Earthquakes and

Earthquake Prediction
Andrei Gabrielov
Purdue University
West Lafayette, IN, USA
www.math.purdue.edu/~agabriel
San Francisco, April 18, 1906
 Plate Tectonics
• Major tectonic plates and world seismicity
 Plate Tectonics
• Plate boundaries and tectonic faults
North American
Plate

Pacific
Plate
Elastic Rebound Theory
Discovered after the great 1906 San Francisco
earthquake (before plate tectonics theory).
Elastic Rebound Theory
Discovered after the great 1906 San Francisco
earthquake (before plate tectonics theory).
Elastic Rebound
Slow build-up of
deformation
(strain) in the
rocks by plate
motion. Strain
(energy) is
released suddenly
as fault slips.
Earthquake Focus and Epicenter
 Earthquakes generate elastic waves:
Body waves: P (pulse), S (transverse)
Surface waves: R (Rayleigh), L (Love)

Surface waves

P-wave S-wave


First Time 
arrival
Seismogram for a distant earthquake
A wave pulse (P-wave)

Animation courtesy of Dr. Dan Russell,

Kettering University
http://www.kettering.edu/~drussell/demos.html
Transverse wave (S-wave)

Animation courtesy of Dr. Dan Russell,

Kettering University
http://www.kettering.edu/~drussell/demos.html
 Rayleigh wave

Animation courtesy of Dr. Dan Russell,

Kettering University
http://www.kettering.edu/~drussell/demos.html
Seismic Waves in the Earth

Seismic waves through

the Earth’s interior
that indicate
structure
(crust, mantle,
outer core,
inner core, etc.)
 Magnitude

· Measure of the ENERGY released in the

earthquake, based on vibration caused by
seismic waves
· Logarithmic scale ― M = 6 is ten times
greater vibration, and a hundred times more
energy, than M = 5 (at the same distance)
· Should not be mistaken for INTENSITY ―
the measure of the damage caused by the
earthquake
 Moment Magnitude Mw
Focus or hypocenter
(point of initiation Epicenter (location on Earth’s surface
of the rupture) above the hypocenter)
*
Depth

Moment = M0 = µ A D (dyne-cm) (dyne is a unit of force)

µ = shear modulus ~ 32 GPa in crust (~3.2 x 1011 dynes/cm2),
~75 GPa in mantle (a measure of strength of rocks)
A = LW = area (cm2), D = average displacement (cm)
Mw = 2/3 log10(M0) - 10.7
Gutenberg-Richter Law
Worldwide earthquakes per year (from USGS):
Descriptor Magnitude Average Annually
Great 8 and higher 1¹
Major 7 - 7.9 17 ²
Strong 6 - 6.9 134 ²
Moderate 5 - 5.9 1319 ²
Light 4 - 4.9 13,000 (est.)
Minor 3 - 3.9 130,000 (est.)
Very Minor 2 - 2.9 1,300,000 (est.)
¹ Based on observations since 1900.
² Based on observations since 1990.
 Aftershocks
• Earthquakes that happen following a mainshock,
in the same region but of smaller magnitude
• Aftershock frequency distribution in time t after
the mainshock satisfies Omori Law:

• Bath’s Law: Aftershock’s magintude is

approximately 1.2 less than mainshock’s
• Aftershocks frequency-magnitude distribution
satisfies Gutenberg-Richter law
World’s largest earthquakes since 1900
  Location Date UTC Mag. Lat. Long.
1 Chile 1960 05 22 9.5 -38.29 -73.05
2 Prince William Sound, Alaska 1964 03 28 9.2 61.02 -147.65
3 Northern Sumatra, Indonesia 2004 12 26 9.1 3.30 95.78
4 Honshu, Japan 2011 03 11 9.0 38.32 142.37
5 Kamchatka 1952 11 04 9.0 52.76 160.06
6 Maule, Chile 2010 02 27 8.8 -35.85 -72.72
7 Off the Coast of Ecuador 1906 01 31 8.8 1.0 -81.5
8 Rat Islands, Alaska 1965 02 04 8.7 51.21 178.50
9 Northern Sumatra, Indonesia 2005 03 28 8.6 2.08 97.01
10 Assam - Tibet 1950 08 15 8.6 28.5 96.5
11 Northern Sumatra, Indonesia 2012 04 11 8.6 2.31 93.06
12 Andreanof Islands, Alaska 1957 03 09 8.6 51.56 -175.39
13 Southern Sumatra, Indonesia 2007 09 12 8.5 -4.44 101.37
14 Banda Sea, Indonesia 1938 02 01 8.5 -5.05 131.62
15 Kamchatka 1923 02 03 8.5 54.0 161.0
16 Chile-Argentina Border 1922 11 11 8.5 -28.55 -70.50
17 Kuril Islands 1963 10 13 8.5 44.9 149.6
Continental USA largest earthquakes
 Largest Earthquakes in the
 
Continental USA
Location Date Magnitude
1. Cascadia subduction zone 1700 01 26 ˜9
2. Fort Tejon, California 1857 01 09 7.9
3. San Francisco, California 1906 04 18 7.8
4. Imperial Valley, California 1892 02 24 7.8
5. New Madrid, Missouri 1811 12 16 7.7
6. New Madrid, Missouri 1812 02 07 7.7
7. New Madrid, Missouri 1812 01 23 7.5
8. Owens Valley, California 1872 03 26 7.4
9. Landers, California 1992 06 28 7.3
10. Hebgen Lake, Montana 1959 08 18 7.3
11. Kern County, California 1952 07 21 7.3
12. West of Eureka, California 1922 01 31 7.3
13. Charleston, South Carolina 1886 09 01 7.3
14. California - Oregon Coast 1873 11 23 7.3
15. N Cascades, Washington 1872 12 15 7.3
 Strong Earthquakes Nucleate in Some
“Dangerous” Structures (D-nodes)
Gelfand, et al., 1976. A r e a s w h e r e t h e e p ic e n t e r s
o f m a g n it u d e 6 . 5 o r m o r e
e a r t h q u a k e s c a n b e s itu a t e d .

Qualitatively, D-nodes F e rn d a le
E p ic e n te r s o f m a g n itu d e
6 .5 o r m o re e a rth q u a k e s :

are recognized B e fo re 1 9 7 6 .
A fte r 1 9 7 6 .

– by local depression
on the background
M a m m o th
C h a lf a n t V a lle y

of NG‑Q depression
L o m a P r ie ta
C o a lin g a

(“local tension on the

background of general S a n S im e o n

compression”) B ig B e a r
H e c to r M in e

L a n d e rs
– by proximity of N o r t h r id g e

S u p e r s t it i o n s H ills

hydrothermal Im p e r ia l V a ll e y

reservoirs
 Earthquake prediction
A strong earthquake is preceded by the following changes in seismicity:

Intensity

Clustering

Range of
correlation
in space

lgN Magnitude- lgN

frequency
relation
m m

Non-precursory Precursory state

state
POSSIBLE OUTCOMES OF PREDICTION
Failure to predict
Space

False alarm

Correct alarm Correct alarm

Time
Intermediate-term (5 yrs) Prediction
Algorithm M8-MSc, Keilis-Borok and Kossobokov
Predicting the 3/11/2011
M9 earthquake in Japan
Predicting the
4/11/2012
M8.6 and M8.2
Earthquakes off the
Western coast of
Northern Sumatra,
Indonesia
 FRONTIERS OF SIMILARITY

Precursors have been defined for earthquakes.

Only the final scale was adjusted for starquakes.
SOCIO-ECONOMIC PREDICTIONS
 Prediction of US Recessions
A d v a n c e p re d ic tio n
P r e d ic t io n o f r e c e s s io n s

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

P re d ic tio n o f r e c o v e r y fr o m re c e s s io n s

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

- R e c e ssio n - A la rm
 US PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS (Keilis-Borok and Lichtman)
Prediction is based on thirteen socio-economic and political factors.
Victory of challenging party is predicted when 6 or more factors are in its favor.
Otherwise victory of incumbent party is predicted.

Predictions published months in advance: all 8 - correct

Retrospective Analysis: 1860 - 1980

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
N u m b e r o f fa c to r s in fa v o r o f c h a lle n g e r
* years when popular vote was reversed by electoral vote.
Red - incumbent won, blue – challenger won.
 13 Keys to Presidency (Keilis-Borok and Lichtman)
Answer YES favors re-election of the incumbent party
Key 1: (Party Mandate): After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more
seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than it did after the previous
midterm elections.
Key 2: (Contest): There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination.
Key 3: (Incumbency): The incumbent-party candidate is the sitting president.
Key 4: (Third party): There is no significant third-party or independent campaign.
Key 5: (Short-term economy): The economy is not in recession during the election
campaign.
Key 6: (Long-term economy): Real per-capita economic growth during the term
equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.
Key 7: (Policy change): The incumbent administration effects major changes in
national policy.
Key 8: (Social unrest): There is no sustained social unrest during the term.
Key 9: (Scandal): The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.
Key 10: (Foreign/military failure): The incumbent administration suffers no major
failure in foreign or military affairs.
Key 11: (Foreign/military success): The incumbent administration achieves a major
success in foreign or military affairs.
Key 12: (Incumbent charisma): The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or a
national hero.
Key 13: (Challenger charisma): The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic or
a national hero.
 Answers for the 2012 presidential election
(published 28 months before the election)
• KEY 1: Party mandate. After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the
U.S. House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. (FALSE)
• KEY 2: Contest. There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. (TRUE)
• KEY 3: Incumbency. The incumbent-party candidate is the sitting president. (TRUE)
• KEY 4: Third party. There is no significant third-party or independent campaign. (TRUE)
• KEY 5: Short-term economy. The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.
(TRUE)
• KEY 6: Long-term economy. Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or
exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. (FALSE)
• KEY 7: Policy change. The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.
(TRUE)
• KEY 8: Social unrest. There is no sustained social unrest during the term. (TRUE)
• KEY 9: Scandal. The administration is untainted by major scandal. (TRUE)
• KEY 10: Foreign/military failure. The administration suffers no major failure in foreign or
military affairs. (TRUE)
• KEY 11: Foreign/military success. The administration achieves a major success in foreign or
military affairs. (FALSE)
• KEY 12: Incumbent charisma. The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.
(FALSE)
• KEY 13: Challenger charisma: The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic or a national
hero. (TRUE)