Nontrivial decay of aftershock density with distance in Southern California

The decay of the aftershock density with distance plays an important role in the discussion of the dominant underlying cause of earthquake triggering. Here, we provide evidence that its form is more complicated than typically assumed and that in particular a transition in the power law decay occurs at length scales comparable to the thickness of the crust. This is supported by an analysis of a very recent high-resolution catalog for Southern California (SC) and surrogate catalogs generated by the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model, which take into account inhomogeneous background activity, short-term aftershock incompleteness, anisotropic triggering, and variations in the observational magnitude threshold. Our findings indicate specifically that the asymptotic decay in the aftershock density with distance is characterized by an exponent larger than 2, which is much bigger than the observed exponent of approximately 1.35 observed for shorter distances ranging from the main shock rupture length up to a length scale comparable to the thickness of the crust. This has also important consequences for time-dependent seismic hazard assessment based on the ETAS model.

[1]  P. Shearer Reply to comment by S. Hainzl on “Self‐similar earthquake triggering, Båth's Law, and foreshock/aftershock magnitudes: Simulations, theory and results for southern California” , 2013 .

[2]  Yosihiko Ogata,et al.  Statistical Models for Earthquake Occurrences and Residual Analysis for Point Processes , 1988 .

[3]  D. Wells,et al.  New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement , 1994, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[4]  K. Felzer,et al.  A model of earthquake triggering probabilities and application to dynamic deformations constrained by ground motion observations , 2008 .

[5]  Yih‐Min Wu,et al.  Empirical Relationships between Aftershock Zone Dimensions and Moment Magnitudes for Plate Boundary Earthquakes in Taiwan , 2013 .

[6]  S. A. Mazhkenov,et al.  On Similarity in the Spatial Distribution of Seismicity , 2013 .

[7]  Tiago P. Peixoto,et al.  Spatiotemporal correlations of aftershock sequences , 2010, 1004.1924.

[8]  Yehuda Ben-Zion,et al.  Earthquake clusters in southern California II: Classification and relation to physical properties of the crust , 2013 .

[9]  B. Gutenberg,et al.  Seismicity of the Earth , 1941 .

[10]  M. Leonard Earthquake Fault Scaling: Self‐Consistent Relating of Rupture Length, Width, Average Displacement, and Moment Release , 2010 .

[11]  M. Baiesi,et al.  Triggering cascades and statistical properties of aftershocks , 2012 .

[12]  G. Molchan,et al.  Aftershock identification: methods and new approaches , 1992 .

[13]  P. Shearer Self-similar earthquake triggering, Båth's law, and foreshock/aftershock magnitudes: Simulations, theory, and results for southern California , 2012 .

[14]  John McCloskey,et al.  Statistical evaluation of characteristic earthquakes in the frequency‐magnitude distributions of Sumatra and other subduction zone regions , 2009 .

[15]  P. Shearer Space-time clustering of seismicity in California and the distance dependence of earthquake triggering , 2012 .

[16]  Sebastian Hainzl,et al.  Dependence of the Omori‐Utsu law parameters on main shock magnitude: Observations and modeling , 2007 .

[17]  Danijel Schorlemmer,et al.  Probability of Detecting an Earthquake , 2008 .

[18]  D. Vere-Jones,et al.  Analyzing earthquake clustering features by using stochastic reconstruction , 2004 .

[19]  Alvaro Corral Local distributions and rate fluctuations in a unified scaling law for earthquakes. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[20]  G. Molchan,et al.  On the spatial scaling of seismicity rate , 2005, physics/0511024.

[21]  Danijel Schorlemmer,et al.  Bayesian analysis of the modified Omori law , 2012 .

[22]  Rodolfo Console,et al.  Refining earthquake clustering models , 2003 .

[23]  O. Lengliné,et al.  Decay and expansion of the early aftershock activity following the 2011, Mw9.0 Tohoku earthquake , 2012 .

[24]  D. Marsan,et al.  Impact of Aseismic Transients on the Estimation of Aftershock Productivity Parameters , 2013 .

[25]  Zhigang Peng,et al.  Migration of early aftershocks following the 2004 Parkfield earthquake , 2009 .

[26]  B. Enescu,et al.  Impact of Earthquake Rupture Extensions on Parameter Estimations of Point-Process Models , 2008 .

[27]  L. Knopoff,et al.  Bursts of aftershocks, long-term precursors of strong earthquakes , 1980, Nature.

[28]  D Sornette,et al.  Diffusion of epicenters of earthquake aftershocks, Omori's law, and generalized continuous-time random walk models. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[29]  Yan Y. Kagan,et al.  Aftershock Zone Scaling , 2002 .

[30]  K. Felzer,et al.  Decay of aftershock density with distance indicates triggering by dynamic stress , 2006, Nature.

[31]  Christian Goltz,et al.  Are seismic waiting time distributions universal , 2004 .

[32]  J. Vidale,et al.  Seismicity rate immediately before and after main shock rupture from high-frequency waveforms in Japan , 2007 .

[33]  P. Shearer,et al.  Applying a three-dimensional velocity model, waveform cross correlation, and cluster analysis to locate southern California seismicity from 1981 to 2005 , 2007 .

[34]  Y. Ogata,et al.  The Centenary of the Omori Formula for a Decay Law of Aftershock Activity , 1995 .

[35]  Hiroo Kanamori,et al.  The diversity of the physics of earthquakes , 2004, Proceedings of the Japan Academy. Series B, Physical and Biological Sciences.

[36]  L. Knopoff,et al.  Statistical Short-Term Earthquake Prediction , 1987, Science.

[37]  P. Shearer,et al.  Waveform Relocated Earthquake Catalog for Southern California (1981 to June 2011) , 2012 .

[38]  Stefan Wiemer,et al.  The influence of tectonic regimes on the earthquake size distribution: A case study for Italy , 2010 .

[39]  Maya Paczuski,et al.  Complex networks of earthquakes and aftershocks , 2004, physics/0408018.

[40]  Y. Kagan,et al.  Comparison of Short-Term and Time-Independent Earthquake Forecast Models for Southern California , 2006 .

[41]  I. Zaliapin,et al.  Earthquake clusters in southern California I: Identification and stability , 2013 .

[42]  Y. Ogata Space-Time Point-Process Models for Earthquake Occurrences , 1998 .

[43]  Ilya Zaliapin,et al.  Clustering analysis of seismicity and aftershock identification. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[44]  Peter Grassberger,et al.  Networks of recurrent events, a theory of records, and an application to finding causal signatures in seismicity. , 2008, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[45]  D. Sornette,et al.  Are aftershocks of large Californian earthquakes diffusing , 2003, physics/0303075.

[46]  Á. Corral,et al.  Scaling behavior of the earthquake intertime distribution: influence of large shocks and time scales in the Omori law. , 2012, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[47]  Y. Kagan Short-Term Properties of Earthquake Catalogs and Models of Earthquake Source , 2004 .

[48]  Y. Kagan Earthquake spatial distribution: the correlation dimension , 2006 .

[49]  Comment on “Self‐similar earthquake triggering, Båth's law, and foreshock/aftershock magnitudes: Simulations, theory, and results for southern California” by P. M. Shearer , 2013 .

[50]  D. Marsan,et al.  Extending Earthquakes' Reach Through Cascading , 2008, Science.

[51]  L. Knopoff,et al.  Is the sequence of earthquakes in Southern California, with aftershocks removed, Poissonian? , 1974, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[52]  Olivier Lengliné,et al.  A new estimation of the decay of aftershock density with distance to the mainshock , 2010 .

[53]  Shinji Toda,et al.  Decay of aftershock density with distance does not indicate triggering by dynamic stress , 2010, Nature.

[54]  M. Baiesi,et al.  Scale-free networks of earthquakes and aftershocks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[55]  G. Brietzke,et al.  Quantitative earthquake forecasts resulting from static stress triggering , 2010 .

[56]  P. Reasenberg Second‐order moment of central California seismicity, 1969–1982 , 1985 .

[57]  D. Turcotte,et al.  Missing data in aftershock sequences: explaining the deviations from scaling laws. , 2008, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.