Ayaho MITSUOKA’s research while affiliated with Institute of Volcanology and Seismology, Russian Academy of Sciences and other places

What is this page?


This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.

Publications (2)


Urgent Joint Seismic Observation Data of the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquakes2016年熊本地震合同地震観測データ: ——地震学的解析の基礎的資料として——
  • Article

October 2020

·

74 Reads

·

2 Citations

Zisin (Journal of the Seismological Society of Japan 2nd ser )

Azusa SHITO

·

Ayaho MITSUOKA

·

·

[...]

·

Hiroshi YAKIWARA

Map showing (left) the location of Kyushu and (right) the target area of this study. Green triangles and pink segments indicate active volcanos and active faults, respectively. Red rectangle in the left image indicates the location of the target study area. Orange rectangle signs in the right image indicate the seismic stations within the target area. Red and blue stars indicate the hypocenters of the foreshock and mainshock, respectively.
(a), (b), and (c) are maps showing the relocated hypocenter distribution and four fault models around the Hinagu and Futagawa fault zones for periods (1), (2), and (3), respectively. (d), (e), and (f) show vertical cross sections plotting the relocated hypocenters that correspond to periods (1), (2), and (3), respectively. Yellow stars and black circles indicate hypocenters with a magnitude of 5 or greater or less than 5, respectively. Blue and red stars indicate the foreshock and mainshock hypocenters, respectively. Pink, green, blue, and orange rectangles show the Hinagu1, Hinagu2, Hinagu3, and Futagawa faults, respectively. Green triangle and pink lines indicate, respectively, the Mt. Unzen volcano and active faults in the study region.
The co‐seismic stress change tensors at a 10 km depth caused by the foreshock and the mainshock, based on the slip model defined in section 2.4. (a) The differential stresses (σ1 − σ3) of the co‐seismic stress change tensors are represented by color contours with the differential stress. (b) Orientations of the principal stress axes of the co‐seismic stress change tensors. Red and blue segments indicate the σ1 and σ3 axes, respectively. Each axis is projected on the horizontal plane. The brown and black rectangles indicate the fault slip models of the foreshock and mainshock, respectively, discussed in section 2.4. Other symbols correspond to those described in Figure 2.
Map showing the distribution of the P and T axes used in the fault type analysis. P axes are plotted for periods (a) (1), (b) (2), and (c) (3). The navy blue and red segments represent strike‐slip and normal fault types (P axes plunging at ≤45° and >45° from horizontal), respectively. The distribution of the T axes indicated for periods (d) (1), (e) (2), and (f) (3). The navy blue and green segments represent strike‐slip and reverse fault types (T axes plunging at ≤45° and >45° from horizontal), respectively. The black triangle indicates the Mt. Unzen volcano. Other symbols correspond to those described in Figure 2. At the bottom of (d), (e), and (f), the focal mechanism solutions in Regions A and B during each period are plotted at the lower hemisphere.
The stress field from 7.5 to 12.5 km in depth estimated in this study. (a) The number of focal mechanism solutions at each block during period (1). (b) and (c) show the optimum estimated stress fields during periods (1). (b) The principal stress axes are plotted onto the lower hemisphere at each block. The circles are plotted at the center of each block. Red, green, and blue diamond symbols indicate the σ1, σ2, and σ3 axes of the optimum solutions, respectively. The dot symbols for each color indicate the 95% confidence regimes of the principal stress directions within the spatial blocks obtained from bootstrap resampling. (c) shows the stress ratios of the optimum deviatoric stress tensors during period (1). Gray outer and inner circles indicate the 95% confidence ranges of the estimated optimum values. (d) indicates the number of focal mechanism solutions at each block during period (3). (e) and (f) show the results of the stress field estimation during period (3). The principal stress axes and the stress ratios during (3) are plotted in (e) and (f), respectively. All symbols correspond to those described in (b) and (c).

+6

Spatiotemporal Change in the Stress State Around the Hypocentral Area of the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake Sequence
  • Article
  • Full-text available

September 2020

·

106 Reads

·

14 Citations

For understanding the physical condition of earthquake generation, we estimated the deviatoric stress fields and fault planes of the large earthquakes in the hypocentral area of the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake sequence, central Kyushu, Japan. We analyzed precise hypocenters and their focal mechanism tensors from 1993 to 2017 and found the complex fault planes of the largest foreshock and the mainshock during the sequence. The faults of large earthquakes could not be detected from the preceding high seismic activity in the area to the mainshock. The analyses of the deviatoric stress tensors obtained from pre‐ and post‐sequence seismic moment tensor data revealed the temporal change in the deviatoric stress field at the vicinity of the hypocenters of the largest foreshock and the mainshock. Because of this temporal change, we found that the stress level of the deviatoric stress field in this region is the same level as the co‐seismic stress change caused by the two large earthquakes. We attempted to estimate the differential stress at the region using a new method, which can be applied to the heterogeneous stress fields. The average value of the estimated differential stresses in the region was 15.4 ± 10 MPa. The rotation of the principal stress axes and the low differential stress are important information to understand the physical processes of the earthquake generation and the state of the crustal stress.

Download

Citations (2)


... Another change in the seismicity before and after the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake sequence was observed at the eastern edge of C1. No earthquakes occurred at >15 km depth before the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake sequence, whereas the Mw 6.2 foreshock marked a shift to the occurrence of deeper earthquakes (Mitsuoka et al., 2020;Shito et al., 2020) (18 km depth slice in Fig. 2). The deep aftershocks are actually located along the eastern edge of C1 (Fig. 2), and magmatic uids likely moved horizontally along the rupture formed by these deep aftershocks. ...

Reference:

Electrical conductive fluid-rich zones and their influence on the earthquake initiation, growth, and arrest processes: Observations from the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake sequence, Kyushu Island, Japan
Urgent Joint Seismic Observation Data of the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquakes2016年熊本地震合同地震観測データ: ——地震学的解析の基礎的資料として——
  • Citing Article
  • October 2020

Zisin (Journal of the Seismological Society of Japan 2nd ser )

... In addition, a small differential stress of approximately 10 MPa was estimated, indicating a weakening of the crustal strength in this area. In addition, heterogeneity in earthquake frequency and size distributions are found 21 . ...

Spatiotemporal Change in the Stress State Around the Hypocentral Area of the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake Sequence