Jump to content

User:Thomaslee1/Seismic tomography

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Seismic tomography or seismotomography is a technique for imaging the subsurface of the Earth with seismic waves produced by earthquakes or explosions. P-, S-, and surface waves can be used for tomographic models of different resolutions based on seismic wavelength, wave source distance, and the seismograph array coverage.[1] The data received at seismometers are used to solve an inverse problem, wherein the locations of reflection and refraction of the wave paths are determined. This solution can be used to create 3D images of velocity anomalies which may be interpreted as structural, thermal, or compositional variations. Geoscientists use these images to better understand core, mantle, and plate tectonic processes.

Seismic tomography or seismotomography is a technique for imaging the subsurface of the Earth using seismic waves[1]. The properties of seismic waves are modified by the material through which they travel. By comparing the differences in seismic waves recorded at different locations, it is possible to create a model of the subsurface structure. Most commonly, these seismic waves are generated by earthquakes or man-made sources such as explosions. Different types of waves, including P-,S-, Rayleigh, and Love waves can be used for tomographic images, though each comes with their own benefits and downsides and are used depending on the geologic setting, seismometer coverage, distance from nearby earthquakes, and required resolution. The model created by tomographic imaging is almost always a seismic velocity model, and features within this model may be interpreted as structural, thermal, or compositional variations. Geoscientists apply seismic tomography to a wide variety of settings in which the subsurface structure is of interest, ranging in scale from whole-Earth structure to the upper few meters below the surface.

History

[edit]

In the early 20th century, seismologists first used travel time variations in seismic waves from earthquakes to make discoveries such as the existence of the Moho[2] and the depth to the outer core[3]. While these findings shared some underlying principles with seismic tomography, modern tomography itself was not developed until the 1970s with the expansion of global seismic networks. Networks like the World-Wide Standardized Seismograph Network were initially motivated by underground nuclear tests[4], but quickly showed the benefits of their accessible, standardized datasets for Geoscience. These developments occurred concurrently with advancements in modeling techniques and computing power that were required to solve large inverse problems[5][6] and generate theoretical seismograms[7], which are required to test the accuracy of a model[8]. As early as 1972[9], researchers successfully used some of the underlying principles of modern seismic tomography to search for fast and slow areas in the subsurface[10].

The first widely cited publication that largely resembles modern seismic tomography was published in 1976 and used local earthquakes to determine the 3D velocity structure beneath Southern California[11][10]. The following year, P-wave delay times were used to create 2D velocity maps of the whole Earth at several depth ranges[12], representing an early 3D model. The first model using iterative techniques, which improve upon an initial model in small steps and are required when there are a large number of unknowns, was done in 1984[13]. The model was made possible by iterating upon the first radially anisotropic Earth model, created in 1981[14]. A radially anisotropic Earth model describes changes in material properties, specifically seismic velocity, along a radial path through the Earth, and assumes this profile is valid for every path from the core to the surface. This 1984 study was also the first to apply the term "tomography" to seismology, as the term had originated in the medical field with X-ray tomography.[8]

Seismic tomography has continued to improve in the past several decades since its initial conception. The development of adjoint inversions, which are able to combine several different types of seismic data into a single inversion, help negate some of the trade-offs associated with any individual data type[8]. Historically, seismic waves have been modeled as 1D rays, a method referred to as "ray theory" that is relatively simple to model and can usually fit travel-time data well[15]. However, recorded seismic waveforms contain much more information than just travel-time and are affected by a wide path around the ray. Methods like the finite-frequency method attempt to account for this within the framework of ray theory[16]. More recently, the development of "full waveform" or "waveform" tomography have abandoned ray theory entirely. This methods models seismic wave propagation in its full complexity and can yield more accurate images of the subsurface. Originally these inversions were developed in exploration seismology[17] in the 1980s and 1990s and were too computationally complex for global and regional scale studies[8], but development of numerical modeling methods to simulate seismic waves[18] has allowed waveform tomography to become more common.

Seismic tomography requires large datasets of seismograms and well-located earthquake or explosion sources. These became more widely available in the 1960s with the expansion of global seismic networks, and in the 1970s when digital seismograph data archives were established. These developments occurred concurrently with advancements in computing power that were required to solve inverse problems and generate theoretical seismograms for model testing.[7]

In 1977, P-wave delay times were used to create the first seismic array-scale 2D map of seismic velocity.[19] In the same year, P-wave data were used to determine 150 spherical harmonic coefficients for velocity anomalies in the mantle.[20] The first model using iterative techniques, required when there are a large numbers of unknowns, was done in 1984. This built upon the first radially anisotropic model of the Earth, which provided the required initial reference frame to compare tomographic models to for iteration.[8] Initial models had resolution of ~3000 to 5000 km, as compared to the few hundred kilometer resolution of current models.[21][22][23]

Seismic tomographic models improve with advancements in computing and expansion of seismic networks. Recent models of global body waves used over 107 traveltimes to model 105 to 106 unknowns.[10][21]

Process

[edit]

Seismic tomography uses seismic records to create 2D and 3D models of the subsurface through an inverse problem that minimizes the difference between the created model and the observed seismic data[24]. Various methods are used to resolve anomalies in the crust, lithosphere, mantle, and core based on the availability of data and types of seismic waves that pass through the region. Longer wavelengths penetrate deeper into the Earth, but seismic waves are not sensitive to features significantly smaller than their wavelength and therefore provide a lower resolution. Different methods also make different assumptions, which can have a large effect on the image created. For example, commonly used tomographic methods work by iteratively improving an initial input model, and thus can produce unrealistic results if the initial model is unreasonable[24].

Seismic tomography uses seismic records to create 2D and 3D images of subsurface anomalies by solving large inverse problems such that generate models consistent with observed data. Various methods are used to resolve anomalies in the crust and lithosphere, shallow mantle, whole mantle, and core based on the availability of data and types of seismic waves that penetrate the region at a suitable wavelength for feature resolution. The accuracy of the model is limited by availability and accuracy of seismic data, wave type utilized, and assumptions made in the model.

Regional or Global Tomography

[edit]
  • Attenuation tomography attempts to extract the anelastic signal from the elastic-dominated waveform of seismic waves. Generally, it is assumed that seismic waves behave elastically, meaning individual rock particles that are displaced by the seismic wave eventually return to their original position. However, a comparatively small amount of permanent deformation does occur, which adds up to significant energy loss over large distances. This anelastic behavior is called attenuation, and in certain conditions can become just as important as the elastic response. It has been shown that contribution of anelasticity to seismic velocity is highly sensitive to the temperature[25], so attenuation tomography can help determine if a velocity feature is caused by a thermal or chemical variation, which can be ambiguous when assuming a purely elastic response[26].
  • Ambient noise tomography uses random seismic waves generated by oceanic and atmospheric disturbances to recover the velocities of surface waves. Assuming ambient seismic noise is equal in amplitude and frequency content from all directions, cross-correlating the ambient noise recorded at two seismometers for the same time period should produce only seismic energy that travels from one station to the other. This allows one station to be treated as a "virtual source" of surface waves sent to the other station, the "virtual receiver"[27]. These surface waves are sensitive to the seismic velocity of the Earth at different depths depending on their period. A major advantage of this method is that it does not require an earthquake or man-made source.[28] A disadvantage of the method is that an individual cross-correlation can be quite noisy due to the complexity of the real ambient noise field. Thus, many individual correlations over a shorter time period, typically one day, need to be created and averaged to improve the signal-to-noise ratio. While this has often required very large amounts of seismic data recorded over multiple years,[27] more recent studies have successfully used much shorter time periods to create tomographic images with ambient noise.[29][30]
  • Waveforms are usually modeled as rays due to ray theory being significantly less complex to model than the full seismic wave equations. However, seismic waves are affected by the material properties of a wide area surrounding the ray path, not just the material through which the ray passes directly. The finite frequency effect is the result the surrounding medium has on a seismic record[16]. Finite frequency tomography accounts for this in determining both travel time and amplitude anomalies, increasing image resolution. This has the ability to resolve much larger variations (i.e. 10–30%) in material properties.

Regional or global tomography

[edit]
  • Attenuation tomography attempts to extract the anelastic signal from the elastic-dominated waveform of seismic waves. The advantage of this method is its sensitivity to temperature, thus ability to image thermal features such as mantle plumes and subduction zones. Both surface and body waves have been used in this approach.
  • Ambient noise tomography cross-correlates waveforms from random wavefields generated by oceanic and atmospheric disturbances. A major advantage of this method is that unlike other methods, it does not require an earthquake or other event to occur in order to produce results.[31] A disadvantage of the method is that it requires a significant amount of time, usually a minimum of one year but several years of data collection are also common. This method has produced high-resolution images and is an area of active research.
  • Waveforms are modeled as rays in seismic analysis, but all waves are affected by the material near the ray path. The finite frequency effect is the result the surrounding medium has on a seismic record. Finite frequency tomography accounts for this in determining both travel time and amplitude anomalies, increasing image resolution. This has the ability to resolve much larger variations (i.e. 10–30%) in material properties.

Applications

[edit]

Hotspots

[edit]
The African large low-shear-velocity province (superplume)

The mantle plume hypothesis proposes that areas of volcanism not readily explained by plate tectonics, called hotspots, are a result of thermal upwelling within the mantle. Some researchers have proposed an upper mantle source above the 660km discontinuity for these plumes,[32] while others propose a much deeper source, possibly at the core-mantle boundary.[33]

While the source of mantle plumes has been highly debated since they were first proposed in the 1970s,[34] most modern studies argue in favor of mantle plumes originating at or near the core-mantle boundary.[35] This is in large part due to tomographic images that reveal both the plumes themselves[36][37] as well as large low-velocity zones in the deep mantle that likely contribute to the formation of mantle plumes. These large low-shear velocity provinces as well as smaller ultra low velocity zones have been consistently observed across many tomographic models of the deep Earth[38]

Subduction Zones

[edit]

Subducting plates are colder than the mantle into which they are moving. This creates a fast anomaly that is visible in tomographic images. Tomographic images have been made of most subduction zones around the world and have provided insight into the geometries of the crust and upper mantle in these areas. These images have revealed that subducting plates vary widely in how steeply they move into the mantle[39][40]. Tomographic images have also seen features such as deeper portions of the subducting plate tearing off from the upper portion[41].

Other Applications

[edit]

Tomography can be used to image faults to better understand their seismic hazard. This can be through imaging the fault itself by seeing differences in seismic velocity across the fault boundary[42] or by determining near-surface velocity structure[43], which can have a large impact on the magnitude on the amplitude of ground-shaking during an earthquake due to site amplification effects[44]. Near-surface velocity structure from tomographic images can also be useful for other hazards, such as monitoring of landslides for changes in near-surface moisture content which has an effect on both seismic velocity and potential for future landslides[45][46].

Tomographic images of volcanoes have yielded new insights into properties of the underlying magmatic system. These images have most commonly been used to estimate the depth and volume of magma stored in the crust[47][48], but have also been used to constrain properties such as the geometry, temperature, or chemistry of the magma[49][50][51]. It is important to note that both lab experiments and tomographic imaging studies have shown that recovering these properties from seismic velocity alone can be difficult due to the complexity of seismic wave propagation through focused zones of hot, potentially melted rocks[52][53].

While comparatively primitive to tomography on Earth, seismic tomography has been proposed on other bodies in the solar system and successfully used on the Moon. Data collected from four seismometers placed by the Apollo missions have been used many times to create 1-D velocity profiles for the moon[54][55][56], and less commonly 3-D tomographic models[57]. Tomography relies on having multiple seismometers, but tomography-adjacent methods for constraining Earth structure have been used on other planets. While on Earth these methods are often used in combination with seismic tomography models to better constrain the locations of subsurface features[58][59], they can still provide useful information about the interiors of other planets when only a single seismometer is available. For example, data gathered by InSight[60] on Mars has been able to detect the Martian core[61].

Hotspots

[edit]
The African large low-shear-velocity province (superplume)

The mantle plume hypothesis proposes that areas of volcanism not readily explained by plate tectonics, called hotspots, are a result of thermal upwelling from as deep as the core-mantle boundary that become diapirs in the crust. This is an actively contested theory,[62] although tomographic images suggest there are anomalies beneath some hotspots. The best imaged of these are large low-shear-velocity provinces, or superplumes, visible on S-wave models of the lower mantle and believed to reflect both thermal and compositional differences.

The Yellowstone hotspot is responsible for volcanism at the Yellowstone Caldera and a series of extinct calderas along the Snake River Plain. The Yellowstone Geodynamic Project sought to image the plume beneath the hotspot.[63] They found a strong low-velocity body from ~30 to 250 km depth beneath Yellowstone, and a weaker anomaly from 250 to 650 km depth which dipped 60° west-northwest. The authors attribute these features to the mantle plume beneath the hotspot being deflected eastward by flow in the upper mantle seen in S-wave models.

The Hawaii hotspot produced the Hawaiian–Emperor seamount chain. Tomographic images show it to be 500 to 600 km wide and up to 2,000 km deep.

Subduction zones

[edit]

Subducting plates are colder than the mantle into which they are moving. This creates a fast anomaly that is visible in tomographic images. Both the Farallon plate that subducted beneath the west coast of North America[64] and the northern portion of the Indian plate that has subducted beneath Asia[65] have been imaged with tomography.

Limitations

[edit]

Global seismic networks have expanded steadily since the 1960s, but are still concentrated on continents and in seismically active regions. Oceans, particularly in the southern hemisphere, are under-covered.[66] Temporary seismic networks have helped improve tomographic models in regions of particular interest, but typically only collect data for months to a few years. The uneven distribution of earthquakes biases tomographic models towards seismically active regions. Methods that do not rely on earthquakes such as active source surveys or ambient noise tomography have helped image areas with little to no seismicity, though these both have their own limitations as compared to earthquake-based tomography.

The type of seismic wave used in a model limits the resolution it can achieve. Longer wavelengths are able to penetrate deeper into the Earth, but can only be used to resolve large features. Finer resolution can be achieved with surface waves, with the trade off that they cannot be used in models deeper than the crust and upper mantle. The disparity between wavelength and feature scale causes anomalies to appear of reduced magnitude and size in images. P- and S-wave models respond differently to the types of anomalies. Models based solely on the wave that arrives first naturally prefer faster pathways, causing models based on these data to have lower resolution of slow (often hot) features[24]. This can prove to be a significant issue in areas such as volcanoes where rocks are much hotter than their surroundings and oftentimes partially melted[67]. Shallow models must also consider the significant lateral velocity variations in continental crust.

Because seismometers have only been deployed in large numbers since the late-20th century, tomography is only capable of viewing changes in velocity structure over decades. For example, tectonic plates only move at millimeters per year, so the total amount of change in geologic structure due to plate tectonics since the development of seismic tomography is several orders of magnitude lower than the finest resolution possible with modern seismic networks[68]. However, seismic tomography has still been used to view near-surface velocity structure changes at time scales of years to months[69][45].

Global seismic networks have expanded steadily since the 1960s, but are still concentrated on continents and in seismically active regions. Oceans, particularly in the southern hemisphere, are under-covered.[70] Tomographic models in these areas will improve when more data becomes available. The uneven distribution of earthquakes naturally biases models to better resolution in seismically active regions.

The type of wave used in a model limits the resolution it can achieve. Longer wavelengths are able to penetrate deeper into the Earth, but can only be used to resolve large features. Finer resolution can be achieved with surface waves, with the trade off that they cannot be used in models of the deep mantle. The disparity between wavelength and feature scale causes anomalies to appear of reduced magnitude and size in images. P- and S-wave models respond differently to the types of anomalies depending on the driving material property. First arrival time based models naturally prefer faster pathways, causing models based on these data to have lower resolution of slow (often hot) features.[71] Shallow models must also consider the significant lateral velocity variations in continental crust.

Seismic tomography provides only the current velocity anomalies. Any prior structures are unknown and the slow rates of movement in the subsurface (mm to cm per year) prohibit resolution of changes over modern timescales.[72]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b Nolet, G. (1987-01-01). "Seismic wave propagation and seismic tomography". In Nolet, Guust (ed.). Seismic Tomography. Seismology and Exploration Geophysics. Springer Netherlands. pp. 1–23. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-3899-1_1. ISBN 978-90-277-2583-7.
  2. ^ Mohorovičić, A. (1910). "Potres od 8.x.1909; Das Beben vom 8.x.1909" [The earthquake of 8 October 1909]. Godisnje Izvjesce Zagrebackog Meteoroloskog Opservatorija za godinu 1909 - Jahrbuch des Meteorologischen Observatoriums in Zagreb für das Jahr 1909 [Yearbook of the Meteorological Observatory in Zagreb for the year 1909] (in Croatian and German). 9 (4): 1–63.
  3. ^ Gutenberg, B. (1914). "Über Erdbebenwellen VIIA [About Earthquakes 7a]". Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Mathematisch-Physikalische Klasse. [News from the Society of Sciences in Göttingen, Mathematical-Physical Class]. (1914): 166–218.
  4. ^ Ammon, C. J.; Lay, T.; Simpson, D. W. (2010-11-01). "Great Earthquakes and Global Seismic Networks". Seismological Research Letters. 81 (6): 965–971. doi:10.1785/gssrl.81.6.965. ISSN 0895-0695.
  5. ^ Backus, G. E.; Gilbert, J. F. (July 1967). "Numerical Applications of a Formalism for Geophysical Inverse Problems". Geophysical Journal International. 13 (1–3): 247–276. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.1967.tb02159.x. ISSN 0956-540X.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  6. ^ Woodhouse, J. H. (1974-06-01). "Surface Waves in a Laterally Varying Layered Structure". Geophysical Journal International. 37 (3): 461–490. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.1974.tb04098.x. ISSN 0956-540X.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  7. ^ a b "A Brief History of Seismology" (PDF). United States Geologic Survey (USGS). Archived from the original on 3 August 2016. Retrieved 4 May 2016.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
  8. ^ a b c d e Liu, Q.; Gu, Y. J. (2012-09-16). "Seismic imaging: From classical to adjoint tomography". Tectonophysics. 566–567: 31–66. Bibcode:2012Tectp.566...31L. doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2012.07.006.
  9. ^ Bois, P.; La Porte, M.; Lavergne, M.; Thomas, G. (June 1972). "WELL‐TO‐WELL SEISMIC MEASUREMENTS". GEOPHYSICS. 37 (3): 471–480. doi:10.1190/1.1440273. ISSN 0016-8033.
  10. ^ a b c Rawlinson, N.; Pozgay, S.; Fishwick, S. (2010-02-01). "Seismic tomography: A window into deep Earth". Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors. 178 (3–4): 101–135. Bibcode:2010PEPI..178..101R. doi:10.1016/j.pepi.2009.10.002.
  11. ^ Aki, Keiiti; Lee, W. H. K. (1976-08-10). "Determination of three-dimensional velocity anomalies under a seismic array using first P arrival times from local earthquakes: 1. A homogeneous initial model". Journal of Geophysical Research. 81 (23): 4381–4399. doi:10.1029/JB081i023p04381.
  12. ^ Dziewonski, Adam M.; Hager, Bradford H.; O'Connell, Richard J. (1977-01-10). "Large-scale heterogeneities in the lower mantle". Journal of Geophysical Research. 82 (2): 239–255. doi:10.1029/JB082i002p00239.
  13. ^ Dziewonski, Adam M. (1984-07-10). "Mapping the lower mantle: Determination of lateral heterogeneity in P velocity up to degree and order 6". Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. 89 (B7): 5929–5952. doi:10.1029/JB089iB07p05929. ISSN 0148-0227.
  14. ^ Dziewonski, Adam M.; Anderson, Don L. (1981-06-01). "Preliminary reference Earth model". Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors. 25 (4): 297–356. doi:10.1016/0031-9201(81)90046-7. ISSN 0031-9201.
  15. ^ Nolet, G. (1987), Nolet, Guust (ed.), "Waveform tomography", Seismic Tomography: With Applications in Global Seismology and Exploration Geophysics, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp. 301–322, doi:10.1007/978-94-009-3899-1_13, ISBN 978-94-009-3899-1, retrieved 2024-10-15
  16. ^ a b Montelli, Raffaella; Nolet, Guust; Dahlen, F. A.; Masters, Guy; Engdahl, E. Robert; Hung, Shu-Huei (2004-01-16). "Finite-Frequency Tomography Reveals a Variety of Plumes in the Mantle". Science. 303 (5656): 338–343. doi:10.1126/science.1092485. ISSN 0036-8075.
  17. ^ Igel, Heinder; Djikpéssé, Hugues; Tarantola, Albert (February 1996). "Waveform inverstion of marine reflection seismograms for P impedance and Poisson's ratio". Geophysical Journal International. 124 (2): 363–371. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.1996.tb07026.x.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  18. ^ Komatitsch, Dimitri; Vilotte, Jean-Pierre (1998-04-01). "The spectral element method: An efficient tool to simulate the seismic response of 2D and 3D geological structures". Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. 88 (2): 368–392. doi:10.1785/BSSA0880020368. ISSN 1943-3573.
  19. ^ Kearey, Philip; Klepeis, Keith A.; Vine, Frederick J. (2013-05-28). Global Tectonics. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-1-118-68808-3.
  20. ^ Nolet, G. (1987-01-01). "Seismic wave propagation and seismic tomography". In Nolet, Guust (ed.). Seismic Tomography. Seismology and Exploration Geophysics. Springer Netherlands. pp. 1–23. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-3899-1_1. ISBN 978-90-277-2583-7.
  21. ^ a b Hosseini, Kasra; Sigloch, Karin; Tsekhmistrenko, Maria; Zaheri, Afsaneh; Nissen-Meyer, Tarje; Igel, Heiner (2020). "Global mantle structure from multifrequency tomography using P, PP and P-diffracted waves". Geophysical Journal International. 220: 96–141. doi:10.1093/gji/ggz394. Retrieved 2024-04-15.
  22. ^ Tsekhmistrenko, Maria; Sigloch, Karin; Hosseini, Kasra; Barruol, Guilhem (August 2021). "A tree of Indo-African mantle plumes imaged by seismic tomography". Nature Geoscience. 14 (8): 612–619. Bibcode:2021NatGe..14..612T. doi:10.1038/s41561-021-00762-9. ISSN 1752-0908.
  23. ^ Romanowicz, Barbara (2003-01-01). "GLOBAL MANTLE TOMOGRAPHY: Progress Status in the Past 10 Years". Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences. 31 (1): 303–328. Bibcode:2003AREPS..31..303R. doi:10.1146/annurev.earth.31.091602.113555.
  24. ^ a b c Rawlinson, N.; Pozgay, S.; Fishwick, S. (2010-02-01). "Seismic tomography: A window into deep Earth". Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors. 178 (3–4): 101–135. Bibcode:2010PEPI..178..101R. doi:10.1016/j.pepi.2009.10.002.
  25. ^ Yang, Yingjie; Forsyth, Donald W. (March 2008). "Attenuation in the upper mantle beneath Southern California: Physical state of the lithosphere and asthenosphere". Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. 113 (B3). doi:10.1029/2007JB005118. ISSN 0148-0227.
  26. ^ Lawrence, Jesse F.; Prieto, Germán A. (2011-06-15). "Attenuation tomography of the western United States from ambient seismic noise". Journal of Geophysical Research. 116 (B6). doi:10.1029/2010JB007836. ISSN 0148-0227.
  27. ^ a b Bensen, G.D.; Ritzwoller, M.H.; Barmin, M.P.; Levshin, A.L.; Lin, F.; Moschetti, M.P.; Shapiro, N.M.; Yang, Y. (June 1, 2007). "Processing seismic ambient noise data to obtain reliable broad-band surface wave dispersion measurements". Geophysical Journal international. 169 (3): 1239–1260.
  28. ^ Shapiro, N. M. (11 March 2005). "High-Resolution Surface-Wave Tomography from Ambient Seismic Noise". Science. 307 (5715): 1615–1618. Bibcode:2005Sci...307.1615S. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.399.6167. doi:10.1126/science.1108339. PMID 15761151. S2CID 10846386.
  29. ^ Wang, Yadong; Allam, Amir; Lin, Fan‐Chi (2019-11-28). "Imaging the Fault Damage Zone of the San Jacinto Fault Near Anza With Ambient Noise Tomography Using a Dense Nodal Array". Geophysical Research Letters. 46 (22): 12938–12948. doi:10.1029/2019GL084835. ISSN 0094-8276.
  30. ^ Wang, Yadong; Lin, Fan-Chi; Ward, Kevin M (2019-02-27). "Ambient noise tomography across the Cascadia subduction zone using dense linear seismic arrays and double beamforming". Geophysical Journal International. 217 (3): 1668–1680. doi:10.1093/gji/ggz109. ISSN 0956-540X.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  31. ^ Shapiro, N. M. (11 March 2005). "High-Resolution Surface-Wave Tomography from Ambient Seismic Noise". Science. 307 (5715): 1615–1618. Bibcode:2005Sci...307.1615S. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.399.6167. doi:10.1126/science.1108339. PMID 15761151. S2CID 10846386.
  32. ^ Waite, Gregory P.; Smith, Robert B.; Allen, Richard M. (April 2006). "V P and V S structure of the Yellowstone hot spot from teleseismic tomography: Evidence for an upper mantle plume". Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. 111 (B4). doi:10.1029/2005JB003867. ISSN 0148-0227.
  33. ^ Pierce, Kenneth L.; Morgan, Lisa A. (2009-11-20). "Is the track of the Yellowstone hotspot driven by a deep mantle plume? — Review of volcanism, faulting, and uplift in light of new data". Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. The Track of the Yellowstone Hotspot. 188 (1): 1–25. doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2009.07.009. ISSN 0377-0273.
  34. ^ Morgan, W. Jason (1972). "Deep Mantle Convection Plumes and Plate Motions". AAPG Bulletin. 56 (2): 203–213. ISSN 0149-1423.
  35. ^ Koppers, Anthony A. P.; Becker, Thorsten W.; Jackson, Matthew G.; Konrad, Kevin; Müller, R. Dietmar; Romanowicz, Barbara; Steinberger, Bernhard; Whittaker, Joanne M. (2021-05-25). "Mantle plumes and their role in Earth processes". Nature Reviews Earth & Environment. 2 (6): 382–401. doi:10.1038/s43017-021-00168-6. ISSN 2662-138X.
  36. ^ Montelli, R.; Nolet, G.; Dahlen, F. A.; Masters, G. (November 2006). "A catalogue of deep mantle plumes: New results from finite‐frequency tomography". Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems. 7 (11). doi:10.1029/2006gc001248. ISSN 1525-2027.
  37. ^ French, Scott W.; Romanowicz, Barbara (September 2015). "Broad plumes rooted at the base of the Earth's mantle beneath major hotspots". Nature. 525 (7567): 95–99. doi:10.1038/nature14876. ISSN 0028-0836.
  38. ^ McNamara, Allen K. (2019-06-05). "A review of large low shear velocity provinces and ultra low velocity zones". Tectonophysics. Linking Plate Tectonics and Volcanism to Deep Earth Dynamics – a tribute to Trond H. Torsvik. 760: 199–220. doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2018.04.015. ISSN 0040-1951.
  39. ^ Portner, Daniel Evan; Rodríguez, Emily E.; Beck, Susan; Zandt, George; Scire, Alissa; Rocha, Marcelo P.; Bianchi, Marcelo B.; Ruiz, Mario; França, George Sand; Condori, Cristobal; Alvarado, Patricia (May 2020). "Detailed Structure of the Subducted Nazca Slab into the Lower Mantle Derived From Continent‐Scale Teleseismic P Wave Tomography". Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. 125 (5). doi:10.1029/2019JB017884. ISSN 2169-9313.
  40. ^ Hall, Robert; Spakman, Wim (2002-07-30). "Subducted slabs beneath the eastern Indonesia–Tonga region: insights from tomography". Earth and Planetary Science Letters. 201 (2): 321–336. doi:10.1016/S0012-821X(02)00705-7. ISSN 0012-821X.
  41. ^ Schmandt, Brandon; Humphreys, Eugene (2010-09-01). "Complex subduction and small-scale convection revealed by body-wave tomography of the western United States upper mantle". Earth and Planetary Science Letters. 297 (3): 435–445. doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2010.06.047. ISSN 0012-821X.
  42. ^ Kamei, Rie; Pratt, R. Gerhard; Tsuji, Takeshi (2012-02-01). "Waveform tomography imaging of a megasplay fault system in the seismogenic Nankai subduction zone". Earth and Planetary Science Letters. 317–318: 343–353. doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2011.10.042. ISSN 0012-821X.
  43. ^ Buddensiek, M.-L.; Sheng, J.; Crosby, T.; Schuster, G. T.; Bruhn, R. L.; He, R. (February 2008). "Colluvial wedge imaging using traveltime and waveform tomography along the Wasatch Fault near Mapleton, Utah". Geophysical Journal International. 172 (2): 686–697. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246x.2007.03667.x. ISSN 0956-540X.
  44. ^ Anderson, John G.; Lee, Yajie; Zeng, Yuehua; Day, Steven (1996-12-01). "Control of strong motion by the upper 30 meters". Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. 86 (6): 1749–1759. doi:10.1785/BSSA0860061749. ISSN 1943-3573.
  45. ^ a b Le Breton, Mathieu; Bontemps, Noélie; Guillemot, Antoine; Baillet, Laurent; Larose, Éric (2021-05-01). "Landslide monitoring using seismic ambient noise correlation: challenges and applications". Earth-Science Reviews. 216: 103518. doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2021.103518. ISSN 0012-8252.
  46. ^ Whiteley, J. S.; Chambers, J. E.; Uhlemann, S.; Boyd, J.; Cimpoiasu, M. O.; Holmes, J. L.; Inauen, C. M.; Watlet, A.; Hawley-Sibbett, L. R.; Sujitapan, C.; Swift, R. T.; Kendall, J. M. (2020-04-01). "Landslide monitoring using seismic refraction tomography – The importance of incorporating topographic variations". Engineering Geology. 268: 105525. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2020.105525. ISSN 0013-7952.
  47. ^ Kiser, Eric; Palomeras, Imma; Levander, Alan; Zelt, Colin; Harder, Steven; Schmandt, Brandon; Hansen, Steven; Creager, Kenneth; Ulberg, Carl (June 2016). "Magma reservoirs from the upper crust to the Moho inferred from high-resolution Vp and Vs models beneath Mount St. Helens, Washington State, USA". Geology. 44 (6): 411–414. doi:10.1130/G37591.1. ISSN 0091-7613.
  48. ^ Lei, Jianshe; Zhao, Dapeng (2005-03-16). "P-wave tomography and origin of the Changbai intraplate volcano in Northeast Asia". Tectonophysics. 397 (3): 281–295. doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2004.12.009. ISSN 0040-1951.
  49. ^ Maguire, Ross; Schmandt, Brandon; Li, Jiaqi; Jiang, Chengxin; Li, Guoliang; Wilgus, Justin; Chen, Min (2022-12-02). "Magma accumulation at depths of prior rhyolite storage beneath Yellowstone Caldera". Science. 378 (6623): 1001–1004. doi:10.1126/science.ade0347. ISSN 0036-8075.
  50. ^ Flinders, Ashton F.; Shelly, David R.; Dawson, Philip B.; Hill, David P.; Tripoli, Barbara; Shen, Yang (2018-09-01). "Seismic evidence for significant melt beneath the Long Valley Caldera, California, USA". Geology. 46 (9): 799–802. doi:10.1130/G45094.1. ISSN 0091-7613.
  51. ^ Paulatto, M.; Annen, C.; Henstock, T. J.; Kiddle, E.; Minshull, T. A.; Sparks, R. S. J.; Voight, B. (January 2012). "Magma chamber properties from integrated seismic tomography and thermal modeling at Montserrat". Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems. 13 (1). doi:10.1029/2011GC003892. ISSN 1525-2027.
  52. ^ Lees, Jonathan M. (2007-11-01). "Seismic tomography of magmatic systems". Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. Large Silicic Magma Systems. 167 (1): 37–56. doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2007.06.008. ISSN 0377-0273.
  53. ^ Paulatto, Michele; Hooft, Emilie E. E.; Chrapkiewicz, Kajetan; Heath, Benjamin; Toomey, Douglas R.; Morgan, Joanna V. (2022-10-20). "Advances in seismic imaging of magma and crystal mush". Frontiers in Earth Science. 10. doi:10.3389/feart.2022.970131. ISSN 2296-6463.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  54. ^ Goins, N. R.; Dainty, A. M.; Toksöz, M. N. (1981-06-10). "Lunar seismology: The internal structure of the Moon". Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. 86 (B6): 5061–5074. doi:10.1029/JB086iB06p05061. ISSN 0148-0227.
  55. ^ Nakamura, Yosio (1983-01-10). "Seismic velocity structure of the lunar mantle". Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. 88 (B1): 677–686. doi:10.1029/JB088iB01p00677. ISSN 0148-0227.
  56. ^ Khan, A.; Mosegaard, K. (June 2002). "An inquiry into the lunar interior: A nonlinear inversion of the Apollo lunar seismic data". Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets. 107 (E6). doi:10.1029/2001JE001658. ISSN 0148-0227.
  57. ^ Zhao, DaPeng; Lei, JianShe; Liu, Lucy (2008-12-01). "Seismic tomography of the Moon". Chinese Science Bulletin. 53 (24): 3897–3907. doi:10.1007/s11434-008-0484-1. ISSN 1861-9541.
  58. ^ Ammon, Charles J.; Randall, George E.; Zandt, George (1990-09-10). "On the nonuniqueness of receiver function inversions". Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. 95 (B10): 15303–15318. doi:10.1029/JB095iB10p15303. ISSN 0148-0227.
  59. ^ Julià, J.; Ammon, C. J.; Herrmann, R. B.; Correig, A. M. (October 2000). "Joint inversion of receiver function and surface wave dispersion observations". Geophysical Journal International. 143 (1): 99–112. doi:10.1046/j.1365-246x.2000.00217.x. ISSN 0956-540X.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  60. ^ Banerdt, W. Bruce; Smrekar, Suzanne E.; Banfield, Don; Giardini, Domenico; Golombek, Matthew; Johnson, Catherine L.; Lognonné, Philippe; Spiga, Aymeric; Spohn, Tilman; Perrin, Clément; Stähler, Simon C.; Antonangeli, Daniele; Asmar, Sami; Beghein, Caroline; Bowles, Neil (March 2020). "Initial results from the InSight mission on Mars". Nature Geoscience. 13 (3): 183–189. doi:10.1038/s41561-020-0544-y. ISSN 1752-0908.
  61. ^ Stähler, Simon C.; Khan, Amir; Banerdt, W. Bruce; Lognonné, Philippe; Giardini, Domenico; Ceylan, Savas; Drilleau, Mélanie; Duran, A. Cecilia; Garcia, Raphaël F.; Huang, Quancheng; Kim, Doyeon; Lekic, Vedran; Samuel, Henri; Schimmel, Martin; Schmerr, Nicholas (2021-07-23). "Seismic detection of the martian core". Science. 373 (6553): 443–448. doi:10.1126/science.abi7730. ISSN 0036-8075.
  62. ^ Julian, Bruce (2006). "Seismology: The Hunt for Plumes" (PDF). mantleplumes.org. Retrieved 3 May 2016.
  63. ^ Smith, Robert B.; Jordan, Michael; Steinberger, Bernhard; Puskas, Christine M.; Farrell, Jamie; Waite, Gregory P.; Husen, Stephan; Chang, Wu-Lung; O'Connell, Richard (2009-11-20). "Geodynamics of the Yellowstone hotspot and mantle plume: Seismic and GPS imaging, kinematics, and mantle flow". Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. The Track of the Yellowstone HotspotWhat do Neotectonics, Climate Indicators, Volcanism, and Petrogenesis Reveal about Subsurface Processes?. 188 (1–3): 26–56. Bibcode:2009JVGR..188...26S. doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2009.08.020.
  64. ^ "Seismic Tomography" (PDF). earthscope.org. Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS). Retrieved 18 May 2016.
  65. ^ Replumaz, Anne; Negredo, Ana M.; Guillot, Stéphane; Villaseñor, Antonio (2010-03-01). "Multiple episodes of continental subduction during India/Asia convergence: Insight from seismic tomography and tectonic reconstruction". Tectonophysics. Convergent plate margin dynamics: New perspectives from structural geology, geophysics and geodynamic modelling. 483 (1–2): 125–134. Bibcode:2010Tectp.483..125R. doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2009.10.007.
  66. ^ Julian, Bruce (2006). "Seismology: The Hunt for Plumes" (PDF). mantleplumes.org. Retrieved 3 May 2016.
  67. ^ Maguire, Ross; Schmandt, Brandon; Chen, Min; Jiang, Chengxin; Li, Jiaqi; Wilgus, Justin (August 2022). "Resolving Continental Magma Reservoirs With 3D Surface Wave Tomography". Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems. 23 (8). doi:10.1029/2022GC010446. ISSN 1525-2027.
  68. ^ Dziewonski, Adam. "Global Seismic Tomography: What we really can say and what we make up" (PDF). mantleplumes.org. Retrieved 18 May 2016.
  69. ^ Martini, Francesca; Bean, Christopher J.; Saccorotti, Gilberto; Viveiros, Fatima; Wallenstein, Nicolau (April 2009). "Seasonal cycles of seismic velocity variations detected using coda wave interferometry at Fogo volcano, São Miguel, Azores, during 2003–2004". Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. 181 (3–4): 231–246. doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2009.01.015. ISSN 0377-0273.
  70. ^ Julian, Bruce (2006). "Seismology: The Hunt for Plumes" (PDF). mantleplumes.org. Retrieved 3 May 2016.
  71. ^ Rawlinson, N.; Pozgay, S.; Fishwick, S. (2010-02-01). "Seismic tomography: A window into deep Earth". Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors. 178 (3–4): 101–135. Bibcode:2010PEPI..178..101R. doi:10.1016/j.pepi.2009.10.002.
  72. ^ Dziewonski, Adam. "Global Seismic Tomography: What we really can say and what we make up" (PDF). mantleplumes.org. Retrieved 18 May 2016.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Thomaslee1/Seismic_tomography&oldid=1251357404"