Chaoyong Peng

Prof. Chaoyong Peng

Institute of Geophysics, China earthquake administration, Beijing, China
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

14Years (2013-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 July 2014 in Computers & Geosciences
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ZXZhiqiang Xu
Zhiqiang Xu
JYJiansi Yang
Jiansi Yang
CPChaoyong Peng
Chaoyong Peng
YWYing Wu
Ying Wu
XJXudong Jiang
Xudong Jiang
BTBaofeng Tian
Baofeng Tian

1 March 2017 in Computers & Geosciences
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CPChaoyong Peng
Chaoyong Peng
YCYang Chen
Yang Chen
Quansheng ChenQuansheng Chen
Quansheng Chen
JYJiansi Yang
Jiansi Yang
HWHongti Wang
Hongti Wang
YZYu Zheng
Yu Zheng

30 August 2022 in Remote Sensing
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CPChaoyong Peng
Chaoyong Peng
PJPeng Jiang
Peng Jiang
QMQiang Ma
Qiang Ma
JSJinrong Su
Jinrong Su
YCYichuan Cai
Yichuan Cai
YZYu Zheng
Yu Zheng
As one of the most earthquake-prone regions in the world, China faces extremely serious earthquake threats, especially for those heavily populated urban areas located near large fault zones. To improve the ability to prevent and minimize earthquake disaster risks, and to reduce earthquake disaster losses, China is currently building a nationwide earthquake early warning system (EEWS) with the largest seismic network in the world. In this paper, we present the newest progress of this project through describing the overall architecture of the national EEWS and evaluating the system performance during the 2022 Lushan M6.1 earthquake. The accuracy of the source characterization for the Lushan earthquake is discussed by comparing the continually estimated location and magnitude with the catalogs obtained from the China Earthquake Networks Center. For this earthquake, the EEWS generated a total of five alerts, and an initial alert was created 5.7 s after its occurrence, with excellent epicentral location and origin time estimation. The final alert was issued 16.5 s after origin time with a magnitude estimate of M6.1, the same as the catalog value. However, from the point view of alerting performance, the radius of the real blind zone without warning time was about 30 km and much larger than the theoretical result, mainly caused by the releasing system not considering the epicenter distance of each terminal when issuing the alerts. Although the earthquake exposed some limitations that need to be addressed in future upgrades, the results showed that most aspects of the EEWS presented a robust performance, with continuous, reliable event detections and early-warning information releasing.

1 July 2013 in Computers & Geosciences
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CPChaoyong Peng
Chaoyong Peng
XZXiaoyi Zhu
Xiaoyi Zhu
JYJiansi Yang
Jiansi Yang
BXBing Xue
Bing Xue
YCYang Chen
Yang Chen

18 February 2017 in Geophysical Research Letters
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
CPChaoyong Peng
Chaoyong Peng
JYJ. S. Yang
J. S. Yang
YZY. Zheng
Y. Zheng
XZX. Y. Zhu
X. Y. Zhu
ZXZ. Q. Xu
Z. Q. Xu
YCY. Chen
Y. Chen

29 January 2020 in Seismological Research Letters
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
CPChaoyong Peng
Chaoyong Peng
QMQiang Ma
Qiang Ma
PJPeng Jiang
Peng Jiang
WHWenhui Huang
Wenhui Huang
DYDake Yang
Dake Yang
JYJiansi Yang
Jiansi Yang
Earthquake early warning systems (EEWSs) are considered to be one of the most effective means for seismic risk mitigation, in terms of both losses and societal resilience, by releasing an alarm immediately after an earthquake occurs and before strong ground shaking arrives the target sites to be protected. To gain experience for the National System for Fast Seismic Intensity Report and Earthquake Early Warning project, we deployed a hybrid demonstration EEWS in the Sichuan–Yunnan border region with micro‐electro‐mechanical system‐based sensors and broadband seismographs and low‐latency data transmission. In this study, we described the structure of this EEWS and analyzed its performance in the first 2 yr from January 2017 to December 2018. During this test period, the EEWS detected and processed a total of 126 ML 3.0+ earthquakes, with excellent epicentral location and magnitude estimation. The average location and magnitude estimation errors for the first alert were 4.2±7.1  km and 0.2±0.31⁠, respectively. For the earthquakes that occurred inside and outside the hybrid network, the first alert was generated 13.4±5.1  s and 26.3±13.5  s after the origin time (OT), respectively. We analyzed the performance of the EEWS for the 31 October 2018 M 5.1 earthquake, because it was the largest event that occurred inside the hybrid network during the test period. The first alert was obtained at 7.5 s after the OT, with a magnitude error of 0.1 magnitude unit, a location error of about 1 km, and a depth error of 8 km. Finally, we discussed the main differences between the EEWS’s estimates and the catalogs obtained by the China Earthquake Network Center, and proposed improvements to reduce the reporting time. This study demonstrated that we constructed a reliable, effective hybrid EEWS for the test region, which can provide sufficient support for the design of the National EEWS project.