Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America; October 2005; v. 95; no. 5;
p. 1809-1824; DOI: 10.1785/0120040159
© 2005 Seismological Society of America
Understanding the Differences between Three Teleseismic mb Scales
John P. Granville1,
Paul G. Richards1,
Won-Young Kim1 and
Lynn R. Sykes1
1 Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of
Columbia University
61 Route 9W
Palisades, New York
10964
johng{at}ldeo.columbia.edu
richards{at}ldeo.columbia.edu
wykim{at}ldeo.columbia.edu
sykes{at}ldeo.columbia.edu
We investigate differences between three body-wave magnitude
(mb) scales for 2009 earthquakes from 1996 to 1999 listed in
the Preliminary Determination of Epicenter (PDE) bulletin having
mb between 5.0 and 5.5 and that also have moment tensor
solutions available from the Harvard Centroid Moment Tensor (CMT)
catalog. A total of 31,280 broadband seismograms are analyzed, for an average of
15 stations per event. Both the PDE and Reviewed Event Bulletin
(REB) procedures for determining an automated mb
are reproduced, thereby eliminating any discrepancies that result from using
different networks of stations. We compare the reproduced PDE and
REB magnitudes to another magnitude measurement,
mb(P), that is based on the Worldwide Standard
Seismographic Network (WWSSN) short-period instrument. We find that
differences between mb(P),
mb(PDE), and
mb(REB) arise from four factors: response
function, length of time window, and corrections for event depth and epicentral
distance. Reproduced mb(PDE) and
mb(P) are strongly correlated, and we expect that
magnitudes assigned from WWSSN short-period instruments during the
1970s and 1980s are consistent with those assigned by the automated procedure
used since 1991 by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), providing
stability in mb measurements over several decades. The
difference between mb(REB) and
mb(P) is much greater because of the significantly
shorter REB window length of 5.5 sec and the high-frequency passband
of the REB displacement response.
Online Material: Filter parameters and color versions of
Figures 8 and
9.

View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 8. (a) Reproduced event mb(PDE) as a function of
event mb(P) for PDE bulletin
mb 5.0 and 5.5 earthquakes. Reproduced PDE
measurements are made using a time window length of 10 sec (to approximate the
time window used in the PDE bulletin). Measurements of
mb(P) are made using a 15-sec time window and the
distance and depth corrections for all magnitudes shown are
Gutenberg–Richter (to match PDE bulletin). Correlation
coefficient value (R) is shown for each plot. (b) Reproduced event
mb(PDE) as a function of event
mb(P) for PDE bulletin
mb 5.0 and 5.5 earthquakes. Both magnitude types are
measured using a 15-sec time window. Distance and depth corrections for all
magnitudes shown are Gutenberg–Richter. Correlation coefficient value
(R) is shown for each plot. (Color versions of
Figures 8a and 8b that include
results for all six subsets of earthquakes [PDE bulletin
mb 5.0 to 5.5] are available in the electronic supplement
to this article.)
|
|

View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 9. (a) Reproduced event mb(REB) as a function of
event mb(P) for PDE bulletin
mb 5.0 and 5.5 earthquakes. Reproduced REB
measurements are made using a time window length of 5.5 sec (to match the time
window used in the REB catalog). Measurements of
mb(P) are made using a 15-sec time window and the
distance and depth corrections for all magnitudes shown are Veith–Clawson
(to match REB catalog). Correlation coefficient value (R) is
shown for each plot. (b) Reproduced event mb(REB)
as a function of event mb(P) for PDE
bulletin mb 5.0 and 5.5 earthquakes. Both magnitude types
are measured using a 15-sec time window. Distance and depth corrections for all
magnitudes shown are Veith–Clawson. Correlation coefficient value
(R) is shown for each plot. (A Color versions of
Figures 9a and 9b that include
results for all six subsets of earthquakes [PDE bulletin
mb 5.0 to 5.5] are available in the electronic supplement
to this article.)
|
|
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. Bormann, R. Liu, X. Ren, R. Gutdeutsch, D. Kaiser, and S. Castellaro
Chinese National Network Magnitudes, Their Relation to NEIC Magnitudes, and Recommendations for New IASPEI Magnitude Standards
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America,
February 1, 2007;
97(1B):
114 - 127.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2005 by the Seismological Society of America.