Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33574409›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Interevent-time distribution and aftershock frequency in non-stationary induced seismicity.

Richard A J Post, Matthias A J Michels, Jean-Paul Ampuero, Thibault Candela, Peter A Fokker, Jan-Diederik van Wees, Remco W van der Hofstad, Edwin R van den Heuvel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Richard A J PostDepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science, Eindhoven University of Technology, 5600 MB, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Matthias A J MichelsDepartment of Applied Physics, Eindhoven University of Technology, 5600 MB, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Jean-Paul AmpueroUniversité Côte d'Azur, IRD, CNRS, Observatoire de la Côte d'Azur, Géoazur, Nice, France.
Thibault CandelaApplied Geosciences, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO), 3508 TA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Peter A FokkerApplied Geosciences, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO), 3508 TA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Jan-Diederik van WeesApplied Geosciences, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO), 3508 TA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Remco W van der HofstadDepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science, Eindhoven University of Technology, 5600 MB, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Edwin R van den HeuvelDepartment of Mathematics and Computer Science, Eindhoven University of Technology, 5600 MB, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. e.r.v.d.heuvel@tue.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The initial footprint of an earthquake can be extended considerably by triggering of clustered aftershocks. Such earthquake-earthquake interactions have been studied extensively for data-rich, stationary natural seismicity. Induced seismicity, however, is intrinsically inhomogeneous in time and space and may have a limited catalog of events; this may hamper the distinction between human-induced background events and triggered aftershocks. Here we introduce a novel Gamma Accelerated-Failure-Time model for efficiently analyzing interevent-time distributions in such cases. It addresses the spatiotemporal variation and quantifies, per event, the probability of each event to have been triggered. Distentangling the obscuring aftershocks from the background events is a crucial step to better understand the causal relationship between operational parameters and non-stationary induced seismicity. Applied to the Groningen gas field in the North of the Netherlands, our model elucidates geological and operational drivers of seismicity and has been used to test for aftershock triggering. We find that the hazard rate in Groningen is indeed enhanced after each event and conclude that aftershock triggering cannot be ignored. In particular we find that the non-stationary interevent-time distribution is well described by our Gamma model. This model suggests that 27.0(± 8.5)% of the recorded events in the Groningen field can be attributed to triggering.

Identifiers

PMID33574409
PMCPMC7878511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.