2019
DOI: 10.1007/s00024-019-02160-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Scaling Relationships of Source Parameters of Inland Crustal Earthquakes in Tectonically Active Regions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
10
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
4
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our analysis reveals that potency density is independent of rupture size, considering ruptures of the same type and tectonic setting, consistent with seismological studies of stress drop (Allmann & Shearer, 2009; Kanamori & Anderson, 1975; Miyakoshi et al, 2019; Venkataraman & Kanamori, 2004; Ye et al, 2016b). The independence of potency density with size for ruptures of any type is compatible with the idea that stress drop or potency density is a fundamental property of ruptures leading to self‐similarity of the earthquake phenomenon (Cocco et al, 2016).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Our analysis reveals that potency density is independent of rupture size, considering ruptures of the same type and tectonic setting, consistent with seismological studies of stress drop (Allmann & Shearer, 2009; Kanamori & Anderson, 1975; Miyakoshi et al, 2019; Venkataraman & Kanamori, 2004; Ye et al, 2016b). The independence of potency density with size for ruptures of any type is compatible with the idea that stress drop or potency density is a fundamental property of ruptures leading to self‐similarity of the earthquake phenomenon (Cocco et al, 2016).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…As it is a difficult issue to choose the appropriate area for the Δσ E calculation (Brown et al, 2015), we also calculate the stress drop using all subfaults and the subfaults with D > 0.5 × D max (the region marked by green lines in Figure 4a), and we obtain Δσ E = 3.3 MPa and Δσ E = 6.8 MPa, respectively. This value seems not so small as expected for the interplate earthquakes (∼10 0 MPa, e.g., Kanamori & Anderson, 1975), but rather is consistent with the intraplate earthquakes, which generally have larger stress drop values (e.g., Miyakoshi et al, 2020;Somerville et al, 1999).…”
Section: Stress Dropsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…Considering this range, the estimated fault dimensions are obviously smaller than expected based on the scaling relation. These much smaller fault dimensions are consistent with the size of the asperity, defined as the region of the large slip on the fault (e.g., Somerville et al, 1999), expected from the empirical relation deduced from the inland crustal earthquakes (Miyakoshi et al, 2020;Somerville et al, 1999). This may suggest that this optimum rectangular fault corresponds to the asperity.…”
Section: Rectangular Fault Model With Uniform Slipmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4). The stress drops recently obtained by Miyakoshi et al (2020) are also plotted in Figure 4, again showcasing the systematic tendency of larger stress drops for the Iranian earthquakes, although the values estimated by Miyakoshi et al (2020) were obtained via seismic waveform inversion analyses, which can lead to different results (which was the case for the 2014 Nagano earthquake). Manighetti et al (2007) pointed out that the earthquake stress drop has a strong relationship with the structural maturity of the ruptured fault.…”
Section: High Stress Drops Of the Iranian Earthquakesmentioning
confidence: 74%
“…(2) A larger stress drop leads to the radiation of strong short-period ground motions. The stress drop is a key parameter for the estimation of strong ground motions caused by earthquake ruptures (e.g., Miyakoshi et al 2020;Soghrat et al 2012). We compared the stress drops of the studied Iranian earthquakes with those of the Japanese earthquakes obtained from our earlier study (Ghayournajarkar and Fukushima 2022) and other studies.…”
Section: Analysis and Results Of Fault Parameter Estimationmentioning
confidence: 99%