2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.pepi.2014.12.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Attenuation and velocity structure from diffuse coda waves: Constraints from underground array data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
16
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
1
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In our study, we would have expected a value near 1.0, as also found in studies where Q and geometrical spreading have been determined simultaneously. Galluzzo et al (2015) found that above 6 Hz, the coda waves were pure body waves, whereas below 6 Hz they were a mixture of surface and body waves. Thus, the geometrical spreading parameter could be less than 1 for lower frequencies.…”
Section: The Geometrical Spreading Parameter βmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our study, we would have expected a value near 1.0, as also found in studies where Q and geometrical spreading have been determined simultaneously. Galluzzo et al (2015) found that above 6 Hz, the coda waves were pure body waves, whereas below 6 Hz they were a mixture of surface and body waves. Thus, the geometrical spreading parameter could be less than 1 for lower frequencies.…”
Section: The Geometrical Spreading Parameter βmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[13], where the attenuation and scattering parameters observed at different frequencies are depth dependent, with increasing frequency sampling deeper structure. At shallow depths (<200 m) the low frequency coda is strongly affected by surface waves [30,31] and so at 3 Hz the scattering anomaly is associated with the scattering volcanic edifice but is also strongly affected (as are all measured frequencies) by the presence of high scattering anomalies to the NE and E of the volcano. From 6 Hz to 9 Hz features are associated with the SHZ reducing the amount of observed scattering, suggesting a strongly coherent boundary forming this feature at 2.9 km depth.…”
Section: Diffusionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…For body waves p = 3 and for surface waves p = 2. As surface waves have been observed to strongly affect the coda at low frequencies (<3 Hz) [30,31], the dominance of body waves is assumed. The diffusion coefficient is related to the physical medium by the transport mean free path l tr and seismic velocity v by:…”
Section: Diffusion Model Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This interval, in the long period bandwidth (0.1-1 Hz) and high frequency range (1-4 Hz), might be in the order of 1-1.5 h and 3-24 s long, respectively (Gorbatikov and Stepanova, 2008;Wang et al, 2014;Zhong et al, 2015a, b). This characteristic is substantially important.…”
mentioning
confidence: 97%
“…For propagation distances typically less than the mean free path, defined as the distance between two successive scattering anomalies, the coherent part is dominance over the incoherent part, while for times more than the mean free time, waves bounce on several heterogeneities and enter into the 5 multiple scattering regime (Hillers et al, 2012(Hillers et al, , 2013Galluzzo et al, 2015). Thereafter scattering sequences gradually distort the phase and amplitude of the incident plane wave front and also gain stability by temporal stabilization of the S-to-P deformation energy ratio, known as equipartitioning (Hillers et al, 2012).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%