Search USGSSearch

Geology topics

R. Aster

Publications and source records attributed to R. Aster.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Estimating pole/zero errors in GSN-IRIS/USGS network calibration metadata

Mapping the digital record of a seismograph into true ground motion requires the correction of the data by some description of the instrument's response. For the Global Seismographic Network (Butler et al., 2004), as well as many other networks, this instrument response is represented as a Laplace domain pole–zero model and published in the Standard for the Exchange of Earthquake Data (SEED) format. This Laplace representation assumes that the seismometer behaves as a linear system, with any abrupt changes described adequately via multiple time-invariant epochs. The SEED format allows for published instrument response errors as well, but these typically have not been estimated or provided to users. We present an iterative three-step method to estimate the instrument response parameters (poles and zeros) and their associated errors using random calibration signals. First, we solve a coarse nonlinear inverse problem using a least-squares grid search to yield a first approximation to the solution. This approach reduces the likelihood of poorly estimated parameters (a local-minimum solution) caused by noise in the calibration records and enhances algorithm convergence. Second, we iteratively solve a nonlinear parameter estimation problem to obtain the least-squares best-fit Laplace pole–zero–gain model. Third, by applying the central limit theorem, we estimate the errors in this pole–zero model by solving the inverse problem at each frequency in a two-thirds octave band centered at each best-fit pole–zero frequency. This procedure yields error estimates of the 99% confidence interval. We demonstrate the method by applying it to a number of recent Incorporated Research Institutions in Seismology/United States Geological Survey (IRIS/USGS) network calibrations (network code IU).

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

High-resolution receiver function imaging reveals Colorado Plateau lithospheric architecture and mantle-supported topography

After maintaining elevations near sea level for over 500 million years, the Colorado Plateau (CP) has a present average elevation of 2 km. We compute new receiver function images from the first dense seismic transect to cross the plateau that reveal a central CP crustal thickness of 42–50 km thinning to 30–35 km at the CP margins. Isostatic calculations show that only approximately 20% of central CP elevations can be explained by thickened crust alone, with the CP edges requiring nearly total mantle compensation. We calculate an uplift budget showing that CP buoyancy arises from a combination of crustal thickening, heating and alteration of the lithospheric root, dynamic support from mantle upwelling, and significant buoyant edge effects produced by small-scale convecting asthenosphere at its margins.

Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas, Utah

Mantle structure beneath the western edge of the Colorado Plateau

Teleseismic traveltime data are inverted for mantle Vp and Vs variations beneath a 1400 km long line of broadband seismometers extending from eastern New Mexico to western Utah. The model spans 600 km beneath the moho with resolution of ~50 km. Inversions show a sharp, large-magnitude velocity contrast across the Colorado Plateau-Great Basin transition extending ~200 km below the crust. Also imaged is a fast anomaly 300 to 600 km beneath the NW portion of the array. Very slow velocities beneath the Great Basin imply partial melting and/or anomalously wet mantle. We propose that the sharp contrast in mantle velocities across the western edge of the Plateau corresponds to differential lithospheric modification, during and following Farallon subduction, across a boundary defining the western extent of unmodified Proterozoic mantle lithosphere. The deep fast anomaly corresponds to thickened Farallon plate or detached continental lithosphere at transition zone depths. Copyright 2008 by the American Geophysical Union.

Geophysical Research Letters