Intermagnitude Relationships and Asperity Statistics

Gusev, Alexander

doi:10.1007/978-3-0348-8654-3_11

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The magnitude in the catalog of the KRSN is listed as a "klass K F68 " [Fedotov, 1972]. The conversion from K F68 to Mw was done using [Gusev, 1991] Mw = 0.61 K r6*-2.17 (3 > Mw > 6.5)…”

Section: Completeness Of the Catalogmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismicity and structure of the Kamchatka Subduction Zone

Gorbatov¹,

Kostoglodov²,

Suárez³

et al. 1997

J. Geophys. Res.

189

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The configuration of the Pacific plate subducted beneath the Kamchatka peninsula and the stress distribution in the Kamchatka subduction zone (KSZ) were studied using the catalog of the Kamchatka regional seismic network, focal mechanism solutions estimated from P wave first motions, the formal inversion of long-period waveforms, and centroid moment tensor solutions. To the south of-55øN, the slab shows an approximately constant dip angle of -55 ø. To the north of-55øN, the dip of the slab becomes shallower reaching -35 ø. The maximum depth of seismicity, Din, varies from -500 km depth near 50øN to -300 km depth at -55øN. The volcanic front is almost linear along the main part of the KSZ whereas it is sharply shifted landward to the north of-55øN. The variation of Dm is apparently consistent with the standard empirical relation Dm --f (rp), where rp is the thermal parameter of the subducted slab.To the north of-55øN, the slab is offset toward the northwest, and it is sharply deformed in a narrow contorted zone which is -30 km wide (-56øN, -161 øE). To the north of this contortion, Dm decreases to -100 km. The landward shift of the northern part of the slab is reflected by a sharp deviation of the volcanic front to the northwest which follows the -90-160 km isodepth range of the subducted slab. The observed value of Dm in the northern segment significantly diverges from the global relation Dm --f (rp). We interpret this as an effective decrease of the thermal thickness of the subducted lithosphere.

show abstract

“…The magnitude in the catalog of the KRSN is listed as a "klass K F68 " [Fedotov, 1972]. The conversion from K F68 to Mw was done using [Gusev, 1991] Mw = 0.61 K r6*-2.17 (3 > Mw > 6.5)…”

Section: Completeness Of the Catalogmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismicity and structure of the Kamchatka Subduction Zone

Gorbatov¹,

Kostoglodov²,

Suárez³

et al. 1997

J. Geophys. Res.

189

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Instead, we (1979); z-based on surface-wave and body-wave M 0 estimates summarized in ZOBIN et al (1988); l -estimated from M LH based on correlation (GUSEV, 1991); h -calculated from M 0 estimate of Harvard CMT. In our case however, the data are scarce and such an approach cannot produce reliable results.…”

Section: The Theoretical Model Of Dependence Of Peak Acceleration On mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…in checking the shape of the magnitude dependence of A max ; however they are of no use in improving the average value of A max (8, 100) when the station corrections are determined from the same data.) The values of JMA magnitude used by Japanese authors were converted to M W using the relationship given in GUSEV (1991). By chance, contributions of the two anomalous stations approximately compensate one another, and the data median for the edited data is comparable to that of the initial data.…”

Section: Estimation Of the Absolute Le6el Of A Max (M W R) And Detementioning

confidence: 99%

The First Version of the A max ( M W , R) Relationship for Kamchatka

Gusev¹,

Гордеев²,

Guseva³

et al. 1997

Pure and Applied Geophysics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To estimate for the first time the typical relation between peak acceleration A max , moment magnitude M W and hypocentral distance R for Kamchatka, 101 analog strong motion records for 1969-1993 were employed as the initial data set. Records of acceleration and velocity meters were obtained at 15 rock to medium-ground Kamchatkan sites from 33 earthquakes with M W =4.5 -7.8, at R =30-250 km. A max values were determined from ''true'' acceleration time histories calculated by spectral deconvolution of digitized records. The maximum value over the two horizontal components was used as the A max value in the further analysis. With the scarce data available, there were no chances to determine reliably the whole A max (M W , R) average surface; thus the shape of this trend surface was determined on a theoretical basis and only the level was fitted to the data. The theoretical model employed included: (1) source spectrum: according to the Brune's spectral model; (2) point-source attenuation: as 1/R plus loss specified by Q(f) =250 f 0.8 ; (3) finite-source correction for a disc-shaped incoherent source, its size depending on M W ; (4) accelerogram duration: including source-dependent and distance-dependent terms; (5) A max value: based on random process representation. Distance trends calculated with this model agree with the empirical ones of FUKUSHIMA and TANAKA (1990). To calculate the absolute level for these trends, observed A max (M W , R) values were reduced to M W =8, R =100 km using the theoretical trends as reference. The median of the reduced values, A max (8, 100), equal to 188 gal. was taken as the absolute reference level for the relation we sought. Note that in the process of data analysis we were forced to entirely reject relatively abundant data of two particular stations because of their prominent local amplification (×5.5) or deamplification (×0.45).

show abstract

“…However, this regression procedure requires the knowledge of the error variance ratio for the two magnitudes, which is usually not known. An alternative to this problem is to take the error variance ratio equal to unity, assuming that error variance of different magnitudes are approximately equal (Ambraseys, 1990;Gusev, 1991;Panza et al, 1993;Cavallini and Rebez, 1996;Kaverina et al, 1996;Gutdeutsch et al, 2002;Stromeyer et al, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%