Investigation of the seismicity of East Anatolian fault zone (EAFZ) according to Poisson and Exponential distribution models
Abstract
Turkey has a high earthquake risk due to include the active North Anatolian Fault Zone (NAFZ) and East Anatolian Fault Zone (EAFZ). The earthquakes should be detail investigated in order to minimize the damage caused by the earthquakes. Different statistical approaches are used in these estimation studies. Poisson distribution model is widely used in earthquake studies. The model used for a large number of statistical studies and it gives reliable results. Moreover, exponential distribution model is used in earthquake prediction studies. In this study, EAFZ and its near regions were selected as the study area. The Poisson and Exponential distribution model was applied by using the earthquakes of Ms≥5.0, which occurred in the selected area between 1900 -2016. The probabilities of occurrence of earthquakes with a magnitude of Ms≥5.0 and recurrence periods are calculated with the obtained model results. According to the results of Poisson model, the probability of earthquake (Ms≥5.2) within 1 year is 33,6% and earthquake recurrence period is estimated as 2 year. According to the exponential distribution model results, the recurrence of earthquakes (Ms≥5.2) is 1 years and probability is74,7%. The two models were compared and the results were evaluated. When the seismicity of the region was examined, it was seen that the results were consistent.
Keywords
Earthquake risk, Poisson model, Exponential distribution model, East Anatolian Fault Zone (EAFZ)
References
- [1] M. Caputo , Analysis of Seismic Risk, Applied Sciences 3, Nato Advanced Study Institutes Series, Noordhoff-Leiden, 1974.
- [2] H.C. Shah and M. Movassate, “Seismic Risk Analysis of California State water Project”, Proc of Fifth European Conf. on Earthquake Engineering 2, 1975, Chap. 10-156.
- [3] M. Bath, “ Seismic Risk in Fennoscandia”, Tectonophysics, vol 57, pp 285-295, 1978.
- [4] T. Utsu, “Estimation of parameters for recurrence models of earthquakes.” Bull. Earthquake Res. Inst., vol 59, pp 53 – 66, 1984.
- [5] S. Pasari and O. Dikshit, “Impact of three-parameter Weibull models in probabilistic assessment of earthquake hazards”, Pure Appl. Geophys.,vol. 171, pp.1251–1281, 2014a.
- [6] S. Pasari and O. Dikshit, “Three parameter generalized exponential distribution in earthquake recurrence interval estimation”, Nat. Hazards, vol. 73, pp.639–656, 2014c.
- [7] S. Pasari, “Earthquake interevent time distribution in Kachchh,” Northwestern India. Earth, Planets and Space, vol. 67, pp.129, 2015.
- [8] S. McClusky, S. Balassanian, A. Barka,C. Demir, S. Ergintav, L. Georgiev, O. Gurkan, M. Hamburger, K. Hurst, H. Kahle, K. Kastens, G. Kekelidze, R. King, V. Kotzev, O. Lenk, S. Mahmoud, A. Mishin, M. Nadariya, A. Ouzounis, D. Paradissis, Y. Peter, M. Prilepin, R. Reilinger, I. Sanli, H. Seeger, A. Tealeb, N. Toksoz, and G. Veis, “Global positioning system constraints on the plate kinematics and dynamics in the eastern Mediterranean and Caucasus,” J. Geophys. Res., vol. 105, pp. 5695–5719, 2000.
- [9] T. Taymaz, R. Westaway and R. Reilinger, “Active faulting and crustal deformation in the Eastern Mediterranean region”, Tectonophysics, vol. 391 pp.1–9, 2004.
- [10] D. McKenzie, “Active tectonics of the mediterranean region”, Geophys. J. R. Astr. Soc., vol. 30, pp. 109–185, 1972.