Abstract
Statistical quantification of observed seismicity is important for understanding earthquake dynamics and future risk in any seismic-prone region. In this paper, we implement the idea of nowcasting (Rundle et al. in Earth and Space Science 3:480–486, 2016) to examine the current uncertain state of earthquake hazard assessment in the seismically active Bay of Bengal (BoB) and adjacent regions. First, we utilize the concept of “natural time” (Varostos et al. in Physical Review E 71:032102, 2005), rather than clock time, to develop a statistical distribution of inter-event counts of “small” earthquakes occurring between “large” earthquakes. Using relevant statistics of natural time, we then calculate the earthquake potential score (EPS) as the cumulative number of small earthquakes since the last large event in the selected region. The EPS, which provides the nowcast value for a region, reveals the current state of earthquake hazard in that region. Therefore, by indirect means, the EPS provides us with a simple yet transparent estimation of the current level of seismic progress through the regional earthquake cycle of recurring events in a geographical area. To illustrate the nowcasting approach in the study region, we computed EPS values for the two most seismically exposed megacities, Dhaka and Kolkata, considering events of \(M \ge 4\) within a radius of 250 km around their respective city centers. We found that the current EPS values corresponding to M ≥ 6 events in Dhaka and Kolkata were approximately 0.72 and 0.40, respectively. The practical applicability of these values is discussed in conjunction with sensitivity analysis of the threshold magnitudes.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
ANSS Earthquake catalog search. (2018) http://www.quake.geo.berkeley.edu/anss/catalog-search.html. Accessed 22 Sept 2018
Chen, K. H., & Burgmann, R. (2017). Creeping faults: Good news, bad news? Reviews of Geophysics, 55, 282–286.
Harris, R. A. (2017). Large earthquakes and creeping faults. Reviews of Geophysics, 55, 169–198.
Hogg, R. V., Mckean, J. W., & Craig, A. T. (2005). Introduction to mathematical statistics. New Delhi: PRC Press.
Holliday, J. R., Graves, W. R., Rundle, J. B., & Turcotte, D. (2016). Computing earthquake probabilities on global scales. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 173, 739–748.
ISC Bulletin: event catalog search. (2018). http://www.isc.ac.uk/iscbulletin/search/catalogue/. Accessed 22 Sept 2018
Johnson, N. L., Kotz, S., & Balakrishnan, N. (1995). Continuous univariate distributions. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
Lee, Y. T., Turcotte, D. L., Holliday, J. R., Sachs, M. K., Rundle, J. B., Chen, C. C., et al. (2011). Results of the regional earthquake likelihood models (RELM) test of earthquake forecasts in California. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(40), 16533–16538.
Liang, W. T., Lee, J. C., Chen, K. H., & Hsiao, N. C. (2017). Citizen earthquake science in Taiwan: from science to hazard mitigation. Journal of Disaster Advances, 12(6), 1174–1181.
Luginbuhl, M., Rundle, J. B., Hawkins, A., & Turcotte, D. L. (2018a). Nowcasting earthquakes: a comparison of induced earthquakes in Oklahoma and at the Geysers, California. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 175, 49–65.
Luginbuhl, M., Rundle, J. B., & Turcotte, D. L. (2018b). Natural time and nowcasting earthquakes: are large global earthquakes temporally clustered? Pure and Applied Geophysics, 175, 661–670.
Nandy, D. R. (2001). Geodynamics of north eastern India and the adjoining region. Kolkata: ACB Publications.
Pasari, S. (2015). Understanding Himalayan tectonics from geodetic and stochastic modeling. PhD Thesis, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, India
Pasari, S. (2018a). Seismotectonic modeling in the Bay-of-Bengal region. New Dimensions for Natural Hazards in Asia: An AOGS-EGU Joint Conference, in Tagaytay, Philippines, 4–8 February, 2018
Pasari, S. (2018b). Stochastic modelling of earthquake interoccurrence times in northwest Himalaya and adjoining regions. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 9(1), 568–588.
Pasari, S., & Dikshit, O. (2014a). Impact of three-parameter Weibull models in probabilistic assessment of earthquake hazards. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 171(7), 1251–1281.
Pasari, S., & Dikshit, O. (2014b). Three-parameter generalized exponential distribution in earthquake recurrence interval estimation. Natural Hazards, 73, 639–656.
Pasari, S., & Dikshit, O. (2015a). Distribution of earthquake interevent times in northeast India and adjoining regions. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 172(10), 2533–2544.
Pasari, S., & Dikshit, O. (2015b). Earthquake interevent time distribution in Kachchh, northwestern India. Earth, Planets and Space, 67, 129.
Pasari, S., & Dikshit, O. (2018). Stochastic earthquake interevent time modelling from exponentiated Weibull distributions. Natural Hazards, 90(2), 823–842.
Rai, A. K., Tripathy, S., & Sahu, S. C. (2015). The May 21st, 2014 Bay of Bengal earthquake: Implications for intraplate stress regime. Current Science, 108(9), 1706–1712.
Rao, G. S., Radhakrishna, M., & Murthy, K. S. R. (2015). A seismotectonic study of the 21 May 2014 Bay of Bengal intraplate earthquake: Evidence of onshore-offshore tectonic linkage and fracture zone reactivation in the northern Bay of Bengal. Natural Hazards, 78, 895–913.
Rundle, J. B., Luginbuhl, M., Giguere, A., & Turcotte, D. L. (2018). Natural time, nowcasting and the physics of earthquakes: estimation of seismic risk to global megacities. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 175, 647–660.
Rundle, J. B., Turcotte, D. L., Donnellan, A., Grant-Ludwig, L., Luginbuhl, M., & Gong, G. (2016). Nowcasting earthquakes. Earth and Space Science, 3, 480–486.
Scholz, C. H. (1990). The mechanics of earthquakes and faulting. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Tiampo, K. F., Rundle, J. B., Klein, W., Martins, J. S. S., & Ferguson, C. D. (2003). Ergodic dynamics in a natural threshold system. Physical Review Letters, 91(1–4), 238501.
Utsu, T. (1984). Estimation of parameters for recurrence models of earthquakes. Bulletin of Earthquake Research Institute, University of Tokyo, 59, 53–66.
Varostos, P. A., Sarlis, N. V., & Skordas, E. S. (2011). Natural time analysis: the new view of time. Berlin: Springer.
Varostos, P. A., Sarlis, N. V., Tanaka, H. K., & Skordas, E. S. (2005). Some properties of the entropy in natural time. Physical Review E, 71, 032102.
Wald, D. J., Quitoriano, V., Worden, B., Hopper, M., & Dewey, J. W. (2011). USGS “Did you feel it?” Internet based macroseismic intensity maps. Annals of Geophysics, 54(6), 688–707.
Wessel, P., & Smith, W. H. F. (1995). New version of the generic mapping tools released (p. 76). Transactions American Geophysical Union: EOS.
Working Group. (2013). Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities: The Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast Version 3 (UCERF 3), USGS Open File Report 2013–1165 and California Geological Survey Special Report 228. http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1165. Accessed 22 Sept 2018
Yin, A. (2006). Cenozoic tectonic evolution of the Himalayan orogen as constrained by along-strike variation of structural geometry, exhumation history, and foreland sedimentation. Earth Science Review, 76, 1–31.
Young, J. C., Wald, D. J., Earle, P. S., & Shanley, L. A. (2013). Transforming earthquake detection and science through citizen seismology. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
Acknowledgements
Valuable comments and constructive suggestions of two anonymous reviewers are highly appreciated. The Generic Mapping Tool (GMT) developed by Wessel and Smith (1995) was used for preparing some figures. Earthquake data for the nowcasting analysis was obtained from the ANSS global composite catalog and ISC Bulletin catalog. This research was supported in part through an Additional Competitive Research Grant (ACRG) from BITS Pilani provided to the author.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors report no potential conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pasari, S. Nowcasting Earthquakes in the Bay of Bengal Region. Pure Appl. Geophys. 176, 1417–1432 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-018-2037-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-018-2037-0