Advertisement

The 2015 Illapel Tsunami Source Recovery by Inversion of DART Tsunami Waveforms Using the R-Solution Method

  • Tatyana A. VoroninaEmail author
  • Vladislav V. Voronin
  • Vladimir A. Cheverda
Article
  • 46 Downloads

Abstract

An approach to recovering an initial tsunami waveform with its application to the 16 September 2015 Illapel tsunami is proposed. The approach is based on inverting the remote measurements of water-level data from the deep-ocean DART buoys without a priori information on a source except for the common information about its spatial localization. The ill-posed inverse problem in question is regularized by means of a least-squares inversion using the truncated singular value decomposition method and the r-solution method. The method proposed suppresses the instability of the numerical solution of the ill-posed problem under consideration. The computational algorithm allows one to find the way to improve the inversion by selecting the most informative set of available observation stations. The method proposed was successfully applied to the 16 September 2015 Illapel tsunami.

Keywords

Tsunami numerical simulation tsunami waveform inversion ill-posed inverse problem singular value decomposition r-solution 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Artem Loskutov, Ph.D., from the Institute of Marine Geology and Geophysics Far Eastern Branch Russian Academy of Science, for his assistance in the preparation of data, and Aleksei Romanenko, Ph.D., from Novosibirsk State University for his assistance in arranging calculations. The research proposed was made under the State Budget Program no. 0315-2016-0005.

References

  1. Calisto, I., Miller, M., & Constanzo, I. (2016). Comparison between tsunami signals generated by different source models and the observed data of the Illapel 2015 earthquake. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 173, 1051–1061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cheverda, V. A., & Kostin, V. I. (2010). r-Pseudoinverse for compact operator. Siberian Electronic Mathematical Reports, 7, 258–282.Google Scholar
  3. Fuentes, M., Riquelme, S., Hayes, G., Medina, M., Melgar, D., & Vargas, G., et al. (2016). A study of the 2015 Mw 8.3 Illapel earthquake and tsunami: Numerical and analytical approaches. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 173, 1847–1858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Heidarzadeh, M., Murotani, S., Satake, K., Ishibe, S., & Gusman, A. R. (2016). Source model of the 16 September 2015 Illapel, Chile, Mw 8.4 earthquake based on teleseismic and tsunami data. Geophysical Research Letters, 43, 643–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Lee, S.-J., Yeh, T.-Y., Lin, T.-C., Lin, Y.-Y., Song, T.-R. A., & Huang, B.-S. (2016). Two-stage composite megathrust rupture of the 2015 Mw 8.4 Illapel, Chile, earthquake identified by spectral-element inversion of teleseismic waves. Geophysical Research Letters, 43, 4979–4985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Li, L., Lay, T., Cheung, K. F., & Ye, L. (2016). Joint modeling of teleseismic and tsunami wave observations to constrain the 16 September 2015 Illapel, Chile, Mw 8.3 earthquake rupture process. Geophysical Research Letters, 43, 4303–4312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Marchuk, A. G., Chubarov, L. B., & Shokin, Y. I. (1983). The numerical simulation of the tsunami wave (p. 176). Novosibirsk: Nauka. (in Russian).Google Scholar
  8. Melgar, D., Fan, W., Riquelme, S., Geng, J., Liang, C., & Fuentes, M. (2016). Slip segmentation and slow rupture to the trench during the 2015, Mw 8.3 Illapel, Chile earthquake. Geophysical Research Letters, 43, 961–966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mulia, I. E., & Asano, T. (2016). Initial tsunami source estimation by inversion with an intelligent selection of model parameters and time delays. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 121, 441–456.Google Scholar
  10. Percival, D. B., Denbo, D. W., Eble, M. C., Gica, E., Mofjeld, H. O., Spillane, M. C., et al. (2011). Extraction of tsunami source coefficients via inversion of DARTr buoy data. Natural Hazards, 58(1), 567–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Piatanesi, A., Tinti, S., & Pagnoni, G. (2001). Tsunami waveform inversion by numerical finite-elements Green’s functions. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 1, 187–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pires, C., & Miranda, P. M. A. (2001). Tsunami waveform inversion by adjoint methods. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 106, 19773–19796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Romano, F., Piatanesi, A., Lorito, S., Tolomei, C., Atzori, S., & Murphy, S. (2016). Optimal time alignment of tide-gauge tsunami waveforms in nonlinear inversions: Application to the 2015 Illapel (Chile) earthquake. Geophysical Research Letters, 43, 11226–11235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ruiz, S., Klein, E., del Campo, F., Rivera, E., Poli, P., Metois, M., et al. (2016). The seismic sequence of the16 September 2015 Mw 8.3 Illapel, Chile, earthquake. Seismological Research Letters, 87, 789–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Satake, K. (1989). Inversion of tsunami waveforms for the estimation of heterogeneous fault motion of large submarine earthquakes: The 1968 Tokachi-oki and the 1983 Japan sea earthquake. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 94, 5627–5636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Satake, K., Fujii, Y., Harada, T., & Namegaya, Y. (2013). Time and space distribution of coseismic slip of the 2011 Tohoku earthquake as inferred from tsunami waveform data. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 103(2B), 1473–1492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Satake, K., & Heidarzadeh, M. A. (2017). Review of source models of the 2015 Illapel, Chile earthquake and insights from tsunami data. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 174(1), 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Tang, L., Titov, V. V., Moore, C., & Wei, Y. (2016). Real-time assessment of the 16 September 2015 Chile tsunami and implications for near-field forecast. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 173, 369–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tinti, S., & Tonini, R. (2013). The UBO-TSUFD tsunami inundation model: Validation and application to a tsunami case study focused on the city of Catania. Italy Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 13, 1795–1816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Titov, V. V., Gonzalez, F. I., Bernard, E. N., Eble, M. C., Mofjeld, H. O., Newman, J. C., et al. (2005). Real-time tsunami forecasting: Challenges and solutions. Natural Hazards, 35(1), 41–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Tilmann, F., Zhang, Y., Moreno, M., Saul, J., Eckelmann, F., & Palo, M. (2016). The 2015 Illapel earthquake, central Chile: A type case for a characteristic earthquake? Geophysical Research Letters, 43, 574–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Voronina, T. A. (2012). Reconstruction of initial tsunami waveforms by a truncated SVD method. Journal of Inverse and Ill-Posed Problems, 19, 615–629.Google Scholar
  23. Voronina, T. A. (2016). Recovering a tsunami source and designing an observational system based on an r-solution method. Numerical Analysis and Applications, 9(4), 267–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Voronina, T. A., & Romanenko, A. A. (2016). The new method of tsunami source reconstruction with r-solution inversion method. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 173(12), 4089–4099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Voronin, V. V., Voronina, T. A., & Tcheverda, V. A. (2015). Inversion method for initial tsunami waveform reconstruction. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 15, 1251–1263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Geophysics of Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of ScienceNovosibirskRussia
  2. 2.Novosibirsk State UniversityNovosibirskRussia
  3. 3.A.A.Trofimuk Institute of Petroleum Geology and Geophysics of Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of ScienceNovosibirskRussia

Personalised recommendations