Community-Driven Code Comparisons for Three-Dimensional Dynamic Modeling of Sequences of Earthquakes and Aseismic Slip (SEAS)

Abstract

We pursue community efforts to develop code verification benchmarks for three-dimensional earthquake rupture and crustal faulting problems• We assess the agreement and discrepancies of seismic and aseismic fault behavior among simulations based on different numerical methods

Subduction earthquake cycles controlled by episodic fluid pressure cycling

“…Despite a simplified model setup, our hydro-mechanical earthquake cycle models demonstrate the ability to capture a rich variety of seismic processes. However, we recognize that in order to make a full comparison to subduction megathrust in geological settings we need to understand how the reported fluid-driven instabilities manifest in three dimensions (e.g., Jiang et al, 2022). Inelastic changes of porosity and permeability, which can arise from fractures (e.g., Rutqvist, 2015), shear-induced dilatancy (e.g., Segall and Rice, 1995), temperaturedependent rock (de)hydration (e.g., Poulet et al, 2014), and mineral precipitation in pores (e.g., Renard et al, 2000;Tenthorey et al, 2003), have been neglected for simplicity.…”

Linking 3D long-term slow-slip cycle models with rupture dynamics: the nucleation of the 2014 Mw 7.3 Guerrero, Mexico earthquake

“…and 3D community benchmark exercises (Jiang et al, 2022;Erickson et al, 2023). We here use the quasi-dynamic approach approximating inertia effects with radiation damping for our SSE cycle simulations.…”

“…To this end, the radiation damping factor η = µ/(2c s ) (with c s being the shear wave speed) has been introduced (Rice, 1993). Compared to fully dynamic simulations, the quasi-dynamic approach can lead to similar overall seismic cycle behavior but differing rupture dynamics Jiang et al, 2022). We detail all slow-slip cycle modeling parameters in the following.…”

“…Cattania and Segall (2021) use 1D fractally rough faults and heterogeneous effective normal stress to model the spatiotemporal relationships between precursory slow slip and clusters of foreshocks. Due to algorithmic complexity and computational cost (e.g., Jiang et al, 2022;Uphoff et al, 2023), it remains challenging to model the complete dynamics of 3D seismic cycles using a single code for a heterogeneous, geometrically complex subduction zone (see Supplementary Text S1). Such modeling should also allow for observational data validation, as we undertake here.…”

Spatio‐Temporal Clustering of Seismicity Enabled by Off‐Fault Plasticity

“…Simulating a single rupture may not be sufficient to get insights into the full history of fault slip as it involves artificial nucleation and depends critically on the prescribed initial conditions (Ampuero & Ben‐Zion, 2008). Modeling Sequence of Earthquake and Aseismic Slip (SEAS) bridges the spatio‐temporal scales to illuminate the pattern of earthquake cycles over a long time as well as evolution of fault slip both during seismic ruptures and inter‐seismic intervals (Abdelmeguid et al., 2019; Erickson et al., 2020; Jiang et al., 2022; Lapusta & Liu, 2009; Lapusta et al., 2000).…”