USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70032768

Seismicity associated with the Sumatra-Andaman Islands earthquake of 26 December 2004

Abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey/National Earthquake Information Center (USGS/ NEIC) had computed origins for 5000 earthquakes in the Sumatra-Andaman Islands region in the first 36 weeks after the Sumatra-Andaman Islands mainshock of 26 December 2004. The cataloging of earthquakes of mb (USGS) 5.1 and larger is essentially complete for the time period except for the first half-day following the 26 December mainshock, a period of about two hours following the Nias earthquake of 28 March 2005, and occasionally during the Andaman Sea swarm of 26-30 January 2005. Moderate and larger (mb ???5.5) aftershocks are absent from most of the deep interplate thrust faults of the segments of the Sumatra-Andaman Islands subduction zone on which the 26 December mainshock occurred, which probably reflects nearly complete release of elastic strain on the seismogenic interplate-thrust during the mainshock. An exceptional thrust-fault source offshore of Banda Aceh may represent a segment of the interplate thrust that was bypassed during the mainshock. The 26 December mainshock triggered a high level of aftershock activity near the axis of the Sunda trench and the leading edge of the overthrust Burma plate. Much near-trench activity is intraplate activity within the subducting plate, but some shallow-focus, near-trench, reverse-fault earthquakes may represent an unusual seismogenic release of interplate compressional stress near the tip of the overriding plate. The interplate-thrust Nias earthquake of 28 March 2005, in contrast to the 26 December aftershock sequence, was followed by many interplate-thrust aftershocks along the length of its inferred rupture zone.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J. W. Dewey, G. Choy, B. Presgrave, S. Sipkin, Arthur C. Tarr, H. Benz, P. Earle, D. Wald. 2007-01-01. Seismicity associated with the Sumatra-Andaman Islands earthquake of 26 December 2004. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120050626

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↗