USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70020377

Global teleseismic earthquake relocation with improved travel times and procedures for depth determination

Abstract

We relocate nearly 100,000 events that occurred during the period 1964 to 1995 and are well-constrained teleseismically by arrival-time data reported to the International Seismological Centre ( ISC ) and to the U.S. Geological Survey's National Earthquake Information Center ( NEIC ). Hypocenter determination is significantly improved by using, in addition to regional and teleseismic P and S phases, the arrival times of PKiKP, PKPdf , and the teleseismic depth phases pP, pwP , and sP in the relocation procedure. A global probability model developed for later-arriving phases is used to independently identify the depth phases. The relocations are compared to hypocenters reported in the ISC and NEIC catalogs and by other sources. Differences in our epicenters with respect to ISC and NEIC estimates are generally small and regionally systematic due to the combined effects of the observing station network and plate geometry regionally, differences in upper mantle travel times between the reference earth models used, and the use of later-arriving phases. Focal depths are improved substantially over most other independent estimates, demonstrating (for example) how regional structures such as downgoing slabs can severely bias depth estimation when only regional and teleseismic P arrivals are used to determine the hypocenter. The new data base, which is complete to about Mw 5.2 and includes all events for which moment-tensor solutions are available, has immediate application to high-resolution definition of Wadati-Benioff Zones ( WBZ s) worldwide, regional and global tomographic imaging, and other studies of earth structure.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Engdah E. Robert, R. D. Van Hilst, Raymond P. Buland. 1998-06-01. Global teleseismic earthquake relocation with improved travel times and procedures for depth determination. https://doi.org/10.1785/bssa0880030722

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗