日本地球惑星科学連合2018年大会

講演情報

[EE] 口頭発表

セッション記号 S (固体地球科学) » S-SS 地震学

[S-SS06] CSEP, earthquake forecast testing, and the role of SSE in earthquake occurrence.

2018年5月21日(月) 10:45 〜 12:15 A01 (東京ベイ幕張ホール)

コンビーナ:Schorlemmer Danijel(GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences)、平田 直(東京大学地震研究所)、Matt Gerstenberger(共同)、鶴岡 弘(東京大学地震研究所)、座長:鶴岡 弘(東京大学地震研究所)、Danijel Schorlemmer(GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences)、Gerstenberger Matthew(GNS Science, New Zealand)

11:30 〜 11:45

[SSS06-04] One-day forecasts generated by the ETAS and Reasenberg-Jones models for the aftershocks following the 2017 Linzhi, Tibet, MS6.9 earthquake, China

*張 盛峰1,2,3庄 建倉1蒋 長勝2 (1.統計数理研究所、2.中国地震局地球物理研究所、3.山東省地震局)

キーワード:ETASモデル、Reasenberg-Jonesモデル、地震確率予測

We fit the Epidemic Type Afterhsock Sequence (ETAS) model and Reasenberg-Jones (R-J) model to the 2017 Linzhi, Tibet, MS6.9 earthquake sequence, using the earthquake catalog of fast report provided by China Earthquake Networks Centers (CENC), dated from the occurrence time of mainshock to 2017/12/12 and containing 856 events in total. A magnitude-ranking method is used to determine the temporal variation of the earthquake detection ability. In our calculation, we set the cut-off magnitude MC=3.0 and the start time tc=0.032 day, considering the time variation of the earthquake detecting ability.

Main results are listed below.
The ETAS parameters are μ 0.7056, p 1.1177, c 0.0206, k 0.0236 and α 1.3511. Compared to the average value of parameters p and α for other historical events of the same magnitudes, the sequence of Linzhi MS6.9 earthquake has a relatively quick decay in occurrence frequency and a relatively weak triggering capability. The residual analysis shows a relative quiescence in the transformed time sequence domain and an increased activity, starting from the 2.5th day and on 23th day, respectively. To study the stability of these two models, starting from 0.5th day after the mainshock, we update the calculation of the model parameters every 0.02 day. The results show that the ETAS and R-J models are unstable in the early time after the mainshock and start to be stable after 10th days and 7th days, respectively. Retrospective one-day probability forecasts of aftershock occurrence were produced based on these two models. To evaluate forecast performance of these two models, we use the N-test method to process the statistical test over time. The results show that the ETAS model have a slightly better performance in the early time after the mainshock than the R-J model.
Figure 1. Temporal variations of estimated parameters of (a) ETAS model and (b) R-J model since the mainshock of the Linzhi MS6.9 earthquake sequence, updated every 0.02 days. The shaded areas in the plots show the corresponding standard errors.