2014
DOI: 10.1186/bf03351726
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Geometry of slab, intraslab stress field and its tectonic implication in the Nankai trough, Japan

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
20
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
1
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Examples are either a localized bending within the anticlinal thrust sheets [Cai et al, 1995] as in C0001, or a much larger scale plate bending associated with subducting slab that causes a stress localization depending on characteristic geometry and motion pattern of the slab [Xu and Kono, 2002;Zhao et al, 2003]. In principle, these factors are related to inhomogeneous deformation that consequently induces local perturbation of in situ stress.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Examples are either a localized bending within the anticlinal thrust sheets [Cai et al, 1995] as in C0001, or a much larger scale plate bending associated with subducting slab that causes a stress localization depending on characteristic geometry and motion pattern of the slab [Xu and Kono, 2002;Zhao et al, 2003]. In principle, these factors are related to inhomogeneous deformation that consequently induces local perturbation of in situ stress.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is possible, therefore, that the lack of high-resolution locations along the Hellenic subduction zone hides the existence of a DWBZ and leads to the observed heterogeneity in sector 4. Two types of stress fields have been identified in the Nankai subduction zone (Xu and Kono, 2002); these have been explained by differences in the geometry and age of the subducting zone.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is a younger subduction history that dip angle of subduction is about 10 ± 3 • [44]. The younger subduction motions encounter strong resistance from the front plate [45,46]. The seismic velocity beneath the NSSB is less than that beneath the central plateau [47].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%