4.5 Article

How do ghost transients from past earthquakes affect GPS slip rate estimates on southern California faults?

Journal

GEOCHEMISTRY GEOPHYSICS GEOSYSTEMS
Volume 14, Issue 4, Pages 828-838

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/ggge.20080

Keywords

earthquake cycle model; fault slip rates; block models; GPS velocity field; seismic hazard; viscoelastic relaxation

Funding

  1. Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, we investigate the extent to which viscoelastic velocity perturbations (or ghost transients) from individual fault segments can affect elastic block model-based inferences of fault slip rates from GPS velocity fields. We focus on the southern California GPS velocity field, exploring the effects of known, large earthquakes for two end-member rheological structures. Our approach is to compute, at each GPS site, the velocity perturbation relative to a cycle average for earthquake cycles on particular fault segments. We then correct the SCEC CMM4.0 velocity field for this perturbation and invert the corrected field for fault slip rates. We find that if asthenosphere viscosities are low (3x1018Pas), the current GPS velocity field is significantly perturbed by viscoelastic earthquake cycle effects associated with the San Andreas Fault segment that last ruptured in 1857 (Mw=7.9). Correcting the GPS velocity field for this perturbation (or ghost transient) adds about 5mm/a to the SAF slip rate along the Mojave and San Bernardino segments. The GPS velocity perturbations due to large earthquakes on the Garlock Fault (most recently, events in the early 1600s) and the White Wolf Fault (most recently, the Mw=7.3 1952 Kern County earthquake) are smaller and do not influence block-model inverted fault slip rates. This suggests that either the large discrepancy between geodetic and geologic slip rates for the Garlock Fault is not due to a ghost transient or that un-modeled transients from recent Mojave earthquakes may influence the GPS velocity field.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available