Affiliation:
1. Central Department of Physics , Tribhuvan University , Kirtipur, Kathmandu , Nepal
2. Birendra Multiple Campus , Tribhuvan University , Bharatpur, Chitwan , Nepal
Abstract
Abstract
The north-east sector of the Himalaya is one of the most active tectonic belts, with complex geological and tectonic features. The b-value and spatial correlation dimension (Dc) of earthquake distribution in the north-east Himalaya and its adjacent regions (20–32°N and 88–98°E) are estimated in the present study. Based on seismicity and faulting pattern, the region is divided into five active regions, namely the (i) South-Tibet, (ii) Eastern-Syntaxis, (iii) Himalayan-Frontal Arc, (iv) Arakan-Yoma belt and (v) Shillong-Plateau. A homogeneous catalogue of 1,416 earthquakes (mb ≥ 4.5) has been prepared from a revised catalogue of the ISC (International Seismological Centre). The b-value has been appraised by the maximum likelihood estimation method, while Dc values have been calculated by the correlation integral method; b-values of 1.08 ± 0.09, 1.13 ± 0.05, 0.92 ± 0.05, 1.00 ± 0.03 and 0.98 ± 0.08 have been computed for the South-Tibet, Eastern-Syntaxis, Himalayan-Frontal Arc, Arakan-Yoma belt and Shillong-Plateau region, respectively. The Dc values computed for the respective regions are 1.36 ± 0.02, 1.74 ± 0.04, 1.57 ± 0.01, 1.8 ± 0.01, and 1.83 ± 0.02. These values are > 1.5, except for the South-Tibet (1.36 ± 0.02). The b-values around the global average value (1.0) reflect the stress level and seismic activity of the regions, while high Dc values refer to the heterogeneity of the seismogenic sources.
Publisher
Adam Mickiewicz University Poznan
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences
Reference83 articles.
1. Aki, K., 1965. Maximum likelihood estimate of b in the formula Log N = a - bM and its confidence limits. Bulletin of Earthquake Research Institute Tokyo University 43, 237–239.
2. Akol, B. & Bekler, T., 2013. Assessment of the statistical earthquake hazard parameters for NW Turkey. Natural Hazards 68, 837–853.10.1007/s11069-013-0659-1
3. Angelier, J. & Baruah, S., 2009. Seismotectonics in Northeast India: A stress analysis of focal mechanism solutions of earthquakes and its kinematic implications. Geophysical Journal International 178, 303–326.10.1111/j.1365-246X.2009.04107.x
4. Aviles, C.A., Scholz, C.H. & Boatwright, J., 1987. Fractal analysis applied to characteristic segments of the San Andreas fault (USA). Journal of Geophysical Research 92, 331–344.10.1029/JB092iB01p00331
5. Berthet, T., Ritz, J.F., Ferry, M., Pelgay, P., Cattin, R., Drukpa, D., Braucher, R. & Hetényi, G., 2014. Active tectonics of the eastern Himalaya: New constraints from the first tectonic geomorphology study in southern Bhutan. Geology 42, 427–430.10.1130/G35162.1
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献