., 2002. Perspectives on Monitoring Resistivity Changes with Telluric Signals at Parkfield, California: 1988–1999. Journal of Geodynamics 33 (4–5), 379–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0264-3707(02)00003-0.

20. Park S.K., Fitterman D.V., 1990. Sensetivity of the Telluric Monitoring Array in Parkfield, California to Changes of Resistivity. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 95 (B10), 1557–15571.

21. Park S.K., Larsen J.C., Lee T.-Ch., 2007. Electrical Resistivity Changes Not Observed with the 28 September 2004 M6.0 Parkfield Earthquake on the San Andreas Fault, California. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 112 (B12), B12305. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JB004459.

22. Petrova N.V., Kurova A.D., 2023. Comparison of Earthquake Classification Systems in Local Magnitudes ML in Some Regions of Northern Eurasia. Russian Journal of Seismology 5 (2), 61–76 (in Russian) DOI:10.35540/2686-7907.2023.2.05.

23. Seminsky I.K., Pospeev A.V., 2022. Reflection of Strong 2020–2021 Baikal Rift Earthquakes in the Earth’s Magnetotelluric Field Observation Data. Izvestiya, Physics of the Solid Earth 58, 484–492. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1069351322040097.

24. Sverdlik L.G., 2019. Short-Period Variations of Specific Electric Resistance of Earth Crust. Bulletin of the Kyrgyz-Russian Slavic University 19 (4), 143–149 (in Russian)

25. Sycheva N.A., 2022. Some Characteristics of the Earthquake Catalog and the Seismic Process According to the KNET Network. Geodynamics & Tectonophysics 13 (3), 0640 (in Russian)

26. Varotsos P., Alexopoulos K., Lazaridou-Varotsou M., Nagao T., 1993. Earthquake Predictions Issued in Greece by Seismic Electric Signals Since February 6, 1990. Tectonophysics 224 (1–3), 269–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1951(93)90080-4.

27. Volikhin A.M., Bragin V.D., Zubovich A.V., Koshkin N.A., Trapeznikov Yu.A., 1993. The Manifestation of Geodynamic Processes in Geophysical Fields. Nauka, Moscow, 158 p. (in Russian)