Shear wave velocity structure of Iranian plateau: using combination of ambient noise cross-correlations (C1) and correlation of coda of correlations (C3)

Ansaripour, M.A.; Rezapour, Mehdi; Saygin, Erdinc

doi:10.1093/gji/ggz257

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This simplifies comparison of results from different datasets because they are less affected by differences in the number and distribution of wave paths. In this section, we consider I DW method does not provide enough measurements to perform tomography reliably at periods above 30 s. Presumably, this is because the coda is enriched at the shorter periods (Spica et al, 2016;Ansaripour et al, 2019).…”

Section: Eikonal Tomographymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A noteworthy observation is that few reliable measurements exist for three-station coda-wave interferometry (I CW with period for I CW is also observed in Spica et al (2016) and Ansaripour et al (2019).…”

Section: Effects Of the 26 S Microseismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…) was initiated by Stehly et al (2008) and has been fairly well studied (Garnier & Papanicolaou, 2009;Froment et al, 2011;Ma & Beroza, 2012;Zhang & Yang, 2013;Haendel et al, 2016;Sheng et al, 2017Sheng et al, , 2018Spica et al, 2017;Ansaripour et al, 2019). Applications of I CW 3 to surface wave tomography or 3-D model construction remain rare, however, in particular at regional or continental scales.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Applications of I CW 3 to surface wave tomography or 3-D model construction remain rare, however, in particular at regional or continental scales. To the best of our knowledge, the principal exceptions are two studies that combine group velocity measurements from I CW 3 with traditional ambient noise interferometry (I AN 2 ) to improve 3-D models of Mexico and the southern US (Spica et al, 2016), and of the Iranian Plateau (Ansaripour et al, 2019).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Three-station interferometry and tomography: coda versus direct waves

Zhang

Feng

Ritzwoller

2020

Geophysical Journal International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY Traditional two-station ambient noise interferometry estimates the Green’s function between a pair of synchronously deployed seismic stations. Three-station interferometry considers records observed three stations at a time, where two of the stations are considered receiver–stations and the third is a source–station. Cross-correlations between records at the source–station with each of the receiver–stations are correlated or convolved again to estimate the Green’s function between the receiver–stations, which may be deployed asynchronously. We use data from the EarthScope USArray in the western United States to compare Rayleigh wave dispersion obtained from two-station and three-station interferometry. Three three-station interferometric methods are distinguished by the data segment utilized (coda-wave or direct-wave) and whether the source–stations are constrained to lie in stationary phase zones approximately inline with the receiver–stations. The primary finding is that the three-station direct wave methods perform considerably better than the three-station coda-wave method and two-station ambient noise interferometry for obtaining surface wave dispersion measurements in terms of signal-to-noise ratio, bandwidth, and the number of measurements obtained, but possess small biases relative to two-station interferometry. We present a ray-theoretic correction method that largely removes the bias below 40 s period and reduces it at longer periods. Three-station direct-wave interferometry provides substantial value for imaging the crust and uppermost mantle, and its ability to bridge asynchronously deployed stations may impact the design of seismic networks in the future.

show abstract

Section: Eikonal Tomographymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Effects Of the 26 S Microseismmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Three-station interferometry and tomography: coda versus direct waves

Zhang

Feng

Ritzwoller

2020

Geophysical Journal International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An underlying assumption of the C 3 approach is that the long-term stacking of correlation functions produces stable, predominantly time-invariant coda waves (Ma & Beroza, 2012), which permits extracting the EGFs between asynchronous stations from the coherent coda energy acquired at different times. The additional raypaths from the asynchronous EGFs enable improvement of the resolution of crustal imaging (Ansaripour et al, 2019;Spica et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Empirical Green's Function Retrieval Using Ambient Noise Source‐Receiver Interferometry

Chen

Saygin

2020

JGR Solid Earth

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Empirical Green's function (EGF) retrieval commonly relies on cross‐correlating the long‐term ambient seismic wavefield that is simultaneously recorded at multiple stations. Recent studies have demonstrated observationally that cross‐correlating the coda of ambient noise cross‐correlation functions enables reconstruction of the EGFs, regardless of the operating time of the stations. In this study, we examine the feasibility of using the nondiffuse energy (i.e., surface waves) of the ambient noise cross‐correlation functions to retrieve EGFs between asynchronous stations. We show that source‐receiver interferometry (SRI), which is conventionally applied to reconstruct virtual seismograms between earthquake‐station pairs, provides an effective framework to retrieve EGFs between asynchronous stations. Our implementation of SRI exploits the nondiffuse wavefield rather than the scattered coda waves that may be contaminated by incoherent energy under nonideal (e.g., sparse, noisy, and short‐duration) network configurations. We demonstrate the robustness of SRI by retrieving asynchronous EGFs and performing seismic tomography between (1) nearby stations and (2) distant temporary arrays from southern Australia. The additional raypaths from asynchronous EGFs provide better illumination of small‐scale crustal structures beneath the regional network. In the larger‐scale example, involving two asynchronous arrays, SRI offers new constraints to the sparsely sampled region along the continental margin of southern Australia. The resulting velocity model agrees well with the independent structural constraints from each seismic array study and sedimentary thickness measurements. This study demonstrates that SRI is a promising tool for integrating seismic arrays operated at different times and can greatly benefit the efforts of improving data coverage and resolution in seismic imaging.

show abstract