中国大陆岩石圈地震层析成像模型的比较研究

IF 1.2 4区 地球科学 Q3 Earth and Planetary Sciences
Xuezhen Zhang , Xiaodong Song , Jiangtao Li
{"title":"中国大陆岩石圈地震层析成像模型的比较研究","authors":"Xuezhen Zhang ,&nbsp;Xiaodong Song ,&nbsp;Jiangtao Li","doi":"10.1016/j.eqs.2022.05.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The Chinese mainland is subject to complicated plate interactions that give rise to its complex structure and tectonics. While several seismic velocity models have been developed for the Chinese mainland, apparent discrepancies exist and, so far, little effort has been made to evaluate their reliability and consistency. Such evaluations are important not only for the application and interpretation of model results but also for future model improvement. To address this problem, here we compare five published shear-wave velocity models with a focus on model consistency. The five models were derived from different datasets and methods (i.e., body waves, surface waves from earthquakes, surface waves from noise interferometry, and full waves) and interpolated into uniform horizontal grids (0.5° × 0.5°) with vertical sampling points at 5 km, 10 km, and then 20 km intervals to a depth of 160 km below the surface, from which we constructed an averaged model (AM) as a common reference for comparative study. We compare both the absolute velocity values and perturbation patterns of these models. Our comparisons show that the models have large (&gt; 4%) differences in absolute values, and these differences are independent of data coverage and model resolution. The perturbation patterns of the models also show large differences, although some of the models show a high degree of consistency within certain depth ranges. The observed inconsistencies may reflect limited model resolution but, more importantly, systematic differences in the datasets and methods employed. Thus, despite several seismic models being published for this region, there is significant room for improvement. In particular, the inconsistencies in both data and methodologies need to be resolved in future research. Finally, we constructed a merged model (ChinaM-S1.0) that incorporates the more robust features of the five published models. As the existing models are constrained by different datasets and methods, the merged model serves as a new type of reference model that incorporates the common features from the joint datasets and methods for the shear-wave velocity structure of the Chinese mainland lithosphere.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46333,"journal":{"name":"Earthquake Science","volume":"35 3","pages":"Pages 161-185"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674451922000350/pdfft?md5=e10044dc505cf9c79cb1f3c042729b0a&pid=1-s2.0-S1674451922000350-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative study of seismic tomography models of the Chinese continental lithosphere\",\"authors\":\"Xuezhen Zhang ,&nbsp;Xiaodong Song ,&nbsp;Jiangtao Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.eqs.2022.05.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The Chinese mainland is subject to complicated plate interactions that give rise to its complex structure and tectonics. While several seismic velocity models have been developed for the Chinese mainland, apparent discrepancies exist and, so far, little effort has been made to evaluate their reliability and consistency. Such evaluations are important not only for the application and interpretation of model results but also for future model improvement. To address this problem, here we compare five published shear-wave velocity models with a focus on model consistency. The five models were derived from different datasets and methods (i.e., body waves, surface waves from earthquakes, surface waves from noise interferometry, and full waves) and interpolated into uniform horizontal grids (0.5° × 0.5°) with vertical sampling points at 5 km, 10 km, and then 20 km intervals to a depth of 160 km below the surface, from which we constructed an averaged model (AM) as a common reference for comparative study. We compare both the absolute velocity values and perturbation patterns of these models. Our comparisons show that the models have large (&gt; 4%) differences in absolute values, and these differences are independent of data coverage and model resolution. The perturbation patterns of the models also show large differences, although some of the models show a high degree of consistency within certain depth ranges. The observed inconsistencies may reflect limited model resolution but, more importantly, systematic differences in the datasets and methods employed. Thus, despite several seismic models being published for this region, there is significant room for improvement. In particular, the inconsistencies in both data and methodologies need to be resolved in future research. Finally, we constructed a merged model (ChinaM-S1.0) that incorporates the more robust features of the five published models. As the existing models are constrained by different datasets and methods, the merged model serves as a new type of reference model that incorporates the common features from the joint datasets and methods for the shear-wave velocity structure of the Chinese mainland lithosphere.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Earthquake Science\",\"volume\":\"35 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 161-185\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674451922000350/pdfft?md5=e10044dc505cf9c79cb1f3c042729b0a&pid=1-s2.0-S1674451922000350-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Earthquake Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674451922000350\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Earth and Planetary Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Earthquake Science","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674451922000350","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Earth and Planetary Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

中国大陆受到复杂的板块相互作用的影响,从而产生了复杂的结构和构造。虽然已经为中国大陆开发了几种地震速度模型,但存在明显的差异,到目前为止,几乎没有人努力评估它们的可靠性和一致性。这种评估不仅对模型结果的应用和解释很重要,而且对未来的模型改进也很重要。为了解决这个问题,我们在这里比较了五个已发表的剪切波速度模型,重点是模型的一致性。这五个模型来自不同的数据集和方法(即体波、地震表面波、噪声干涉测量表面波和全波),并插值到均匀的水平网格(0.5°×0.5°)中,垂直采样点间隔5公里、10公里,然后间隔20公里,深度为地表下160公里,在此基础上,我们构建了一个平均模型(AM),作为比较研究的常用参考。我们比较了这些模型的绝对速度值和扰动模式。我们的比较表明,这些模型的绝对值差异很大(>;4%),并且这些差异与数据覆盖率和模型分辨率无关。模型的扰动模式也显示出很大的差异,尽管一些模型在某些深度范围内显示出高度的一致性。观察到的不一致可能反映了有限的模型分辨率,但更重要的是,所使用的数据集和方法存在系统差异。因此,尽管该地区已经发布了几个地震模型,但仍有很大的改进空间。特别是,数据和方法上的不一致需要在未来的研究中解决。最后,我们构建了一个合并模型(ChinaM-S1.0),该模型融合了五个已发表模型中更稳健的特征。由于现有模型受到不同数据集和方法的约束,合并后的模型是一种新型的参考模型,它融合了中国大陆岩石圈剪切波速度结构的联合数据集和联合方法的共同特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comparative study of seismic tomography models of the Chinese continental lithosphere

The Chinese mainland is subject to complicated plate interactions that give rise to its complex structure and tectonics. While several seismic velocity models have been developed for the Chinese mainland, apparent discrepancies exist and, so far, little effort has been made to evaluate their reliability and consistency. Such evaluations are important not only for the application and interpretation of model results but also for future model improvement. To address this problem, here we compare five published shear-wave velocity models with a focus on model consistency. The five models were derived from different datasets and methods (i.e., body waves, surface waves from earthquakes, surface waves from noise interferometry, and full waves) and interpolated into uniform horizontal grids (0.5° × 0.5°) with vertical sampling points at 5 km, 10 km, and then 20 km intervals to a depth of 160 km below the surface, from which we constructed an averaged model (AM) as a common reference for comparative study. We compare both the absolute velocity values and perturbation patterns of these models. Our comparisons show that the models have large (> 4%) differences in absolute values, and these differences are independent of data coverage and model resolution. The perturbation patterns of the models also show large differences, although some of the models show a high degree of consistency within certain depth ranges. The observed inconsistencies may reflect limited model resolution but, more importantly, systematic differences in the datasets and methods employed. Thus, despite several seismic models being published for this region, there is significant room for improvement. In particular, the inconsistencies in both data and methodologies need to be resolved in future research. Finally, we constructed a merged model (ChinaM-S1.0) that incorporates the more robust features of the five published models. As the existing models are constrained by different datasets and methods, the merged model serves as a new type of reference model that incorporates the common features from the joint datasets and methods for the shear-wave velocity structure of the Chinese mainland lithosphere.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Earthquake Science
Earthquake Science GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
42
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Earthquake Science (EQS) aims to publish high-quality, original, peer-reviewed articles on earthquake-related research subjects. It is an English international journal sponsored by the Seismological Society of China and the Institute of Geophysics, China Earthquake Administration. The topics include, but not limited to, the following ● Seismic sources of all kinds. ● Earth structure at all scales. ● Seismotectonics. ● New methods and theoretical seismology. ● Strong ground motion. ● Seismic phenomena of all kinds. ● Seismic hazards, earthquake forecasting and prediction. ● Seismic instrumentation. ● Significant recent or past seismic events. ● Documentation of recent seismic events or important observations. ● Descriptions of field deployments, new methods, and available software tools. The types of manuscripts include the following. There is no length requirement, except for the Short Notes. 【Articles】 Original contributions that have not been published elsewhere. 【Short Notes】 Short papers of recent events or topics that warrant rapid peer reviews and publications. Limited to 4 publication pages. 【Rapid Communications】 Significant contributions that warrant rapid peer reviews and publications. 【Review Articles】Review articles are by invitation only. Please contact the editorial office and editors for possible proposals. 【Toolboxes】 Descriptions of novel numerical methods and associated computer codes. 【Data Products】 Documentation of datasets of various kinds that are interested to the community and available for open access (field data, processed data, synthetic data, or models). 【Opinions】Views on important topics and future directions in earthquake science. 【Comments and Replies】Commentaries on a recently published EQS paper is welcome. The authors of the paper commented will be invited to reply. Both the Comment and the Reply are subject to peer review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信