Rupture process of the 2004 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake

Science

Volumn 308, Issue 5725, 2005, Pages 1133-1139

  Ammon, Charles J ^a   Ji, Chen ^b   Thio, Hong Kie ^c   Robinson, David ^d   Ni, Sidao ^b,e   Hjorleifsdottir, Vala ^b   Kanamori, Hiroo ^b   Lay, Thorne ^f   Das, Shamita ^d   Helmberger, Don ^b   Ichinose, Gene ^c   Polet, Jascha ^g   Wald, David ^h  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^c URS CORPORATION   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF CHINA   (China)

^f UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^g Institute for Crustal Studies   (United States)

^h DENVER FEDERAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CRACK INITIATION; GEOGRAPHICAL REGIONS; SEISMIC WAVES; SEISMOLOGY; SLIP FORMING; TECTONICS;

AFTERSHOCK ZONES; ISLANDS; PLATE BOUNDARY OFFSHORE; RUPTURE PROCESS;

EARTHQUAKE EFFECTS;

EARTHQUAKE; EARTHQUAKE RUPTURE; FOCAL MECHANISM;

AMPLITUDE MODULATION; AUSTRALIA; BOUNDARY LAYER; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EARTHQUAKE; GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM; INDIA; INTERFEROMETER; ISLAND (GEOLOGICAL); KINETICS; LATITUDE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SPIKE WAVE;

INDIAN OCEAN; OCEANIC REGIONS; WORLD;

EID: 21044454988     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1112260     Document Type: Review

References (41)

1. H. Kanamori, Proc. Jpn. Acad. Ser. B 80, 297 (2004).
2. Seismic efficiency can be defined as ER/(ER + EG), where ER is the energy radiated seismically and EG is the energy mechanically dissipated during the fracture.
3. D. Wald, T. Heaton, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 84, 668 (1994).
4. T. Lay et al., Science 308, 1127 (2005).
5. Here, we are considering periods shorter than about 2 s as short periods.
6. Ni et al., Nature 434, 582 (2005).
7. A. Lomax, Geophys. Res. Lett., in press.
8. M. Ishii, P. Shearer, H. Houston, J. Vidale, in preparation.
9. C. de Groot-Hedlin, in preparation.
10. J. Koyama, S. Zheng, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 37, 108 (1985).
11. H. Houston, H. Kanamori, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 76, 19 (1986).
12. Materials and methods are available as supporting material on Science Online.
13. R1 is the fundamental mode Rayleigh wave that travels along the shorter great-circle arc connecting the source with the receiver; R2 travels along the longer arc. R3 leaves the source with the same azimuth as R1 but makes an additional transit around the Earth.
14. D. Komatitsch, J. Ritsema, J. Tromp, Science 298, 1737 (2002).
15. J. Ritsema, H.-J. van Heijst, J. H. Woodhouse, Science 286, 1925 (1999).
16. C. Bassin, G. Laske, G. Masters, Eos 81, 897 (2000).
17. J. Park et al., EOS 86, 57 (2005).
18. C. J. Ammon, A. A. Velasco, T. Lay, Geophys. Res. Lett. 70, 97 (1993).
19. A. A. Velasco, C. J. Ammon, T. Lay, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 84, 735 (1994).
20. A. M. Dziewonski, D. L. Anderson, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 25, 297 (1981).
21. R. W. Clayton, R. A. Wiggins, Geophys. J. K. Astron. Soc. 47, 151 (1976).
22. M. Kikuchi, H. Kanamori, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 72, 491 (1982).
23. The directivity parameter is an azimuth-corrected slowness defined by Γ = cos(ø)/c, where ø is the azimuth of the station relative to the rupture direction and c is the wave phase velocity. For the Rayleigh waves, we assumed a phase velocity of 4.75 km/s. The results do not change significantly if we vary the value by about 20%.
24. L. J. Ruff, Geophys. Res. Lett. 11, 629 (1984).
25. L. Ruff, in Seismic Tomography, G. Nolet Ed. (D. Reidel, Dordecht, Netherlands, 1987), pp. 339-366.
26. Early inversions of P waves included slip models on Web sites: http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eq_depot/2004/eq_041226/neic_slav_ff.html (C.J),
27. www.eri.u-tokyo.ac.jp/sanchu/Seismo_Note/2004/EIC161e.html (Y.Yamanaki)
28. http://iisee.kenken.go.jp/staff/yagi/eq/Sumatra2004/Sumatra2004.html (Y. Yagi),
29. and www.geop.itu.edu.tr/%7Etaymaz/sumatra (T. Taymaz, O. Tan, S. Yolsal).
30. S. Das, B. V. Kostrov, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 85, 293 (1994).
31. H. K. Thio, R. W. Graves, P. G. Somerville, T. Sato, T. Ishii, J. Geophys. Res. 109, 10.1029/2002JB002381 (2004).
32. C. Ji, D. J. Wald, D. V. Helmberger, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 92, 1192 (2002).
33. C. Ji, D. J. Wald, D. V. Helmberger, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 92, 1208 (2002).
34. C. Ji, D. V. Helmberger, D. J. Wald, K.-F. Ma, J. Geophys. Res. 108, 10.1029/2002JB001764 (2003).
35. K. Sieh, Nature 434, 573 (2005).
36. G. Ekström, J. Tromp, E. W. F. Larson, J. Geophys. Res. 102, 8137 (1997).
37. J. Park et al., Science 308, 1139 (2005).
38. O. Gudmundsson, M. A. Sambridge, J. Geophys. Res. 103, 7121 (1998).
39. R. A. Kerr, Science 308, 341 (2005).
40. Information about the Center for Earth Science Studies Seismology Research Group is available online at www. seires.net/content/view/123/52/.
41. We acknowledge the efforts of those associated with the collection of data made freely available through the Federation of Digital Broadband Seismographic Networks. Seismic waveform data were obtained from the Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS) Data Management System. This work was supported in part by NSF contracts EAR-0125595 and EAR-0337491, USGS contract 04HQGR0038, and the California Institute of Technology Tectonics Observatory. S.N. was supported in part by the Outstanding Young Scientists Program of the National Science Foundation of China (40425005).