Automatic detection of weak & interfering seismic events

Table 1. Comparisons between event locations as reported in local bulletins and those obtained using our automatic location scheme - differences are mostly small. The few exceptions in this regard are events located outside or on the periphery of the German (ca 8 stations used) and Norwegian (ca 6 stations used) network areas where the epicenter resolution is relatively poor for any location method. Ca 20 stations used from Italian network area.

Table 2. Listing of the weak events (Germany) detected with our approach. Note, Events 4 & 5 interfere with each other - analyst unable to analyze properly these two events.

Remark: such a high accuracy of the method is caused, in fact, by the use of a group velocity rather than a phase one - the latter is much more dependent on a local crust structure. See, e.g. "Energetic Envelope Transform"
Acknowledgements
The authors, Gennady Ryzhikov & Marina Biryulina, are grateful to Manfred Henger and Gernot Hartmann (Hannover, Germany), and Rodolfo Console and Franco Mele (Rome, Italy) for providing us with real seismological data.

< BACK

çÅÎÎÁÄÉÊ òÙÖÉËÏ×