Aseismic afterslip is postseismic fault sliding that may significantly redistribute crustal stresses and drive aftershock sequences. Afterslip is typically modeled through geodetic observations of surface deformation on a case-by-case basis, thus questions of how and why the afterslip moment varies between earthquakes remain largely unaddressed. We compile 148 afterslip studies following 53 6.0-9.1 earthquakes, and formally analyze a subset of 88 well-constrained kinematic models. Afterslip and coseismic moments scale near-linearly, with a median Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (CC) of 0.91 after bootstrapping (95% range: 0.89-0.93). We infer that afterslip area and average slip scale with coseismic moment as and , respectively. The ratio of afterslip to coseismic moment ( ) varies from <1% to >300% (interquartile range: 9%-32%). weakly correlates with (CC: -0.21, attributed to a publication bias), rupture aspect ratio (CC: -0.31), and fault slip rate (CC: 0.26, treated as a proxy for fault maturity), indicating that these factors affect afterslip. does not correlate with mainshock dip, rake, or depth. Given the power-law decay of afterslip, we expected studies that started earlier and spanned longer timescales to capture more afterslip, but does not correlate with observation start time or duration. Because estimates for a single earthquake can vary by an order of magnitude, we propose that modeling uncertainty currently presents a challenge for systematic afterslip analysis. Standardizing modeling practices may improve model comparability, and eventually allow for predictive afterslip models that account for mainshock and fault zone factors to be incorporated into aftershock hazard models.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9287082 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2021JB023897 | DOI Listing |
Nature
April 2024
Université Côte d'Azur, CNRS, Observatoire de la Côte d'Azur, IRD, Géoazur, Valbonne, France.
Subduction zones generate the largest earthquakes on Earth, yet their detailed structure, and its influence on seismic and aseismic slip, remains poorly understood. Geological studies of fossil subduction zones characterize the seismogenic interface as a 100 m-1 km thick zone in which deformation occurs mostly on metres-thick faults. Conversely, seismological studies, with their larger spatial coverage and temporal resolution but lower spatial resolution, often image the seismogenic interface as a kilometres-wide band of seismicity.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFSci Rep
November 2023
Research Center for Urban Safety and Security, Kobe University, Rokkodai-cho 1-1, Nada Ward, Kobe, 657-8501, Japan.
Large subduction earthquakes induce complex postseismic deformation, primarily driven by afterslip and viscoelastic relaxation, in addition to interplate relocking processes. However, these signals are intricately intertwined, posing challenges in determining the timing and nature of relocking. Here, we use six years of continuous GNSS measurements (2015-2021) to study the spatiotemporal evolution of afterslip, seismicity and locking after the 2015 Illapel earthquake ([Formula: see text] 8.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFSci Adv
April 2023
Earthquake Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Moffett Field, CA, USA.
The shallower portions of subduction zone megathrust faults host Earth's most hazardous tsunamigenic earthquakes, yet understanding how and when they slip remains elusive because of challenges making seafloor observations. We performed Global Navigation Satellite System Acoustic seafloor geodetic surveys before and ~2.5 months after the 29 July 2021 (moment magnitude) 8.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFSci Adv
September 2022
Université Côte d'Azur, IRD, CNRS, Observatoire de la Côte d'Azur, Géoazur, France.
Transient fault slip spans time scales from tens of seconds of earthquake rupture to years of aseismic afterslip. So far, seismic and geodetic recordings of these two phenomena have primarily been studied separately and mostly with a focus on kinematic aspects, which limits our physical understanding of the interplay between seismic and aseismic slip. Here, we use a Bayesian dynamic source inversion method, based on laboratory-derived friction laws, to constrain fault stress and friction properties by joint quantitative modeling of coseismic and postseismic observations.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAseismic afterslip is postseismic fault sliding that may significantly redistribute crustal stresses and drive aftershock sequences. Afterslip is typically modeled through geodetic observations of surface deformation on a case-by-case basis, thus questions of how and why the afterslip moment varies between earthquakes remain largely unaddressed. We compile 148 afterslip studies following 53 6.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!