Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · 70168975

An automatic P‐Phase arrival‐time picker

Abstract

Presented is a new approach for picking P ‐phase arrival time in single‐component acceleration or broadband velocity records without requiring detection interval or threshold settings. The algorithm P PHASE P ICKER transforms the signal into a response domain of a single‐degree‐of‐freedom (SDOF) oscillator with viscous damping and then tracks the rate of change of dissipated damping energy to pick P ‐wave phases. The SDOF oscillator has a short natural period and a correspondingly high resonant frequency, which is higher than most frequencies in a seismic wave. It also has a high damping ratio (60% of critical). At this damping level, the frequency response approaches the Butterworth maximally flat magnitude filter, and phase angles are preserved. The relative input energy imparted to the oscillator by the input signal is converted to elastic strain energy and then dissipated by the damping element as damping energy. The damping energy yields a smooth envelope over time; it is zero in the beginning of the signal, zero or near zero before the P ‐phase arrival, and builds up rapidly with the P wave. Because the damping energy function changes considerably at the onset of the P wave, it is used as a metric to track and pick the P ‐phase arrival time. The P PHASE P ICKER detects P ‐phase onset using the histogram method. Its performance is compared with picking techniques using short‐term‐average to long‐term‐average ratio, and a picking method that finds the first P ‐phase arrival time using the Akaike information criterion. A large set of records with various intensities and signal‐to‐noise ratios is used for testing the P PHASE P ICKER , and it is demonstrated that P PHASE P ICKER is able to more accurately pick the onset of genuine signals against the background noise and to correctly distinguish between whether the first arrival is a P wave (emergent or impulsive) or whether the signal is from a faulty sensor.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Erol Kalkan. 2016-05-24. An automatic P‐Phase arrival‐time picker. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120150111

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗