Bootstrapping shear-wave splitting errors

1994 ◽  
Vol 84 (6) ◽  
pp. 1971-1977 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Sandvol ◽  
Thomas Hearn

Abstract We have developed a bootstrap method to estimate errors associated with inverting SKS waveforms for shear-wave splitting parameters. Although presented for shear-wave splitting inversions, this method is suitable for any waveform inversion procedure. The bootstrap error estimation method consists of multiple inversions of simulated data that imitate the original data with differing noise sequences. The results of the bootstrap inversions are used to directly calculate variances and covariances for all model parameters. We employ a bootstrap error estimation technique to nonlinear inversion for shear-wave splitting parameters. Since seismic data have correlated errors, the bootstrap method was modified for stationary bandlimited time series. This modified bootstrap method was applied to shear-wave splitting measurements from over 60 pairs of horizontal seismograms. The method is stable under a large range of noise conditions. By using this bootstrap method, we can distinguish among data with no apparent splitting, data with splitting, and noisy data.

2005 ◽  
Vol 163 (3) ◽  
pp. 962-980 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. T. Walker ◽  
G. H. R. Bokelmann ◽  
S. L. Klemperer ◽  
G. Bock

Summary We present the results of a shear-wave splitting analysis across the Eifel hotspot in west-central Europe. Our data set includes 18 permanent European broadband stations and 102 temporary Eifel broadband and short-period stations. We observe variations in splitting at most permanent stations, but are not able to model them reliably with unique dipping-axis or two-layer anisotropy models. We prefer instead a single-layer model with a horizontal fast axis to approximate the first-order anisotropy, which varies smoothly between stations. We observe a first-order parabolic pattern in fast polarization azimuth around the hotspot, which suggests that a lattice preferred orientation (LPO) of olivine fast axes exists in the asthenosphere as a result of the interaction between the slowly WSW-moving Eurasian plate and a mantle upwelling beneath the Eifel volcanic fields. The minority of the variation not explained by this model correlates with rapid lateral changes in splitting, and is interpreted as a result of additional anisotropy and/or the effects of dynamic recrystallization associated with LPO development in the region of corner flow near the conduit. Our parabolic asthenospheric flow (PAF) interpretation is consistent with Eifel geological, tomographic, receiver function, global absolute plate motion, electrical conductivity anisotropy, and geochemical studies, as well as with splitting studies in the Great Basin and around Hawaii.We suggest that the Eifel upwelling is sporadic, and a result of a low excess upwelling temperature and/or varying crustal stresses that periodically shift and facilitate eruption. The PAF pattern we observe neither suggests nor rules out anisotropy in the conduit associated with a wet Eifel upwelling.We use our optimum PAF model parameters to calculate a Eurasian plate speed of 12 km Ma−1, which is consistent with the recent HS3-NUVEL1A speed of 19 ± 14 km Ma−1.


Geothermics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 94 ◽  
pp. 102115
Author(s):  
F. Chacón-Hernández ◽  
F.R. Zúñiga ◽  
J.O. Campos-Enríquez ◽  
J. Lermo-Samaniego ◽  
N. Jiménez-Méndez

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhongping Qian ◽  
Xiang‐Yang Li ◽  
Mark Chapman ◽  
Yonggang Zhang ◽  
Yanguang Wang

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Cornwell ◽  
Sebastian Rost ◽  
David A Thompson ◽  
Gregory A. Houseman ◽  
Lisa A Millar ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 30 (24) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Sandvol ◽  
Niyazi Turkelli ◽  
Ekrem Zor ◽  
Rengin Gok ◽  
Tolga Bekler ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document