Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Similar seismic moment release process for shallow and deep earthquakes

Nature Geoscience volume 16, pages 454–460 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

The generation of earthquakes at depths exceeding 60 km remains debated, as rocks at such depths are anticipated to be ductile. Seismological investigations have revealed a variety of rupture characteristics that are distinguishable between shallow (0–60 km), intermediate-depth (60–300 km) and deep-focus (300–700 km) earthquakes, but it is unclear whether different physical mechanisms are controlling earthquake ruptures. Here, we apply machine learning classification to a global database of earthquakes with moderate to large moment magnitudes to show that depth-dependent elastic properties can explain the range of resulting rupture characteristics. We find that the rigidity of the surrounding medium is the primary control of the earthquakes’ source characteristics and that all the analysed earthquakes shared similar moment release processes with the medium effect corrected. Thus, the rupture duration, rupture length and the associated drop in stress scale with depth due to the accompanying changes in rigidity. Our results support a constant strain drop hypothesis, in which the ratio of coseismic slip to the characteristic rupture length remains largely unchanged for earthquakes at all depths and regardless of the nucleation mechanisms. These results also suggest that medium-rigidity-corrected earthquake self-similarity holds for earthquakes of different depths and host-rock types.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Global and depth distributions of 3,675 moment magnitude (Mw) > 5.5 shallow, intermediate-depth and deep-focus earthquakes.
Fig. 2: Random forest classification accuracies and interpretation of \(\widetilde {{{{F}}}}_{{{{{\mathrm{m}}}}}}\) and \(\widetilde {{{\boldsymbol{T}}}}\).
Fig. 3: Correlation of STF features with depth, \(\widetilde {{{{F}}}}_{{{{{\mathrm{m}}}}}}\) and \(\widetilde {{{\boldsymbol{T}}}}\).
Fig. 4: Systematic variations in earthquake parameters under the constant strain drop hypothesis.
Fig. 5: Corrected definition of earthquake self-similarity under the constant strain drop hypothesis.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The SCARDEC database is available at http://scardec.projects.sismo.ipgp.fr/(last accessed on 3 March 2022). The STFs dataset generated by kinematic source inversion can be accessed from the supplementary material in ref. 47 (https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JB012426, last accessed on 3 September 2021). The source data of Figs. 2, 3 and 5, and Extended Data Figs. 1–8, are available via Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7690185.

Code availability

The machine learning algorithms are developed with scikit-learn, an open-source Python package. The code and the input STF features used in this study are available via Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7690185.

References

  1. Wadati, K. Shallow and deep earthquakes. Geophys. Mag. 1, 161–202 (1928).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Persh, S. E. & Houston, H. Strongly depth-dependent aftershock production in deep earthquakes. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, 1808–1816 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Houston, H. Deep earthquake. In G. Schubert (Ed.), Treatise on Geophysics 329–354 (Elsevier, 2015).

  4. Frohlich, C. Deep Earthquakes (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2006).

  5. Denolle, M. A. Energetic onset of earthquakes. Geophys. Res. Lett. 46, 2458–2466 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Poli, P. & Prieto, G. A. Global rupture parameters for deep and intermediate-depth earthquakes: rupture parameters for deep earthquakes. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 121, 8871–8887 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kuge, K. & Kawakatsu, H. Significance of non-double couple components of deep and intermediate-depth earthquakes: implications from moment tensor inversions of long-period seismic waves. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 75, 243–266 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Houston, H. The non-double-couple component of deep earthquakes and the width of the seismogenic zone. Geophys. Res. Lett. 20, 1687–1690 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Knopoff, L. & Randall, M. J. The compensated linear-vector dipole: a possible mechanism for deep earthquakes. J. Geophys. Res. 75, 4957–4963 (1970).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Green, H. W. & Houston, H. The mechanics of deep earthquakes. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 23, 169–213 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ferrand, T. P. et al. Dehydration-driven stress transfer triggers intermediate-depth earthquakes. Nat. Commun. 8, 15247 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Raleigh, C. B. & Paterson, M. S. Experimental deformation of serpentinite and its tectonic implications. J. Geophys. Res. 70, 3965–3985 (1965).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Yamasaki, T. & Seno, T. Double seismic zone and dehydration embrittlement of the subducting slab. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 108, B4 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ogawa, M. Shear instability in a viscoelastic material as the cause of deep focus earthquakes. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 92, 13801–13810 (1987).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kelemen, P. B. & Hirth, G. A periodic shear-heating mechanism for intermediate-depth earthquakes in the mantle. Nature 446, 787–790 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Zhan, Z. Gutenberg–Richter law for deep earthquakes revisited: a dual-mechanism hypothesis. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 461, 1–7 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Zhan, Z. Mechanisms and implications of deep earthquakes. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 48, 147–174 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Green, H. W. II, Scholz, C. H., Tingle, T. N., Young, T. E. & Koczynski, T. A. Acoustic emissions produced by anticrack faulting during the olivine→spinel transformation. Geophys. Res. Lett. 19, 789–792 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Houston, H. Influence of depth, focal mechanism, and tectonic setting on the shape and duration of earthquake source time functions. J. Geophys. Res. 106, 11137–11150 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Houston, H., Benz, H. M. & Vidale, J. E. Time functions of deep earthquakes from broadband and short-period stacks. J. Geophys. Res. 103, 29895–29913 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Vidale, J. E. & Houston, H. The depth dependence of earthquake duration and implications for rupture mechanisms. Nature 365, 45–47 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Tocheport, A., Rivera, L. & Chevrot, S. A systematic study of source time functions and moment tensors of intermediate and deep earthquakes. J. Geophys. Res. 112, B07311 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Houston, H. & Williams, Q. Fast rise times and the physical mechanism of deep earthquakes. Nature 352, 520–522 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Vallée, M. Source time function properties indicate a strain drop independent of earthquake depth and magnitude. Nat. Commun. 4, 2606 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Duputel, Z., Tsai, V. C., Rivera, L. & Kanamori, H. Using centroid time-delays to characterize source durations and identify earthquakes with unique characteristics. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 374, 92–100 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Poli, P. & Prieto, G. Global and along‐strike variations of source duration and scaling for intermediate‐depth and deep‐focus earthquakes. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41, 8315–8324 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Vallée, M. & Douet, V. A new database of source time functions (STFs) extracted from the SCARDEC method. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 257, 149–157 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Breiman, L. Random forests. Mach. Learn. 45, 5–32 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Dziewonski, A. M. & Anderson, D. L. Preliminary reference Earth model. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 25, 297–356 (1981).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Bilek, S. L. & Lay, T. Rigidity variations with depth along interplate megathrust faults in subduction zones. Nature 400, 443–446 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hauke, J. & Kossowski, T. Comparison of values of Pearson’s and Spearman’s correlation coefficients on the same sets of data. Quaest. Geogr. 30, 87–93 (2011).

  32. Yin, J., Li, Z. & Denolle, M. A. Sourcetime function clustering reveals patterns in earthquake dynamics. Seismol. Res. Lett. 92, 2343–2353 (2021).

  33. Shearer, P. M. Introduction to Seismology (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2019).

  34. Walter, W. R., Mayeda, K., Gok, R. & Hofstetter, A. in Earthquakes: Radiated Energy and the Physics of Faulting (eds Abercrombie, R. et al.) 25–41 (AGU Monograph Series Vol. 170, 2006).

  35. Liu, M., Huang, Y. & Ritsema, J. Stress drop variation of deep‐focus earthquakes based on empirical Green’s functions. Geophys. Res. Lett. 47, 9 (2020).

  36. Chu, S. X. & Beroza, G. C. Aftershock productivity of intermediate-depth earthquakes in Japan. Geophys. J. Int. 230, 448–463 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kanamori, H. Mechanism of tsunami earthquakes. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 6, 346–359 (1972).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Sallarès, V. & Ranero, C. R. Upper-plate rigidity determines depth-varying rupture behaviour of megathrust earthquakes. Nature 576, 96–101 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Cheung, K. F., Lay, T., Sun, L. & Yamazaki, Y. Tsunami size variability with rupture depth. Nat. Geosci., https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00869-z (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ulrich, T., Gabriel, A.-A. & Madden, E. H. Stress, rigidity and sediment strength control megathrust earthquake and tsunami dynamics. Nat. Geosci., https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-021-00863-5 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Sallarès, V. et al. Large slip, long duration, and moderate shaking of the Nicaragua 1992 tsunami earthquake caused by low near-trench rock rigidity. Sci. Adv. 7, eabg8659 (2021).

  42. Aki, K. Scaling law of seismic spectrum. J. Geophys. Res. 72, 1217–1231 (1967).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Ben-Zion, Y. On quantification of the earthquake source. Seismol. Res. Lett. 72, 151–152 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Ben-Menahem, A. & Singh, S. J. in Seismic Waves and Sources (eds Ben-Menahem, A. & Singh, S. J.) 151–256 (Springer, 1981).

  45. Campus, P. & Das, S. Comparison of the rupture and radiation characteristics of intermediate and deep earthquakes. J. Geophys. Res. 105, 6177–6189 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Kirby, S. H., Stein, S., Okal, E. A. & Rubie, D. C. Metastable mantle phase transformations and deep earthquakes in subducting oceanic lithosphere. Rev. Geophys. 34, 261–306 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Ye, L., Lay, T., Kanamori, H. & Rivera, L. Rupture characteristics of major and great (Mw ≥ 7.0) megathrust earthquakes from 1990 to 2015: 2. Depth dependence. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 121, 845–863 (2016).

  48. Li, J., Zheng, Y., Thomsen, L., Lapen, T. J. & Fang, X. Deep earthquakes in subducting slabs hosted in highly anisotropic rock fabric. Nat. Geosci. 11, 696–700 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Billen, M. I. Deep slab seismicity limited by rate of deformation in the transition zone. Sci. Adv. 6, eaaz7692 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Chai, K. E. K., Anthony, S., Coiera, E. & Magrabi, F. Using statistical text classification to identify health information technology incidents. J. Am. Med Inf. Assoc. 20, 980–985 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Fernandez, A., Garcia, S., Herrera, F. & Chawla, N. V. SMOTE for learning from imbalanced data: progress and challenges, marking the 15-year anniversary. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 61, 863–905 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Hasanin, T., Khoshgoftaar, T. M., Leevy, J. L. & Bauder, R. A. Severely imbalanced big data challenges: investigating data sampling approaches. J. Big Data 6, 107 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Cui, X., Li, Z. & Huang, H. Subdivision of seismicity beneath the summit region of Kilauea volcano: implications for the preparation process of the 2018 eruption. Geophys. Res. Lett. 48, 20 (2021).

  54. Li, Z., Meier, M.-A., Hauksson, E., Zhan, Z. & Andrews, J. Machine learning seismic wave discrimination: application to earthquake early warning. Geophys. Res. Lett. 45, 4773–4779 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Rouet-Leduc, B., Hulbert, C. & Johnson, P. A. Continuous chatter of the Cascadia subduction zone revealed by machine learning. Nat. Geosci. 12, 75–79 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank M. Vallée and L. Ye for the STF data. The manuscript benefited from discussion with Z. Peng and R. Wang. We also thank S. Ma for helping with the figures. This research is supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (no. 2021YFC3000704 and 2022YFC3005602) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 42274063). Y.H. is supported by the Strategic Priority Research Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences (no. XDB42020104).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Seismology and Physics of Earth’s Interior, School of Earth and Space Sciences, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China

    Xin Cui, Zefeng Li & Yan Hu

  2. Mengcheng National Geophysical Observatory, University of Science and Technology of China, Mengcheng, China

    Zefeng Li & Yan Hu

Authors
  1. Xin Cui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zefeng Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yan Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Z.L. conceived the idea and supervised the project. X.C. performed the data analysis and wrote the manuscript draft. All the authors took part in the discussion of the results and contributed to writing the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zefeng Li.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Geoscience thanks the anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary Handling Editor: Louise Hawkins, in collaboration with the Nature Geoscience team.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 Relationship of dichotomy accuracies and feature importance.

(a), (b) Relationship of dichotomy accuracies of individual features and their random forest feature importance for shallow and deep earthquake classification and for intermediate-depth and deep-focus earthquake classification. Error bars represent the standard deviation of 1,000 iterations of dichotomy.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Classification accuracies of synthetic \(\widetilde F_m\) and \(\widetilde T\).

(a), (b), Classification accuracies of synthetic \(\widetilde F_m\) and \(\widetilde T\) with different noise amplitudes. Error bars represent the standard deviation of 1,000 iterations of dichotomy. S-D: shallow vs deep; ID-DF: intermediate-depth vs deep-focus.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Depth variation of STF features \(\widetilde F_m\) and \(\widetilde T\) and interpretation as Earth’s depth-varying rigidity.

(a) Left panel: depth-dependency of \(\widetilde F_m\). Gray dots represent the \(\widetilde F_m\) of individual earthquakes. Red squares with vertical bars are the average and standard deviation over a 50-km bin. The number of events per bin are 2625, 310, 223, 121, 86, 29, 8, 37, 28, 27, 34, 74 and 62 from shallow to deep depths. Green stars represent large tsunami earthquakes. The blue curve represents the theoretical prediction of \(\widetilde F_m\) using a modified preliminary reference Earth model under a constant strain drop assumption (after Vallée, 2013). Right panel: similar to the left panel for Synthetic \(\widetilde {{{\mathrm{F}}}}_{{{\mathrm{m}}}}\) predicted by the constant strain drop assumption with added Gaussian perturbation (standard deviation 0.18 for 0–60 km and 0.15 for 60–700 km). (b) Similar to (a) but for \(\widetilde T\) (standard deviation 0.22 for 0–60 km and 0.14 for 60–700 km). S-D: shallow and deep earthquake classification; ID-DF: intermediate-depth and deep-focus earthquake classification.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Spearman coefficient relations of STF features and depth for shallow and deep earthquakes.

Spearman coefficient relations of STF features and depth for shallow and deep earthquakes. The number in the top right represents the spearman correlation coefficient.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Spearman coefficient relations of STF features and \(\widetilde F_m\) for shallow and deep earthquakes.

Spearman coefficient relations of STF features and \(\widetilde F_m\) for shallow and deep earthquakes. The number in the top right represents the spearman correlation coefficient.

Extended Data Fig. 6 Spearman coefficient relations of STF features and depth for intermediate-depth and deep-focus earthquakes.

Spearman coefficient relations of STF features and depth for intermediate-depth and deep-focus earthquakes. The number in the top right represents the spearman correlation coefficient.

Extended Data Fig. 7 Spearman coefficient relations of STF features \(\widetilde T\) for intermediate-depth and deep-focus earthquakes.

Spearman coefficient relations of STF features \(\widetilde T\) for intermediate-depth and deep-focus earthquakes. The number in the top right represents the spearman correlation coefficient.

Extended Data Fig. 8 Random forest classification accuracy with an additional feature, scaled energy.

(a) The red dots are the feature importance for shallow and deep earthquake classification (the Y label on the right). The blue dots are the average accuracies of 1,000 iterations of random forest classifications by progressively adding features into the model from the highest to the lowest importance (the Y label on the left). Error bars are standard deviations. (b) Similar to the left panel but for intermediate-depth and deep-focus earthquake classification.

Extended Data Table 1 List of source time function features
Full size table

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Text 1 and 2, Supplementary Figs. 1–3 and Supplementary Table 1.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cui, X., Li, Z. & Hu, Y. Similar seismic moment release process for shallow and deep earthquakes. Nat. Geosci. 16, 454–460 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-023-01176-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-023-01176-5

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing