Advertisement

Scaling Relationships of Source Parameters of Inland Crustal Earthquakes in Tectonically Active Regions

  • Ken MiyakoshiEmail author
  • Kazuhiro Somei
  • Kunikazu Yoshida
  • Susumu Kurahashi
  • Kojiro Irikura
  • Katsuhiro Kamae
Article
  • 17 Downloads

Abstract

We examined the scaling relationships of inland crustal earthquakes occurring in tectonically active regions such as the Japanese Islands. Two important points related to reliable scaling relationships are discussed empirically: the objective estimation of source parameters such as the seismic moment and rupture area, and the regionality of the scaling. Rupture areas are objectively estimated by trimming heterogeneous slip distributions obtained from waveform inversion. Two trimming procedures have been proposed to determine effective rupture areas, by Somerville et al. (Seismol Res Lett 70:59–80, 1999) and Thingbaijam and Mai (Bull Seismol Soc Am 106:1802–1816, 2016). We confirmed that both trimmed rupture areas agree well with each other when applied to the same dataset. The source scaling characteristics are known to depend on the seismotectonic regime. We investigate the source scaling relationships of inland crustal earthquakes in Japan using source parameters obtained from 36 slip models for 22 recent events (Mw 5.4–7.1) by waveform inversion analysis. We confirmed that the source scaling relationships consisting of two stages were almost the same as those obtained for crustal earthquakes on the US West Coast by Hanks and Bakun (Bull Seismol Soc Am 92:1841–1846, 2002). For larger earthquakes (Mw > 7.4) in seismically active regions, Tajima et al. (ZISIN2; J Seismol Soc Jpn 66:31–45, 2013) found saturation of fault displacements showing the third stage. Combining the earthquake data of Mw 5.4–7.1 in this study with those of Mw 7.0–8.0 compiled by Murotani et al. (Pure Appl Geophys 172:1371–1381, 2015), we conclude that the scaling relationship for rupture area versus seismic moment coincides with the three-stage source scaling relationship using source parameters extracted from waveform inversions.

Keywords

Three-stage scaling relationship earthquake category waveform inversion trimming method 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We used the hypocentral information catalog of the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) in cooperation with the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT), and source information from F-net provided by the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Resilience (NIED). We would like to thank Dr. Asano, K. (DPRI), Dr. Sekiguchi, H. (DPRI), Prof. Iwata, T. (DPRI), Dr. Horikawa, H. (AIST), Dr. Kubo, H. (NIED), Dr. Suzuki, W. (NIED), Dr. Aoi, S. (NIED), and Dr. Hikima, K. (TEPCO) for provision of waveform inversion results. Careful reviews and comments by the editor and two anonymous reviewers were quite helpful in improving the manuscript. This study was mainly based on the 2017 & 2018 research project “Examination for uncertainty of strong ground motion prediction for the inland crustal earthquakes” by the Secretariat of the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA), Japan.

Supplementary material

24_2019_2160_MOESM1_ESM.docx (45 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 45 kb)
24_2019_2160_MOESM2_ESM.docx (22 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 23 kb)

References

  1. Fujii, Y., & Matsu’ura, M. (2000). Regional difference in scaling laws for large earthquakes and its tectonic implication. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 157, 2283–2302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Hanks, T. H., & Bakun, W. H. (2002). A bilinear source-scaling model for M–logA observations of continental earthquakes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 92, 1841–1846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Hashimoto, T. (2007). The surface length of earthquake fault and the moment magnitude. In Abstracts of Japan Geoscience Union meeting, S145-013.Google Scholar
  4. Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion (HERP). (1999). Seismic activity in Japan. https://www.hp1039.jishin.go.jp/eqchreng/eqchrfrm.htm. Accessed Oct 2018.
  5. Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion (HERP). (2017). Predicting strong ground motions for identified earthquake scenarios (RECIPE) (in Japanese). https://www.jishin.go.jp/main/chousa/17_yosokuchizu/recipe.pdf. Accessed Oct 2018.
  6. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). (2016). Diffuse seismicity in seismic hazard assessment for site evaluation of nuclear installations. Safety reports series, no. 89. https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub1727web-33787836.pdf. Accessed Oct 2018.
  7. Irikura, K., & Miyake, H. (2001). Predicting of strong ground motions for scenario earthquakes. Journal of Geography, 110, 849–875. (in Japanese).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Irikura, K., & Miyake, H. (2011). Recipe for predicting strong ground motion from crustal earthquake scenarios. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 168, 85–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kanamori, H., & Anderson, D. L. (1975). Theoretical basis of some empirical relations in seismology. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 65, 1073–1095.Google Scholar
  10. Leonard, M. (2010). Earthquake fault scaling: Self-consistent relating of rupture length, width, average displacement, and moment release. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 100, 1971–1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Leonard, M. (2012). Erratum: Earthquake fault scaling: Self-consistent relating of rupture length, width, average displacement, and moment release. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 102, 2972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Leonard, M. (2014). Self-consistent earthquake fault-scaling relations: Update and extension to stable continental strike-slip faults. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 104, 2953–2965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mai, P. M., & Beroza, G. C. (2000). Source scaling properties from finite-fault-rupture models. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 90, 604–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mai, P. M., & Thingbaijam, K. K. S. (2014). SRCMOD: An online database of finite-fault rupture models. Seismological Research Letters, 85, 1348–1357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Miyakoshi, K., Irikura, K., & Kamae, K. (2015). Re-examination of scaling relationships of source parameters of the inland earthquakes in Japan based on the waveform inversion of strong motion data. Journal of Japan Association for Earthquake Engineering, 15, 141–156. (in Japanese with English abstract).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Miyakoshi, K., Kagawa, T., Sekiguchi, H., Iwata, T., & Irikura, K. (2000). Source characterization of inland earthquakes in Japan using source inversion results. In Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (CD-ROM).Google Scholar
  17. Murotani, S., Matsushima, S., Azuma, T., Irikura, K., & Kitagawa, S. (2015). Scaling relation of source parameters of earthquakes on inland crustal mega-fault systems. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 172, 1371–1381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Okada, Y. (1992). Internal deformation due to shear and tensile faults in a half-space. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 82, 1018–1040.Google Scholar
  19. Scholz, C. H., Aviles, C. A., & Wesnousky, S. G. (1986). Scaling differences between large interplate and intraplate earthquakes. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 76, 65–70.Google Scholar
  20. Somerville, P., Irikura, K., Graves, R., Sawada, S., Wald, D., Abrahamson, N., et al. (1999). Characterizing crustal earthquake slip models for the prediction of strong ground motion. Seismological Research Letters, 70, 59–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Stirling, M., Goded, D., Berryman, K., & Litchfield, N. (2013). Selection of earthquakes scaling relationships for seismic-hazard analysis. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 103, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Stirling, M., Rhoades, D., & Berryman, K. (2002). Comparison of earthquake scaling relations derived from data of instrumental and preinstrumental era. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 92, 812–830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tajima, R., Matsumoto, Y., Si, H., & Irikura, K. (2013). Comparative study on scaling relations of source parameters for great earthquakes in inland crusts and on subducting plate-boundaries. ZISIN2 (Journal of the Seismological Society of Japan), 66, 31–45. (in Japanese with English abstract).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Takemura, M. (1998). Scaling law for Japanese intraplate earthquakes in special relations to the surface faults and the damages. ZISIN2 (Journal of the Seismological Society of Japan), 51, 211–228. (in Japanese with English abstract).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Thingbaijam, K. K. S., & Mai, P. M. (2016). Evidence for truncated exponential probability distribution of earthquake slip. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 106, 1802–1816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Thingbaijam, K. K. S., Mai, P. M., & Goda, K. (2017). New empirical earthquake source-scaling laws. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 107, 2225–2246.  https://doi.org/10.1785/0120170017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wells, D. L., & Coppersmith, K. J. (1994). New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84, 974–1002.Google Scholar
  28. Yen, Y. T., & Ma, K. F. (2011). Source-scaling relationship for M 4.6-8.9 earthquakes, specifically for earthquakes in the collision zone of Taiwan. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 101, 464–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Geo-Research InstituteOsakaJapan
  2. 2.Aichi Institute of TechnologyToyotaJapan
  3. 3.Institute for Integrated Radiation and Nuclear ScienceKyoto UniversitySennan-gunJapan

Personalised recommendations