The ANSS event ID is ak0205a7q1nx and the event page is at https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/ak0205a7q1nx/executive.
2020/04/24 01:54:59 64.764 -149.003 22.0 3.8 Alaska
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2020/04/24 01:54:59:0 64.76 -149.00 22.0 3.8 Alaska Stations used: AK.BPAW AK.CCB AK.DHY AK.DOT AK.H21K AK.H22K AK.H24K AK.HDA AK.I21K AK.I23K AK.J19K AK.J20K AK.J25K AK.K20K AK.KTH AK.M26K AK.MCK AK.MLY AK.NEA2 AK.PAX AK.PPD AK.RIDG AK.RND AK.SCRK AK.WRH AT.MENT AT.PMR IU.COLA TA.G19K TA.G21K TA.G23K TA.G24K TA.G26K TA.G27K TA.H27K Filtering commands used: cut o DIST/3.3 -40 o DIST/3.3 +50 rtr taper w 0.1 hp c 0.03 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 3.89e+21 dyne-cm Mw = 3.66 Z = 21 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 185 70 -85 NP2 351 21 -103 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 3.89e+21 25 271 N 0.00e+00 5 3 P -3.89e+21 65 103 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx -3.64e+19 Mxy 9.75e+19 Mxz 3.74e+20 Myy 2.53e+21 Myz -2.95e+21 Mzz -2.49e+21 ########--#### ###########-------#### #############----------##### #############-------------#### ##############----------------#### ###############-----------------#### ###############-------------------#### ################--------------------#### ###############---------------------#### #### #########---------------------##### #### T #########---------- ---------#### #### #########---------- P ---------#### ################---------- ---------#### ###############---------------------#### ###############---------------------#### ##############--------------------#### #############--------------------### ############-------------------### ###########----------------### ##########---------------### ########------------## #####--------# Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P -2.49e+21 3.74e+20 2.95e+21 3.74e+20 -3.64e+19 -9.75e+19 2.95e+21 -9.75e+19 2.53e+21 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20200424015459/index.html |
STK = 185 DIP = 70 RAKE = -85 MW = 3.66 HS = 21.0
The NDK file is 20200424015459.ndk The waveform inversion is preferred.
Given the availability of digital waveforms for determination of the moment tensor, this section documents the added processing leading to mLg, if appropriate to the region, and ML by application of the respective IASPEI formulae. As a research study, the linear distance term of the IASPEI formula for ML is adjusted to remove a linear distance trend in residuals to give a regionally defined ML. The defined ML uses horizontal component recordings, but the same procedure is applied to the vertical components since there may be some interest in vertical component ground motions. Residual plots versus distance may indicate interesting features of ground motion scaling in some distance ranges. A residual plot of the regionalized magnitude is given as a function of distance and azimuth, since data sets may transcend different wave propagation provinces.
Left: ML computed using the IASPEI formula for Horizontal components. Center: ML residuals computed using a modified IASPEI formula that accounts for path specific attenuation; the values used for the trimmed mean are indicated. The ML relation used for each figure is given at the bottom of each plot.
Right: Residuals from new relation as a function of distance and azimuth.
Left: ML computed using the IASPEI formula for Vertical components (research). Center: ML residuals computed using a modified IASPEI formula that accounts for path specific attenuation; the values used for the trimmed mean are indicated. The ML relation used for each figure is given at the bottom of each plot.
Right: Residuals from new relation as a function of distance and azimuth.
![]() |
The focal mechanism was determined using broadband seismic waveforms. The location of the event (star) and the stations used for (red) the waveform inversion are shown in the next figure.
![]() |
|
The program wvfgrd96 was used with good traces observed at short distance to determine the focal mechanism, depth and seismic moment. This technique requires a high quality signal and well determined velocity model for the Green's functions. To the extent that these are the quality data, this type of mechanism should be preferred over the radiation pattern technique which requires the separate step of defining the pressure and tension quadrants and the correct strike.
The observed and predicted traces are filtered using the following gsac commands:
cut o DIST/3.3 -40 o DIST/3.3 +50 rtr taper w 0.1 hp c 0.03 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3The results of this grid search are as follow:
DEPTH STK DIP RAKE MW FIT WVFGRD96 1.0 0 50 -90 3.13 0.2130 WVFGRD96 2.0 -5 50 -90 3.31 0.3005 WVFGRD96 3.0 -5 50 -95 3.33 0.2199 WVFGRD96 4.0 5 90 65 3.25 0.1986 WVFGRD96 5.0 5 90 65 3.28 0.2541 WVFGRD96 6.0 5 90 65 3.31 0.3071 WVFGRD96 7.0 5 90 65 3.32 0.3532 WVFGRD96 8.0 5 90 70 3.41 0.3875 WVFGRD96 9.0 180 85 -70 3.44 0.4328 WVFGRD96 10.0 180 80 -70 3.46 0.4734 WVFGRD96 11.0 180 80 -70 3.48 0.5117 WVFGRD96 12.0 180 75 -70 3.51 0.5466 WVFGRD96 13.0 180 75 -70 3.53 0.5795 WVFGRD96 14.0 0 20 -95 3.54 0.6095 WVFGRD96 15.0 -5 20 -100 3.56 0.6387 WVFGRD96 16.0 185 70 -85 3.58 0.6622 WVFGRD96 17.0 185 70 -85 3.60 0.6819 WVFGRD96 18.0 185 70 -85 3.61 0.6971 WVFGRD96 19.0 185 70 -85 3.63 0.7080 WVFGRD96 20.0 185 70 -85 3.64 0.7144 WVFGRD96 21.0 185 70 -85 3.66 0.7172 WVFGRD96 22.0 185 70 -85 3.67 0.7164 WVFGRD96 23.0 185 75 -80 3.68 0.7134 WVFGRD96 24.0 185 75 -80 3.69 0.7086 WVFGRD96 25.0 185 75 -80 3.70 0.7014 WVFGRD96 26.0 185 75 -80 3.71 0.6916 WVFGRD96 27.0 185 75 -80 3.72 0.6801 WVFGRD96 28.0 185 75 -80 3.73 0.6670 WVFGRD96 29.0 185 75 -80 3.74 0.6518
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 21.0 185 70 -85 3.66 0.7172
The mechanism corresponding to the best fit is
![]() |
|
The best fit as a function of depth is given in the following figure:
![]() |
|
The comparison of the observed and predicted waveforms is given in the next figure. The red traces are the observed and the blue are the predicted. Each observed-predicted component is plotted to the same scale and peak amplitudes are indicated by the numbers to the left of each trace. A pair of numbers is given in black at the right of each predicted traces. The upper number it the time shift required for maximum correlation between the observed and predicted traces. This time shift is required because the synthetics are not computed at exactly the same distance as the observed, the velocity model used in the predictions may not be perfect and the epicentral parameters may be be off. A positive time shift indicates that the prediction is too fast and should be delayed to match the observed trace (shift to the right in this figure). A negative value indicates that the prediction is too slow. The lower number gives the percentage of variance reduction to characterize the individual goodness of fit (100% indicates a perfect fit).
The bandpass filter used in the processing and for the display was
cut o DIST/3.3 -40 o DIST/3.3 +50 rtr taper w 0.1 hp c 0.03 n 3 lp c 0.10 n 3
![]() |
Figure 3. Waveform comparison for selected depth. Red: observed; Blue - predicted. The time shift with respect to the model prediction is indicated. The percent of fit is also indicated. The time scale is relative to the first trace sample. |
![]() |
Focal mechanism sensitivity at the preferred depth. The red color indicates a very good fit to the waveforms. Each solution is plotted as a vector at a given value of strike and dip with the angle of the vector representing the rake angle, measured, with respect to the upward vertical (N) in the figure. |
A check on the assumed source location is possible by looking at the time shifts between the observed and predicted traces. The time shifts for waveform matching arise for several reasons:
Time_shift = A + B cos Azimuth + C Sin Azimuth
The time shifts for this inversion lead to the next figure:
The derived shift in origin time and epicentral coordinates are given at the bottom of the figure.
The WUS.model used for the waveform synthetic seismograms and for the surface wave eigenfunctions and dispersion is as follows (The format is in the model96 format of Computer Programs in Seismology).
MODEL.01 Model after 8 iterations ISOTROPIC KGS FLAT EARTH 1-D CONSTANT VELOCITY LINE08 LINE09 LINE10 LINE11 H(KM) VP(KM/S) VS(KM/S) RHO(GM/CC) QP QS ETAP ETAS FREFP FREFS 1.9000 3.4065 2.0089 2.2150 0.302E-02 0.679E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 6.1000 5.5445 3.2953 2.6089 0.349E-02 0.784E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 13.0000 6.2708 3.7396 2.7812 0.212E-02 0.476E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 19.0000 6.4075 3.7680 2.8223 0.111E-02 0.249E-02 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.0000 7.9000 4.6200 3.2760 0.164E-10 0.370E-10 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00