ライフサイエンスコーパス: seismicity

1 ction based on spatio-temporal variations of seismicity.

2 served logarithmic periodicity in precursory seismicity.

3 luence on the nature of self-organization of seismicity.

4 nstead it must depend on the fluctuations in seismicity.

5 ions between faults associated with regional seismicity.

6 ip distribution on the main rupture from the seismicity.

7 t could result in overpressuring and induced seismicity.

8 brittle crust and of the causes of volcanic seismicity.

9 drothermal system as the cause of uplift and seismicity.

10 ned from the depth of the current background seismicity.

11 er-arrival times population marks background seismicity.

12 ring the occurrence of postinjection induced seismicity.

13 of inducing 20% of 2008 to 2013 central U.S. seismicity.

14 potential impacts on crustal deformation and seismicity.

15 r injected tracks the long-term evolution of seismicity.

16 is the trigger of instability that leads to seismicity.

17 should lead to temporal clustering of global seismicity.

18 cy events, analogous to volcanic long-period seismicity.

19 roduce fluid overpressures which may trigger seismicity.

20 on for its presence in other regions of deep seismicity.

21 tes of hydroacoustically recorded earthquake seismicity.

22 , the slow slip began before the increase in seismicity.

23 pid tapering to markedly decreased levels of seismicity.

24 recurrence statistics derived from regional seismicity.

25 zard and for processes that drive intraplate seismicity.

26 e propagation direction, including triggered seismicity.

27 Furthermore, we interpret the band of seismicity above the magma chamber as a zone of hydrothe

28 Seismicity along continental transform faults is usually

29 as island-arc volcanism, intermediate-depth seismicity and chemical exchange between the subducting

30 lerating rates of geophysical signals (e.g., seismicity and deformation) preceding large-scale dynami

31 There were no precursor signals such as seismicity and edifice inflation.

32 We show that perplexing patterns in seismicity and fault plane solutions can be accounted fo

33 The patterns of seismicity and faulting are similar to those observed in

34 re and mineralogy, so the connection between seismicity and healing may help to explain recent observ

35 Here we use seismicity and hydrogeological models to show that fluid

36 ween the start of injection and the onset of seismicity and in regions that went on to host moderate

37 The origin and prevalence of triggered seismicity and remote aftershocks are under debate.

38 Preliminary examination of seismicity and seafloor morphology farther north along t

39 cale erosion rates correlate with historical seismicity and storm-driven runoff variability.

40 ow models that reveal a relationship between seismicity and the rate change of 'dynamic topography' (

41 seismic evidence to test whether patterns of seismicity and the stabilities of these potentially rele

42 the sequence within the context of regional seismicity and to identify areas of remaining and/or ele

43 Observations that unequivocally link seismicity and wastewater injection are scarce.

44 Both landscape evolution and regional seismicity appear to be examples of self-organized criti

45 Most observations of fluctuations of seismicity are of the rate of occurrence of smaller eart

46 Clustering of seismicity at 120-160 km depth suggests that the slab's

47 The inter-arrival times of the post 2000 seismicity at Campi Flegrei caldera are statistically di

48 relation between dehydration of minerals and seismicity at depths less than about 250 km, and conclud

49 intraplate earthquakes, temporal patterns in seismicity at remote plate boundaries, and space-based g

50 at intermediate depth (50 to 200 kilometers) seismicity can be generated by dehydration reactions in

51 ftershocks implies that such transform-fault seismicity cannot be explained by seismic triggering mod

52 that are based on observations of precursory seismicity cannot depend on the average properties of th

53 aration is accurately quantified with global seismicity catalogs alone.

54 om earthquake occurrence rates obtained from seismicity catalogues.

55 Although increased seismicity commonly accompanies geothermal production, i

56 tern equatorial Pacific reveal low-magnitude seismicity concentrated at the propagating tip of the Ga

57 Yellowstone has remained restless, with high seismicity, continuing uplift/subsidence episodes with m

58 possibility has considerable appeal, because seismicity data are routinely collected and have good sp

59 n 300 m from the 2 </= M < 3 mainshocks, the seismicity decay 5 min before the mainshocks is indistin

60 jacent to the central sub-basin and like the seismicity decreases to the north and south.

61 The short time delay between injection and seismicity differs from both the hypothetical expected t

62 ing decreased recurrence intervals, we infer seismicity during this interval records fault-valve beha

63 gnificant implications on scales relevant to seismicity, energy resources, engineering applications a

64 t the fluctuations of the order parameter of seismicity exhibit distinct minima a few months before a

65 Dyke opening and seismicity focused at the most distal segment at any giv

66 bsequent finite-element modelling shows that seismicity focuses in regions of high-gravity-derived de

67 The seismicity formulation predicts large changes of earthqu

68 localization, with both natural and induced seismicity generally clustered in discrete zones.

69 ly over 14 days, was revealed by propagating seismicity, ground deformation mapped by Global Position

70 Many active volcanoes exhibit changes in seismicity, ground deformation, and gas emissions, which

71 t those seismic signals generated from micro seismicity have extremely low amplitude.

72 nate two puzzling features of plate boundary seismicity: how great earthquakes can re-rupture regions

73 ata and the frequency-magnitude relation for seismicity imply that had the largest shocks in the seri

74 beneath Long Beach, California, and identify seismicity in an actively deforming localized zone penet

75 of elevated hazard based on a lack of recent seismicity in comparison with other portions of a fault.

76 The extent to which ongoing seismicity in intraplate regions represents long-lived a

77 hquakes in some regions while increasing the seismicity in neighboring regions, up to the present.

78 injected) provides the best correlation with seismicity in recent years.

79 he observational data of the fluctuations of seismicity in space, in time, and in a coupled space-tim

80 The 2004 M = 9.2 Sumatra earthquake altered seismicity in the Andaman backarc rift-transform system.

81 belts, including, for example, the causes of seismicity in the Indian plate beneath the modern Himala

82 A recent dramatic increase in seismicity in the midwestern United States may be relate

83 We examined historical and instrumental seismicity in the New Madrid central U.S. region to dete

84 Our results imply that ongoing background seismicity in the New Madrid region is driven by ongoing

85 rocesses are directly triggering some of the seismicity in the region.

86 Seismicity in the western United States away from the pl

87 We directly measure fault slip and seismicity induced by fluid injection into a natural fau

88 The order parameter of seismicity introduced in this time domain is the varianc

89 thus show that the occurrence of background seismicity is an excellent parameter to monitor the curr

90 U.S. region to determine whether present-day seismicity is composed predominantly of aftershocks of t

91 Seismicity is concentrated in the central sub-basin and

92 ng where gravitational body forces encourage seismicity is crucial to understanding and appraising in

93 The character of the seismicity is extremely sensitive to distributions of in

94 ometers) at Kilauea volcano demonstrate that seismicity is focused on an active fault zone at 30-kilo

95 Here, we show that the background seismicity is increasing at the same rate of (1) the gro

96 e algorithm is self-adapting to the level of seismicity: it can be transferred without readaptation f

97 Seismicity localization should occur where convective ch

98 tural gradients have been invoked to explain seismicity localization, the underlying cause of seismic

99 was aseismic, or associated with very light seismicity (magnitude <5 earthquakes).

100 Here we show that this triggered seismicity marked the beginning of a five-year trend, co

101 al represent the most likely cause of recent seismicity near Azle.

102 ugh of small amplitude, modulate the ongoing seismicity of the New Madrid region.

103 Seismicity of the plate boundary is therefore either non

104 Seismicity off the coast of Iquique started to increase

105 ting continental earthquakes as steady-state seismicity overestimates the hazard in presently active

106 s between blueschist-facies metamorphism and seismicity, particularly through dehydration reactions i

107 roaches to this problem have used precursory seismicity patterns that precede large earthquakes with

108 milar renormalizations for other premonitory seismicity patterns.

109 Induced seismicity potential is suppressed where tight confining

110 frastructure) or undermine (e.g., leakage or seismicity potential) this approach, but the sequestrati

111 To understand the seismicity preceding this event, we studied the location

112 intrusion correlate temporally with recorded seismicity, providing evidence that some seismic events

113 This accord means that changes in seismicity rate are sufficiently predictable to be inclu

114 ify the spatial and temporal patterns of the seismicity rate changes.

115 The seismicity rate increase was to the north for the Lander

116 Triggered seismicity rate increases may therefore be most likely t

117 ali, Alaska, earthquake triggered widespread seismicity rate increases throughout British Columbia an

118 ations radiated as seismic waves can trigger seismicity rate increases, as proposed for the Landers e

119 rshock duration is consistent with models of seismicity rate variations based on rate- and state-depe

120 mes after the mainshock, when low background seismicity rates allow for good aftershock detection, th

121 elsewhere might go undetected if background seismicity rates are low.

122 We infer that California seismicity rates are modestly modulated by natural hydro

123 urface deformation, hydrological loading and seismicity rates at both annual and multi-annual timesca

124 arkfield and potentially affecting long-term seismicity rates for fault systems adjacent to the valle

125 mation, induce crustal stresses and modulate seismicity rates.

126 micity localization, the underlying cause of seismicity remains unclear.

127 ways to assess seismic hazards and forecast seismicity response to perturbations of natural or anthr

128 cool subduction zones exhibit differences in seismicity, seismic structure, and arc magmatism, which

129 nnot depend on the average properties of the seismicity, such as the Gutenberg-Richter (G-R) distribu

130 lthough models of homogeneous faults develop seismicity that has a Gutenberg-Richter distribution, th

131 phenomena, such as the remote triggering of seismicity, there has been no means of actually monitori

132 We first gauge the response of the regional seismicity to the Landers event with a new technique, an

133 Drainage coincided with increased seismicity, transient acceleration, ice-sheet uplift, an

134 ay help to explain earthquake clustering and seismicity triggering by shaking, and may be involved in

135 wastewater injection and U.S. mid-continent seismicity using a newly assembled injection well databa

136 l and multi-annual timescales indicates that seismicity variations are the direct result of elastic s

137 ions is very likely to trigger large induced seismicity, which may damage the caprock and ruin the ob

138 The physical processes generating seismicity within volcanic edifices are highly complex a