Joint Inversion of Coseismic and Early Postseismic Slip to Optimize the Information Content in Geodetic Data: Application to the 2009 M_w 6.3 L'Aquila Earthquake, Central Italy

When analyzing the rupture of a large earthquake, geodetic data are often critical. These data are generally characterized by either a good temporal or a good spatial resolution, but rarely both. As a consequence, many studies analyze the coseismic rupture with data that also include one or more days of early postseismic deformation. Here, we invert simultaneously for the coseismic and postseismic slip with the condition that the sum of the two models remains compatible with data covering the two slip episodes. We validate the benefits of this approach with a toy model and an application to the 2009 M_w 6.3 L'Aquila earthquake, using a Bayesian approach and accounting for epistemic uncertainties. For the L'Aquila earthquake, we find that if early postseismic deformation is not an explicitly acknowledged coseismic signal, coseismic slip models may overestimate the peak amplitude while long‐term postseismic models may largely underestimate the total postseismic slip amplitude. This example illustrates how the proposed approach could improve our comprehension of the seismic cycle, fault frictional properties, and the spatial and temporal relationship between seismic rupture, afterslip, and aftershocks

Editorial workflow of a community-led, all-volunteer scientific journal: lessons from the launch of Seismica

Seismica is a community-led, volunteer-run, diamond open-access journal for seismology and earthquake science, and Seismica's mission and core values align with the principles of Open Science. This article describes the editorial workflow that Seismica uses to go from a submitted manuscript to a published article. In keeping with Open Science principles, the main goals of sharing this workflow description are to increase transparency around academic publishing, and to enable others to use elements of Seismica's workflow for journals of a similar size and ethos. We highlight aspects of Seismica's workflow that differ from practices at journals with paid staff members, and also discuss some of the challenges encountered, solutions developed, and lessons learned while this workflow was developed and deployed over Seismica's first year of operations

The launch of Seismica: a seismic shift in publishing

Seismica, a community-run Diamond Open Access (OA) journal for seismology and earthquake science, opened for submissions in July 2022. We created Seismica to support a shift to OA publishing while pushing back against the extreme rise in the cost of OA author processing charges, and the inequities this is compounding. Seismica is run by an all-volunteer Board of 47 researchers who fulfil traditional editorial roles as well as forming functional teams to address the needs for technical design and support, copy editing, media and branding that would otherwise be covered by paid staff at a for-profit journal. We are supported by the McGill University Library (Québec, Canada), who host our website and provide several other services, so that Seismica does not have any income or financial expenditures. We report the process of developing the journal and explain how and why we made some of the major policy choices. We describe the organizational structure of the journal, and discuss future plans and challenges for the continued success and longevity of Seismica

Editorial workflow of a community-led, all-volunteer scientific journal: lessons from the launch of Seismica

Seismica is a community-led, volunteer-run, diamond open-access journal for seismology and earthquake science, and Seismica's mission and core values align with the principles of Open Science. This article describes the editorial workflow that Seismica uses to go from a submitted manuscript to a published article. In keeping with Open Science principles, the main goals of sharing this workflow description are to increase transparency around academic publishing, and to enable others to use elements of Seismica's workflow for journals of a similar size and ethos. We highlight aspects of Seismica's workflow that differ from practices at journals with paid staff members, and also discuss some of the challenges encountered, solutions developed, and lessons learned while this workflow was developed and deployed over Seismica's first year of operations

The launch of Seismica: a seismic shift in publishing

Seismica, a community-run Diamond Open Access (OA) journal for seismology and earthquake science, opened for submissions in July 2022. We created Seismica to support a shift to OA publishing while pushing back against the extreme rise in the cost of OA author processing charges, and the inequities this is compounding. Seismica is run by an all-volunteer Board of 47 researchers who fulfil traditional editorial roles as well as forming functional teams to address the needs for technical design and support, copy editing, media and branding that would otherwise be covered by paid staff at a for-profit journal. We are supported by the McGill University Library (Québec, Canada), who host our website and provide several other services, so that Seismica does not have any income or financial expenditures. We report the process of developing the journal and explain how and why we made some of the major policy choices. We describe the organizational structure of the journal, and discuss future plans and challenges for the continued success and longevity of Seismica

Accounting for uncertain fault geometry in earthquake source inversions – II: application to the Mw 6.2 Amatrice earthquake, central Italy

International audienceOur understanding of earthquake sources is limited by the availability and the quality of observations and the fidelity of our physical models. Uncertainties in our physical models will naturally bias our inferences of subsurface fault slip. These uncertainties will always persist to some level as we will never have a perfect knowledge of the Earth’s interior. The choice of the forward physics is thus ambiguous, with the frequent need to fix the value of several parameters such as crustal properties or fault geometry. Here, we explore the impact of uncertainties related to the choice of both fault geometry and elastic structure, as applied to the 2016 Mw 6.2 Amatrice earthquake, central Italy. This event, well instrumented and characterized by a relatively simple fault morphology, allows us to explore the role of uncertainty in basic fault parameters, such as fault dip and position. We show that introducing uncertainties in fault geometry in a static inversion reduces the sensitivity of inferred models to different geometric assumptions. Accounting for uncertainties thus helps infer more realistic and robust slip models. We also show that uncertainties in fault geometry and Earth’s elastic structure significantly impact estimated source models, particularly if near-fault observations are available

Accounting for uncertain fault geometry in earthquake source inversions – I: theory and simplified application

International audienceThe ill-posed nature of earthquake source estimation derives from several factors including the quality and quantity of available observations and the fidelity of our forward theory. Observational errors are usually accounted for in the inversion process. Epistemic errors, which stem from our simplified description of the forward problem, are rarely dealt with despite their potential to bias the estimate of a source model. In this study, we explore the impact of uncertainties related to the choice of a fault geometry in source inversion problems. The geometry of a fault structure is generally reduced to a set of parameters, such as position, strike and dip, for one or a few planar fault segments. While some of these parameters can be solved for, more often they are fixed to an uncertain value. We propose a practical framework to address this limitation by following a previously implemented method exploring the impact of uncertainties on the elastic properties of our models. We develop a sensitivity analysis to small perturbations of fault dip and position. The uncertainties of our fixed fault geometry are included in the inverse problem under the formulation of the misfit covariance matrix that combines both prediction and observation uncertainties. We validate this approach with the simplified case of a fault that extends infinitely along strike, using both Bayesian and optimization formulations of a static slip inversion. If epistemic errors are ignored, predictions are overconfident in the data and slip parameters are not reliably estimated. In contrast, inclusion of uncertainties in fault geometry allows us to infer a robust posterior slip model. Epistemic uncertainties can be many orders of magnitude larger than observational errors for great earthquakes (Mw > 8). Not accounting for uncertainties in fault geometry may partly explain observed shallow slip deficits for continental earthquakes. Similarly, ignoring the impact of epistemic errors can also bias estimates of near-surface slip and predictions of tsunamis induced by megathrust earthquakes

Impact of topography on earthquake static slip estimates

International audienceOur understanding of earthquakes is limited by our knowledge, and our description, of the physics of the Earth. When solving for subsurface fault slip, it is common practice to assume minimum complexity for the Earth's characteristics such as topography, fault geometry and elastic properties. These characteristics are difficult to include in simulations and our knowledge of them is incomplete, leading many to believe that there is minimal advantage to be gained by accounting for these effects. However, 3D structure can be easily included with the newly-developed software package SPECFEM-X, and topography and bathymetry can be measured directly and are well known all over the Earth's surface. Accounting for topography thus seems to be an efficient strategy for incorporating accurate and extensive information into the inverse problem. Here, we explore the impact of topography on static slip estimates, with a particular focus on how topography may impact slip resolution on the fault. We also wonder if the influence of topography can be accounted for by simply using a receiver elevation correction. To this end, we analyze the 2015 M w 7.5 Gorkha, Nepal, and the 2010 M w 8.8 Maule, Chile, earthquakes within a Bayesian framework. The regions affected by these events represent two different types of topography. Chile, which contains both the Peru-Chile trench and the Andes mountains, has a greater elevation range and steeper gradients than Nepal, where the primary topographic feature is the Himalayan mountain range. Additionally, the slip of the continental Nepal event is well constrained, whereas observations are less informative in a subduction context. We show that topography has a non-negligible impact on inferred slip models. Our results suggest that the effect of topography on slip estimates increases with two main factors: poor observational constraints and high elevation gradients. In particular, we find that accounting for topography improves slip resolution where topographic gradients are large and the data is less informative: at depths for the Gorkha event, and near the trench for the Maule event. When topography has a significant impact on slip resolution, which is probably the case of many subduction events, the receiver elevation correction is not sufficient

Distribution of Interseismic Coupling Along the North and East Anatolian Faults Inferred From InSAR and GPS Data

International audienceThe North Anatolian Fault (NAF) has produced numerous major earthquakes. After decades of quiescence, the Mw 6.8 Elazığ earthquake (24 January 2020) has recently reminded us that the East Anatolian Fault (EAF) is also capable of producing significant earthquakes. To better estimate the seismic hazard associated with these two faults, we jointly invert interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) and GPS data to image the spatial distribution of interseismic coupling along the eastern part of both the NAF and EAF. We perform the inversion in a Bayesian framework, enabling to estimate uncertainties on both long‐term relative plate motion and coupling. We find that coupling is high and deep (0–20 km) on the NAF and heterogeneous and superficial (0–5 km) on the EAF. Our model predicts that the Elazığ earthquake released between 200 and 250 years of accumulated moment, suggesting a bicentennial recurrence time