2019
DOI: 10.1785/0220180257
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Complete Automatic Procedure to Compile Reliable Seismic Catalogs and Travel‐Time and Strong‐Motion Parameters Datasets

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(2014) and Scafidi et al. (2019), P and S onsets are detected, event locations and local magnitudes are estimated, and features related to M 0 and E S are extracted from recordings. Uncertainties in event location are mostly within 1 km both horizontally and vertically (Figure S1 in Supporting Information ).…”
Section: Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…(2014) and Scafidi et al. (2019), P and S onsets are detected, event locations and local magnitudes are estimated, and features related to M 0 and E S are extracted from recordings. Uncertainties in event location are mostly within 1 km both horizontally and vertically (Figure S1 in Supporting Information ).…”
Section: Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this study, we consider the period from the 1st January 2005 to the 31st December 2009. Following the automatic procedure described in Spallarossa et al (2014) and Scafidi et al (2019), P and S onsets are detected, event locations and local magnitudes are estimated, and features related to M 0 and E S are extracted from recordings. Uncertainties in event location are mostly within 1 km both horizontally and vertically (Figure S1 in Supporting Information S1).…”
Section: Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One entire year of seismic activity reconstructed with the information derived from all the 155 permanent and temporary (stand-alone) stations installed soon after the first (Amatrice) mainshock of the sequence by both INGV mobile network pool, the British Geological Survey and Edinburgh University. Event detection, P- and S-wave arrival times and maximum amplitudes to be used for local magnitude computation, were automatically estimated using a combination of the Complete Automatic Seismic Processor (CASP 40 ) and RSNI-Picker2 procedures 41 , 42 . Arrival time residuals were minimized using the grid search program NonLinLoc 35 together with a 1D velocity model with homogeneous layers (after De Luca et al .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For generating the catalogues, the IpoP code 31 , 32 , the Complete Automatic Seismic Processor (CASP 40 ) and RSNI-Picker2 41 , 42 are available upon request. All of the other codes are all open access: NonLinLoc software 35 used for CAT1 and CAT3; HypoDD 36 , 38 for CAT2, CAT4 and CAT5; PhaseNet picker 14 , (REAL) package 48 , Velest code 49 and HypoInverse software 50 used for generating the dataset of CAT5.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The comprehensive study of microseismicity can provide a valuable description of the geological medium properties and earthquake related processes in the investigated crustal volumes, such as for instance the identification and geometrical characterization of active fault structures (Shearer, 2002;Hauksson and Shearer, 2005;Lin et al, 2007;De Landro et al, 2015;Adinolfi et al, 2019;Battimelli et al, 2019;Adinolfi et al, 2022), the study of the regional stress field (De Matteis et al, 2012;Terakawa, 2017;Maeda et al, 2020;De Matteis et al, 2021), the small-scale variability of faulting style, stress and strength (Prieto et al, 2004;Hardebeck, 2006;Syracuse et al, 2010;Adinolfi et al, 2015;Stabile et al, 2012;Festa et al, 2021), and the assessment of seismic hazard (Schorlemmer and Wiemer, 2005;Bernard et al, 2006;Emolo et al, 2011). Such achievements have led to an increasing demand for managing and analyzing large amounts of seismic data, mostly consisting of small-magnitude seismic events with signals comparable to or even below the noise level, for which analysts' manual operations are unfeasible (Yoon et al, 2015;Perol et al, 2018;Mousavi et al, 2019;Scafidi et al, 2019;Scala et al, 2022). Seismic monitoring is moving towards the development of fully automated and robust processing approaches, able to exploit the nowadays available huge amount of continuous data and to speed up seismic analyses, which are important for seismic risk assessment and reduction practices (Spallarossa et al, 2021a).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%