Additional dataset concerning "Observations of mantle seismic anisotropy using array techniques: shear-wave splitting of beamformed SmKS phases"
1
Citation
0
Reference
10
Related Paper
Citation Trend
Abstract:
SplitRacer input and output for beams and single-station splitting measurements for event 201007290731. This dataset was used in "Observations of mantle seismic anisotropy using array techniques: shear-wave splitting of beamformed SmKS phases" by Jonathan Wolf, Daniel A. Frost, Maureen D. Long, Ed Garnero, Adeolu O. Aderoju, Neala Creasy and Ebru Bozdag. The manuscript is available at https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JB025556.Keywords:
Shear wave splitting
Seismic array
Seismic anisotropy
Seismic anisotropy
Shear wave splitting
Cite
Citations (4)
Abstract Shear‐wave splitting measurements are commonly used to resolve seismic anisotropy in both the upper and lowermost mantle. Typically, such techniques are applied to SmKS phases that have reflected (m‐1) times off the underside of the core‐mantle boundary before being recorded. Practical constraints for shear‐wave splitting studies include the limited number of suitable phases as well as the large fraction of available data discarded because of poor signal‐to‐noise ratios (SNRs) or large measurement uncertainties. Array techniques such as beamforming are commonly used in observational seismology to enhance SNRs, but have not been applied before to improve SmKS signal strength and coherency for shear wave splitting studies. Here, we investigate how a beamforming methodology, based on slowness and backazimuth vespagrams to determine the most coherent incoming wave direction, can improve shear‐wave splitting measurement confidence intervals. Through the analysis of real and synthetic seismograms, we show that (a) the splitting measurements obtained from the beamformed seismograms (beams) reflect an average of the single‐station splitting parameters that contribute to the beam; (b) the beams have (on average) more than twice as large SNRs than the single‐station seismograms that contribute to the beam; (c) the increased SNRs allow the reliable measurement of shear wave splitting parameters from beams down to average single‐station SNRs of 1.3. Beamforming may thus be helpful to more reliably measure splitting due to upper mantle anisotropy. Moreover, we show that beamforming holds potential to greatly improve detection of lowermost mantle anisotropy by demonstrating differential SKS–SKKS splitting analysis using beamformed USArray data.
Shear wave splitting
Seismogram
Seismic anisotropy
Seismic array
Slowness
Shear waves
S-wave
Cite
Citations (23)
Abstract Observations of seismic anisotropy can provide direct constraints on the character of mantle flow in subduction zones, critical for our broader understanding of subduction dynamics. Here we present over 750 new SKS splitting measurements in the vicinity of Mount St. Helens in the Cascadia subduction zone using a combination of stations from the iMUSH broadband array and Cascades Volcano Observatory network. This provides the highest density of splitting measurements yet available in Cascadia, acting as a focused “telescope” for seismic anisotropy in the subduction zone. We retrieve spatially consistent splitting parameters (mean fast direction Φ : 74°, mean delay time ∂t : 1.0 s) with the azimuthal occurrence of nulls in agreement with the fast direction of splitting. When averaged across the array, a 90° periodicity in splitting parameters as a function of back azimuth is revealed, which has not been recovered previously with single‐station observations. The periodicity is characterized by a sawtooth pattern in Φ with a clearly defined 45° trend. We present new equations that reproduce this behavior based upon known systematic errors when calculating shear wave splitting from data with realistic seismic noise. The corrected results suggest a single layer of anisotropy with an ENE‐WSW fast axis parallel to the motion of the subducting Juan de Fuca plate; in agreement with predictions for entrained subslab mantle flow. The splitting pattern is consistent with that seen throughout Cascadia, suggesting that entrainment of the underlying asthenosphere with the subducting slab is coherent and widespread.
Shear wave splitting
Seismic anisotropy
Asthenosphere
Seismic array
Cite
Citations (14)
Shear wave splitting
Seismic anisotropy
Seismic array
Cite
Citations (24)
Shear-wave splitting measurements are commonly used to resolve seismic anisotropy in both the upper and lowermost mantle. Typically, such techniques are applied to SmKS phases that have reflected (m-1) times off the underside of the core-mantle boundary before being recorded. Practical constraints for shear-wave splitting studies include the limited number of suitable phases as well as the large fraction of available data discarded because of poor signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) or large measurement uncertainties. Array techniques such as beamforming are commonly used in observational seismology to enhance SNRs, but have not been applied before to improve SmKS signal strength and coherency for shear wave splitting studies. Here, we investigate how a beamforming methodology, based on slowness and backazimuth vespagrams to determine the most coherent incoming wave direction, can improve shear-wave splitting measurement confidence intervals. Through the analysis of real and synthetic seismograms, we show that (1) the splitting measurements obtained from the beamformed seismograms (beams) reflect an average of the single-station splitting parameters that contribute to the beam; (2) the beams have (on average) more than twice as large SNRs than the single-station seismograms that contribute to the beam; (3) the increased SNRs allow the reliable measurement of shear wave splitting parameters from beams down to average single-station SNRs of 1.3. Beamforming may thus be helpful to more reliably measure splitting due to upper mantle anisotropy. Moreover, we show that beamforming holds potential to greatly improve detection of lowermost mantle anisotropy by demonstrating differential SKS-SKKS splitting analysis using beamformed USArray data.
Shear wave splitting
Seismogram
Seismic anisotropy
Slowness
Seismic array
S-wave
Shear waves
Cite
Citations (0)
We examine upper mantle anisotropy across the Hawaiian Swell by analyzing shear wave splitting of teleseismic SKS waves recorded by the PLUME broadband land and ocean bottom seismometer deployments. Mantle anisotropy beneath the oceans is often attributed to flow‐induced lattice‐preferred orientation of olivine. Splitting observations may reflect a combination of both fossil lithospheric anisotropy and anisotropy due to present‐day asthenospheric flow, and here we address the question whether splitting provides diagnostic information on possible asthenospheric plume flow at Hawaii. We find that the splitting fast directions are coherent and predominantly parallel to the fossil spreading direction, suggesting that shear wave splitting dominantly reflects fossil lithospheric anisotropy. The signature of anisotropy from asthenospheric flow is more subtle, although it could add some perturbation to lithospheric splitting. The measured delay times are typically 1 s or less, although a few stations display larger splitting delays of 1–2 s. The variability in the delay times across the different stations indicates differences in the degree of anisotropy or in the thickness of the anisotropic layer or in the effect of multilayer anisotropy. Regions with smaller splitting times may have experienced processes that modified the lithosphere and partially erased the fossil anisotropy; alternatively, asthenospheric splitting may either constructively add to or destructively subtract from lithospheric splitting to produce the observed variability in delay times.
Shear wave splitting
Seismic anisotropy
Seismometer
Mantle plume
Cite
Citations (29)
Shear wave splitting
Massif
Seismic anisotropy
Slab
Asthenosphere
Seismic array
Cite
Citations (59)
Shear wave splitting is a robust tool to infer the direction and strength of seismic anisotropy in the lithosphere and underlying asthenosphere. Previous shear wave splitting studies in the Afar Depression and adjacent areas concluded that either Precambrian sutures or vertical magmatic dikes are mostly responsible for the observed anisotropy. Here we report results of a systematic analysis of teleseismic shear wave splitting using all the available broadband seismic data recorded in the Afar Depression, Main Ethiopian Rift (MER), and Ethiopian Plateau. We found that while the ∼450 measurements on the Ethiopian Plateau and in the MER show insignificant azimuthal variations with MER‐parallel fast directions and thus can be explained by a single layer of anisotropy, the ∼150 measurements in the Afar Depression reveal a systematic azimuthal dependence of splitting parameters with a π /2 periodicity, suggesting a two‐layer model of anisotropy. The top layer is characterized by a relatively small (0.65 s) splitting delay time and a WNW fast direction that can be attributed to magmatic dikes within the lithosphere, and the lower layer has a larger (2.0 s) delay time and a NE fast direction. Using the spatial coherency of the splitting parameters obtained in the MER and on the Ethiopian Plateau, we estimated that the optimal depth of the source of anisotropy is centered at about 300 km, i.e., in the asthenosphere. The spatial and azimuthal variations of the observed anisotropy can best be explained by a NE directed flow in the asthenosphere beneath the MER and the Afar Depression.
Shear wave splitting
Asthenosphere
Seismic anisotropy
Dike
Cite
Citations (78)
We developed a three‐dimensional (3D) shear‐wave splitting tomography method to image the spatial anisotropy distribution by back projecting shear wave splitting delay times along ray paths derived from a 3D shear velocity model, assuming the delay times are accumulated along the ray paths. The local strength of the anisotropy is indicated by a parameter of anisotropy percentage, K. Using the shear‐wave splitting delay times for 575 earthquakes measured at PASO and HRSN stations, we imaged a detailed 3D anisotropy percentage model around the San Andreas Fault Observatory at Depth (SAFOD). The anisotropy percentage model shows strong heterogeneities, consistent with the strong spatial variations in both measured delay times and fast polarization directions. The San Andreas Fault (SAF) zone is highly anisotropic down to a depth of ∼4 km and then becomes less anisotropic at greater depths. Outside the fault zone, the highly anisotropic zone extends as deep as ∼7 km, consistent with the systematic depth dependence of the average time delays. To the southwest of the SAF, the Salinian granitic block shows relatively strong anisotropic anomalies that are presumably caused by aligned microcracks consistent with the direction of the regional maximum compressive horizontal stress. To the northeast of the fault zone, a strong anisotropic anomaly between depths ∼2 and ∼4 km corresponds to a serpentinite body sandwiched between Franciscan rocks.
Shear wave splitting
Seismic anisotropy
Cite
Citations (45)
SUMMARY Determinations of seismic anisotropy, or the dependence of seismic wave velocities on the polarization or propagation direction of the wave, can allow for inferences on the style of deformation and the patterns of flow in the Earth’s interior. While it is relatively straightforward to resolve seismic anisotropy in the uppermost mantle directly beneath a seismic station, measurements of deep mantle anisotropy are more challenging. This is due in large part to the fact that measurements of anisotropy in the deep mantle are typically blurred by the potential influence of upper mantle and/or crustal anisotropy beneath a seismic station. Several shear wave splitting techniques are commonly used that attempt resolve seismic anisotropy in deep mantle by considering the presence of multiple anisotropic layers along a raypath. Examples include source-side S-wave splitting, which is used to characterize anisotropy in the deep upper mantle and mantle transition zone beneath subduction zones, and differential S-ScS and differential SKS-SKKS splitting, which are used to study anisotropy in the D″ layer at the base of the mantle. Each of these methods has a series of assumptions built into them that allow for the consideration of multiple regions of anisotropy. In this work, we systematically assess the accuracy of these assumptions. To do this, we conduct global wavefield modelling using the spectral element solver AxiSEM3D. We compute synthetic seismograms for earth models that include seismic anisotropy at the periods relevant for shear wave splitting measurements (down to 5 s). We apply shear wave splitting algorithms to our synthetic seismograms and analyse whether the assumptions that underpin common measurement techniques are adequate, and whether these techniques can correctly resolve the anisotropy incorporated in our models. Our simulations reveal some inaccuracies and limitations of reliability in various methods. Specifically, explicit corrections for upper mantle anisotropy, which are often used in source-side direct S splitting and S-ScS differential splitting, are typically reliable for the fast polarization direction ϕ but not always for the time lag δt, and their accuracy depends on the details of the upper mantle elastic tensor. We find that several of the assumptions that underpin the S-ScS differential splitting technique are inaccurate under certain conditions, and we suggest modifications to traditional S-ScS differential splitting approaches that lead to improved reliability. We investigate the reliability of differential SKS-SKKS splitting intensity measurements as an indicator for lowermost mantle anisotropy and find that the assumptions built into the splitting intensity formula can break down for strong splitting cases. We suggest some guidelines to ensure the accuracy of SKS-SKKS splitting intensity comparisons that are often used to infer lowermost mantle anisotropy. Finally, we suggest a new strategy to detect lowermost mantle anisotropy which does not rely on explicit upper mantle corrections and use this method to analyse the lowermost mantle beneath east Asia.
Shear wave splitting
Seismic anisotropy
Core–mantle boundary
Shear waves
Seismogram
Cite
Citations (27)