4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Ionospheric anomalies possibly associated with M ≥ 6.0 earthquakes in the Japan area during 1998-2010: Case studies and statistical study

期刊

JOURNAL OF ASIAN EARTH SCIENCES
卷 41, 期 4-5, 页码 410-420

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jseaes.2010.10.005

关键词

Ionospheric anomaly; Total electron content; Earthquake-related ionospheric anomaly; Statistical analysis; Case studies; M >= 6.0 earthquakes around Japan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, we examine pre-earthquake ionospheric anomalies in time series and perform a statistical test by using total electron content (TEC) derived from global ionosphere maps (GIM) around the Japan area for the first time. The normalized GIM-TEC (GIM-TEC*), which is computed based on 15 days backward running mean of GIM-TEC, have been investigated for minimizing possible confounding effects of consecutive earthquakes and identify the abnormal signals. Meanwhile, to reduce the effect of strong geomagnetic activities such as geomagnetic storms, the criterion for removing the GIM-TEC data have been adapted; that is when Dst index exceeds -60 nT. Temporal variations of GIM-TEC for large and destructive earthquakes in Japan have been studied; which are the 2004 mid-Niigata Prefecture Earthquake (M6.8), its aftershock (M6.1), the 2007 offshore mid-Niigata Earthquake (M6.8), and the 2008 lwate-Miyagi Nairiku Earthquake (M7.2). Although there are some positive and negative TEC anomalies before and after the four earthquakes, there is a tendency that positive TEC anomalies appear 1-5 days before all the above earthquakes even during the quiet geomagnetic condition. Superposed epoch analyses have been performed for the statistical analysis of TEC anomalies associated with M >= 6.0 earthquakes during the 12-year period of May 1998-May 2010. The statistical result indicates the significance of the positive TEC anomalies 1-5 days before earthquakes within 1000 km from the epicenter around Japan. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据