DOE OSTI · 2571676
SCEC/USGS Community Stress-Drop Validation Study: How Spectral Fitting Approaches Influence Measured Source Parameters
Abstract
Spectral source parameters used to estimate an earthquake’s stress drop (Δσ) can vary significantly across measurement approaches. The Statewide California Earthquake Center/U.S. Geological Survey Community Stress‐Drop Validation Study was initiated to compare source parameter estimates, focusing initially on a dataset from the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence. As part of that validation effort, here we focus on one potential source of uncertainty: whether spectral fitting approaches alone, applied to a common set of spectra from the 2019 Ridgecrest sequence result in different source parameter estimates. By using a common set of benchmark spectra analyzed across a consistent frequency band of 1–40 Hz, we eliminate many sources of variability. A subgroup of validation study participants volunteered to estimate the low‐frequency displacement (Ω 0 ) and corner frequency (ƒ c ) by fitting a smooth function to benchmark displacement spectra. Participants used linear‐ or log‐sampled spectra, assumed a Brune or Boatwright spectral model, and applied different misfit criteria. We compare 17 approaches used to estimate Ω 0 , ƒ c , and Δσ for 54 earthquake spectra. Our results reveal that 35% of events have Δσ estimates within a factor of two, whereas others exhibit variations exceeding an order of magnitude. The variability in and can largely be attributed to whether a spectrum is consistent with the smooth function of an idealized simple crack model. The trade‐off between Ω 0 and ƒ c may be more pronounced when using linearly sampled spectra, as higher frequency spectral bumps control the fits. As expected, methods that assumed a Boatwright model tended to have lower Ω 0 and somewhat higher ƒ c compared to those assuming a Brune model, although resulting Δσ estimates are similar. Finally, when compared to the overall validation study results, the fitting approach alone may account for between 5% and 90% (25% on average) of the total variability in spectral Δσ.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Cochran, Elizabeth S. [US Geological Survey, Pasadena, CA (United States)] (ORCID:0000000324854484), Baltay, Annemarie [US Geological Survey, Moffett Field, CA (United States)] (ORCID:000000026514852X), Chu, Shanna [Rice Univ., Houston, TX (United States)] (ORCID:000000015974183X), Abercrombie, Rachel E. [Boston Univ., MA (United States)] (ORCID:0000000345155420), Bindi, Dino [Helmholtz-Zentrum Potsdam (HZP), (Germany). German Research Centre for GeoSciences] (ORCID:0000000286192220), Chen, Xiaowei [Texas A & M Univ., College Station, TX (United States)] (ORCID:0000000163623297), Parker, Grace A. [US Geological Survey, Moffett Field, CA (United States)] (ORCID:0000000294452571), Pennington, Colin [Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)] (ORCID:0000000214749368), Shearer, Peter M. [Univ. of California, San Diego, CA (United States). Scripps Inst. of Oceanography] (ORCID:0000000229927630), Trugman, Daniel T. [Univ. of Nevada, Reno, NV (United States)] (ORCID:0000000292964223). 2024-12-17. SCEC/USGS Community Stress-Drop Validation Study: How Spectral Fitting Approaches Influence Measured Source Parameters. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120240140
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.