Murphy, Shane

Nel 2018 è stato avviato il progetto FOCUS - Fiber Optic Cable Use For Seafloor Studies Of Earthquake - coordinato da Marc-André Gutscher del Laboratoire Géosciences Océan dell’Università di Brest, in Francia. Questo progetto indaga la sismicità e la struttura crostale del Mar Ionio attraverso l’analisi e l’interpretazione di dati raccolti da strumentazione sottomarina e da reti di monitoraggio disponibili o appositamente installate nelle zone di costa. In tale contesto, l’Osservatorio Nazionale Terremoti (ONT) e l’Osservatorio Etneo (OE), entrambe Sezioni dell’Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV), e il Laboratorio di Sismologia dell'Università della Calabria (UniCal), hanno contribuito al progetto con l’installazione di una rete sismica temporanea lungo la costa ionica calabro-siciliana a integrazione della rete permanente presente nell’area dello Stretto di Messina. La rete temporanea, costituita da 13 stazioni, ha acquisito dal mese di dicembre 2021 al mese di giugno 2023. Nel gennaio 2022, i partner internazionali del progetto FOCUS hanno installato una rete temporanea di sismometri OBS e sensori di pressione per fondali marini. La grande quantità di dati raccolta e la loro integrazione, consentirà di migliorare il monitoraggio sismico e le conoscenze relative alla struttura terrestre dell’area con particolare attenzione alle strutture sismogenetiche con un dettaglio mai raggiunto fino a ora. Tutte le istituzioni coinvolte in FOCUS collaborano per l’acquisizione e l’elaborazione dei dati, l’imaging dell’interno della Terra attraverso l’utilizzo di tecniche avanzate, l’interpretazione e la modellazione dei dati. Il presente lavoro descrive la progettazione, la realizzazione e la gestione della rete temporanea a terra definita FXland, fornendo indicazioni relative sul suo generale funzionamento e sulle caratteristiche del dataset acquisito.

The INGV is the operational center for earthquake monitoring in Italy, https://www.ingv.it/en/monitoraggio-e-infrastrutture/sorveglianza/servizio-di-sorveglianza-sismica, it operates the Italian National Seismic Network and other networks at different scales and is a primary node of EIDA for archiving and distributing seismic recordings. INGV provides earthquake information to the Department of Civil Protection and to the public. In the frame of the FOCUS (Fiber Optic Cable Use for seafloor studies of earthquake hazard and deformation) project, https://www.geo-ocean.fr/Recherche/Projets-de-Recherche/ERC-FOCUS, we deployed a temporary seismic network, FXLand (1J), for a passive seismological experiment to record regional seismicity and teleseismic events. This experiment aims to improve the detection of seismicity; the accuracy of earthquake locations, and to define the crustal structure of the region. The seismicity in the Ionian area is possibly the result of two types of tectonic activity at different depths: a gently NW dipping subduction interface of the Calabrian subduction zone, and the strike-slip fault systems in the Ionian Sea, well expressed in the morpho-bathymetry and observed in previous seismic profiles.

In the frame of FocusX2 project INGV (Osservatorio Nazionale Terremoti and Osservatorio Etneo) and UniCal (Laboratorio di Sismologia) are deploying, from the end of 2021 to January 2023 a temporary seismic network for an active/passive seismological experiment to record regional and global seismicity in the Ionian Sea. The goal of this experiment is to improve the detection of seismicity in the Ionian Sea area and the accuracy of the locations; to better define the crustal structure of the region and find patterns related to fault systems. The seismicity in the area is possibly the result of two types of tectonic activity at different depths: a gently NW dipping subduction interface of the Calabrian subduction zone, and the strike-slip fault systems in the Ionian Sea, well expressed in the morpho-bathymetry and observed in previous seismic profiles. The deployment of 13 temporary land stations, FocusX temporary land (network code 1J) https://doi.org/10.13127/SD/O5QWM6WJCD along the coasts of eastern Sicily and SW Calabria, is going to complement the permanent networks (network codes IV, MN and IY); in the same period OBS stations are deployed at sea: FocusX temporary OBS-network (network code XH). The land stations are equipped with two different type of digitizers: Reftek 130 (12), and SaraSL06 (2); and with three different type of velocimeters: Trillium 120C (10), Le 5s (2) and ss08 60s (2). Continuous data are transmitted in real time at the INGV Rome acquisition system, used in the seismic surveillance, archived and distributed in EIDA https://eida.ingv.it/it/. In the deployment period 23rd December 2021 - 9th May 2022 regional seismicity (area between Lat 36.5-38.2 Lon 14.5-16.0) include 390 events located by the INGV seismic surveillance system, two of them with magnitude larger than 4.0 as well as 56 teleseismic earthquakes with magnitude larger than magnitude 6.0, two of them larger than 7.0. The two local events with M>4.0 and some of their aftershocks, were analyzed by the analysts of the Italian Seismic Bulletin including all the stations of the FXland 1J network.

Tsunamis constitute a significant hazard for European coastal populations, and the impact of tsunami events worldwide can extend well beyond the coastal regions directly affected. Understanding the complex mechanisms of tsunami generation, propagation, and inundation, as well as managing the tsunami risk, requires multidisciplinary research and infrastructures that cross national boundaries. Recent decades have seen both great advances in tsunami science and consolidation of the European tsunami research community. A recurring theme has been the need for a sustainable platform for coordinated tsunami community activities and a hub for tsunami services. Following about three years of preparation, in July 2021, the European tsunami community attained the status of Candidate Thematic Core Service (cTCS) within the European Plate Observing System (EPOS) Research Infrastructure. Within a transition period of three years, the Tsunami candidate TCS is anticipated to develop into a fully operational EPOS TCS. We here outline the path taken to reach this point, and the envisaged form of the future EPOS TCS Tsunami. Our cTCS is planned to be organised within four thematic pillars: (1) Support to Tsunami Service Providers, (2) Tsunami Data, (3) Numerical Models, and (4) Hazard and Risk Products. We outline how identified needs in tsunami science and tsunami risk mitigation will be addressed within this structure and how participation within EPOS will become an integration point for community development.

The NEAM Tsunami Hazard Model 2018 (NEAMTHM18) is a probabilistic hazard model for tsunamis generated by earthquakes. It covers the coastlines of the North-eastern Atlantic, the Mediterranean, and connected seas (NEAM). NEAMTHM18 was designed as a three-phase project. The first two phases were dedicated to the model development and hazard calculations, following a formalized decision-making process based on a multiple-expert protocol. The third phase was dedicated to documentation and dissemination. The hazard assessment workflow was structured in Steps and Levels. There are four Steps: Step-1) probabilistic earthquake model; Step-2) tsunami generation and modeling in deep water; Step-3) shoaling and inundation; Step-4) hazard aggregation and uncertainty quantification. Each Step includes a different number of Levels. Level-0 always describes the input data; the other Levels describe the intermediate results needed to proceed from one Step to another. Alternative datasets and models were considered in the implementation. The epistemic hazard uncertainty was quantified through an ensemble modeling technique accounting for alternative models’ weights and yielding a distribution of hazard curves represented by the mean and various percentiles. Hazard curves were calculated at 2,343 Points of Interest (POI) distributed at an average spacing of ∼20 km. Precalculated probability maps for five maximum inundation heights (MIH) and hazard intensity maps for five average return periods (ARP) were produced from hazard curves. In the entire NEAM Region, MIHs of several meters are rare but not impossible. Considering a 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years (ARP≈2,475 years), the POIs with MIH >5 m are fewer than 1% and are all in the Mediterranean on Libya, Egypt, Cyprus, and Greece coasts. In the North-East Atlantic, POIs with MIH >3 m are on the coasts of Mauritania and Gulf of Cadiz. Overall, 30% of the POIs have MIH >1 m. NEAMTHM18 results and documentation are available through the TSUMAPS-NEAM project website (http://www.tsumaps-neam.eu/), featuring an interactive web mapper. Although the NEAMTHM18 cannot substitute in-depth analyses at local scales, it represents the first action to start local and more detailed hazard and risk assessments and contributes to designing evacuation maps for tsunami early warning.

Tsunamis are unpredictable and infrequent but potentially large impact natural disasters. To prepare, mitigate and prevent losses from tsunamis, probabilistic hazard and risk analysis methods have been developed and have proved useful. However, large gaps and uncertainties still exist and many steps in the assessment methods lack information, theoretical foundation, or commonly accepted methods. Moreover, applied methods have very different levels of maturity, from already advanced probabilistic tsunami hazard analysis for earthquake sources, to less mature probabilistic risk analysis. In this review we give an overview of the current state of probabilistic tsunami hazard and risk analysis. Identifying research gaps, we offer suggestions for future research directions. An extensive literature list allows for branching into diverse aspects of this scientific approach.

Finite-fault models for the 2010 Mw 8.8 Maule, Chile earthquake indicate bilateral rupture with large-slip patches located north and south of the epicenter. Previous studies also show that this event features significant slip in the shallow part of the megathrust, which is revealed through correction of the forward tsunami modeling scheme used in tsunami inversions. The presence of shallow slip is consistent with the coseismic seafloor deformation measured off the Maule region adjacent to the trench and confirms that tsunami observations are particularly important for constraining far-offshore slip. Here, we benchmark the method of Optimal Time Alignment (OTA) of the tsunami waveforms in the joint inversion of tsunami (DART and tide-gauges) and geodetic (GPS, InSAR, landleveling) observations for this event. We test the application of OTA to the tsunami Green’s functions used in a previous inversion. Through a suite of synthetic tests we show that if the bias in the forward model is comprised only of delays in the tsunami signals, the OTA can correct them precisely, independently of the sensors (DART or coastal tidegauges) and, to the first-order, of the bathymetric model used. The same suite of experiments is repeated for the real case of the 2010 Maule earthquake where, despite the results of the synthetic tests, DARTs are shown to outperform tidegauges. This gives an indication of the relative weights to be assigned when jointly inverting the two types of data. Moreover, we show that using OTA is preferable to subjectively correcting possible time mismatch of the tsunami waveforms. The results for the source model of the Maule earthquake show that using just the first-order modeling correction introduced by OTA confirms the bilateral rupture pattern around the epicenter, and, most importantly, shifts the inferred northern patch of slip to a shallower position consistent with the slip models obtained by applying more complex physics-based corrections to the tsunami waveforms. This is confirmed by a slip model refined by inverting geodetic and tsunami data complemented with a denser distribution of GPS data nearby the source area. The models obtained with the OTA method are finally benchmarked against the observed seafloor deformation off the Maule region. We find that all of the models using the OTA well predict this offshore coseismic deformation, thus overall, this benchmarking of the OTA method can be considered successful.

The Calabrian subduction zone is one of the narrowest arcs on Earth and a key area to understand the geodynamic evolution of the Mediterranean and other marginal seas. Here in the Ionian Sea, the African plate subducts beneath Eurasia. Imaging the boundary between the downgoing slab and the upper plate along the Calabrian subduction zone is important for assessing the potential of the subduction zone to generate mega‐thrust earthquakes and was the main objective of this study. Here we present and analyze the results from a 380 km long, wide‐angle seismic profile spanning the complete subduction zone, from the deep Ionian Basin and the accretionary wedge to NE Sicily, with additional constraints offered by 3‐D Gravity modeling and the analysis of earthquake hypocenters. The velocity model for the wide‐angle seismic profile images thin oceanic crust throughout the basin.

In their comment, Yamomoto and co-authors are primarily concerned with the existence and effect of large values of minimum and maximum phase residuals in our analysis and locations using the 2014 observations, as listed in Tables S7 and S8 in the supplementary material of our paper (Batsi et al, 2018). We retain these large residuals in the tables and analysis since they have vanishingly small effect on the NonLinLoc locations, since the used, equal differential time (EDT) location algorithm (Lomax, 2008; Lomax et al., 2009) is highly robust to outlier readings. In the case of our Marmara study, phases with residuals larger than 1-2sec have near zero weight in the locations and corrected phase data. However, we agree the larger residuals may have had adverse effect on the generation of station corrections, though this, in turn, would also be mitigated by the robust location procedure. As a result, we consider that the location discrepancies between Yamomoto et al (2017) and Batsi et al. (2018) are not due to effects of excessively large residuals on the station corrections or locations. Instead, we propose that, as in many seismicity studies, error and uncertainty in the absolute hypocenter locations is primarily related to error in the velocity model and insufficient geometrical coverage of the source zones by the available seismic stations. To support this proposition, and following the recommendation of Yamamoto et al., we recalculate station corrections for our 2014 data set and then relocate the 14 common events (Table A) that were located by both Yamamoto et al. (2017) and ourselves (see Table 9 in Batsi et al., 2018, with correct Yamomoto’s location for event 3: 40.8058N, 27.9504E, 13.411km). We first generate station corrections as described in Batsi et al. (2018) using all events from 2014 which comply with the Batsi et al. (2018) location criteria (number of stations ≥ 5; number of phases ≥ 6; (3) root mean square (rms) location error ≤ 0.5s; azimuthal gap ≤ 180°), except that we explicitly exclude from the analysis any P or S residuals > 3.0s when generating station corrections (Table B). We then relocate in the high‐resolution, 3D, P‐velocity model, as described in Batsi et al. (2018), the 14 common events using these station corrections. Figure 1 shows, for the 14 common events listed I Table A, the absolute NonLinLoc maximum likelihood and expectation hypocenters, and location probability density (pdf) clouds for our absolute relocations, along with the corresponding Yamamoto et al. (2017) double-difference relocations and Batsi et (2018) relative (NonDiffLoc) locations. For sake of clarity, calculation results are detailed in Figure 2 for each individual event (1 to 14). The full information on the earthquake location spatial uncertainty is shown by the pdf clouds, while the maximum-likelihood hypocenter is the best solution point and the expectation hypocenter shows a weighted mean or “center of mass” of the cloud. The pdf clouds show a large uncertainty in hypocenter depth, the formal standard error in depth ranges from 2-9km. There is also a large separation between the maximum likelihood and expectation hypocenters for some events. These results underline the large uncertainty in depth determination and corresponding instability in any one-point measure chosen as a hypocenter. However, despite these uncertainties and instabilities, the Yamamoto et al. (2017) hypocenters remain generally deeper than the maximum likelihood and expectation hypocenters for our relocations, positioned towards the deeper uncertainty limits of our locations (e.g. the lower portion of the pdf clouds), and the Yamamoto et al. (2017) epicenters fall near the Main Marmara fault (MMF) while our relocated epicenters define off axis seismicity, along secondary faults from the MMF system. Thus our relocated events, which explicitly exclude excessively large residuals, still show differences with the Yamamoto et al. (2017) events, but not as large as those we found in our original study. Based on our recalculated NonLinLoc absolute locations, we suspect that  Yamamoto et al (2017) results are systematically too deep and Batsi et al (2018) systematically too shallow, compared to what should be expected. These differences in epicenter and depth, along with the size and shape of the pdf clouds for our relocations, are most easily explained by differences in the 3D velocity models and by differences in available stations and the consequent network geometry . However, while the epicentral distances at most of the OBS stations are shorter than the focal depths, as noted by Yamomoto et al., the elongation of our pdf clouds in depth suggests that an increase in network aperture with more distant stations, along with an accurate 3D model, is required to better constrain depth. High-resolution earthquake epicenter and depth determinations below the Sea of Marmara is a difficult problem, yet of critical importance. To better understand why the two studies produce different results, and to obtain the best possible locations, the best action is to increase the number of constraints by merging the two OBS datasets, and examine, step by step, the effects of locations methods, network geometry and 3D velocity models from the two studies. Sharing the data (or phase picks and model) would provide an unique opportunity to give real, direct insight into these issues. We suspect that epicenters will shift as a function of used velocity model and station set, and that in all cases depth uncertainty is large, as is clearly represented in the NonLinLoc location, pdf clouds, while linearized location error estimates usually show lower uncertainty.

The complexity of coseismic slip distributions influences the tsunami hazard posed by local and, to a certain extent, distant tsunami sources. Large slip concentrated in shallow patches was observed in recent tsunamigenic earthquakes, possibly due to dynamic amplification near the free surface, variable frictional conditions or other factors. We propose a method for incorporating enhanced shallow slip for subduction earthquakes while preventing systematic slip excess at shallow depths over one or more seismic cycles. The method uses the classic k−2 stochastic slip distributions, augmented by shallow slip amplification. It is necessary for deep events with lower slip to occur more often than shallow ones with amplified slip to balance the long-term cumulative slip. We evaluate the impact of this approach on tsunami hazard in the central and eastern Mediterranean Sea adopting a realistic 3D geometry for three subduction zones, by using it to model ~ 150,000 earthquakes with 𝑀𝑤 from 6.0 to 9.0. We combine earthquake rates, depth-dependent slip distributions, tsunami modeling, and epistemic uncertainty through an ensemble modeling technique. We found that the mean hazard curves obtained with our method show enhanced probabilities for larger inundation heights as compared to the curves derived from depth-independent slip distributions. Our approach is completely general and can be applied to any subduction zone in the world.