cellular seismology in the central and eastern united states? › ... › kafka-nshm_06.pdf ·...

Cellular Seismology inthe Central and Eastern

United States?

Alan KafkaBoston Collegewww2.bc.edu/~kafka

Questions:

(1) Is the “tendency forfuture earthquakes to occurnear past earthquakes” a real,measurable, physicalphenomenon?

(2) Do we have samples thatare representative of thisphenomenon?

(3) Can we measure it?

USGS National Seismic Hazard MapsPast Seismicity Future Earthquakes

“When you can measure something and expressit in numbers, you know something about it.” - Lord Kelvin

H1 H2

H3

Choose a radius such thatcircles fill P percentage of maparea.

ρ = 6/8 = 75% = sample ofbinomial random variable, ρ.

ρ = Probability(“success”)

success = red circle occurswithin one of the green circles.

^

33% Map Area78% Hits 79% Hits

Northeastern United States

M ≥ 3.0 (1984-1987)M ≥ 5.0 (1988-2001)

Southern California

M ≥ 2.0 (1975-1987)M ≥ 4.0 (1988-2001)

33% Map Area

Central and Eastern United States

M ≥ 3.0 (1924-1987)M ≥ 4.5 (1988-2003)

-65-105

25

50

90% Hits

74%Hits

33%Area

RegionsStudied

Results(1988-2001)

NEUS = Northeastern USSEUS = Southeastern USNM = New MadridCEUS = Central and Eastern USSCA = Southern CaliforniaNCA = Northern CaliforniaPNW = Pacific NorthwestISR = IsraelTKY = Turkey

ρ̂

mean

ρ(P)^

%area (P)

ρ̂

P

What is the distribution of , for a given P?

What is the best estimateof ρ, for a given P?

ρ̂

P = 33%

ρ̂

ρ̂

From Kafka (SRL, 2002)

What is the 95% confidenceinterval for ρ, for a given P?

_

R11R12

R14R13

R21R22

R23R24

Magnitude > 5.0

NEIC 1973-2002

R1492%

R2470%

87-88 (M5.0+)89-90 (M5.5+)

P = 10% Area

R2284%

Can apply CellularSeismology method

to many:

two-year (“past”)

two-year (“future”)

sub-catalogs ofNEIC data,

and test hypothesessystematically.

M5+ M6.0+

10%Map Area

ρ̂

Region

M5+ M5.5+

936.7

7610.6

6616.7

8314.9

875.8

955.8

4928.5

876.6

914.3 78

6.8

6311.2

8010.9

864.0

953.1

6116.6

876.6

93%76%

66% 87%

87%49%

83%95%

_%Hits for 10% Map Area

INAP

RIDGE

CONTINENT

%Hits for 33% Map Area

SUBDUCTION80%

39%

98%

100%

INTERIOR OF NORTH AMERICAN PLATE (INAP): 80%CONTINENT: 39% RIDGE: 98% SUBDUCTION: 100%

Central and Eastern United States

M ≥ 3.0 (1924-1987)M ≥ 4.0 (1988-2003)

-65-105

25

50

Future large earthquakesin the CEUS have about86% probability ofoccurring within 36 km ofpast earthquakes, andabout 60% probability ofoccurring within 14 km ofpast earthquakes.

- Kafka (2005)

green zones = 36 km radius = 33% map areablue zones = 14 km radius = 10% map area

0.79≤ρ(0.33)≤0.93

0.50≤ρ(0.10)≤0.70

ρ(0.33)=0.86

ρ(0.10)=0.60

^

^

M ≥ 3.0 (1924-1987)

M ≥ 4.0 (January 2004 - April 2006)

green zones = 33% map area 53% hitsblue zones = 10% map area 33% hits

Central and Eastern United States

M(min)

ρ̂

ρ̂

Fortune cookie

M ≥ 3.0 (1924-1987)

M ≥ 3.0 (January 2004 - April 2006)

green zones = 33% map area 63% hitsblue zones = 10% map area 35% hits

Central and Eastern United States

ρ̂

ρ̂

Sample Number (time)