4.7 Article

Community-Driven Code Comparisons for Three-Dimensional Dynamic Modeling of Sequences of Earthquakes and Aseismic Slip

Journal

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2021JB023519

Keywords

earthquake source processes; aseismic slip; crustal faulting; numerical modeling; code verification; community benchmarks

Funding

  1. Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC)
  2. National Science Foundation (NSF) [EAR-1600087]
  3. United States Geological Survey (USGS) [G17AC00047]
  4. NSF [ACI-1548562, EAR-1848192, EAR-2121666, EAR170014]
  5. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) [RGPIN-2018-05389]
  6. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) KAKENHI [19K04031]
  7. Dutch Research Council (NWO) [DEEP.NL.2018.037]
  8. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) [200021-169880]
  9. EU-MC ITN [604713]
  10. EU ERC StG [852992]
  11. European Union [852992]
  12. European Research Council (ERC) [852992] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)
  13. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [19K04031] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Dynamic modeling of earthquake and aseismic slip sequences (SEAS) provides a framework for connecting and predicting geophysical observations. In this study, we develop two benchmarks for 3D SEAS problems to compare and verify numerical codes. Our findings show good agreement among simulated outputs, but discrepancies in rupture fronts of the initial event are influenced by various factors. The recurrence intervals and nucleation phase of later earthquakes are particularly sensitive to numerical resolution and domain size.
Dynamic modeling of sequences of earthquakes and aseismic slip (SEAS) provides a self-consistent, physics-based framework to connect, interpret, and predict diverse geophysical observations across spatial and temporal scales. Amid growing applications of SEAS models, numerical code verification is essential to ensure reliable simulation results but is often infeasible due to the lack of analytical solutions. Here, we develop two benchmarks for three-dimensional (3D) SEAS problems to compare and verify numerical codes based on boundary-element, finite-element, and finite-difference methods, in a community initiative. Our benchmarks consider a planar vertical strike-slip fault obeying a rate- and state-dependent friction law, in a 3D homogeneous, linear elastic whole-space or half-space, where spontaneous earthquakes and slow slip arise due to tectonic-like loading. We use a suite of quasi-dynamic simulations from 10 modeling groups to assess the agreement during all phases of multiple seismic cycles. We find excellent quantitative agreement among simulated outputs for sufficiently large model domains and small grid spacings. However, discrepancies in rupture fronts of the initial event are influenced by the free surface and various computational factors. The recurrence intervals and nucleation phase of later earthquakes are particularly sensitive to numerical resolution and domain-size-dependent loading. Despite such variability, key properties of individual earthquakes, including rupture style, duration, total slip, peak slip rate, and stress drop, are comparable among even marginally resolved simulations. Our benchmark efforts offer a community-based example to improve numerical simulations and reveal sensitivities of model observables, which are important for advancing SEAS models to better understand earthquake system dynamics.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available