Modeling of Kashmir Aftershock Decay Based on Static Coulomb Stress Changes and Laboratory-Derived Rate-and-State Dependent Friction Law
- 267 Downloads
We model the spatial and temporal evolution of October 8, 2005 Kashmir earthquake’s aftershock activity using the rate-and-state dependent friction model incorporating uncertainties in computed coseismic stress perturbations. We estimated the best possible value for frictional resistance “Aσ n”, background seismicity rate “r” and coefficient of stress variation “CV” using maximum log-likelihood method. For the whole Kashmir earthquake sequence, we measure a frictional resistance Aσ n ~ 0.0185 MPa, r ~ 20 M3.7+ events/year and CV = 0.94 ± 0.01. The spatial and temporal forecasted seismicity rate of modeled aftershocks fits well with the spatial and temporal distribution of observed aftershocks that occurred in the regions with positive static stress changes as well as in the apparent stress shadow region. To quantify the effect of secondary aftershock triggering, we have re-run the estimations for 100 stochastically declustered catalogs showing that the effect of aftershock-induced secondary stress changes is obviously minor compared to the overall uncertainties, and that the stress variability related to uncertain slip model inversions and receiver mechanisms remains the major factor to provide a reasonable data fit.
KeywordsSeismology early warning system Coulomb failure stresses and fault interaction model
This work is partly funded by the Generali Group. Comments by Tom Parsons and one anonymous reviewer improved the manuscript.
- Avouac, J. P., Ayoub, F., Leprince, S., Konca, O. and Helmberger, D. V. (2006) The 2005, Mw 7.6 Kashmir earthquake: sub-pixel correlation of ASTER images and seismic waveforms analysis, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 249, 514–528, doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2006.06.025.
- Catalli, F., Cocco, M., Console, R. and Chiaraluce, L. (2008), Modeling seismicity rate changes during the 1997 Umbria-Marche sequence (central Italy) through rate and state dependent model, J. Geophys. Res., 113, B11301, doi: 10.1029/2007JB005356.
- Cattania, C., S. Hainzl, L. Wang, F. Roth, and B. Enescu (2014), Propagation of Coulomb stress uncertainties in physics-based aftershock models, J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth, 119, 7846–7864. doi: 10.1002/2014JB011183.
- Cattania, C., S. Hainzl, L. Wang, B. Enescu, and F. Roth (2015), Aftershock triggering by postseismic stresses: a study based on Coulomb rate-and-state models, J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth, 120, 2388–2407, doi: 10.1002/2014JB011500.
- Cocco, M., Hainzl, S., Catalli, F., Enescu, B., Lombardi, A. M. and Woessner, J. (2010), Sensitivity study of forecasted aftershock seismicity based on Coulomb stress calculation and rate- and state-dependent frictional response, J. Geophys. Res., 115, B05307, doi: 10.1029/2009JB006838.
- Daley, D. J. and Vere-Jones, D. (2003), An Introduction to the Theory of Point Processes, Vol. I: Elementary Theory and Methods, 2nd ed., Springer, New York.Google Scholar
- Gardner, J. K., and Knopoff, L. (1974), Is the sequence of earthquakes in Southern California, with aftershocks removed, Poissonian?, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 64(5), 1363–1367.Google Scholar
- Hainzl, S., Enescu, B., Cocco, M., Woessner, J., Catalli, F., Wang, R. and Roth, F. (2009), Aftershock modeling based on uncertain stress calculations, J. Geophys. Res., 114, B05309, doi: 10.1029/2008JB006011, 2009.
- Hainzl, S., Steacy, S. and Marsan, D. (2010a), Seismicity models based on Coulomb stress calculations, Community Online Resource for Statistical Seismicity Analysis, doi: 10.5078/corssa-32035809.
- Hainzl, S., Zöller, G. and Wang, R. (2010b), Impact of the receiver fault distribution on aftershock activity, J. Geophys. Res., 115, B05315, doi: 10.1029/2008JB006224.
- Hardebeck, J. L. and Hauksson, E. (2001), Crustal stress field in southern California and its implications for fault mechanisms, J. Geophys. Res., 106 (B10), 21, 859–821, 882.Google Scholar
- Harris, R. A. (1998), Introduction to special section: stress triggers, stress shadows, and implication for seismic hazard. J. Geophys. Res., 103, 24 347-24, 358.Google Scholar
- Helmstetter, A. and Shaw, B. E. (2006), Relation between stress heterogeneity and aftershock rate in the rate-and-state model, J. Geophys. Res., 111, B07304, doi: 10.1029/2005JB004077.
- Jouanne, F., Awan, A., Madji, A., Pêcher, A., Latif, M., Kausar, A., Mugnier, J. L., Khan, I. and Khan, N. A. (2011), Postseismic deformation in Pakistan after the 8th October 2005 earthquake: Evidence of afterslip along a flat north of the Balakot-Bagh thrust, J. Geophys. Res., 116, B07401, 22 pp. doi: 10.1029/2010JB007903.
- Mallman, E. P. and Zoback, M. D. (2007), Assessing elastic Coulomb stress transfer models using seismicity rates in southern California and southwestern Japan, J. Geophys. Res., 112, B03304, doi: 10.1029/2005JB004076.
- Marsan, D. (2006), Can coseismic stress variability suppress seismicity shadows? Insights from a rate-and-state friction model, J. Geophys. Res., 111, B06305, doi: 10.1029/2005JB004060.
- Okada, Y. (1992), Internal deformation due to shear and tensile faults in a half space, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 82, 1018–1040.Google Scholar
- Parsons, T., Ogata, Y., Zhuang, J. and Geist, E. L. (2012), Evaluation of static stress change forecasting with prospective and blind tests, Geophys. J. Int., 188, 1425–1440, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2011.05343.x.
- Parsons, T., Yeats, R. S., Yagi, Y. and Hussain, A. (2006), Static stress change from the 8 October, 2005 M = 7.6 Kashmir earthquake, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, L06304, doi: 10.1029/2005GL025429.
- Pathier, E., Fielding, E. J., Wright, T. J., Walker, R., Parsons, B. E. and Hensley, S. (2006), Displacement field and slip distribution of the 2005 Kashmir earthquake from SAR imagery, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33, L20310, doi: 10.1029/2006GL027193.
- Segou, M., T. Parsons and W. Ellsworth (2013), Comparative evaluation of combined physics based and statistical forecast models, Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 118, p. 6219–6240, doi: 10.1002/2013JB010313.
- Stein R. S., Lin, J. and King, G. C. P. (1981), Static stress changes and the triggering of earthquakes. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 84:935–953.Google Scholar
- Toda, S., and Stein, R. S. (2003), Toggling of seismicity by the 1997 Kagoshima earthquake couplet: a demonstration of time dependent stress transfers J. Geophys. Res., 108(B12), 2567, doi: 10.1029/2003JB002527.
- Toda, S., Stein, R. S., Richards-Dinger, K. and Bozkurt, S. B. (2005), Forecasting the evolution of seismicity in southern California: animations built on earthquake stress transfer, J. Geophys. Res., 110(B5), B05S16, doi: 10.1029/2004JB003415.
- Utsu, T. (1961), A statistical study on the occurrence of aftershocks, Geophys. Mag., 30, 521605.Google Scholar
- Woessner, J., S. Hainzl, W. Marzocchi, M. J. Werner, A. M. Lombardi, F. Catalli, B. Enescu, M. Cocco, M. C. Gerstenberger, and S. Wiemer (2011), A retrospective comparative forecast test on the 1992 Landers sequence, J. Geophys. Res., 116, B05305, doi: 10.1029/2010JB007846.
- Woessner, J., Jonsson, S., Sudhaus, H. and Bachmann, C. (2012), Reliability of Coulomb stress changes inferred from correlated uncertainties of finite-fault source models, J. Geophys. Res., 117, B07303, doi: 10.1029/2011JB009121.
- Zhuang, J., Ogata, Y. and Vere‐Jones, D. (2004), Analyzing earthquake clustering features by using stochastic reconstruction, J. Geophys. Res., 109, B05301, doi: 10.1029/2003JB002879.