Search of Attractors in seismic time series of Caucasus

Main Article Content

Tamaz Chelidze
Natalia Zhukova
Teimuraz Matcharashvili
Ekaterine Mepharidze

Abstract

Last years appear controversial publications both on revealing attractors in seismic time series (which means that they can be represented by deterministic chaos model) as well as on theabsence of such ordered structures. So, it seems interesting to study, what methodology should be applied to earthquake time series (ETS) in order to reveal possible attractor structures. There are two main approaches to the problem: i. events in ETSare considered individually; ii. the number of events in ETS in some time window (a seismic rate) is calculated, which is widely used as a proxy of the strain rate in the Earth crust. The study considers how the spatio-temporal parameters of seismic rate calculations affects the nonlinear structures (phase space plots) in low seismicity areas (Batumi region)  as well as before, during main event aftershocks and after strongest Caucasian earthquakes Spitak (1988) and (Racha, 1991).The seismic phase portraits and recurrence plots are constructed for several time windows, different epicentral distances and different magnitude thresholds. The nonlinear structure of laboratory natural and synchronized stick-slip sequences are also considered. The phase  space plots' analysis can reveal some fine details of seismic process dynamics.

Published: Apr 6, 2016

Article Details

How to Cite
Chelidze, T., Zhukova, N., Matcharashvili, T., & Mepharidze, E. (2016). Search of Attractors in seismic time series of Caucasus. Journals of Georgian Geophysical Society, 18(18). Retrieved from https://ggs.openjournals.ge/index.php/GGS/article/view/1731
Section
Articles

References

Abarbanel, H. and Tsimring, L. S. 1993.The Analysis of Observed Chaotic data in Physical Systems, Rev. Mod.Phys, 65, 1331-1392.

Anishchenko, V. S. 1995.Dynamical Chaos—Models and Experiments, World Scientific Series on Nonlinear Science—Series A, Singapore.

Beltrami, H.,Mareschal, J.-C.1993. Strange seismic attractors?Pure and Applied Geophysics, 141, 71-81

Chelidze, T.,Matcharashvili, T. 2015. Dynamical Patterns in Seismology. In: Recurrence Quantification Analysis: Theory and best practices. (Eds. C.Webber and N.Marwan). Springer Cham Heidelberg, pp. 291-335.

Eckmann, J-P., Kamphorst, S., Ruelle, D. 1987. Recurrence plots of dynamical systems. Europhysics Letters. 4, 973-977.

Einicke, G. A. 2012. Smoothing, Filtering and Prediction: Estimating the Past, Present and Future. Intech.

Goltz, C.1997. Fractal and chaotic properties ofearthquakes.Springer, Berlin.

Marsan, D., and Wyss, M. 2011. Seismicity rate changes. Community Online Resource for Statistical Seismicity Analysis; doi:10.5078/corssa-25837590.

Matcharashvili, T., Chelidze, T., Javakhishvili, Z. 2000. Nonlinear analysis of magnitude and interevent time interval sequences for earthquakes of the Caucasian region. Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics, 7, 9 – 19.

Matcharashvili, T., Chelidze, T., Zhukova, N. 2015. Assessment of a ratio of the correlated and uncorrelated waiting times in the Southern California earthquake catalogue. Physica A 433, 291-303.

Matthews, M. and Reasenberg, P.1988.Statistical methods for investigating quiescence and other temporal seismicity patterns.Pure Appl. Geophys. 126, 357-372.

Simonoff, J. S. 1998. Smoothing Methods in Statistics, 2nd edition.Springer.

Sobolev, G. 2011. Seismicity dynamics and earthquake predictability. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 445–458.

Srivastava, H. N., Bhattacharya, S. N. and Sinha Ray, K. C. 1996. Geophys. Res. Lett.,23, 3519–3522.

Webber, C., Marwan, N. (Eds). 2015. Recurrence Quantification Analysis. Theory and Best Practices. Springer Cham Heidelberg