kathimerini.gr
Santorini Earthquake Swarm Reveals Gaps in Seismic Monitoring
A strong seismic swarm lasting over 20 days near Santorini and Amorgos has spurred a major scientific response using advanced technology, revealing significant shortcomings in the existing seismic monitoring infrastructure and highlighting the importance of open data and machine learning for enhanced earthquake detection and analysis.
- What are the underlying causes of this unusual seismic activity, considering the geological context of the region?
- The Santorini seismic event is unique due to its location within a volcanic zone and a field of tectonic faults. Machine learning algorithms have detected significantly more earthquakes (20,218 vs 1,954) than traditional methods. This increased detection, coupled with cloud computing for faster analysis (20 minutes vs. 12 hours), provides a much clearer understanding of the situation.
- How might the implementation of machine learning and open data policies improve future seismic monitoring and response in the area?
- The improved seismic monitoring, utilizing machine learning and cloud computing, reveals a pattern of earthquake swarms recurring twice daily for extended periods, possibly indicating magma movement ('diking'). While there's currently no increased volcanic activity, this enhanced monitoring offers vital insight into future events and potentially improves response time to similar occurrences. Open data sharing among scientific teams is crucial for effective analysis.
- What are the immediate consequences of the prolonged seismic activity near Santorini and Amorgos, and what is its global significance?
- A swarm of earthquakes near Santorini and Amorgos has lasted over 20 days, prompting a large-scale scientific response involving advanced technology. This situation highlighted deficiencies in seismic monitoring, such as a malfunctioning seismograph on Anhydros island, which was replaced only after the seismic activity began. Despite modern tools, their use has been suboptimal.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the situation as a success story of scientific mobilization and technological advancement in the face of a significant seismic event. While detailing challenges like the non-functional seismograph, the focus remains on the positive aspects of the response and the deployment of advanced techniques. This positive framing might downplay the severity of the initial inadequacies in monitoring infrastructure.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral and factual, using technical terminology appropriately. The descriptions of the seismic activity are precise. While the tone is slightly positive in highlighting the successful implementation of new technologies, this can be seen as a natural consequence of reporting on a positive response to a challenging event rather than a deliberate bias.
Bias by Omission
The article highlights a lack of functioning seismographs in the area prior to the seismic swarm, specifically mentioning the non-functional seismograph on Anhydros island. This suggests a bias by omission in not fully exploring the extent of pre-existing infrastructural deficiencies in seismic monitoring. The article also focuses heavily on the response *after* the swarm began, potentially underplaying any systemic issues that led to the inadequate monitoring beforehand. While the article mentions advanced technologies, it doesn't delve into why these weren't fully utilized prior to the event, possibly omitting details of political, financial, or logistical constraints.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the use of modern technology, including machine learning algorithms and cloud computing, for faster and more efficient earthquake detection and analysis. This showcases advancements in technology and infrastructure that improve disaster monitoring and response. The deployment of new seismographs and geodetic stations also improves infrastructure for monitoring seismic activity.