krischer
commented
2 years ago So the comment identifier does not have to be unique?
This is not hard-coded in the core of DUGSeis and could be changed for each processing script: https://github.com/swiss-seismological-service/DUGseis/blob/0cefbff2edd83f8a8d55d52ea0af97790a79ae50/scripts/run_processing.py#L132-L136
One could either add a resource identifier with the proper string or an actual event type object.
kaestli
Currently, event classificatiions are stored as quakeML "comment" objects, with "id" attribute set to a random UUID, and "text" to (e.g.): "Classification: passive". This is a misinterpretation of the quakeML event object. comment ID is intended to hold an identifyer of the comment type; e.g. "smi:ch.ethz.bedrettolab/DUGseis-eventclass", and text the actual value of the comment, e.g. "active". This will allow a later user of the data to find/extract all comments of the same type.
Having said that, for the classification of interest, quakeML also offers an explicit data field: event.eventtype, being one of: not existing • not reported • earthquake • anthropogenic event • collapse • cavity collapse • mine collapse • building collapse • explosion • accidental explosion • chemical explosion • controlled explosion • experimental explosion • industrial explosion • mining explosion • quarry blast • road cut • blasting levee • nuclear explosion • induced or triggered event • rock burst • reservoir loading • fluid injection • fluid extraction • crash • plane crash • train crash • boat crash • other event • atmospheric event • sonic boom • sonic blast • acoustic noise • thunder • avalanche • snow avalanche • debris avalanche • hydroacoustic event • ice quake if all classes can be satisfied from this list, it would be more straight-forward to use event.eventtype for classification than a custom comment.