Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 339

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Seismic anisotropy of oceanic upper mantle: Shear wave splitting methodologies and observations

Open access
Wolfe, Cecily J., Silver, Paul G.·1998·Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth

Abstract

We develop methodologies to obtain accurate measurements of shear wave splitting and apply these techniques to examine the pattern of oceanic upper mantle anisotropy. To obtain high‐quality estimates of receiver splitting at island stations, we devise a stacking method that finds the optimum splitting parameters and 95% error region for teleseismic shear‐wave phases from a suite of earthquake events. To obtain additional measurements in oceanic regions, we develop techniques to measure splitting parameters and errors for SS phases that sample upper mantle anisotropy at their bounce points. However, we find the data are often of low resolution, and anomalous characteristics are sometimes found that make splitting difficult to interpret. Ten second splitting of SS is observed across the BANJO seismic array, but we cannot unambiguously attribute this signal to mantle anisotropy at the bounce. The receiver splitting methods are used to assess the adequacy of a two anisotropic layer model for the Pacific region, with fast polarization azimuth (ϕ) in the lithosphere oriented in the fossil spreading direction and ϕ in the asthenosphere oriented in the absolute plate motion direction. This model has been proposed to explain surface wave data in the Pacific Ocean, but our splitting results demonstrate that oceanic anisotropy patterns are more heterogeneous than would be predicted. While the island splitting measurements could reflect the influence of individual hotspot upwellings, hotspot effects do not appear to be universally dominant. We propose that splitting observations alternatively indicate broad‐scale differences in the underlying character of oceanic upper mantle anisotropy, associated with coherant patters of lithospheric structure and asthenospheric flow. In particular, splitting, surface wave models, and regional studies all support a model where lithospheric anisotropy throughout the South Pacific has been erased or reoriented toward the absolute plate motion direction, whereas more limited observations in the North Pacific indicate that the fossil lithospheric signature appears to be preserved.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/97jb02023

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 339

Metadata

Authors
Wolfe, C. J., & Silver, P. G.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth
Published
1998-01-10
Volume
103
Issue
B1
Pages
749-771
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2067396291
Cited by
339
References
0
FWCI
12.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Seismic anisotropy of oceanic upper mantle: Shear wave splitting methodologies and observations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/97jb02023
The paper
Wolfe, C. J., & Silver, P. G. (1998). Seismic anisotropy of oceanic upper mantle: Shear wave splitting methodologies and observations. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. https://doi.org/10.1029/97jb02023

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.