Scripts 01-08 implement the complete cosmic-ray/earthquake correlation analysis from data ingestion through out-of-sample validation and combined timeseries sinusoid fitting. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
1.7 KiB
1.7 KiB
Cosmic Ray / Earthquake Correlation Study
Scientific context
Testing Homola et al. 2023 (JASTP 247, 106068, DOI 10.1016/j.jastp.2023.106068) which claims a 6σ correlation between cosmic ray rate variations and global seismic activity at a 15-day lag, with ~11-year periodicity. Prior replication attempt using independent NMDB data failed. This project is a rigorous methodological replication + stress test.
Key hypotheses to test
- The 15-day lag signal survives phase-randomised surrogate null models
- The signal survives solar cycle detrending (both series share an ~11-year component)
- The signal is stable across NMDB station subsets
- The signal is stable across time windows (e.g., 1980-95, 1995-2010, 2005-19)
- The signal appears with seismic moment (M₀ ∝ 10^(1.5Mw)) not raw magnitude sum
Data sources
- NMDB: http://nest.nmdb.eu (44 stations, pressure-corrected hourly neutron counts)
- USGS: earthquake catalogue (M≥4.5 for completeness)
- SIDC/KSO: daily sunspot numbers
- Reference: Pierre Auger scaler data (optional, secondary)
Hardware
- CPU: Xeon E5-2680 v4 (14 physical / 28 logical cores)
- RAM: 60 GB
- GPU: Nvidia M40, 12 GB VRAM, compute capability 5.2 (CUDA 11.x max)
- Prefer CuPy over PyTorch for FFT work; M40 does not support bfloat16
Code standards
- Python 3.11+, type hints required for public functions
- pytest for all data-transformation functions
- Keep raw data in
data/raw/, processed indata/processed/, results inresults/ - All station metadata (lat, lon, altitude, rigidity cutoff) in
config/stations.yaml - Seed all random operations; log seed + git SHA in every results file
- Use
polarsorpandaswithpyarrowbackend (not default pandas) for speed