The ANSS event ID is ak022f0tjq2y and the event page is at https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/ak022f0tjq2y/executive.
2022/11/23 01:36:42 61.732 -149.604 38.0 4.3 Alaska
USGS/SLU Moment Tensor Solution ENS 2022/11/23 01:36:42:0 61.73 -149.60 38.0 4.3 Alaska Stations used: AK.CUT AK.FIRE AK.GHO AK.KNK AK.L22K AK.RC01 AK.SAW AK.SLK AT.PMR AV.STLK 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 0.08 n 3 Best Fitting Double Couple Mo = 2.26e+22 dyne-cm Mw = 4.17 Z = 42 km Plane Strike Dip Rake NP1 330 57 -123 NP2 200 45 -50 Principal Axes: Axis Value Plunge Azimuth T 2.26e+22 7 83 N 0.00e+00 27 349 P -2.26e+22 62 186 Moment Tensor: (dyne-cm) Component Value Mxx -4.59e+21 Mxy 2.31e+21 Mxz 9.67e+21 Myy 2.19e+22 Myz 3.52e+21 Mzz -1.73e+22 -------------# ###---------########## ##########--################ ###########---################ ###########-------################ ###########----------############### ###########------------############### ###########---------------############## ##########-----------------########### ##########-------------------########## T ##########--------------------######### #########----------------------########### #########----------------------########### ########---------- ----------######### ########---------- P ----------######### #######---------- ----------######## ######------------------------###### ######-----------------------##### ####----------------------#### ####---------------------### ##-------------------- -------------- Global CMT Convention Moment Tensor: R T P -1.73e+22 9.67e+21 -3.52e+21 9.67e+21 -4.59e+21 -2.31e+21 -3.52e+21 -2.31e+21 2.19e+22 Details of the solution is found at http://www.eas.slu.edu/eqc/eqc_mt/MECH.NA/20221123013642/index.html |
STK = 200 DIP = 45 RAKE = -50 MW = 4.17 HS = 42.0
The NDK file is 20221123013642.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 0.08 n 3The results of this grid search are as follow:
DEPTH STK DIP RAKE MW FIT WVFGRD96 2.0 -5 45 90 3.56 0.2852 WVFGRD96 4.0 155 80 65 3.64 0.2932 WVFGRD96 6.0 160 80 75 3.67 0.3523 WVFGRD96 8.0 345 80 -70 3.74 0.3807 WVFGRD96 10.0 340 70 -70 3.78 0.3950 WVFGRD96 12.0 340 70 -75 3.79 0.3955 WVFGRD96 14.0 200 20 -45 3.83 0.3922 WVFGRD96 16.0 205 25 -40 3.86 0.3857 WVFGRD96 18.0 205 30 -40 3.88 0.3760 WVFGRD96 20.0 190 40 -60 3.89 0.3734 WVFGRD96 22.0 190 45 -60 3.91 0.3789 WVFGRD96 24.0 190 45 -60 3.93 0.3814 WVFGRD96 26.0 225 35 -10 3.97 0.3833 WVFGRD96 28.0 215 35 -25 3.98 0.3980 WVFGRD96 30.0 210 40 -30 4.00 0.4188 WVFGRD96 32.0 205 40 -35 4.02 0.4456 WVFGRD96 34.0 200 40 -45 4.03 0.4699 WVFGRD96 36.0 200 45 -45 4.05 0.4900 WVFGRD96 38.0 200 45 -45 4.07 0.5003 WVFGRD96 40.0 200 45 -50 4.15 0.5170 WVFGRD96 42.0 200 45 -50 4.17 0.5200 WVFGRD96 44.0 200 45 -50 4.18 0.5186 WVFGRD96 46.0 200 45 -50 4.19 0.5153 WVFGRD96 48.0 200 50 -50 4.20 0.5100 WVFGRD96 50.0 180 50 -85 4.20 0.5098 WVFGRD96 52.0 180 50 -85 4.21 0.5089 WVFGRD96 54.0 180 50 -85 4.21 0.5063 WVFGRD96 56.0 180 50 -85 4.22 0.5041 WVFGRD96 58.0 180 50 -85 4.22 0.4996 WVFGRD96 60.0 180 50 -85 4.22 0.4938 WVFGRD96 62.0 185 50 -75 4.24 0.4897 WVFGRD96 64.0 185 50 -70 4.25 0.4839 WVFGRD96 66.0 185 50 -70 4.25 0.4784 WVFGRD96 68.0 185 50 -70 4.25 0.4726 WVFGRD96 70.0 195 55 -55 4.28 0.4673 WVFGRD96 72.0 195 55 -50 4.29 0.4629 WVFGRD96 74.0 195 55 -50 4.30 0.4584 WVFGRD96 76.0 195 55 -50 4.30 0.4535 WVFGRD96 78.0 195 55 -50 4.31 0.4478
The best solution is
WVFGRD96 42.0 200 45 -50 4.17 0.5200
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 0.08 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