Skip to main content
Log in

A review of b-value imaging and fractal dimension studies in the Andaman Sumatra subduction

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Andaman–Sumatra is one of the seismically active subduction zones and experienced three largest earthquakes in the recent past and rupturing more than 1,600-km-long portion of the plate boundary. The seismicity analysis of these large earthquakes source region (5°S–15°N latitude and 90°E–103°E longitude) has been carried out by several researchers and quantified the spatial and temporal variation of b-value which is a proxy to differential stress conditions and fractal dimension which is an indicator of material heterogeneity and strength. The results of all these studies clearly bring out the low b-value and low fractal dimension corresponding to locales were sizable magnitude earthquakes have occurred. Further locales of high stress regions are identified.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aki K (1965) Maximum-likelihood estimate of b in the formula of log N = a − bM and its confidence limits. Bull Earthq Res Inst Tokyo Univ 43:237–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Aki K (1981) Earthquake prediction, vol 4. Geophys Union, Washington, pp 566–574

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya PM, Kayal JR (2007) Application of fractal in marine sciences: study of the 2004 Sumatra earthquake (Mw 9.3) sequence in Andaman-Nicobar islands. Indian J Mar Sci 36(2):136–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta S, Mukhopadhyay B, Bhattacharya A (2007) Seismicity pattern in north Sumatra Great Nicobar region: in search of precursor for the 26 December 2004 earthquake. J Earth Syst Sci 116(3):215–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dimri VP (2005) Introduction: fractals in geophysics and seismology. In: Dimri VP (ed) Fractal behavior of the earth system. Springer, Netherlands, p 208

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dimri VP, Srivastava K (2007) Tsunami propagation of the (2004) Sumatra earthquake and the fractal Analysis of the aftershock activity. Indian J Mar Sci 36(2):128–135

  • Enescu B, Ito K (2002) Spatial analysis of the frequency–magnitude distribution and decay rate of the (2000) Western Tottori earthquake. Earth Planets Space 54(8):847–860

  • Frohlich C, Davis S (1993) Teleseismic b values; or, much ado about 1.0. J Geophys Res 98(B1):631–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibowicz SJ, Debski W (2006) Seismicity before and after the two great Sumatra earthquakes of 2004 and 2005. Acta Geophys 54(4):343–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grassberger P (1983) Generalized dimensions of strange attractors. Phys Lett 97:227–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutenberg B, Richter C (1944) Frequency of earthquakes in California. Bull Seismol Soc Am 34:185–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirata T, Satoh T, Ito K (1987) Fractal structure of spatial distribution of microfracturing in rock. Geophys J R Astron Soc 90:369–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanamori H (1981) The nature of seismicity patterns before large earthquakes. In: Simpson DW, Richards PG (eds) Earthquake predictions: an international review. Maurice Ewing series, vol 4. American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, pp 1–19

  • Nanjo K, Nagahama H, Satomura M (1998) Rates of aftershock decay and the fractal structure of active fault systems. Tectonophysics 287:173–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nuannin P (2006) The potential of b-value variations as earthquake precursors for small and large events. Digital comprehensive summaries of Uppsala dissertations from the faculty of science and technology, p 183

  • Nuannin P, Kulhánek O, Persson L (2005) Spatial and temporal b-value anomalies preceding the devastating off coast of NW Sumatra earthquake of December 26, (2004). Geophys Res Lett 32:L11307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogata Y (1988) Statistical models for earthquake occurrences. J Am Stat As 83(401):9–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozer N, Ceylan S (2012) Fractal properties and simulation of micro-seismicity for seismic hazard analysis: a comparison of North Anatolian and San Andreas fault zones. Res Geophys V2:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramana DV, Srinagesh D, Chadha RK (2009) Spatial analysis of the frequency magnitude distributions of aftershock activity of Dec (2004) Tsunamigenic Sumatra earthquake. Curr Sci 96(6):834–837

  • Roy S, Ghosh U, Hazra S, Kayal JR (2010) Fractal dimension and b-value mapping in the Andaman–Sumatra subduction zone. Nat Hazards. doi:10.1007/s11069-010-9667-6

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholz CH (1990) The mechanics of earthquakes and faulting. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Scordilis EM (2006) Empirical global relations converting MS and mb to moment magnitude. J Seismol 10:225–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sukmono S, Zen MT, Hendrajaya L, Kadir W, Santoso D, Dubois J (1997) Fractal pattern of the Sumatra fault seismicity and its possible application to earthquake prediction. Bull Seismol Soc Am 87(6):1685–1690

    Google Scholar 

  • Swaroopa VR (2011). Tsunami modeling and hazard estimation along the east and west coast of India due to tsunamigenic earthquakes in the Indian Ocean. Unpublished PhD thesis, Osmania University, Hyderabad, pp 172

  • Teotia SS, Kumar D (2007) The great Sumatra–Andaman earthquake of 26 December 2004 was predictable even from seismicity data of mb > 4.5 a lesson to learn from nature. Indian J Mar Sci 36(2):122–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Tosi P (1998) Seismogenic structure behavior revealed by spatial clustering of seismicity in the Umbria–Marche Region (Central Italy). Ann Geophys 41(2):215–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang JH (1999) Studies of the frequency–magnitude relation of earthquakes based on a one-dimensional dynamical lattice model. Proc Nat Sci Counc ROC(A) 23:169–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiemer S (2001) Software package to analyze seismicity: ZMAP. Seismol Res Lett 72:374–383

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiemer S, Wyss M (1997) Mapping the frequency–magnitude distribution in asperities: an improved technique to calculate recurrence times? J Geophys Res 102(159):115–128

    Google Scholar 

  • www.earthquakes.usgc.gov

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kirti Srivastava.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Srivastava, K., Rani, S. & Srinagesh, D. A review of b-value imaging and fractal dimension studies in the Andaman Sumatra subduction. Nat Hazards 77 (Suppl 1), 97–107 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1143-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1143-2

Keywords

Navigation