Quick Search:    advanced search

GSW Home   GeoRef Home   My GSW Alerts   Contact GSW   About GSW   Journals List   Help

This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Smith, G. P. Articles by Ekström, G. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

Improving teleseismic event locations using a three-dimensional Earth model

Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences Harvard University, 20 Oxford Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138

Abstract

A comparison is made between seismic event locations derived from standard spherically symmetric Earth models (JB, PREM, IASP91) and a recent Earth model (S&P12/WM13) that incorporates large-scale lateral heterogeneity of P- and S-wave velocities in the mantle. Events with known hypocentral coordinates are located in the different Earth models using standard methods. Two sets of events are considered: a data set of 26 explosions, including primarily nuclear weapons test explosions and peaceful nuclear explosions in the United States and former USSR; and a published data set of 82 well-located earthquakes with a more even global distribution. IASP91 and PREM are shown to offer similar errors in event location and origin time estimates with respect to the JB model. The three-dimensional (3D) model S&P12/WM13 offers improvement in event locations over all three one-dimensional (1D) models with, or without, station corrections. For the explosion events, the average mislocation distance is reduced by approximately 40%; for the earthquakes, the improvements are smaller. Corrections for crustal thickness beneath source and receiver are found to be of similar magnitude to the mantle corrections, but use of station corrections together with the three-dimensional mantle model provide the best locations.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. P. Flanagan, S. C. Myers, and K. D. Koper Regional Travel-Time Uncertainty and Seismic Location Improvement Using a Three-Dimensional a priori Velocity Model Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, June 1, 2007; 97(3): 804 - 825. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. A. Ozacar and S. L. Beck The 2002 Denali Fault and 2001 Kunlun Fault Earthquakes: Complex Rupture Processes of Two Large Strike-Slip Events Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, December 1, 2004; 94(6B): S278 - S292. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Global Test of Seismic Event Locations Using Three-Dimensional Earth Models Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, December 1, 2001; 91(6): 1704 - 1716.

				Improving Global Seismic Event Locations Using Source-Receiver Reciprocity Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, June 1, 2001; 91(3): 594 - 603.

				Improving Sparse Network Seismic Location with Bayesian Kriging and Teleseismically Constrained Calibration Events Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, February 1, 2000; 90(1): 199 - 211.

				C. A. Schultz, S. C. Myers, J. Hipp, and C. J. Young Nonstationary Bayesian kriging: A predictive technique to generate spatial corrections for seismic detection, location, and identification Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, October 1, 1998; 88(5): 1275 - 1288. [Abstract] [PDF]