Impact of earthquake rupture extensions on parameter estimations of point-process models

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

Volumn 98, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 2066-2072

  Hainzl, S ^a   Christophersen, A ^b   Enescu, B ^a  

^a GFZ GERMAN RESEARCH CENTRE FOR GEOSCIENCES   (Germany)

^b ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EARTHQUAKES; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; SEISMOLOGY;

EARTHQUAKE RUPTURES; EPIDEMIC-TYPE AFTERSHOCK SEQUENCE; POINT PROCESSES; PROCESS MODELLING; TERM CLUSTERING;

STOCHASTIC MODELS;

AFTERSHOCK; EARTHQUAKE MECHANISM; EARTHQUAKE PREDICTION; EARTHQUAKE RUPTURE; EARTHQUAKE TRIGGER; ESTIMATION METHOD; FORESHOCK; LANDERS EARTHQUAKE 1992; PARAMETERIZATION; SEISMICITY; STOCHASTICITY;

EID: 50549084530     PISSN: 00371106     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1785/0120070256     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Aki, K. (1965). Maximum likelihood estimate of b in the formula log N = a - bM and its confidence limits, Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst. 43, 237-239.
2. Christophersen, A., and E. G. C. Smith (2008). Foreshock rates from aftershock abundance with different search algorithms, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. (in press).
3. Console, R., M. Murru, and A. M. Lombardi (2003). Refining earthquake clustering models, J. Geophys. Res. 108, no. B10, 2468, doi 10.1029/2002JB002130.
4. Console, R., M. Murru, F. Catalli, and G. Falcone (2006). Real time forecasts through an earthquake clustering model constrained by the rate-and-state constitutive law: comparison with a purely stochastic ETAS model, Seism. Res. Lett. 78, 49-56.
5. Daley, D. J., and D. Vere-Jones (2003). Elementary Theory and Methods, in An Introduction to the Theory of Point Processes, Second Ed., Vol. 1, Springer, New York.
6. Felzer, K. R., and E. E. Brodsky (2006). Decay of aftershock density with distance indicates triggering by dynamic stress, Nature 441, no. 7094, 735-738.
7. Felzer, K. R., R. E. Abercrombie, and G. Ekstrom (2004). A common origin for aftershocks, foreshocks, and multiplets, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, no. 1, 88-98.
8. Felzer, K. R., T. W. Becker, R. E. Abercrombie, G. Ekstrom, and J. R. Rice (2002). Triggering of the 1999 M-W 7.1 Hector Mine earthquake by aftershocks of the 1992 M-W 7.3 Landers earthquake, J. Geophys. Res. 107, no. B9, 2190.
9. Fletcher, R., and M. J. D. Powell (1963). A rapidly convergent descent method for minimization, Comput. J. 6, 163-168.
10. Gerstenberger, M. C., S. Wiemer, L. M. Jones, and P. A. Reasenberg (2005). Real-time forecasts of tomorrow's earthquakes in California, Nature 435, 328-331.
11. Hauksson, E., W-C. Chi, and P. Shearer (2003). Comprehensive waveform cross-correlation of southern California seismograms: part 1. Refined hypocenters obtained using the double-difference method and tectonic implications (abstract), in Proc. Fall Ann. Meeting, American Geophysical Union, 8-12 December 2003, San Francisco, CA.
12. Helmstetter, A. (2003). Is earthquake triggering driven by small earthquakes?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, no. 5, 058501.
13. Helmstetter, A., and D. Somette, (2002). Subcritical and supercritical regimes in epidemic models of earthquake aftershocks, J. Geophys. Res. 107, no. B10, 2237.
14. Helmstetter, A., Y. Y. Kagan, and D. D. Jackson (2005). Importance of small earthquakes for stress transfers and earthquake triggering, J. Geophys. Res. 110, B05S08, doi 10.29/2004JB003286.
15. Helmstetter, A., Y. Y. Kagan, and D. D. Jackson (2006). Comparison of short-term and time-independent earthquake forecast models for southern California, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96, no. 1, 90-106.
16. Helmstetter, A., Y. Y. Kagan, and D. D. Jackson (2007). High-resolution time-independent grid-based forecast for M ≥ 5 earthquakes in California, Seism. Res. Lett. 78, 78-86.
17. Helmstetter, A., D. Sornette, and J.-R. Grasso (2003). Mainshocks are aftershocks of conditional foreshocks: how do foreshock statistical properties emerge from aftershock laws, J. Geophys. Res. 108, no. B1, 2046.
18. Hough, S. E. and K. B. Olsen (Editors) (2007). Special issue on: regional earthquake likelihood models, Seism. Res. Lett. 78, 7-140.
19. Kagan, Y. Y. (2004). Short-term properties of earthquake catalogs and models of earthquake source, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, no. 4, 1207-1228.
20. Kanamori, H., and D. L. Anderson (1975). Theoretical basis of some empirical relations in seismology, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 65, no. 5, 1073-1095.
21. Ogata, Y. (1988). Statistical models for earthquake occurrence and residual analysis for point processes, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 83, 9-27.
22. Ogata, Y. (1992). Detection of precursory relative quiescence before great earthquakes through a statistical model, J. Geophys. Res. 97, 19,845-19,871.
23. Ogata, Y. (1999). Space-time point-process models for earthquake occurrences, Ann. Inst. Statist. Math. 50, 379-402.
24. Ogata, Y., and H. C. Zhuang (2006). Space-time ETAS models and an improved extension, Tectonophysics 413, 13-23.
25. Schoenberg, F. P. (2003). Multidimensional residual analysis of point process models for earthquake occurrences, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 98, 789-795.
26. Utsu, T., and A. Seki (1955). Relation between the area of aftershock region and the energy of the main shock, J. Seismol. Soc. Jpn. 7, 233-240 (in Japanese).
27. Utsu, T., Y. Ogata, and R. S. Matsu'ura (1995). The centenary of the Omori formula for a decay of aftershock activity, J. Phys. Earth 43, 1-33.
28. Wells, D. L., and K. J. Coppersmith (1994). New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 84, 974-1002.
29. Yamanaka, Y., and K. Shimazaki (1990). Scaling relationship between the number of aftershocks and the size of the main shock, J. Phys. Earth 38, no. 4, 305-324.
30. Zhuang, J., Y. Ogata, and D. Vere-Jones (2004). Analyzing earthquake clustering features by using stochastic reconstruction, J. Geophys. Res. 109, no. B5, B05301.
31. Zhuang, J. C., C. P. Chang, Y. Ogata, and Y. I. Chen (2005). A study on the background and clustering seismicity in the Taiwan region by using point process models, J. Geophys. Res. 110, no. B5, B05S18.