Literature DB >> 31597971

Real-time discrimination of earthquake foreshocks and aftershocks.

Laura Gulia1, Stefan Wiemer2.   

Abstract

Immediately after a large earthquake, the main question asked by the public and decision-makers is whether it was the mainshock or a foreshock to an even stronger event yet to come. So far, scientists can only offer empirical evidence from statistical compilations of past sequences, arguing that normally the aftershock sequence will decay gradually whereas the occurrence of a forthcoming larger event has a probability of a few per cent. Here we analyse the average size distribution of aftershocks of the recent Amatrice-Norcia and Kumamoto earthquake sequences, and we suggest that in many cases it may be possible to discriminate whether an ongoing sequence represents a decaying aftershock sequence or foreshocks to an upcoming large event. We propose a simple traffic light classification to assess in real time the level of concern about a subsequent larger event and test it against 58 sequences, achieving a classification accuracy of 95 per cent.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31597971     DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-1606-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nature        ISSN: 0028-0836            Impact factor:   49.962


  7 in total

1.  Earthquake conversations.

Authors:  Ross S Stein
Journal:  Sci Am       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 2.142

2.  Variations in earthquake-size distribution across different stress regimes.

Authors:  Danijel Schorlemmer; Stefan Wiemer; Max Wyss
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2005-09-22       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Real-time forecasts of tomorrow's earthquakes in California.

Authors:  Matthew C Gerstenberger; Stefan Wiemer; Lucile M Jones; Paul A Reasenberg
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2005-05-19       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  California aftershock hazard forecasts.

Authors:  P A Reasenberg; L M Jones
Journal:  Science       Date:  1990-01-19       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Geophysics. Recognizing foreshocks from the 1 April 2014 Chile earthquake.

Authors:  Emily E Brodsky; Thorne Lay
Journal:  Science       Date:  2014-05-16       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  The debate on the prognostic value of earthquake foreshocks: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Arnaud Mignan
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2014-02-14       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Induced seismicity closed-form traffic light system for actuarial decision-making during deep fluid injections.

Authors:  A Mignan; M Broccardo; S Wiemer; D Giardini
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-10-19       Impact factor: 4.379

  7 in total
  10 in total

1.  Gauss curvature-based unique signatures of individual large earthquakes and its implications for customized data-driven prediction.

Authors:  In Ho Cho
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-05-23       Impact factor: 4.996

2.  No Significant Effect of Coulomb Stress on the Gutenberg-Richter Law after the Landers Earthquake.

Authors:  Víctor Navas-Portella; Abigail Jiménez; Álvaro Corral
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Were changes in stress state responsible for the 2019 Ridgecrest, California, earthquakes?

Authors:  K Z Nanjo
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-06-17       Impact factor: 14.919

4.  Acoustic Energy Release During the Laboratory Seismic Cycle: Insights on Laboratory Earthquake Precursors and Prediction.

Authors:  David C Bolton; Srisharan Shreedharan; Jacques Rivière; Chris Marone
Journal:  J Geophys Res Solid Earth       Date:  2020-08-11       Impact factor: 3.848

5.  Imaging dynamic three-dimensional traction stresses.

Authors:  Yuanzhe Li; Pengpeng Bai; Hui Cao; Lvzhou Li; Xinxin Li; Xin Hou; Jingbo Fang; Jingyang Li; Yonggang Meng; Liran Ma; Yu Tian
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 14.136

6.  Temporal Variation of b Value with Statistical Test in Wenchuan Area, China Prior to the 2008 Wenchuan Earthquake.

Authors:  Weiyun Xie; Katsumi Hattori; Peng Han; Haixia Shi
Journal:  Entropy (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 2.738

7.  Frequency-Magnitude Statistics of Laboratory Foreshocks Vary With Shear Velocity, Fault Slip Rate, and Shear Stress.

Authors:  David C Bolton; Srisharan Shreedharan; Jacques Rivière; Chris Marone
Journal:  J Geophys Res Solid Earth       Date:  2021-11-12       Impact factor: 4.390

8.  Revealing the spatiotemporal complexity of the magnitude distribution and b-value during an earthquake sequence.

Authors:  Marcus Herrmann; Ester Piegari; Warner Marzocchi
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-08-29       Impact factor: 17.694

9.  Rock and fault rheology explain differences between on fault and distributed seismicity.

Authors:  C Collettini; M R Barchi; N De Paola; F Trippetta; E Tinti
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-09-26       Impact factor: 17.694

10.  The influence of the brittle-ductile transition zone on aftershock and foreshock occurrence.

Authors:  Giuseppe Petrillo; Eugenio Lippiello; François P Landes; Alberto Rosso
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-06-15       Impact factor: 14.919

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.