2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.softx.2019.03.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

FMC—Earthquake focal mechanisms data management, cluster and classification

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 70 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 60 publications
0
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Each pole of the diagram represents one of the three pure styles of deformation (pure strike-slip, pure normal or pure reverse motion). For each focal mechanism, Kaverina diagrams (e.g., Alvarez-Gómez, 2019)…”
Section: Focal Mechanism Computationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Each pole of the diagram represents one of the three pure styles of deformation (pure strike-slip, pure normal or pure reverse motion). For each focal mechanism, Kaverina diagrams (e.g., Alvarez-Gómez, 2019)…”
Section: Focal Mechanism Computationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The RMS values of earthquakes were estimated from the average of the P and T direction variability shown in Table S2 and the supporting information “focal_mechanisms_uncertenties.Rar.” The Events 12, 17, and 20 are composite focal mechanism, for details see methodological section 3.3. (b) Kaverina plot of the focal mechanisms, where the number of each mechanism is the same as in (a) (this plot was made using the FMC software of Alvarez‐Gomez, 2019). (c) The meaning of each area in the Kaverina plot.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An important tectonic issue is defining the faulting type of focal mechanisms and the tectonic regime of an area. To determine the faulting type of focal mechanisms objectively, we employed Kaverina et al's plot classification (Kaverina et al, 1996) using the FMC open source software (Alvarez‐Gomez, 2019). This classification depends on the plunge of the P , T , and B axis of each focal mechanism and allows the faulting type to be described as normal, reverse, strike‐slip, or a mixture between them—either normal strike‐slip or strike‐slip normal depending on the predominant displacement component.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since each inversion contains clusters of unique dimensions, we facilitate comparison between the earthquake‐only and the earthquake‐and‐SSE inversion results by designating groups of clusters that span similar spatial areas, labeled EI#, for groups from the earthquake‐only inversion, and ESI# for groups from the earthquake and SSE inversion. We utilize Kaverina‐type rupture classification diagrams (Kagan, 2005; Kaverina et al., 1996) generated by FMC (Álvarez‐Gómez, 2019) to visualize the rupture type of focal mechanism data to determine each group. Kaverina‐type ternary diagrams classify events into seven rupture types based on the plunges of the P, B, and T centroid moment tensor axes: (1) strike‐slip; (2) strike‐slip–normal; (3) strike‐slip–reverse; (4) normal–strike‐slip; (5) reverse–strike‐slip; (6) normal; and (7) reverse (Figure 3).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%