Temporal and spatial variations in the magnitude of completeness for homogenized moment magnitude catalogue for northeast India (original) (raw)

Northeast India region is one of the most seismically active areas in the world. Events data for the period 1897–2010, used in this study has been largely compiled from global ISC, NEIC and GCMT databases. Historical seismicity catalogue of Gupta et al (1986) and some events data from the bulletins of India Meteorological Department are also used. Orthogonal regression relations for conversion of body and surface wave magnitudes to M w,HRVD based on events data for the period 1978–2006 have been derived. An Orthogonal Standard Regression (OSR) relationship has also been obtained for scaling of intensity estimates to M w,NEIC using 126 global intensity events with intensity VI or greater during the period 1975–2010.

Magnitude of completeness and Gutenberg–Richter (GR) recurrence parameter values have been determined for the declustered homogenized catalogue pertaining to four different time periods namely, 1897–1963, 1964–1990, 1964–2000 and 1964–2010. The M c and ‘_b_’ values are observed to decrease and increase, respectively, with addition of newer data with time. The study region has been subdivided into nine seismogenic zones keeping in view the spatial variations in earthquake occurrence and prevalent tectonics. M c, ‘_b_’ and ‘_a_’ values have been estimated with respect to each zone, and the variations in the values of these parameters have been analysed.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

• Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
• Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
• Cancel anytime View plans

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

• Angelier J and Baruah S 2009 Seismotectonics in Northeast India: A stress analysis of focal mechanism solutions of earthquake and it kinematic; Geophys. J. Int. 178 303–326.
  Article Google Scholar
• Ambraseys N N 1990 Uniform magnitude re-evaluation of European earthquakes associated with strong-motion recordings; Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 19 1–20.
  Article Google Scholar
• Bapat A, Kulkarni R C and Guha S K 1983 Catalogue of earthquakes in India and neighbourhood from historical period upto 1979; Indian Society of Earthquake Technology, Roorkee, India.
• Carroll R J and Ruppert D 1996 The use and misuse of orthogonal regression in linear errors-in-variables models; Am. Stat. 50(1) 1–6.
  Article Google Scholar
• Castellaro S and Bormann P 2007 Performance of different regression procedures on the magnitude conversion problem; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97 1167–1175.
  Article Google Scholar
• Castellaro S, Mulargia F and Kagan YY 2006 Regression problems for magnitudes; Geophys. J. Int. 165 913–930.
  Article Google Scholar
• Cavallini F and Rebez A 1996 Representing earthquake intensity magnitude relationship with a nonlinear function; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 86 73–78.
  Google Scholar
• Chandra U 1992 Seismotectonics of Himalaya; Curr. Sci. 62(1&2) 40–71.
  Google Scholar
• Das R, Wason H R and Sharma M L 2011a Homogenization of earthquake catalogue for Northeast India and adjoining region; Pure Appl. Geophys., doi: 10.1007/s00024-011-0339-6.
• Das R, Wason H R and Sharma M L 2011b Global regression relations for conversion of surface wave and body wave magnitudes to moment magnitude; Natural Hazards 59(2) 801–810, doi: 10.1007/s11069-011-9796-6.
• Dutta T K 1964 Seismicity of Assam–zones of tectonic activity; Bull. Natl. Geophys. Res. Inst. 2 152–163.
  Google Scholar
• Fuller W A 1987 Measurement Error Models; Wiley, New York.
• Gardner J K and Knopoff L 1974 Is the sequence of earthquakes in southern California, with aftershocks removed, Poissonian? Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 64 1363–1367.
  Google Scholar
• Gupta H K, Rajendran K and Singh H N 1986 Seismicity of Northeast India region: Part I: The database; J. Geol. Soc. India 28 345–365.
  Google Scholar
• Gusev A A 1991 Intermagnitude relationships and asperity statistics; Pure Appl. Geophys. 136(N4) 515–527.
  Article Google Scholar
• Gutdeutsch R, Kaiser D and Jentzsch G 2002 Estimation of earthquake magnitudes from epicentral intensities and other focal parameters in Central and Southern Europe; Geophys. J. Int. 151(N3) 824–834.
  Article Google Scholar
• IS: 1893-2002 Indian standard, criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures; Part I (5th edn), Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
• Joshi G C and Sharma M L 2008 Uncertainties in the estimation of M max; J. Earth Syst. Sci. 117(S2) 671–682.
  Article Google Scholar
• Kaverina A N, Lander A V and Prozorov A G 1996 Global creepex distribution and its relation to earthquake – source geometry and tectonic origin; Geophys. J. Int. 125 249–265.
  Article Google Scholar
• Kendall M G and Stuart A 1979 The advanced theory of statistics (Vol. 2, 4th edn), Griffin, London.
  Google Scholar
• Madansky A 1959 The fitting of straight lines when both variables are subject to error; Am. Stat. Assoc. J. 54 173–205.
  Article Google Scholar
• Panza G F, Prozorov A and Pazzi G 1993 Extension of global creepex definition (M s – m b) to local studies (M d – M L): the case of the Italian region; Terra Nova. 5(N2) 150–156.
  Article Google Scholar
• Reasenberg P 1985 Second-order moment of central California seismicity, 1969–1982; J. Geophys. Res. 90 5479–5495.
  Article Google Scholar
• Ristau J 2009 Comparison of magnitude estimates for New Zealand earthquakes: Moment magnitude, local magnitude, and teleseismic body-wave magnitude; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99 1841–1852.
  Article Google Scholar
• Stromeyer D, Grünthal G and Wahlström R 2004 Chi-square regression for seismic strength parameter relation, and their uncertainties, with application to an m w-based earthquake catalogue for central, northern and northwestern Europe; J. Seismol. 8 143–153.
  Article Google Scholar
• Thingbaijam K K, Nath S K, Yadav A, Raj A, Walling M Y and Mohanty W K 2008 Recent seismicity in Northeast India and its adjoining region; J. Seismol. 12 107–123.
  Article Google Scholar
• Uhrhammer R A 1986 Characteristics of northern and central California seismicity; Earthquake Notes 57(1) 21 (abstract).
  Google Scholar
• Utsu T 1965 A method for determining the value of b in a formula log n = a − bM showing the magnitude-frequency relation for earthquakes (with English summary); Geophys. Bull. Hokkaido Uni. 13 99–103.
  Google Scholar
• Wiemer S 2001 Software package to analyze seismicity: ZMAP; Seismol. Res. Lett. 72 373–382.
  Article Google Scholar
• Woessner J and Wiemer S 2005 Assessing the quality of earthquake catalogues: Estimating the magnitude of completeness and its uncertainty; Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95(2) 684–698.
  Article Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Department of Earthquake Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee, India
   RANJIT DAS, H R WASON & M L SHARMA

Authors

1. RANJIT DAS
2. H R WASON
3. M L SHARMA

Corresponding author

Correspondence toH R WASON.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

DAS, R., WASON, H.R. & SHARMA, M.L. Temporal and spatial variations in the magnitude of completeness for homogenized moment magnitude catalogue for northeast India.J Earth Syst Sci 121, 19–28 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-012-0144-3

Download citation

• Received: 22 December 2010
• Revised: 30 August 2011
• Accepted: 02 September 2011
• Published: 01 March 2012
• Issue date: February 2012
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-012-0144-3

Keywords