The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Determination of earthquake source parameters from waveform data for studies of global and regional seismicity
Abstract
It is possible to use the waveform data not only to derive the source mechanism of an earthquake but also to establish the hypocentral coordinates of the ‘best point source’ (the centroid of the stress glut density) at a given frequency. Thus two classical problems of seismology are combined into a single procedure. Given an estimate of the origin time, epicentral coordinates and depth, an initial moment tensor is derived using one of the variations of the method described in detail by Gilbert and Dziewonski (1975). This set of parameters represents the starting values for an iterative procedure in which perturbations to the elements of the moment tensor are found simultaneously with changes in the hypocentral parameters. In general, the method is stable, and convergence rapid. Although the approach is a general one, we present it here in the context of the analysis of long‐period body wave data recorded by the instruments of the SRO and ASRO digital network. It appears that the upper magnitude limit of earthquakes that can be processed using this particular approach is between 7.5 and 8.0; the lower limit is, at this time, approximately 5.5, but it could be extended by broadening the passband of the analysis to include energy with periods shorter that 45 s. As there are hundreds of earthquakes each year with magnitudes exceeding 5.5, the seismic source mechanism can now be studied in detail not only for major events but also, for example, for aftershock series. We have investigated the foreshock and several aftershocks of the Sumba earthquake of August 19, 1977; the results show temporal variation of the stress regime in the fault area of the main shock. An area some 150 km to the northwest of the epicenter of the main event became seismically active 49 days later. The sense of the strike‐slip mechanism of these events is consistent with the relaxation of the compressive stress in the plate north of the Java trench. Another geophysically interesting result of our analysis is that for 5 out of 11 earthquakes of intermediate and great depth the intermediate principal value of the moment tensor is significant, while for the remaining 6 it is essentially zero, which means that their mechanisms are consistent with a simple double‐couple representation. There is clear distinction between these two groups of earthquakes.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Altamimi, Z., Rebischung, P., Métivier, L., & Collilieux, X. (2016) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth · doi:10.1002/2016jb013098 · Cited by 1,427
Magnitude scale and quantification of earthquakes
Kanamori, H. (1983) · Tectonophysics · doi:10.1016/0040-1951(83)90273-1 · Cited by 372
Metadata
- Authors
- Dziewonski, A. M., Chou, T. ‐., & Woodhouse, J. H.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 1981-04-10
- Volume
- 86
- Issue
- B4
- Pages
- 2825-2852
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1973287273
- Cited by
- 3,191
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 15.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Determination of earthquake source parameters from waveform data for studies of global and regional seismicity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/jb086ib04p02825
- The paper
- Dziewonski, A. M., Chou, T. ‐., & Woodhouse, J. H. (1981). Determination of earthquake source parameters from waveform data for studies of global and regional seismicity. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. https://doi.org/10.1029/jb086ib04p02825
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.