From crotwell at seis.sc.edu Wed Apr 8 11:52:33 2009 From: crotwell at seis.sc.edu (Philip Crotwell) Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 14:52:33 -0400 Subject: [data-issues] mag 9.5 bogus event in db Message-ID: <1e63606c0904081152m440ad5e8od0eadc043ffb53a5@mail.gmail.com> Hi I suspect you just store what you are given, but thought I would point this out just in case. It is very unlikely that this was really a magnitude 9.5. 1 2006-10-09 19:06:18.0 18.974 121.117 11 9.5 MS ISCCD MAN MAN 249 22 LUZON, PHILIPPINE ISLANDS I looked at the ISC website and they also have the 9.5 magnitude, so your db is correct in that sense. I guess the ISC can argue that MAN (whoever that is) contributed it, and so they should publish it. But it seems like a little extra care should be given to really large magnitudes as people are often interested in the biggest earthquakes. As it stands now, the "biggest" earthquake in the database this decade is not really a very big earthquake. :( The reason I noticed this is that REV picks up on this event and so the biggest circle on our map is not real. I am going to manually reject this event in REV, so not a big deal for me, but might continue be for others. I will also send something to the isc. thanks, Philip PS There was a 9.9 in Bolivia in 1999, likely same type of issue. 1999-10-14 10:59:35.0 -16.559 -62.775 .1 9.9 MD ISCCD HDC HDC 120 8 CENTRAL BOLIVIA From tim at iris.washington.edu Wed Apr 8 12:48:44 2009 From: tim at iris.washington.edu (Tim Ahern) Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 12:48:44 -0700 Subject: [data-issues] mag 9.5 bogus event in db In-Reply-To: <1e63606c0904081152m440ad5e8od0eadc043ffb53a5@mail.gmail.com> References: <1e63606c0904081152m440ad5e8od0eadc043ffb53a5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: The DMC's policy is to mimic the information provided by the catalog suppliers. If they remove bogus events then we will as well but we do not intervene at this level. There are other examples we are aware of as well. Cheers Tim On Apr 8, 2009, at 11:52 AM, Philip Crotwell wrote: > Hi > > I suspect you just store what you are given, but thought I would point > this out just in case. It is very unlikely that this was really a > magnitude 9.5. > > 1 2006-10-09 19:06:18.0 18.974 121.117 11 9.5 MS ISCCD MAN > MAN 249 22 LUZON, PHILIPPINE ISLANDS > > I looked at the ISC website and they also have the 9.5 magnitude, so > your db is correct in that sense. I guess the ISC can argue that MAN > (whoever that is) contributed it, and so they should publish it. But > it seems like a little extra care should be given to really large > magnitudes as people are often interested in the biggest earthquakes. > As it stands now, the "biggest" earthquake in the database this decade > is not really a very big earthquake. :( > > The reason I noticed this is that REV picks up on this event and so > the biggest circle on our map is not real. I am going to manually > reject this event in REV, so not a big deal for me, but might continue > be for others. > > I will also send something to the isc. > > thanks, > Philip > > PS There was a 9.9 in Bolivia in 1999, likely same type of issue. > 1999-10-14 10:59:35.0 -16.559 -62.775 .1 9.9 MD ISCCD HDC HDC > 120 8 CENTRAL BOLIVIA > _______________________________________________ > data-issues mailing list > data-issues at iris.washington.edu > http://www.iris.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/data-issues Program Manager, IRIS Data Management System IRIS DMC 1408 NE 45th Street #201 Seattle, WA 98105 (206)547-0393 x118 (206) 547-1093 FAX From rob at iris.washington.edu Wed Apr 8 12:50:15 2009 From: rob at iris.washington.edu (Robert Casey) Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 12:50:15 -0700 Subject: [data-issues] mag 9.5 bogus event in db In-Reply-To: <1e63606c0904081152m440ad5e8od0eadc043ffb53a5@mail.gmail.com> References: <1e63606c0904081152m440ad5e8od0eadc043ffb53a5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B27600D-B332-483F-9B14-AF880C9BB149@iris.washington.edu> Thanks for the note on that, Philip. We'll have to take a look at removing these cataclysmic quake entries. I wonder if we'd be able to keep an eye on these ultra-large quakes via our IEB event cache (ranked by magnitude)? -Rob On Apr 8, 2009, at 11:52 AM, Philip Crotwell wrote: > Hi > > I suspect you just store what you are given, but thought I would point > this out just in case. It is very unlikely that this was really a > magnitude 9.5. > > 1 2006-10-09 19:06:18.0 18.974 121.117 11 9.5 MS ISCCD MAN > MAN 249 22 LUZON, PHILIPPINE ISLANDS > > I looked at the ISC website and they also have the 9.5 magnitude, so > your db is correct in that sense. I guess the ISC can argue that MAN > (whoever that is) contributed it, and so they should publish it. But > it seems like a little extra care should be given to really large > magnitudes as people are often interested in the biggest earthquakes. > As it stands now, the "biggest" earthquake in the database this decade > is not really a very big earthquake. :( > > The reason I noticed this is that REV picks up on this event and so > the biggest circle on our map is not real. I am going to manually > reject this event in REV, so not a big deal for me, but might continue > be for others. > > I will also send something to the isc. > > thanks, > Philip > > PS There was a 9.9 in Bolivia in 1999, likely same type of issue. > 1999-10-14 10:59:35.0 -16.559 -62.775 .1 9.9 MD ISCCD HDC HDC > 120 8 CENTRAL BOLIVIA > _______________________________________________ > data-issues mailing list > data-issues at iris.washington.edu > http://www.iris.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/data-issues From rob at iris.washington.edu Wed Apr 8 12:51:26 2009 From: rob at iris.washington.edu (Robert Casey) Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 12:51:26 -0700 Subject: [data-issues] mag 9.5 bogus event in db In-Reply-To: References: <1e63606c0904081152m440ad5e8od0eadc043ffb53a5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <789A267E-2251-47BE-BDB0-ACFA17623003@iris.washington.edu> I'll retract my earlier removal statement.... -Rob On Apr 8, 2009, at 12:48 PM, Tim Ahern wrote: > The DMC's policy is to mimic the information provided by the catalog > suppliers. If they remove bogus events > then we will as well but we do not intervene at this level. > > There are other examples we are aware of as well. > > Cheers > Tim From rick at iris.washington.edu Wed Apr 8 12:51:54 2009 From: rick at iris.washington.edu (Rick Benson) Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 12:51:54 -0700 Subject: [data-issues] mag 9.5 bogus event in db In-Reply-To: <1e63606c0904081152m440ad5e8od0eadc043ffb53a5@mail.gmail.com> References: <1e63606c0904081152m440ad5e8od0eadc043ffb53a5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Hello, Philip- The IRIS DMC has been aware that these events populate the catalogs, and a conscious decision was made to leave them in place and have them altered at the source. Thanks for the note, and since you are contacting the ISC, we will not ask them again. -Rick On Apr 8, 2009, at 11:52 AM, Philip Crotwell wrote: > Hi > > I suspect you just store what you are given, but thought I would point > this out just in case. It is very unlikely that this was really a > magnitude 9.5. > > 1 2006-10-09 19:06:18.0 18.974 121.117 11 9.5 MS ISCCD MAN > MAN 249 22 LUZON, PHILIPPINE ISLANDS > > I looked at the ISC website and they also have the 9.5 magnitude, so > your db is correct in that sense. I guess the ISC can argue that MAN > (whoever that is) contributed it, and so they should publish it. But > it seems like a little extra care should be given to really large > magnitudes as people are often interested in the biggest earthquakes. > As it stands now, the "biggest" earthquake in the database this decade > is not really a very big earthquake. :( > > The reason I noticed this is that REV picks up on this event and so > the biggest circle on our map is not real. I am going to manually > reject this event in REV, so not a big deal for me, but might continue > be for others. > > I will also send something to the isc. > > thanks, > Philip > > PS There was a 9.9 in Bolivia in 1999, likely same type of issue. > 1999-10-14 10:59:35.0 -16.559 -62.775 .1 9.9 MD ISCCD HDC HDC > 120 8 CENTRAL BOLIVIA > _______________________________________________ > data-issues mailing list > data-issues at iris.washington.edu > http://www.iris.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/data-issues ================ Rick Benson Director of Operations IRIS DMC (206)547-0393 ext. 119(office) rick at iris.washington.edu From crotwell at seis.sc.edu Fri Apr 10 10:52:05 2009 From: crotwell at seis.sc.edu (Philip Crotwell) Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 13:52:05 -0400 Subject: [data-issues] mag 9.5 bogus event in db Message-ID: <1e63606c0904101052h2955bc19ja30c54c285c1ded9@mail.gmail.com> Hi all Just FYI as I assume any updates flow automatically via secret messages carried in IRIS's top secret diplomatic pouch. thanks, Philip ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: James Date: Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 11:06 AM Subject: Re: [Fwd: bad large magnitudes in catalog] To: crotwell at seis.sc.edu Hi, Thank you for finding this and letting us know. I have checked with our seismologists and deleted this magnitude. Normally extreme magnitudes would be spotted and removed during the editing process but somehow this one escaped. I have forwarded your email to our director and he should be able to answer with more detail if needed. I am going to review out data to check for other rogue magnitudes. Best wishes James > > Hi > > There are a couple of events in the ISC catalog with very large > magnitudes that are very likely not real. This came up because REV, > our education and outreach earthquake viewer (http://rev.seis.sc.edu), > uses the ISC catalog for older events and it picked up on at least one > of these (Event ?9196527 Philippine Islands region, MS 9.5). The > result is that the largest earthquake in REV is not really an > earthquake. I have manually deleted this event, and so this particular > event is no longer an issue for REV, but I am wondering if this type > of thing could happen in the future. > > I presume that most of these are reported to you by other > organizations and so you are simply recording what you were given. > However, it seem to me that given the public's interest in big > earthquakes and in particular "what is the biggest earthquake ever" > that particular attention should be paid to make sure that very large > but incorrect magnitudes do not get into the final catalog. Do you > have any system to filter out or flag for further review an magnitude > estimate that is very large, say bigger than 8 or 9? > > Also, I noticed that there are errata for several events listed the > Methods and Programs section of the ISC site but only for very old > data. Is there anything similar that lists errata for newer parts of > the catalog? > http://www.isc.ac.uk/doc/database/load_ffb.html#ST51 > > thanks, > Philip Crotwell > > > From nettles at ldeo.columbia.edu Sat Apr 11 11:34:52 2009 From: nettles at ldeo.columbia.edu (Meredith Nettles) Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 14:34:52 -0400 Subject: [data-issues] funny network code "7A" in 2009 SeismiQuery list Message-ID: Hi, Looking in SeismiQuery / by network / 2009 the first network entry I see for the year is "7A". Clicking on this, the calendar header gives the name as "BTO" and the calendar indicates data available for 2009/06/06 and 2009/06/07 (impressive if it were true!). Clicking on those dates gives the error message java.sql.SQLException: ORA-00980: synonym translation is no longer valid This is probably not a real network code? Thanks, Meredith From tim at iris.washington.edu Sat Apr 11 12:58:09 2009 From: tim at iris.washington.edu (Tim Ahern) Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 12:58:09 -0700 Subject: [data-issues] funny network code "7A" in 2009 SeismiQuery list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6BC681F0-41FD-4BF9-AB06-F71F8CA2341D@iris.washington.edu> It is a real network code. It is however something still in development. It will ultimately hold data from Australian portable networks. I am not sure that it will be data at the DMC. Right now it should be viewed as a valid but empty network more or less. Good sleuthing. Tim Program Manager, IRIS Data Management System IRIS DMC 1408 NE 45th Street #201 Seattle, WA 98105 (206)547-0393 x118 (206) 547-1093 FAX On Apr 11, 2009, at 11:34 AM, Meredith Nettles wrote: > Hi, > > Looking in > SeismiQuery / by network / 2009 > the first network entry I see for the year is "7A". Clicking on this, > the calendar header gives the name as "BTO" and the calendar indicates > data available for 2009/06/06 and 2009/06/07 (impressive if it were > true!). Clicking on those dates gives the error message > java.sql.SQLException: ORA-00980: synonym translation is no longer > valid > > This is probably not a real network code? > > Thanks, > > Meredith > _______________________________________________ > data-issues mailing list > data-issues at iris.washington.edu > http://www.iris.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/data-issues From rick at iris.washington.edu Sat Apr 11 12:59:34 2009 From: rick at iris.washington.edu (Rick Benson) Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 12:59:34 -0700 Subject: [data-issues] funny network code "7A" in 2009 SeismiQuery list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4B2CD888-7E45-4C0E-9803-BF10817E4905@iris.washington.edu> Hello, Meredith- Indeed, this network 7A has been assigned and is legitimate. These networks that have leading numerics were initiated by the RSES group in Australia for their temporary networks. The virtual network is http://www.iris.edu/vnets?vnet=_ANU , or you can see all assigned network codes with http://www.iris.edu/mda, or starting with all temporary network codes with http://www.iris.edu/mda#tnetlist The text using SeismiQuery should have referred to BTL as the network name for 7A, not BTO, and we will look into why you get into this mouse trap with SeismiQuery on Monday. Thanks for the note, Rick On Apr 11, 2009, at 11:34 AM, Meredith Nettles wrote: > Hi, > > Looking in > SeismiQuery / by network / 2009 > the first network entry I see for the year is "7A". Clicking on this, > the calendar header gives the name as "BTO" and the calendar indicates > data available for 2009/06/06 and 2009/06/07 (impressive if it were > true!). Clicking on those dates gives the error message > java.sql.SQLException: ORA-00980: synonym translation is no longer > valid > > This is probably not a real network code? > > Thanks, > > Meredith > _______________________________________________ > data-issues mailing list > data-issues at iris.washington.edu > http://www.iris.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/data-issues ================ Rick Benson Director of Operations IRIS DMC (206)547-0393 ext. 119(office) rick at iris.washington.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nettles at ldeo.columbia.edu Sat Apr 11 13:35:36 2009 From: nettles at ldeo.columbia.edu (Meredith Nettles) Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 16:35:36 -0400 Subject: [data-issues] funny network code "7A" in 2009 SeismiQuery list In-Reply-To: <4B2CD888-7E45-4C0E-9803-BF10817E4905@iris.washington.edu> References: <4B2CD888-7E45-4C0E-9803-BF10817E4905@iris.washington.edu> Message-ID: <1DCA936A-AAC2-439F-8834-6A08C9C5F147@ldeo.columbia.edu> Hi Rick, Tim, Okay, good to know. Tim's note explains why no stations showed up when I tried to use SeismiQuery to find whether there were stations associated with the code - sounds like none exist yet. So I will ignore it (but I will still doubt the validity of any data from June, 2009, for at least a few more weeks!). Thanks, Meredith From crotwell at seis.sc.edu Wed Apr 29 08:10:20 2009 From: crotwell at seis.sc.edu (Philip Crotwell) Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:10:20 -0400 Subject: [data-issues] bad num samples TS.DGR. .BHZ Message-ID: <1e63606c0904290810w424757b0tc2756ef2611fb978@mail.gmail.com> Hi Just saw this, probably falls in the "old garbage" category, but looks like the is a discrepancy between the header and compressed number of samples. Chris might be better able to explaine which value comes from where, but I think I remember that the "header" value in DHI comes from the database, while the "decompressed" value comes from the miniseed b1000s for the seismogram. The problem also appears for BHN but at least for me not BHE. If you have SOD installed, you can reproduce this with: find_events -b 1993-07-11 -e 1993-07-11 -m 6.2 -r | find_stations -n TS -s DGR -r | find_seismograms -c BHZ -B -2P -E 5P Anyway, just letting you know... thanks, Philip rabbit:~/tmp crotwell$ find_events -b 1993-07-11 -e 1993-07-11 -m 6.2 -r | find_stations -n TS -s DGR -r | find_seismograms -c BHZ -B -2P -E 5P -117.0090 33.6500 700. DGR -70.5700 -25.3600 30 1993_192_13_36_019 6.8MS 2009-04-29 11:06:41,911 - EventChannelPair: Event: Near Coast Of Northern Chile | 07/11/1993 13:36:19 GMT | Mag: 6.8 | Depth 30.00 km | (-25.36, -70.57) TS.19880404T00:00:00.000Z.DGR. .BHZ.19930622T00:00:00.000Z Event station subsetter in progress edu.iris.dmc.seedcodec.SteimException: Number of samples decompressed doesn't match number in header: 3703 != 3704 at edu.iris.dmc.seedcodec.Steim2.decode(Steim2.java:83) at edu.iris.dmc.seedcodec.Codec.decompress(Codec.java:129) at edu.iris.Fissures.seismogramDC.LocalSeismogramImpl.decodeBits(LocalSeismogramImpl.java:1395)