%0 Journal Article
%9 ACL : Articles dans des revues avec comité de lecture répertoriées par l'AERES
%A Cui, X.
%A Li, Z. F.
%A Ampuero, Jean-Paul
%A De Barros, L.
%T Does foreshock identification depend on seismic monitoring capability ?
%D 2025
%L fdi:010094171
%G ENG
%J Geophysical Research Letters
%@ 0094-8276
%K foreshock identificaiton ; earthquake sequence ; statistical seismology
%K ETATS UNIS ; CALIFORNIE
%M ISI:001504559700001
%N 11
%P e2025GL115394 [11 ]
%R 10.1029/2025gl115394
%U https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010094171
%> https://horizon.documentation.ird.fr/exl-doc/pleins_textes/2025-07/010094171.pdf
%V 52
%W Horizon (IRD)
%X 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.
%$ 066 ; 020