Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · 70219225

Rayleigh wave amplitude uncertainty across the Global Seismographic Network and potential implications for global tomography

Abstract

The Global Seismographic Network (GSN) is a multiuse, globally distributed seismic network used by seismologists, to both characterize earthquakes and study the Earth’s interior. Most stations in the network have two collocated broadband seismometers, which enable network operators to identify potential metadata and sensor issues. In this study, we investigate the accuracy with which surface waves can be measured across the GSN, by comparing waveforms of vertical‐component Rayleigh waves from M w "> M w Mw 6 and larger events between collocated sensor pairs. We calculate both the amplitude deviation and correlation coefficient between waveforms at sensor pairs. In total, we make measurements on over 670,000 event–station pairs from events that occurred from 1 January 2010 to 1 January 2020. We find that the average sensor‐pair amplitude deviation, and, therefore, GSN calibration level, is, approximately, 4% in the 25–250 s period band. Although, we find little difference in sensor‐pair amplitude deviations as a function of period across the entire network, the amount of useable data decreases rapidly as a function of increasing period. For instance, we determined that just over 12% of records at 250 s period provided useable recordings (e.g., sensor‐pair amplitude deviations of less than 20% and sensor‐pair correlation greater than 0.95). We then use these amplitude‐estimate deviations to identify how data coverage and quality could be limiting our ability to invert for whole Earth 3D attenuation models. We find an increase in the variance of our attenuation models with increasing period. For example, our degree 12 attenuation inversion at 250 s period shows 32% more variance than our degree 12 attenuation model at 25 s. This indicates that discrepancies of deep‐mantle tomography between studies could be the result of these large uncertainties. Because these high uncertainties arise from limited, high‐quality observations of long‐period ( ⁠ > 100    s ">

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Adam T. Ringler, Robert E. Anthony, C. A. Dalton, David C. Wilson. 2021-03-30. Rayleigh wave amplitude uncertainty across the Global Seismographic Network and potential implications for global tomography. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120200255

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↗