Fractal behaviour of distances between consecutive aftershocks: the examples of Landers, Northridge and Hector Mine Southern California mainshocks

  • Xavier LanaEmail author
  • Dolors Martínez
  • Carina Serra
  • Amir Hosseini


Distances between consecutive aftershocks are analysed by means of mono- and multifractal theory with the aim of quantifying the complexity of the physical mechanism governing them, as well as their predictability and predictive instability. Hausdorff, Ha, and Hurst, H, exponents are determined by semivariograms and rescaled analysis, respectively. The exponent β of the power law describing power spectral contents is also quantified. These three parameters permit a generation of fractional Gaussian noise, fGn, simulating distances. The complexity and predictive instability of physical mechanism generating the series of distances is quantified by means of the correlation dimension, μ*, the Kolmogorov entropy, κ, and the Lyapunov exponents, λi, which are based on the reconstruction theorem formulation. Additionally, the multifractal detrended fluctuation analysis, MF-DFA, contributes with a different point of view to quantify the complexity of the series, in terms of fractal spectral width, W, spectral asymmetry, B, and the critical Hölder exponent, a0. By one hand, the MF-DFA is applied to the complete set of distances characterising the whole aftershock process. By the other hand, the MF-DFA is applied to segments of the series of distances with the aim of determining the evolution of the complexity since the mainshock up to the end of the stress relaxation process. Finally, an ARIMA multilinear regression process is applied to obtain some improvements, in comparison with fGn simulations, on the prediction of distances. The database for this analysis is obtained from the Southern California Seismic Network (SCSN) catalogue. Three series of aftershocks equalling to or exceeding magnitudes of 2.0, assuring seismic catalogue completeness, and associated with Landers (06/28/1992), Northridge (01/17/1994) and Hector Mine (10/16/1999) mainshocks are obtained. It is worth mentioning that common mono-multifractal behaviour for the three aftershocks series is not detected, whatever aftershock periods or segments of them are considered.

Key words

interevent distances multifractality ARIMA process southern California 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



This research was supported by the Spanish Government through the project CGL2015-65913-P.


  1. Bak, P., Tang, C., and Wiesenfeld, K., 1988, Self-organized criticality, Physical Review A, 38, 364–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bak, P., Cheng, K., and Tang, C., 1990, A forest-fire model and some thoughts on turbulence, Physical Letters A, 147, 297–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barriere, B. and Turcotte, D.L., 1994, Seismicity and self-organized criticality, Physical Review E, 49, 1151–1160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Box, G.E.P. and Jenkins, G.M., 1976, Time Series Analysis: Forecasting and Control. Holden-Day, Oakland, 575 p.Google Scholar
  5. Burgueño, A., Lana, X., Serra, C., and Martínez, M.D., 2014, Daily extreme temperature multifractals in Catalonia (NE Spain), Physics Letters A, 378, 874–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohee, B.P. and Beroza, G.C., 1994, Slip distribution of the 1992 Landers earthquake and its implications for earthquake source mechanics, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84, 692–712.Google Scholar
  7. Correig, A.M., Urquizú, M., and Vila, J., 1997, Aftershock series of event February 18, 1996: an interpretation in terms of self-organized criticality, Journal of Geophysical Research, 102, 27407–27420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davidsen, J. and Paczusky, M., 2005, Analysis of the spatial distribution between successive earthquakes, Physical Review Letters, 94, 048501. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diks, C., 1999, Nonlinear Time Series Analysis: Methods and Applications. Nonlinear Time Series and Chaos, Vol. 4, World Scientific, River Edge, 209 p.Google Scholar
  10. Dimri, V.P., 2005, Fractal Behaviour of the Earth System. Springer, Berlin, 208 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dutta, S., 2010, EEG pattern of normal and epileptic rats: monofractal or multifractal? Fractals, 18, 425–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eckmann, J.P., Oliffson, S., Ruelle, D., and Cilliberto, S., 1986, Lyapunov exponents from time series, Physical Review A, 34, 4971–4979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Feder, J., 1988, Fractals. Plenum Press, New York, 147 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Feng, T., Fu, Z., Deng, X., and Mao, J., 2009, A brief description to different multi-fractal behaviours of daily wind speed records over China, Physics Letters A 373, 4134–4141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ge, E. and Leung, Y., 2012, Detection of crossover time scales in multifractal detrended fluctuation analysis, Journal of Geographical Systems, 15, 115–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ghosh, D., Dep, A., Dutta, S., Sengupta, R., and Samanta, S., 2012, Multifractality of radon concentration fluctuation in earthquake related signal, Fractals, 20, 33–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Goltz, Ch., 1997, Fractal and Chaotic Properties of Earthquakes. Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences, Vol. 77, Springer, Berlin, 182 p.Google Scholar
  18. Gomberg, J., 1996, Stress/strain changes and triggering seismicity following the MW Landers, California, earthquake, Journal of Geophysical Research, 101, 751–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Grassberger, P. and Procaccia, I., 1983a, Characterization of strange attractors, Physical Review Letters, 50, 346–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grassberger, P. and Procaccia, I., 1983b, Estimation of the Kolmogorov entropy from a chaotic signal, Physical Review A, 28, 448–451.Google Scholar
  21. Gross, S.J. and Kisslinger, C., 1997, Estimating tectonic stress rate and state with Landers afterschocks, Journal of Geophysical Research, 102, 7603–7612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hauksson, E., 1994, State of stress from focal mechanisms before and after the 1992 Landers earthquake sequence, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84, 917–934.Google Scholar
  23. Hauksson, E., Jones, L.M., and Hutton, K., 1995, The 1994 Northridge earthquake sequence in California: seismological and tectonic aspects, Journal of Geophysical Research, 100, 12335–12355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hauksson, E., Jones, L.M., and Hutton, K., 2002, The 1999 Mw7.1 Hector Mine, California, earthquake sequence: complex conjugate strikeslip faulting, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 92, 1154–1170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hauksson, E., Jones, M.L., Hutton, K., and Eberhart-Phillips, D., 1993, The 1992 Landers earthquake sequence: seismological observations, Journal of Geophysical Research, 98, 19835–19858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jones, L.M., 1994, Foreshocks, aftershocks, and earthquakes probabilities: accounting for the Landers earthquake, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84, 892–899.Google Scholar
  27. Kagan, Y.Y., 2002, Aftershock zone scaling, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 92, 641–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kanamori, H. and Anderson, D.L., 1975, Theoretical basis of some empirical relations in seismology, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 65, 1073–1096.Google Scholar
  29. Kantelhardt, J.W., Zschiegner, S.A., Koscielny-Bunde, E., Havlin, S., Bunde, A., and Stanley, H.E., 2002, Multifractal detrended fluctuaction analysis of nonstationary time series, Physica A, 316, 87–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaplan, J.K. and Yorke, J.A., 1979, Chaotic behaviour of multidimensional difference equations. In: Walter, H.O. and Peitgen, H.O. (eds.), Functional Difference Equations and Approximation of Fixed Points. Springer, Berlin, 730, p. 204–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kilb, D., Gomberg, J., and Bodin, P., 2002, Aftershock triggering by complete Coulomb stress changes, Journal of Geophysical Research, 107, ESE 2-1–ESE 2-14. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. King, G.C.P., Stein, R.S., and Lin, J., 1994, Static stress changes and the triggering of earthquakes, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84, 935–953.Google Scholar
  33. Korvin, G., 1992, Fractal Models in the Earth Sciences. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 396 p.Google Scholar
  34. Koscielny-Bunde E., Kantelhardt, J.W, Braund, P., Bunde, A., and Havlin, S., 2006, Long-term persistence and multifractality of river runoff records: detrended fluctuation studies, Journal of Hydrology, 322,120–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lana, X., Martínez, M.D., Serra C., and Burgueño A., 2010, Complex behaviour and predictability of the European dry spell regimes, Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics, 17, 499–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lana, X., Burgueño, A., Martínez, M.D., and Serra, C., 2016, Complexity and predictability of the monthly western Mediterranean oscillation index, International Journal of Climatology, 36, 2435–2450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lana, X., Martínez, M.D., Hosseini, S.A., and Serra, C., 2017, Fractal analysis and statistics of seismic generation rates: the example of the southern California, Geosciences Journal, 21, 355–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lolli, B. and Gasperini, P., 2006, Comparing different models for aftershock rate decay: the role of the catalogue incompleteness in the first time after mainshock, Tectonophysics, 423, 43–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Li, Y., Vidale, J.E., Day, S.M., Oglesby, D.D., and Cochran, E., 2003, Post seismic fault healing on the rupture zone of the 1999 M 7.1 Hector Mine, California, Earthquake, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 93, 856–869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Main, I., 1996, Statistical physics, seismogenesis and seismic hazard, Reviews of Geophysics, 34, 433–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Malamud, B.D. and Turcotte, D.L., 1999, Self-affine time series: I. Generation and analyses. In: Domowska, R. and Saltzman, V. (eds.), Advances in Geophysics, Vol. 40. Academic Press, San Diego, p. 1–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mali, P., 2015, Multifractal characterization of global temperature anomalies, Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 121, 641–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mandelbrot, B.B. and Van Ness, J.W., 1968, Fractional Brownian motion, fractional noises and applications, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Review, 10, 422–437.Google Scholar
  44. Mandelbrot, B.B. and Wallis, J.R., 1969, Computer experiments with fractional Gaussian noises, Parts I, II, III, Water Resources Research, 5, 228–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Martínez, M.D. and Lana, X., 2018, Multifractality of the spatial distribution of seismicity in Landers (1992, Mw 7.3) and Hector Mine (1999, Mw 7.1) aftershock area (Southern California) and possible predictive signs of mainshocks. European Geosciences Union General Assembly 2018, Vienna, Apr. 8–13, Vol. 20, EGU2018-4371.Google Scholar
  46. Monterrubio, M., Lana, X., and Martínez, M.D., 2015, Aftershock sequences of three seismic crises at Southern California, USA, simulated by a cellular automata model based on self-organized criticality, Geosciences Journal, 19, 81–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Monterrubio, M., Martínez, M.D., and Lana, X., 2016, Two complementary stress release processes based on departures from Omori’s law, Geosciences Journal, 20, 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Moreno, Y., Correig, A.M., Gómez, J.B., and Pacheco, A.F., 2001, A model for complex aftershock sequences, Journal of Geophysical Research, 106, 6609–6619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Movahed, M.S. and Hermanis, E., 2008, Fractal analysis of river flow fluctuations, Physica A, 387, 915–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Muzy, J.F., Bacry, E., and Arneodo, A., 1994, The multifractal formalism revisited with wavelets, International Journal of Bifurcation Chaos, 4, 245–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ogata, Y., 1983, Estimation of the parameters in the modified Omori formula for aftershock frequencies by the maximum likelihood procedure, Journal of Physics of the Earth, 31, 115–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ogata, Y., 1988, Statistical models for earthquake occurrence and residual analysis for point sources, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83, 9–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ogata, Y., 1998, Space-time point-process models for earthquakes occurrences, Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 50, 379–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ogata, Y. and Zhuang, J., 2006, Space-time ETAS model and an improved extension, Tectonophysics, 413, 3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Omori, F., 1894, On aftershocks of earthquakes, Journal of the College of Science, Imperial University of Tokio, 7, 111–200.Google Scholar
  56. Press, W.H., Teukolsky, S.A., Vetterling, W.T., and Flannery, B.P., 1992, Numerical recipes in FORTRAN (2nd edition). Cambridge University press, Cambridge, 963 p.Google Scholar
  57. Robertson, M.C., Sammis, C.G., Sahimi, M., and Martin, A.J., 1995, Fractal analysis of three-dimensional spatial distribution of earthquakes with a percolation interpretation, Journal of Geophysical Research, 100, 609–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Roquemore, G.R. and Simila, G.W., 1994, Aftershocks from the 28 June 1992 Landers earthquake: northern Mojave desert to the Coso Volcanic Field, California, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84, 854–862.Google Scholar
  59. Shcherbakov, R., Turcotte, D.L., and Rundle, J.B., 2005, Aftershock statistics, Pure and Applied Geophysics, 162, 1051–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Shcherbakov, R., Van Aalsburg, J., Rundle, J.B., and Turcotte, D.L., 2006, Correlations in aftershocks and seismicity patterns, Tectonophysics, 413, 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Shimizu, Y., Thurner, S., and Ehrenberger, K., 2002, Multifractal spectra as a measure of complexity in human posture, Fractals, 10, 103–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Stephenson, D.B., Pavan, V., and Bojariu, R., 2000, Is the North Atlantic Oscillation a random walk? International Journal of Climatology, 20, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Stinchcombe, R.B, and Watson, B.P., 1976, Renormalization group approach for percolation conductivity, Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics, 9, 3221–3247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Stoop, F. and Meier, P.F., 1988, Evaluation of Lyapunov exponents and scaling functions from time series, Journal of the Optical Society of America B, 5, 1037–1045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Thio, H.K. and Kanamori, H, 1996, Source complexity of the 1994 Northridge earthquake and its relation to aftershock mechanisms, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 86, S84–S92.Google Scholar
  66. Turcotte, D.L., 1997, Fractal and chaos in Geology and Geophysics (2nd edition). Cambridge University press, Cambridge, 398 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Utsu, T., 1961, A statistical study of the occurrence of aftershocks, Geophysical Magazine, 30, 521–605.Google Scholar
  68. Utsu, T., Ogata, Y., and Matsu’ura, R.S., 1995, The centenary of the Omori formula for a decay law of aftershock activity, Journal of Physics of the Earth, 43, 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wald, D.J. and Heaton, T.H., 1994, Spatial and temporal distribution of slip for the 1992 Landers, California, earthquake, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84, 668–691.Google Scholar
  70. Wiemer, S., Gerstenberger, M., and Hauksson, E., 2002, Properties of the aftershock sequence of the 1999 Mw 7.1 Hector Mine earthquake: implications for aftershocks hazard, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 92, 1227–1240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wiggins, S., 2003, Introduction to applied nonlinear dynamical systems and chaos (2nd edition). Texts in Applied Mathematics Vol. 2, Springer, New York, 844 p.Google Scholar
  72. Woessner, J. and Wiemer, S., 2005, Assessing the quality of the earthquake catalogue: estimating the magnitude of completeness and its uncertainty, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 95, 684–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wyatt, F.K., Agnew, D.C., and Gladwin, M., 1994, Continuous measurements of crustal deformation for the 1992 Landers earthquake sequence, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84, 768–779.Google Scholar
  74. Wyss, M. and Wiemer, S., 2000, Change in the probability for earthquakes in Southern California due to the Landers magnitude 7.3 earthquake, Science, 290, 1334–1338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Korean Geoscience Societies and Springer 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xavier Lana
    • 1
    Email author
  • Dolors Martínez
    • 1
  • Carina Serra
    • 1
  • Amir Hosseini
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhysicsUniversitat Politècnica de CatalunyaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations