Regionalization and dependence of coda Q on frequency and lapse time in the seismically active Peloritani region (northeastern Sicily, Italy)

Giampiccolo, E.; Tuvè, Tiziana

doi:10.1007/s10950-018-9750-0

“…The use of this value is important for comparison with the results of studies in other regions of the world which use the same value. Another geometrical spreading value was 𝛽 = 1.0 was chosen for body waves, which is usually used in other studies (Ibanez et al 1990;Dasovic et al 2013;Bora et al 2017;Giampiccolo et al 2018;Blanke et al 2019;Demirci 2019 and many others). And as is shown by Pavlenko (2008Pavlenko ( , 2016, for the study territory of the Western Caucasus, for distances less than 70 km, it is optimal to use geometrical spreading 𝛽 = 1.0.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The method of obtaining Qc by estimating the decay of the envelope of the coda waves assuming single scattering is called Coda Wave Decay method (CWD). Numerous studies show a correlation between the Qc and crustal heterogeneity in the lithosphere (Havskov et al 1989;Ibanez et al 1990;Gupta et al 1998;Sato et al 2012;Dasovic et al 2013;Giampiccolo et al 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regional variation of coda Q in Northwest Caucasus

Zvereva

¹

,

Havskov

²

,

Габсатарова

³

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coda Q has been studied in the North-West Caucasus region using 267 earthquakes and 17 stations from the network of the Geophysical Survey, Russian Academy of Sciences. This is the first Qc study for the region using such a large dataset. The average frequency-dependent coda Q relationship is Qc=90±21•f 1.02±0.11 . This value compares closely to other similar tectonic areas in the world where the same processing parameter had been used. Three specific zones, two in the Greater Caucasus tectonic area and one east of the Ciscaucasian trough area, were studied separately. There was a clear difference in Qc between the zones, particularly for the Ciscaucasian trough area which shows a higher Qc than the 2 other zones. However, the difference between the zones became smaller when using long lapse times tending to give a constant Qc as a function of lapse time. For longer lapse time it is assumed that a large part of the coda waves passes the mantle. The 2 zones in Greater Caucasus now had a similar Qc while the East zone in the Ciscaucasian trough still gave the highest values. We contribute this difference to differences in attenuation in the mantle under the two tectonic areas. In our area, there is then a clear difference in Qc for the 3 study areas in the crust but in the mantle the difference is mainly between the two tectonic zones.

show abstract

“…The use of this value is important for comparison with the results of studies in other regions of the world which use the same value. Another geometrical spreading value was 𝛽 = 1.0 was chosen for body waves, which is usually used in other studies (Ibanez et al 1990;Dasovic et al 2013;Bora et al 2017;Giampiccolo et al 2018;Blanke et al 2019;Demirci 2019 and many others). And as is shown by Pavlenko (2008Pavlenko ( , 2016, for the study territory of the Western Caucasus, for distances less than 70 km, it is optimal to use geometrical spreading 𝛽 = 1.0.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The method of obtaining Qc by estimating the decay of the envelope of the coda waves assuming single scattering is called Coda Wave Decay method (CWD). Numerous studies show a correlation between the Qc and crustal heterogeneity in the lithosphere (Havskov et al 1989;Ibanez et al 1990;Gupta et al 1998;Sato et al 2012;Dasovic et al 2013;Giampiccolo et al 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regional variation of coda Q in Northwest Caucasus

Zvereva

¹

,

Havskov

²

,

Габсатарова

³

2022

Preprint

2

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coda Q has been studied in the North-West Caucasus region using 267 earthquakes and 17 stations from the network of the Geophysical Survey, Russian Academy of Sciences. This is the first Qc study for the region using such a large dataset. The average frequency-dependent coda Q relationship is Qc=90±21∙f1.02±0.11. This value compares closely to other similar tectonic areas in the world where the same processing parameter had been used. Three specific zones, two in the Greater Caucasus tectonic area and one east of the Ciscaucasian trough area, were studied separately. There was a clear difference in Qc between the zones, particularly for the Ciscaucasian trough area which shows a higher Qc than the 2 other zones. However, the difference between the zones became smaller when using long lapse times tending to give a constant Qc as a function of lapse time. For longer lapse time it is assumed that a large part of the coda waves passes the mantle. The 2 zones in Greater Caucasus now had a similar Qc while the East zone in the Ciscaucasian trough still gave the highest values. We contribute this difference to differences in attenuation in the mantle under the two tectonic areas. In our area, there is then a clear difference in Qc for the 3 study areas in the crust but in the mantle the difference is mainly between the two tectonic zones.

show abstract