Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Estimating the magnitude of completeness for assessing the quality of earthquake catalogue of the ENSN, Egypt

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Arabian Journal of Geosciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

After the Cairo Earthquake in 1992 with moderate magnitude (Ms 5.9), the government established the Egyptian National Seismological Network (ENSN) with 66 short-period and broadband stations, organized by National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics (NRIAG). Around 55,000 local events were recorded from 1997 to 2014. The aim of this study is to assess the magnitude of completeness (M c) of an instrumental earthquake catalogue. Three different methods named the maximum curvature (MAXC), b value stability (MBS), and entire magnitude range (EMR) were applied to calculate M c and the results are compared together; all of these used methods are catalogue-based methods, in which M c is estimated based on departure from the linear frequency-magnitude relation of the local earthquakes published in the ENSN catalogue. Accurate knowledge of the magnitude of completeness M c is essential for many seismicity-based studies and particularly for mapping out seismicity parameters such as the b value of the Gutenberg-Richter relationship. The difference in M c between the three used methods is 0.9. However, tests performed on the diverse data sets presented here had confirmed that the EMR method is the more accurate method to estimate M c. Estimating M c solely based on the frequency-magnitude distribution (FMD) has some obvious drawbacks like the difficulty of estimating M c in areas of low seismicity. The final results showed that the MAXC technique (M c = 1.6 ± 0.02) needs fewer events to reach a stable result. While the MBS results (M c = 2.5 ± 0.04) gave always higher M c values compared with the other two methods, comparing to the third method, the EMR results (M c = 1.8 ± 0.03) maximize the amount of data available for the M c determination, which should serve to stabilize the M c estimates. This study will play an important role in the future reconfiguration of the ENSN stations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aki K (1987) Magnitude frequency relation for small earthquakes: a clue to the origin of fmax of large earthquakes. J Geophys Res 92:1349–1355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cao AM, Gao SS (2002) Temporal variations of seismic b-values beneath northeastern Japan island arc. Geophys Res Lett 29:1334. doi:10.1029/2001GL013775, 6, 8, 14, 15, 18, 19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Alessandro A, Luzio D, D’Anna G, Mangano G (2011) Seismic network evaluation through simulation: an application to the Italian National Seismic Network. Bull Seismol Soc Am 101:1213–1232. doi:10.1785/0120100066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faeh D, Giardini D, Bay F, Baer M, Bernardi F, Braunmiller J, Deichmann N, Furrer M, Gantner L, Gisler M, Isenegger D, Jimenez MJ, Kaestli P, Koglin R, Masciadri V, Rutz M, Scheideg-ger C, Schibler R, Schorlemmer D, Schwarz-Zanctti G, Steimen S, Sellami S, Wiemer S, Woessner J (2003) Earthquake Catalog of Switzerland (ECOS) and the related macroseismic database. Eclogae Geol Helv 96:219–236

    Google Scholar 

  • Felzer KR (2006) Calculating the Gutenberg-Richter b-value. EOS Trans AGU, Fall Meet 87(52)

  • Gomberg J (1991) Seismicity and detection/location threshold in the southern Great Basin seismic network. J Geophys Res 96(B10):16,401–16,414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutenberg R, Richter CF (1944) Frequency of earthquakes in California. Bull Seismol Soc Am 34:185–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermann RE (1991) Seismicity rate variations and systematic changes in magnitudes in teleseismic catalogs. Tectonophysics 193:277–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey D, Hansen R (1994) Contributions of IRIS data to nuclear monitoring. IRIS Newsl 13:1

    Google Scholar 

  • Ishimoto M, Iida K (1939) Observations of earthquakes registered with the micro-seismograph constructed recently. Bull Earthquake Res Inst 17:443–478

    Google Scholar 

  • Kagan YY (2002) Seismic moment distribution revisited: I. Statistical results. Geophys J Int 148:520–541, 9,19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogata Y, Katsura K (1993) Analysis of temporal and spatial heterogeneity of magnitude frequency distribution inferred from earthquake catalogues. Geophys J Int 113:727–738, 9, 14, 19, 25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rydelek PA, Sacks IS (1989) testing the completeness of earthquake catalogs and the hypothesis of self-similarity. Nature 337:251–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rydelek PA, Sacks IS (1992) Comment on “Seismicity and detection/location threshold in the southern Great Basin seismic network” by Joan Gomberg. J Geophys Res 97(B11):15,361–15,362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rydelek PA, Sacks IS (2003) Comment on “Minimum magnitude of completeness in earthquake catalogs: examples from Alaska, the western United States, and Japan”, by Stefan Wiemer and Max Wyss. Bull Seismol Soc Am 93:1862–1867, 30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schorlemmer D, Woessner J (2008) Probability of detecting an earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 98:2103–2117. doi:10.1785/0120070105, 4, 9, 10, 12, 13, 33, 34, 35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schorlemmer D, Wiemer S, Wyss M (2005) Variations in earthquake-size distribution across different stress regimes. Nature 437:539–542. doi:10.1038/nature04094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith WD (1981) The b-value as an earthquake precursor. Nature 289:136–139. doi:10.1038/289136a0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Speidel DH, Mattson PH (1993) The polymodal frequency-magnitude relationship of earthquakes. Bull Seismol Soc Am 83:1893–1901

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiemer S (2001) Software package to analyze seismicity: ZMAP. Seismol Res Lett 72:373–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiemer S, Baer M (2000) Mapping and removing quarry blast events from seismicity catalogs. Bull Seismol Soc Am 90:525–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiemer S, Wyss M (2000) Minimum magnitude of complete reporting in earthquake catalogs: examples from Alaska, the western United States, and Japan. Bull Seismol Soc Am 90:859–869, 6, 7, 14, 15, 16, 17, 24, 28, 29, 30, 32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiemer S, Giardin D, Fah D, Deichmann N, Sellami S (2009) Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for Switzerland: best estimates and uncertainties. J Seismol. doi:10.1007/s10950-008-9138-7

    Google Scholar 

  • Woessner J, Wiemer S (2005) Assessing the quality of earthquake catalogues: estimating the magnitude of completeness and its uncertainty. Bull Seismol Soc Am 95. doi:10.1785/012040007. 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30

  • Zuniga FR, Wiemer S (1999) Seismicity patterns: are they always related to natural causes? Pure Appl Geophys 155:713–726

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuniga R, Wyss M (1995) Inadvertent changes in magnitude reported in earthquake catalogs: influence on b-value estimates. Bull Seismol Soc Am 85:1858–1866

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics (NRIAG), Helwan, Egypt

    H. E. Abdel Hafiez

Authors
  1. H. E. Abdel Hafiez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to H. E. Abdel Hafiez.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hafiez, H.E.A. Estimating the magnitude of completeness for assessing the quality of earthquake catalogue of the ENSN, Egypt. Arab J Geosci 8, 9315–9323 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-015-1929-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-015-1929-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation