The difference in the generation of P and S weaves by the DPRK nuclear tests and their aftershocks allows distinguishing the natural and artificial events.
Hot Sexy call girls in Moti Nagar,🔝 9953056974 🔝 escort Service
Discrimination of the DPRK underground explosions and their aftershocks using the Pg/Lg spectral amplitude ratio
1. Discrimination of the DPRK underground
explosions and their aftershocks using the
Pg/Lg spectral amplitude ratio
Ivan Kitov, Ronan Le Bras, Mikhail Rozhkov, PTS CTBTO
Irina Sanina, IDG RAS
The views expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
CTBT Preparatory Commission.
2. Page 2
OUTLINE
• Six DPRK explosions
• Routine detection of explosions and aftershocks
using waveform cross correlation. Multi-master
method
• Clustering of aftershocks according to
waveform similarity
• Usage of Pg/Lg spectral amplitude ratio method
for discrimination of DPRK explosions and their
aftershocks
• The Mahalanobis distance as a discrimination
criterion
4. Page 4
23 WELL MEASURED DPRK5 and DPRK6
AFTERSHOCKS: IDC ESTIMATES
USING WAVEFORM CROSS CORRELATION
Date Time mb( Lg-scaled ) IDC LEB origin ID
September 11, 2016 (A_SHOCK1) 1:50:48 AM 2.83 13558133
September 3, 2017 (A_SHOCK2) 3:38:31 AM 4.11 14807656
September 3, 2017 (A_SHOCK6) 9:31:28 AM 2.59
September 23, 2017 (A_SHOCK3) 4:42:58 AM 3.08 14892975
September 23, 2017 (A_SHOCK4) 8:29:14 AM 3.74 14892904
October 12, 2017 (A_SHOCK5) 4:41:06 PM 3.33 14968848
October 31, 2017 10:20:13 AM 2.51
December 1, 2017 10:45:54 PM 2.91
December 5, 2017 2:40:52 PM 3.14 15176138
December 6, 2017 4:20:05 PM 2.59
December 9, 2017 6:08:40 AM 2.78 15189602
December 9, 2017 6:13:31 AM 3.44 15185217
December 9, 2017 6:40:00 AM 3.06 15185213
February 5, 2018 10:32:30 AM 2.74
February 5, 2018 8:07:29 PM 2.93
February 5, 2018 9:57:35 PM 2.90
February 6, 2018 4:49:36 AM 2.70
February 6, 2018 10:12:30 AM 2.68
February 6, 2018 10:53:52 AM 3.09
February 7, 2018 9:46:23 PM 3.36 15428296
February 8, 2018 5:39:17 PM 2.69
April 22, 2018 7:25:08 PM 2.76 15724447
April 22, 2018 7:31:18 PM 3.07 15724134
THESE AFTERSHOCKS AND 6 DPRK
TESTS ARE USED AS MASTER EVENTS
IN MULTI-MASTER CROSS
CORRELATION (CC) DETECTION AND
ASSOCIATION.
THE P/S DISCRIMINATION CRITERIA
ARE APPLIED TO THESE EVENTS
ONLY SINCE Pg AMPLITUDE IS TOO
LOW FOR SMALLER AFTERSHOCKS
AFTERSHOCKS SELECTED BASED ON
LARGEST NUMBER OF CC
DETECTIONS
10. Page 10
MULTI-MASTER APPROACH
Multi-master method
provides:
• Lower detection threshold
(this event was not detected
by standard methods and
DPRK tests as master event)
• More reliable solution
(clustering of detections
within 2 s interval)
• More reliable location
• More accurate location
Notice much higher SNRCC
than standard SNR
DATE 2017246 ORIGIN TIME 09:31:29.86
Estimated distance from DPRK5 3.8km +-3 km
Station Arrival time Residual, s SNRCC SNR
SEHB 09:32:18.64 -1.13 43.6 3.4
SEHB 09:32:19.99 0.22 21.9 2.3
SEHB 09:32:20.69 0.92 6.2 3.2
SEHB 09:32:21.44 1.67 7.3 2.6
MDJ 09:32:22.59 -0.60 5.8 4.0
MDJ 09:32:23.19 0.00 5.5 3.9
MDJ 09:32:23.41 0.22 48.8 3.9
MDJ 09:32:23.53 0.35 6.1 4.0
MDJ 09:32:23.61 0.43 5.9 4.0
USRK 09:32:25.28 -0.69 15.7 4.8
USRK 09:32:25.50 -0.47 8.0 4.8
USRK 09:32:25.55 -0.42 13.0 4.8
USRK 09:32:25.68 -0.29 7.7 4.8
USRK 09:32:25.73 -0.24 9.6 4.8
USRK 09:32:25.88 -0.41 57.9 4.8
USRK 09:32:26.12 0.16 14.7 4.8
USRK 09:32:26.58 0.61 5.1 4.8
USRK 09:32:27.32 1.36 9.8 4.8
KSRS 09:32:31.00 -1.00 5.3 5.5
KSRS 09:32:31.20 -0.80 21.8 5.5
KSRS 09:32:31.35 -0.44 98.0 5.5
KSRS 09:32:31.65 -0.35 5.3 5.5
KSRS 09:32:32.25 0.25 15.5 5.5
KSRS 09:32:32.25 0.25 7.0 5.5
KSRS 09:32:32.40 0.40 13.1 5.5
MULTI-MASTER SOLUTION
11. Page 11
CONCENTRATION OF DETECTIONS
IN MULTI-MASTER APPROACH
The number of origin times from detections by 57 templates at USRK and KSRS within
running 8 s interval with a 1 s step
Out of
noise
statistics
Noise quasi-normal
statistics
DPRK6 and
biggest
aftershock
Weak aftershock
with more detections
12. Page 12
AFTERSHOCKS FOUND
USING MULTI-MASTER METHOD
81 aftershocks with 15 and more associated detections
after the DPRK 5 and DPRK6 (209 aftershocks with Nassoc>=11)
13. Page 13
MAGNITUDES OF AFTERSHOCKS
Scaling of Lg-amplitude to the biggest aftershock
(3:38:31 UTC, 03.09.2017) with mb(IDC)=4.11
18. Page 18
NETWORK DISCRIMINATION
MAHALANOBIS DISTANCE
Short (0.1-4.2) Mahalanobis
distances within groups
Large (100-20000) Mahalanobis,
(square) MD,
distances between groups
Critical α=0.001 corresponds to
MD =16.3 for df=3
19. DISCUSSION
• 23 aftershocks with mb between 2.5 and 4.1 were found using cross correlation.
These events are tested for Pg/Lg spectral ratio discrimination
• 23 well measured aftershocks are likely split into two clusters with similarity
measured by SNRcc and might be associated with two different explosions –
DPRK5 and DPRK6
• Multi-master cross-correlation method is more effective in detection of the
smallest events (81 reliable events found) and uses the observed variation in
similarity between aftershocks
• DPRK explosions and their aftershocks can be accurately discriminated using the
method of Pg/Lg spectral ratio
• The Mahalanobis distance serves for extremely effective network discrimination
• Aftershocks sequence is likely not ended with the last few weak events found in
May 2018 and two bigger events on April 22, 2018.
Editor's Notes
The IDC detected all six DPRK underground tests. The number of associated stations increased with magnitude and also due to new IMS stations deployed since 2006. All explosions have mb by approximately one unit of magnitude larger than Ms, and thus, are not screened out by mb-Ms criterion. IDC routine automatic processing detected two events: 3:38:31.88 UTC on September 3 and 8:29:16.29 UTC on September 23 , 2017. We interpret both events as the DPRK6 aftershocks. A prototype IDC waveform cross correlation (WCC) processing detected these two aftershocks and three more events with similar characteristics. All five aftershocks were reviewed by IDC analysts who confirmed them as valid seismic events saved under the IDC LEB account. Two from five aftershocks included 3 and more IMS primary stations and were saved as REB events and were also published by the ISC.
The IDC detected all six DPRK underground tests. The number of associated stations increased with magnitude and also due to new IMS stations deployed since 2006. All explosions have mb by approximately one unit of magnitude larger than Ms, and thus, are not screened out by mb-Ms criterion. IDC routine automatic processing detected two events: 3:38:31.88 UTC on September 3 and 8:29:16.29 UTC on September 23 , 2017. We interpret both events as the DPRK6 aftershocks. A prototype IDC waveform cross correlation (WCC) processing detected these two aftershocks and three more events with similar characteristics. All five aftershocks were reviewed by IDC analysts who confirmed them as valid seismic events saved under the IDC LEB account. Two from five aftershocks included 3 and more IMS primary stations and were saved as REB events and were also published by the ISC.
All five aftershocks found by the WCC method were detected by regional IMS array stations USRK and KSRS at distances 410 km and 440 km, respectively. Auxiliary 3-C IMS station KLR is at the distance of ~900 km from the DPRK test site has also detected explosions and aftershocks. To corroborate our findings we added to our analysis two non-IMS 3-C stations SEHB (~345 km) and MDJ (~370 km). Here we present waveforms recorded at station USRK from the biggest explosion DPRK6 and its biggest (mb=4.1 similar to that of the DPRK1) aftershock. To demonstrate the change in frequency content of various regional phases (Pn, Pg, Lg) we filter original waveforms in 6 frequency bands: 1-2, 1.3-3, 2-4, 3-6, 4-8, 6-12 Hz. Since KSRS and SEHB have the sampling rate of 20 Hz, the latter filter is 6-10 Hz for them. The difference in Pg and Lg relative amplitudes between DPRK6 and its aftershock is clear.
This slide continues waveform presentation at stations KSRS, SEHB, and MDJ depicting various DPRK tests and aftershocks. The overall difference in frequency content between explosions and aftershocks is confirmed, but the DPRK1 looks a bit different from DPRK5 and DPRK6. Having records from DPRK tests at USRK and KSRS we created corresponding waveform templates for the WCC detector using the DPRK4 only, which found five aftershocks in automatic processing at two IMS stations. In the prototype processing pipeline we used the length of correlation window of 10 s and conservative values of the STA (0.8 s) and LTA (20 s) lengths and STA/LTA threshold. With five aftershocks found as valid seismic events one can also use corresponding waveforms as templates. We also extend cross correlation analysis by varying defining parameters: CC window length, STA and LTA, thresholds, frequency bands in broader ranges.
Typical results of the WCC use are presented in this slide as time series (traces) of the cross correlation coefficient (CC) and signal-to-noise ratio SNR (STA/LTA). Further we use SNRCC for CC traces in order to distinguish from standard SNR obtained from actual waveforms. Here we present results obtained for stations USRK. Since we process 1h intervals, the hour between 3:00 and 4:00 a.m. September 3, 2017 is shown. Time is presented in sample of time, 1 sample= 0.025 s. The upper left panel shows the CC trace obtained by correlation of the multichannel USRK waveform with a waveform template obtained from the DPRK2. The CC window length 140 s. The frequency band is 4-8 Hz. One can see two sharp picks corresponding to DPRK6 and its aftershock (A_SHOCK2) 8.5 min later. Correlation between DPRK2 and DPRK6 is better than the one between DPRK2 and A_SHOCK2. The mid-left panel presents similar trace for the A_SCHOCK1 (11.09.2016) and A_SHOCK2 and the lower-left panel shows the CC trace for the A_SHOCK1 and DPRK2 as a template. In all cases, CC picks on arrival times of Pn from these events are clear. To the right, we present shorter time intervals near representative CC-detections. The upper two panels illustrate the importance of master event – the CC peak for the DPRK3, and the A_SHOCK2 template results a much higher peak, which is sharp also and one can use a really small STA value of 0.1 s to produce a sharp SNRCC peak as shown in the lower panel. The arrival time can be determined with a high accuracy.
Varying all defining parameters we calculate largest SNRCC for all pairs of events (6 DPRK and 5 aftershocks). This slide presents these peak values as a color highlighted table for stations KSRS and USRK. Chiefly, the highest values are of the diagonal. But there are couple exclusions as well. This means that another event suppresses, in terms of CC level, pre-signal noise better than the slave event. In all cases, STA=0.1s, LTA=20s, and the most efficient CC length varies from 10 s to 150 s. The best frequency band, FB, also mainly depends on source type. The largest SNRCC at the KSRS is above 650 (!) for the DPRK5 as master and DPRK6 as slave. There is also an important observation that DPRK test correlates best between themselves and not so good with their aftershocks. In turn, the aftershocks have a clear cluster A_SHOCK3 to A_SHOCK5.
Here we first time present the sixth aftershock, A_SHOCK6, which is obtained using five aftershocks as master events. The A_SHOCK6 better correlates with A_SHOCK1. One may interpret aftershock clustering as manifestation of their specific location and/or source mechanisms. Both stations demonstrate the same behavior.
Varying all defining parameters we calculate largest SNRCC for all pairs of events (6 DPRK and 5 aftershocks). This slide presents these peak values as a color highlighted table for stations KSRS and USRK. Chiefly, the highest values are of the diagonal. But there are couple exclusions as well. This means that another event suppresses, in terms of CC level, pre-signal noise better than the slave event. In all cases, STA=0.1s, LTA=20s, and the most efficient CC length varies from 10 s to 150 s. The best frequency band, FB, also mainly depends on source type. The largest SNRCC at the KSRS is above 650 (!) for the DPRK5 as master and DPRK6 as slave. There is also an important observation that DPRK test correlates best between themselves and not so good with their aftershocks. In turn, the aftershocks have a clear cluster A_SHOCK3 to A_SHOCK5.
Here we first time present the sixth aftershock, A_SHOCK6, which is obtained using five aftershocks as master events. The A_SHOCK6 better correlates with A_SHOCK1. One may interpret aftershock clustering as manifestation of their specific location and/or source mechanisms. Both stations demonstrate the same behavior.
The sixth aftershocks is better characterized by a combined master event, when all available templates are used together as independent stations. The DPRK5 was selected as a reference event and all arrival time residuals related to varying template start times are reduced to the reference event, i.e. all templates from different master events must have 0 s time residual relative to the detection found by auto-correlation of the DPRK5. This approach can substantially suppress false arrivals, which may happen at lower threshold levels. When almost all templates ( the largest number is 12 or less – 6 DPRK and 6 aftershocks as at KSRS) at a given station detect the same arrival at close times one can trust such an arrival more that just to those obtained by only one template. The A_SHOCK6 is the smallest among all aftershocks, but has been found by all four stations and many (not all) templates. Standard detection based on one master event creates a weaker event hypothesis, which is also located at a larger distance. Overall, combined masters can provide:
Lower detection threshold; More reliable solution; More reliable location; More accurate location.
It is also important to stress that the SNRcc estimates (highlighted green) are much higher that standard SNR for the Pn-wave arrival highlighted red. This is the advantage of the WCC method. Together with higher SNRcc we obtain very accurate arrival time estimates, as the arrival time residual column demonstrates.
The relative sizes of all aftershocks are better estimated using Lg amplitude scaling since Lg has the largest amplitude among all other regional phases generated by six aftershocks. Frequency dependent RMS amplitudes at KSRS and USRK are shown in two figures. Table lists logarithms of the RMS amplitude ratios with the A_SHOCK2 as a reference. For mb(A_SHOCK2) = 4.1, the A_SHOCK6 has magnitude mb=2.4. The A_SHOCK4 has mb=3.61 +-0.11 and the IDC mb in the REB is 3.4. Therefore, we can find as small events as mb=2.4 and even lower judging by the number of detecting templates and their SNRcc. We have carried out an extensive search for smaller events using the combined-master approach and found no more so far.
The relative sizes of all aftershocks are better estimated using Lg amplitude scaling since Lg has the largest amplitude among all other regional phases generated by six aftershocks. Frequency dependent RMS amplitudes at KSRS and USRK are shown in two figures. Table lists logarithms of the RMS amplitude ratios with the A_SHOCK2 as a reference. For mb(A_SHOCK2) = 4.1, the A_SHOCK6 has magnitude mb=2.4. The A_SHOCK4 has mb=3.61 +-0.11 and the IDC mb in the REB is 3.4. Therefore, we can find as small events as mb=2.4 and even lower judging by the number of detecting templates and their SNRcc. We have carried out an extensive search for smaller events using the combined-master approach and found no more so far.
The relative sizes of all aftershocks are better estimated using Lg amplitude scaling since Lg has the largest amplitude among all other regional phases generated by six aftershocks. Frequency dependent RMS amplitudes at KSRS and USRK are shown in two figures. Table lists logarithms of the RMS amplitude ratios with the A_SHOCK2 as a reference. For mb(A_SHOCK2) = 4.1, the A_SHOCK6 has magnitude mb=2.4. The A_SHOCK4 has mb=3.61 +-0.11 and the IDC mb in the REB is 3.4. Therefore, we can find as small events as mb=2.4 and even lower judging by the number of detecting templates and their SNRcc. We have carried out an extensive search for smaller events using the combined-master approach and found no more so far.
The difference in cross correlation between and across explosions and aftershocks may have deep roots in the difference of corresponding source mechanisms. Formally, waveforms generated by small (point) sources with similar (delta-) time functions for P-waves (like DPRK1 and A_SHOCK2) should be similar but relative amplitudes of regional phases might be quite different and also might be azimuth depended due to source directivity. Also, the spectrum of S-waves may fall relatively faster for explosions than for earthquake-type sources. All these differences are reflected in the shapes of signals from explosions and aftershocks presented earlier as well as in spectral ratios of P and S waves. Here, we use Pg for P- and Lg for S-wave groups. Figures show frequency dependent P/S ratios as obtained at 4 stations from all available records. The explosion and aftershocks curves diverge with increasing frequency allowing usage of the P/S ratio as an effective and reliable discriminant.
To better illustrate the difference we calculated, where possible, the mean and standard deviation values for two groups of sources and present here corresponding mean-value curves together the uncertainty estimates. Two cases are presented for KSRS and USRK.
The deviation between the mean-value curves can be measured in standard deviations for each group separately and this gives an estimate of the probability of wrong interpretation of an explosion as aftershock and vice versa. This probability is extremely small judging by the range of the distance from 4 to 35 standard deviations.
There are 3 stations having at least 5 estimates for explosions and aftershocks. This table present corresponding P/S ratios for all frequency band. We selected FB3 to FB5 to calculate the network-based (3 stations together) Mahalanobis distance between explosion and aftershocks. These values are highlighted red. For each FB, we get the M-distance between and across source types. The M-distance is calculated from a given source to the average explosion or aftershock.
The result of M-distance calculation is shown here. The distances within groups are around 1 and between the groups are 1000 and more. These values imply effective network discrimination of the DPRK explosions and their aftershocks as sources of quite different types. Altogether, we have strong evidences in favour of earthquake-like aftershocks, which can also be split into smaller clusters likely related to different locations and effectiveness of P and S wave generation.
This result cannot be directly extrapolated to discrimination of explosions and earthquakes in the broader regional context. Different sources are needed.