Probability of Detecting an Earthquake

We present a new method for estimating earthquake detection proba- bilities that avoids assumptions about earthquake occurrence, for example, the event-size distribution, and uses only empirical data: phase data, station infor- mation, and network-specific attenuation relations. First, we determine the detection probability for each station as a function of magnitude and hypocentral distance, using data from past earthquakes. Second, we combine the detection probabilities of sta- tions using a basic combinatoric procedure to determine the probability that a hy- pothetical earthquake with a given size and location could escape detection. Finally, we synthesize detection-probability maps for earthquakes of particular magnitudes and probability-based completeness maps. Because the method relies only on detec- tion probabilities of stations, it can also be used to evaluate hypothetical additions or deletions of stations as well as scenario computations of a network crisis. The new approach has several advantages: completeness is analyzed as a function of network properties instead of earthquake samples; thus, no event-size distribution is assumed. Estimating completeness is becoming possible in regions of sparse data where meth- ods based on parametric earthquake catalogs fail. We find that the catalog of the Southern California Seismic Network (SCSN) has, for most of the region, a lower magnitude of completeness than that computed using traditional techniques, although in some places traditional techniques provide lower estimates. The network reliably records earthquakes smaller than magnitude 1.0 in some places and 1.0 in the seis- mically active regions. However, it does not achieve the desired completeness of mag- nitude ML 1:8 everywhere in its authoritative region. A complete detection is achieved at ML 3:4 in the entire authoritative region; thus, at the boundaries, earthquakes as large as ML 3:3 might escape detection.

[1]  I N Bronstein,et al.  Taschenbuch der Mathematik , 1966 .

[2]  Shinji Toda,et al.  Response of the San Andreas fault to the 1983 Coalinga-Nuñez earthquakes: An application of interaction-based probabilities for Parkfield , 2002 .

[3]  J. Gomberg Seismicity and detection/location threshold in the Southern Great Basin Seismic Network , 1991 .

[4]  D. Amorèse Applying a Change-Point Detection Method on Frequency-Magnitude Distributions , 2007 .

[5]  E. Hauksson,et al.  Southern California Seismic Network Update , 2006 .

[6]  S. Wiemer,et al.  Spatial variability of seismicity parameters in aftershock zones , 1999 .

[7]  H. Kanamori,et al.  Determination of earthquake energy release and ML using TERRAscope , 1993 .

[8]  S. Wiemer,et al.  Assessing the Quality of Earthquake Catalogues: Estimating the Magnitude of Completeness and Its Uncertainty , 2005 .

[10]  Bernice Bender,et al.  Maximum likelihood estimation of b values for magnitude grouped data , 1983 .

[11]  Stephen S. Gao,et al.  Temporal variation of seismic b‐values beneath northeastern Japan island arc , 2002 .

[12]  Paul A. Rydelek,et al.  Testing the completeness of earthquake catalogues and the hypothesis of self-similarity , 1989, Nature.

[13]  B. Gutenberg,et al.  Frequency of Earthquakes in California , 1944, Nature.

[14]  M. Wyss,et al.  Mapping spatial variability of the frequency-magnitude distribution of earthquakes , 2002 .

[16]  T. Utsu A method for determining the value of b in a formula log n=a-bM showing the magnitude frequency relation for earthquakes , 1965 .

[17]  E. Hauksson,et al.  The 1997 Kagoshima (Japan) earthquake doublet: A quantitative analysis of aftershock rate changes , 2004 .

[18]  R. Stein The role of stress transfer in earthquake occurrence , 1999, Nature.

[19]  M. Wyss,et al.  Minimum Magnitude of Completeness in Earthquake Catalogs: Examples from Alaska, the Western United States, and Japan , 2000 .

[20]  Walter H. F. Smith,et al.  Free software helps map and display data , 1991 .

[21]  D. Marsan Triggering of seismicity at short timescales following Californian earthquakes , 2003 .

[22]  P. Reasenberg,et al.  Earthquake triggering by seismic waves following the Landers and Hector Mine earthquakes , 2001, Nature.

[23]  Stefan Wiemer,et al.  Seismic quiescence before the landers (M = 7.5) and big bear (M = 6.5) 1992 earthquakes , 1994 .

[24]  Y. Ogata Seismicity Analysis through Point-process Modeling: A Review , 1999 .

[25]  K. Aki 17. Maximum Likelihood Estimate of b in the Formula logN=a-bM and its Confidence Limits , 1965 .

[26]  F. Ringdal,et al.  Optimized Seismic Threshold Monitoring – Part 1: Regional Processing , 2002 .

[27]  C. Cornell Engineering seismic risk analysis , 1968 .

[28]  Matthew C. Gerstenberger,et al.  Real-time forecasts of tomorrow's earthquakes in California , 2005, Nature.