Cui X., Li Z. F., Ampuero Jean-Paul, De Barros L. (2025). Does foreshock identification depend on seismic monitoring capability ?. Geophysical Research Letters, 52 (11), p. e2025GL115394 [11 p.]. ISSN 0094-8276.
Titre du document
Does foreshock identification depend on seismic monitoring capability ?
Geophysical Research Letters, 2025,
52 (11), p. e2025GL115394 [11 p.] ISSN 0094-8276
Foreshocks, though well-documented phenomena preceding many large earthquakes, have limited forecasting utility due to their non-pervasive occurrence and non-distinctive characteristics. Using California as an example, we investigate how seismic monitoring capability, particularly the completeness magnitude (M-c), influences the inferred proportion of mainshocks with foreshocks (P-f). We test four foreshock identification methods, namely the fixed-window, nearest neighbor clustering, empirical statistical (ES) methods and the epidemic-type aftershock sequence (ETAS) model. The fixed-window method shows P-f decreasing with higher M-c due to the misclassification of background events as foreshocks. In contrast, clustering and ES methods yield relatively stable P(f )across different M-c values. The ETAS model suggests that many foreshocks in California are associated with aseismic driving processes, but the identification of the processes diminishes at high M-c. These results show that improved seismic monitoring capability does not significantly increase PPf but is crucial for distinguishing processes driving foreshocks.
Plan de classement
Sciences fondamentales / Techniques d'analyse et de recherche [020]
;
Géophysique interne [066]
