See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/225669901

"Stress triggering" between different rupture events in several earthquakes

Article in Acta Seismologica Sinica · January 2000

DOI: 10.1007/s11589-000-0062-3

CITATIONS READS

14 22

4 authors, including:

Yongge Wan
Institute of Disaster Prevention
81 PUBLICATIONS 1,278 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Stress inversion from focal mechanism and other geological measurement! View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Yongge Wan on 09 January 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Vol.13 No.6 (607~615) ACTA SEISMOLOGICA SINICA Nov., 2000

Article ID: 1000-9116(2000)06-0607-09

″ Stress triggering″ between different rupture

events in several earthquakes*
WAN Yong-ge1, 2) (万永革) WU Zhong-liang1) (吴忠良) ZHOU Gong-wei1) (周公威)
HUANG Jing1) (黄 静)

1) Institute of Geophysics, China Seismological Bureau, Beijing 100081, China

2) College of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Technique, China Seismological Bureau, Yanjiao Beijing 101601, China

Abstract
Most strong earthquakes have complex rupture processes. As an approximation, each earthquake can be described
as two or more subevents of rupture with time interval of several seconds to several days. In order to discuss the
relationship between different subevents, we investigated the rupture process of the 1966 Xingtai, the 1976 Tang-
shan, the 1990 Gonghe and the 1996 Lijiang earthquake by calculating the static Coulomb failure stress changes
produced by the first subevent. The calculation of static stress changes produced by fault slip is based on the for-
mulation of Okada (1992). The result suggests that the static Coulomb failure stress changes (∆CFS) produced by
the first subevent have ″triggering″ effect on the subsequent subevents which locate in the region where the Cou-
lomb stress change produced by the first event is positive, with the order of magnitude 10−2~10−1 MPa.

Key words: Coulomb failure stress change; seismic parameter; stress triggering
CLC number: P315.72+ 7 Document code: A

Introduction
More and more observations suggest that most intermediate and strong earthquakes have
complex source processes. Most intermediate and strong earthquakes occurred in continental re-
gion of China include two or more rupture events. The subevents have time interval from several
seconds (such as the 1990 Gonghe, Qinghai earthquake and the 1996 Lijiang, Yunnan earthquake),
several minutes (such as the 1976 Tangshan earthquake) to several days (such as the 1966 Xingtai
earthquake). To study the relationship between different rupture events occurred subsequently is of
significant importance in seismic source study, which can further provide earthquake prediction
research and the mitigation of seismic hazard with useful information. Study on the relationship
between different rupture events can be carried out in different points of view. In this study, we
take into account the static Coulomb failure stress change (∆CFS) produced by the first rupture
event on subsequent events.
″Stress triggering″ is by no means a new problem in seismology. Chinnery (1963), Smith and
Van de Lindt (1969), Rybichi (1973), CHEN, et al (1975), Yamashina (1978), HUANG and
WANG (1980), and LUO (1980), et al made systematic progress in this field during the 1960s to

*
Received date: 2000-02-01; revised date: 2000-08-24; accepted date: 2000-08-24.
Foundation item: State Natural Science Foundation of China (49725410) and the Project ″973″.
本文英文审校： 许忠淮
608 ACTA SEISMOLOGICA SINICA Vol.13

the 1980s. ″Stress triggering″ has attracted attention again among seismologists since recent years
(Harris, 1998; Stein, 1999) because of three reasons. Firstly, according to the result of theoretical
calculation, the static Coulomb failure stress change is generally of the order of magnitude 10−2~10−1
MPa (Rybichi, 1973; Yamashina, 1978; Das, Scholz, 1981). According to the previous model,
such a stress change cannot result in earthquake occurrence. Even if it has some triggering effects,
it must be very little. But the result of the nonlinear dynamics of earthquake since the 1980s sug-
gests that the system of geodynamics is in a state of self-organized criticality (Bak, Tang, 1989; Ito,
Matsuzaki, 1990; WU, 2000). The stress released by an earthquake process is only a small portion
of the ambient stress accumulated in the lithosphere (Main, 1996; Grasso, Sornette, 1998). It
seems that ″triggering″ earthquake does not necessarily need a great stress change. In this perspec-
tive, the effect of ∆CFS of the order of 10−2 ~10−1 MPa cannot be neglected.
Secondly, up to now, whether static stress change (Simpson, et al, 1988; Reasenberg, Simp-
son, 1992; Crider, Pollard, 1998; Hardebeck, et al, 1998) or dynamic stress change (Gomberg, et
al, 1997; Cotton, Coutant, 1997) plays a predominant role in earthquake triggering is still an open
question. The controversy and discussion on this problem makes seismologists and geologists
consider this problem once again.
Thirdly, the strong earthquake of M=7.9 in Izmit, Turkey on August 17, 1999 had a strong
impact on both science and society (Parsons, et al, 2000; Hubert-Ferrari, et al, 2000). Before the
earthquake, by calculating the ∆CFS produced by previous earthquakes as well as deformation
loading, Stein, et al (1997) and Nalbant, et al (1998) predicted that Izmit is the region with high
seismic risk. Although still to be discussed in the view of statistical significance, this result made a
stir in seismology, and made the ∆CFS calculation one of the hot topics among seismologists.

1 ∆ CFS calculation
Earthquake is produced by underground rock rupture. Elastic deformation and elastic energy
release are the predominant processes in a relatively short time after the earthquake. As a first or-
der approximation, we can simplify the earth medium as isotropic elastic medium in semi-infinite
space. If we know the geometrical parameters of the seismic fault plane, we can calculate the dis-
placement and strain in the elastic medium. There has been analytical calculation about this prob-
lem (Chinnery, 1963; CHEN, et al, 1975; Okada, 1992). In this study, we adopt the formulations
of Okada (1992), which can be applied to various types of fault to calculate the static strain pro-
duced by earthquake, and then calculate the stress using Hooke′s law.
∆CFS on the fault is defined as:
∆ σ f = ∆ τ s + µ (∆σ n − ∆P ) (1)
where ∆τs is shear stress change, ∆σn is normal stress change (positive for extension), µ is friction
coefficient, and ∆P is pore pressure change (Stein, et al, 1992; King, et al, 1994). The friction co-
efficient reduced by the pore pressure can be written in the form µ′=µ (1−B), where B is the
Skempton coefficient ranging between 0 and 1 (Rice, 1992). Consequently, equation (1) becomes
∆ σ f = ∆ τ s + µ ′∆σ n (2)
In our calculation, we adopt µ′=0.4 following Stein, et al (1992) and King, et al (1994). Nu-
merical experiments suggest that variation of this value has little effect on space distribution of
∆CFS, but has a little effect on the magnitude of the stress change. We project the shear stress
No.6 WAN Yong-ge, et al: ″STRESS TRIGGERING″ BETWEEN DIFFERENT RUPTURES 609

change onto the assumed fault sliding direction. The shear stress change is defined as positive
when it has the same direction as that assumed sliding direction, otherwise, the shear stress is
negative. The assumed sliding direction is taken from the mechanism of subsequent rupture event.

2 Results for earthquakes

2.1 The 1966 Xingtai earthquake
The M=6.8 earthquake occurred in the east of Longyao County, Xingtai, Hebei Province on
March 8, 1966. Subsequently, there occurred a M=7.2 earthquake in the north, in Ningjin County
on March 22 (14 days later). The earthquake parameters provided by the Seismological Bureau of
Hebei Province (1986) are listed in Table 1. ZENG, et al (1988) obtained that the first nodal plane
is the rupture plane according to the NE-SW direction of seismic intensity and the distribution of
aftershocks, as well as its consistence with the strike direction of tec tonic structure in Shulu De-
pression. We infer that the rupture length of the M=6.8 earthquake is 21 km, the width is 11 km,
and the displacement is 195 cm, according to the statistical relation given by QIN (1989) based on
seismic wave spectral scaling law. The pattern of ∆CFS at the depth of 9 km are calculated using
these parameters and is given in Figure 1. The figure suggests that the M=7.2 earthquake located
in the area where the static ∆CFS produced by the M=6.8 earthquake is positive, and the ∆CFS
value is 0.02~0.2 MPa. This indicates that the Coulomb stress change produced by the M=6.8
earthquake is ″encouraging ″ the occurrence of the M=7.2 earthquake.
Table 1 Parameters of the earthquakes in this study
Fault plane solution
Original time (GMT) Epicenter location Depth
Site M Nodal plane I Nodal plane II
/km
a-mo-d h:min:s ϕN / (°) λE/ (°) φ /(°) δ /(°) λ /(°) φ /(°) δ /(°) λ /(°)
Xingtai 1966-03-07 21:29:14 37.4 114.9 6.8 10 27 80 170 119 80 11
1966-03-22 08:19:46 37.5 115.1 7.2 9 19 90 180 109 90 6
Tangshan 1976-07-27 19:42:54.6 39.6 117.9 7.8 23 126 79 −49 229 43 −163
1976-07-28 10:45:35.2 39.7 118.4 7.1 26 279 49 −71 72 44 −110
Gonghe 1990-04-26 09:37:15 36.0 100.3 6.2 8 108 55 50 344 52 132
1990-04-26 09:37:46 6.4 11 102 70 −6 194 84 20
Lijiang 1996-02-03 11:14:19.8 27.0 100.3 6.1 12 145 42 −107
1996-02-03 11:14:26.8 6.2 12 153 63 −124
Note: Fault plane solution φ, δ, λ represents strike, dip and rake, respectively. The first nodal plane is the preferred fault plane.

2.2 The 1976 Tangshan earthquake

The M=7.8 earthquake occurred in Tangshan, Hebei Province at 3h42min (local time) on July
28, 1976. Subsequently there occurred the M=7.1 earthquake at Shangjialin in Luanxian, about 40
km away from Tangshan City. The CMT parameters of Harvard University are listed in Table 1.
Based on geological structure, seismic intensity, distribution of aftershocks and deformation fea-
ture, ZHANG, et al (1990) inferred that the nodal plane striking NE direction is the seismogenic
fault plane. Using the data of P wave first motion, ZHANG, et al (1980) got the result that the
strike direction of fault plane is NE, the rupture length along NE direction is 70 km; and the rup-
ture length along SW direction is 45 km. In this study, we adopt the first nodal plane in Table 1 as
the fault plane and calculated the ∆CFS at the depth of 26 km (Figure 2). Figure 2 suggests that
the second mainshock located in the area where Coulomb stress change produced by the first
mainshock is positive, with the ∆CFS value 0.1~0.2 MPa. It turns out that ∆CFS produced by the
first mainshock is ″encouraging ″ the occurrence of the second mainshock.
610 ACTA SEISMOLOGICA SINICA Vol.13

Figure 1 ∆CFS produced by the Xingtai earth-
quake occurred on March 8, 1966 on
the fault of the second earthquake on
March 22
Dashed line represents negative stress
change. The unit of contour line is MPa. The
pane in figure represents the projection of
seismic fault at depth of 9 km. Circle repre-
sents hypocenter or initiation point of the
second earthquake on March 22
Figure 2 ∆CFS produced by the Tangshan
M=7.8 earthquake on the fault of
the M=7.1 earthquake
Dashed line represents negative stress
change. The unit of contour line is MPa.
The pane in figure represents the projection
of seismic fault at depth of 26 km. Circle
represents hypocenter or initiation point of
the second earthquake

2.3 The 1990 Gonghe, Qinghai, earthquake

The MS =6.9 earthquake occurred in Gonghe County, Qinghai Province, China, on April 26,
1990. This earthquake is a complex seismic event (Person, 1991). Its seismic parameters are listed
in Table 1. According to the long period seismic wave data and the leveling data acquired before
and after the Gonghe earthquake, CHEN, et al (1994, 1996) retrieved the rupture process of this
earthquake. They obtained that the earthquake includes at least two subevents. As a whole, the
earthquake can be represented as a NWW striking faulting. Slip is heterogeneous on the fault
plane. On the NWW-SEE fault plane, there are two areas with greater slip: one is to the NWW end,
with nucleus (slip greater than 60 cm) in the depth range of 4.3~12.3 km. The other is to the SWW
end, with nucleus in the depth range of 5.1~15.4 km. Time interval between the two events is 20 s.
CHEN, et al (1996) also got the seismic moment tensor solution using broadband (BB) body wave
data recorded by the China Digital Seismograph Network (CDSN). They obtained that the earth-
quake consists of three subevents. The first event is the slip on the left lateral reverse fault with
strike direction 96°, the second is the slip on the right lateral reverse fault with strike direction
106°, and the third is the slip on the left lateral reverse fault with strike direction 100°. The snap
shots of the rupture process suggest that the first and the third events are distinct, and locate at the
NWW end and SEE end of the fault, respectively. At the beginning of the earthquake, rupture in i-
tiated at the NWW end of the fault plane, and then expanded toward the SEE and triggered rupture
at the SEE end of the fault plane. LI and CHEN (1996) and CHEN, et al (1994) also treated the
first and the second events as a single event in their inversion using long period (LP) body wave
data, because it is hard to distinguish the two events in space and time.
According to the inversion of CHEN, et al (1996) and the scaling law provided by Utsu
(1987), it can be estimated that the length of the first rupture event is 25 km, the width 13 km, and
No.6 WAN Yong-ge, et al: ″STRESS TRIGGERING″ BETWEEN DIFFERENT RUPTURES 611

the slip 79 cm; the length of the third

rupture event is 20 km, and the width
is 10 km. According to the spatio-
temporal snap shots of rupture process
retrieved by CHEN, et al (1996), the
first event is located at the NWW end
of the fault plane with the depth 8 km;
and the third event is ol cated at the
SEE end with the depth 11 km. Ac-
cording to the overall fault plane with
strike 102°, the two events are 25 km
apart from each other. The ∆CFS pro-
jected onto the fault plane of the third
event at the depth of 11 km is given in
Figure 3a and b. The two figures ex-
hibit that the third event locates in the
region with positive Coulomb stress
change of 0.03~0.06 MPa. It seems
that the first event has some ″trigger-
ing″ effect on the third one.
2.4 The 1996 Lijiang, Yunnan,
earthquake
On February 3, 1996, a MS =6.5
earthquake struck Lijiang, Yunnan
Province. Its seismic parameters are
Figure 3(a) ∆CFS at the depth of 11 km produced by the
listed in Table 1. According to the first event on the third event of the Gonghe,
source rupture process inverted from Qinghai, earthquake. Dashed line represents
body wave data by XU, et al (1998), negative value of the stress change. The unit of
contour line is MPa. Circle represents hypo-
this earthquake consists of two events.
center or initiation point of the third event
The second event is located 2 km east (b) ∆CFS on the rupture plane of the third event
and 15 km south of the first event. produced by the first event. The strike of the
The fault plane parameters of the two rupture plane is in NWW-SEE. The unit of
contour line is MPa. Circle represents hypo-
events are listed in Table 1. Based on
center or initiation point of the third event
the empirical relation provided by
Utsu (1987), we roughly estimate that the length of the fault plane of the first event is 18 km, the
width is 9 km and the slip is 56 cm; the length of the fault plane of the second event is 20 km and
the width is 10 km. Both events have the initiation point at the depth of 12 km. According to the
distribution of aftershocks and the simultaneous inversion of the source mechanism of the two
events, MA, et al (1998) speculated that the whole rupture process initiated from the north and
proceeded to the south. XU, et al (1997) inverted the spatio-temporal complexity of this earth-
quake, and got the same conclusion as XU, et al (1998).
Based on the parameters mentioned above, the calculated ∆CFS of the first event on the fault
plane of the second event is given in Figure 4a. This figure exhibits that the Coulomb failure stress
change produced by the first event at the depth of 12 km obviously shows a spatial pattern with 4
612 ACTA SEISMOLOGICA SINICA Vol.13

petals. The epicenter of the second event locates in the range of 0.03~0.05 MPa of the ∆CFS pro-
duced by the first event (MS =6.1). Based on this result, we claim that the ∆CFS is ″in favor of ″ the
occurrence of the second event. Figure 4b represents the ∆CFS on the rupture plane of the second
event produced by the first one.

Figure 4(a) ∆CFS produced by the first event (MS=6.1) on the second event (MS=6.2) of Lijiang,
Yunnan, earthquake. Dashed line represents negative stress change. The unit of con-
tour line is MPa. The pane in figure represents the projection of seismic fault at
depth of 12 km. Circle represents hypocenter or initiation point of the second event
(b) ∆CFS on the rupture plane of the second event produced by the first event. The
strike of the rupture plane is in SSE. The unit of contour line is MPa. Circle repre-
sents hypocenter or initiation point of the second event

3 Discussion and conclusions

In the discussion of stress triggering, based on the relation between the occurred earthquake
and ″ triggered″ earthquake, the researches at present can be divided roughly into 3 categories: j
aftershocks triggered by mainshock (Troise, et al, 1998; LIU, FU, 1999); k the strong earth-
quakes triggered by other strong earthquakes and deformation loading (DENG, Sykes, 1997a, b;
Hodgkinson, et al, 1996; Stein, et al, 1997); l earthquakes triggered by volcano or explosion
(Thatcher, Savage, 1982; Nostro, et al, 1998; Nikolaev, 1995). But the study on whether there is
triggering effect or not between different rupture events in the same earthquake remains to be con-
ducted.
There are two reasons for our interest in this problem. On one hand, most of Chinese earth-
quakes have complex rupture process. On the other hand, the predominant time scale is short (in
order of seconds or days), which makes it possible to adopt relatively simple earth model (e.g.
perfect elastic earth model) and makes the problem relatively simple. To some extent, the situation
considered in this study is a special test against the earthquake stress triggering model.
In recent years, with the development of broadband digital seismology, we can get relatively
exact seismic source parameters and the detailed rupture process to some extent. This develop-
ment provides an unprecedented opportunity for the quantitative investigation of the interaction
between earthquakes or between different rupture events in the same earthquake. In ″classical″
seismology, it is ever hard to tell which nodal plane is the fault plane in the focal mechanism solu-
tion. Without digital seismology, it is almost impossible to distinguish different events with time
interval of some seconds as those in the Gonghe earthquake. To some extent, the reconsideration
of the ″stress triggering″, a ″classical″ problem in seismology, is based on the recent development
of ″modern″ seismology.
No.6 WAN Yong-ge, et al: ″STRESS TRIGGERING″ BETWEEN DIFFERENT RUPTURES 613

For the1966 Xingtai, the 1976 Tangshan, the 1990 Gonghe and the 1996 Lijiang earthquake,
which can be approximated as two or more rupture events, we have calculated ∆CFS for the sub-
sequent events produced by the first strong event. The result indicates that, in the cases we con-
sidered, all ″hypocenters″ or rupture initiation points of the subsequent event are located in the
region where the ∆CFS is positive, and the value is greater than 10−2 MPa, the so-called triggering
threshold (Harris, 1998). Noting that the stress change produced by Earth tide is of the order of
10−3 MPa (Bodri, Iizuka, 1989), the ∆CFS induced by an earthquake is about 101 ~102 times of that
of the Earth tide. In this point of view, we can say that the ∆CFS produced by the first rupture
event is ″in favor of ″ the occurrence of the subsequent events.
Figure 5 gives the amplitude of the ∆CFS and time delay between the ″triggering″ event and
the ″triggered″ one provided by several other studies as well as this paper. All the ∆CFS given by
different researchers are of the order
of 10−2 ~10−1 MPa, which is consis-
tent with the statistic test result pro-
vided by Anderson and Johnson
(1999). In addition, it seems that
there is no relation between the time
delay and the ∆CFS, i.e. the Cou-
lomb failure stress change may alter
earthquake occurrence probability,
but can hardly give the exact occur-
rence time with the view of predic-
tion. Besides, Figure 3b and Figure
4b also show that the ″initiation
point″ of subsequent rupture event
does not locate in the region of
Figure 5 ∆CFS versus time delay of the subsequent event
maximum ∆CFS. The data represented by + is from Nalbant, et al (1998), £
It is worth pointing out that from Perfettini, et al (1999), ρ from Troise, et al (1998), •
from Stein, et al (1997), from Caskey and Wesnousky
complexities of the seismic rupture (1997), and × from this study
process consisting of two or more
rupture events is almost a general characteristics of the intermediate-strong earthquakes occurred
in the continental region of China. There are also other models, maybe better ones, for this phe-
nomenon. For example, models of 3-dimensional rupture dynamics, which have been developing
since recent years, have shown prospective potential and advantage in this kind of research. Our
study is only one of the alternative considerations on this problem.
Dr. XU Li-sheng provided detailed source imaging data for this research. Dr. LIU Rui-feng
offered part of the earthquake mechanism data. Dr. Okada Y. and Prof. Sykes L. R. provided part
of source code for calculation. Reviews by anonymous referees helped much in improving the
manuscript.

References
Anderson G, Johnson H. 1999. A new statistical test for static stress triggering: Application to the 1987 Superstition Hills earthquake
sequence [J]. J Geophys Res, 104(B9): 20 153~20 168.
Bak P, Tang C. 1989. Earthquakes as a self-organized critical phenomenon [J]. J Geophys Res, 94(B11): 15 635~15 637.
614 ACTA SEISMOLOGICA SINICA Vol.13

Bodri B, Iizuka. 1989. On the correlation between Earth tidal and microseismic activity [J]. Phys Earth Planet Inter, 55(1-2): 126~134.
Caskey S J, Wesnousky S G. 1997. Static stress changes and earthquake triggering during the 1954 Fairview Peak and Dixie Valley
earthquakes, Central Nevada [J]. Bull Seism Soc Amer, 87(3): 521~527.
CHEN Yun-tai, LIN Bang-hui, LIN Zhong-yang, et al. 1975. The focal mechanism of the 1966 Xingtai earthquake as inferred from the
ground deformation observations [J]. Acta Geophysica Sinica, 18(3): 164~182 (in Chinese with English abstract).
CHEN Y T, XU L S, LI X, et al. 1996. Source process of the 1990 Gonghe, China, earthquake and tectonic stress field in the northeastern
Qinghai-Xizang (Tibetan) Plateau [J]. Pure Appl Geephys, 146(1): 697~715.
CHEN Yun-tai, ZHAO Ming, LI Xu, et al. 1994. Complexity in the source process of the Gonghe, Qinghai, China earthquake [A]. In:
CHEN Yun-tai, KAN Rong-ju, TENG Ji-wen, et al eds. Advances in Solid Earth Geophysics in China —In honor of Professor ZENG
Rong-sheng′s 70th Birthday [C]. Beijing: Oceanic Press, 287~304 (in Chinese with English abstract).
Chinnery M A. 1963. The stress changes that accompany strike-slip faulting [J]. Bull Seism Soc Amer, 53(1): 921~932.
Cotton F, Coutant O. 1997. Dynamic stress variations due to shear faulting in a plane-layered medium [J]. Geophys J Intl, 128(3):
676~688.
Crider J G, Pollard D D. 1998. Fault linkage: Three-dimensional mechanical interaction between echelon normal faults [J]. J Geophys Res,
103(B10): 24 373~24 391.
Das S, Scholz C. 1981. Off-fault aftershock clusters caused by shear stress increase [J]? Bull Seism Soc Amer, 71(5): 1 669~1 675.
DENG J, Sykes L R. 1997a. Evolution of the stress field in southern California and triggering of moderate-size earthquakes: A 200-year
perspective [J]. J Geophys Res, 102(B5): 9 859~9 886.
DENG J, Sykes L R. 1997b. Stress evolution in southern California and triggering of moderate-, small-, and micro-size earthquakes [J]. J
Geophys Res, 102(B11): 24 411~24 435.
Gomberg J, Blanpied M L, Beeler N M. 1997. Transient triggering of near and distant earthquakes [J]. Bull Seism Soc Amer, 87(2):
294~309.
Grasso J R, Sornette D. 1998. Testing self-organized criticality by induced seismicity [J]. J Geophys Res, 103(B12): 29 965~29 987.
Hardebeck J L, Nazareth J J, Hauksson E. 1998. The static stress change triggering model: Constraints from two southern California
aftershock sequences [J]. J Geophys Res, 103(B10): 24 427~24 437.
Harris R A. 1998. Introduction to special section: Stress triggers, stress shadows, and implications for seismic hazard [J]. J Geophys Res,
103(B10): 24 347~24 358.
Hodgkinson K M, Stein R S, King G C P. 1996. The 1954 Rainbow Mountain – Fairview Peak – Dixie Valley earthquakes: A triggered
normal faulting sequence [J]. J Geophys Res, 101(B11): 25 459~25 471.
HUANG Fu-ming, WANG Ting-yun. 1980. The stress field of a dislocating inclined fault [J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 2(1): 1~20 (in
Chinese with English abstract).
Hubert-Ferrari A, Barka A, Jacques E, et al. 2000. Seismic hazard in the Marmara Sea region following the 17 August 1999 Izmit earth-
quake [J]. Nature, 404: 269~272.
Ito K, Matsuzaki M. 1990. Earthquakes as a self-organized critical phenomenon [J]. J Geophys Res, 95(B5): 6 853~6 860.
King G C P, Stein R S, LIN J. 1994. Static stress changes and the triggering of earthquakes [J]. Bull Seism Soc Amer, 84(3): 935~953.
LI Xu, CHEN Yun-tai. 1996. Inversion of long period body wave data for the source process of the Gonghe, Qinghai, China earthquake
[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 9(3): 361~369.
LIU Gui-ping, FU Zheng-xiang. 1999. Regional seismicity triggered by the Hyogo-Ken Nanbu, Japan, M=7.2 earthquake on January 17,
1995 [J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 12(3): 277~284.
LUO Zuo-li. 1980. Stress deformation and tilt fields of the earthquake sources [J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 2(2): 169~185 (in Chinese
with English abstract).
MA Shu-tian, YAO Zhen-xing, JI Chen. 1998. Preliminary estimation for the focal mechanisms of 1996 Lijiang main shock in Yunnan
Province and studies of related problems [J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 11(1): 21~33.
Main I. 1996. Statistical physics, seismogenesis, and seismic hazard [J]. Rev Geophys, 34(4): 433~462.
Nalbant S S, Hubert A, King G C P. 1998. Stress coupling between earthquakes in the northwest Turkey and the north Aegean Sea [J]. J
Geophys Res, 103(B10): 24 469~24 486.
Nikolaev A. 1995. Inducing of earthquakes by underground nuclear explosions [A]. In: Console R, Nikolaev A eds. Inducing of Earth-
quakes by Underground Nuclear Explosions: Environmental and Ecological Problems [C]. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag, 11~19.
Nostro C, Stein R S, Cocco M, et al. 1998. Two-way coupling between Vesuvius eruptions and southern Apennine earthquakes, Italy, by
elastic stress transfer [J]. J Geophys Res, 103(B10): 24 487~24 504.
Okada Y. 1992. Internal deformation due to shear and tensile faults in a half-space [J]. Bull Seism Soc Amer, 82(2): 1 018~1 040.
Parsons T, Toda S, Stein R S, et al. 2000. Heightened odds of large earthquakes near Istanbul: An interaction-based probability calculation
[J]. Science, 288: 661~665.
Perfettini H, Stein S S, Simpson R, et al. 1999. Stress transfer by the 1988~1989 M=5.3 and 5.4 Lake Elsman foreshocks to the Loma
Prieta fault: Unclamping at the site of peak mainshock slip [J]. J Geophys Res, 104(B9): 20 169~20 182.
Person W J. 1991. Seismological notes. March-April 1990 [J]. Bull Seism Soc Amer, 81(1): 297~302.
QIN Jia-zheng. 1989. The research on quantified relations of seismic magnitude and seismic source parameters in Yunnan region, China,
using earthquake intensity data [A]. In MIN Zi-qun ed. The Selected Papers on Research of Seismic Risk in the Region of Yunnan and
Guizhou, China [C]. Kunming: Yunnan Science and Technology Press, 261~272 (in Chinese).
Reasenberg P A, Simpson R W. 1992. Response of regional seismicity to the static stress change produced by the Loma Prieta earthquake
[J]. Science, 255: 1 687~1 690.
Rice J R. 1992. Fault stress states, pore pressure distribution, and the weakness of the San Andreas fault [A]. In: Evans B, Wong T F eds.
Fault Mechanics and Transport Properties of Rock [C]. London: Academic Press, 475~503.
 No.6 WAN Yong-ge, et al: ″STRESS TRIGGERING″ BETWEEN DIFFERENT RUPTURES 615

Rybichi K. 1973. Analysis of aftershocks on the basis of dislocation theory [J]. Phys Earth Planet Inter, 7(4): 409~422.
Seismological Bureau of Hebei Province. 1986. The 1966 Xingtai earthquake [M]. Beijing: Seismological Press, 58~68 (in Chinese).
Simpson R W, Schulz S S, Dietz L D, et al. 1988. The response of creeping parts of the San Anderas fault to earthquakes on nearly faults:
Two examples [J]. Pure Appl Geophys, 126(2-4): 665~685.
Smith S W, Van de Lindt W. 1969. Strain adjustments associated with earthquakes in southern California [J]. Bull Seism Soc Amer, 59(4):
1 569~1 589.
Stein R S. 1999. The role of stress transfer in earthquake occurrence [J]. Nature, 402: 605~609.
Stein R S, Barka A A, Dieterich J H. 1997. Progressive failure on the North Anatolian fault since 1939 by earthquake stress triggering [J].
Geophys J Intl, 128(3): 594~604.
Stein R S, King G C P, Lin J. 1992. Change in failure stress on the southern San Andreas fault system caused by the 1992 M = 7.4 Landers
earthquake [J]. Science, 258: 1 328~1 332.
Thatcher W, Savage J C. 1982. Triggering of large earthquakes by magma-chamber inflation, Izu Peninsula, Japan [J]. Geology, 10(12):
637~640.
Troise C, De Natale G, Pingue F, et al. 1998. Evidence for static stress interaction among earthquakes in south-central Appennines (Italy)
[J]. Geophys J Intl, 134(3): 809~817.
Utsu T ed. 1987. LI Yu-che, LU Zhen-ye, DING Jian-hai, et al trans. 1990. Encyclopedia of Earthquake [M]. Beijing: Seismological
Press, 317~318 (in Chinese).
WU Zhong-liang. 2000. Critical Phenomena in Seismic Source Physics [M]. Beijing: Seismological Press, 86~109 (in Chinese).
XU Li-sheng, CHEN Yun-tai, Fasthoff S. 1997. Temporal and spatial complexity in the rupture process of the February 3, 1996, Lijiang,
Yunnan, China, earthquake [A]. In: CHEN Yun-tai ed: Advances in Seismology in China —In Honor of Professor XIE Yu-shou′s 80th
Birthday [C]. Beijing: Seismological Press, 91~105 (in Chinese with English abstract).
XU Yang, Kikuchi M, SU You-jin. 1998. Body wave inversion for the source process of the February 3, 1996 Lijiang, Yunnan earthquake
[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 11(2): 135~140.
Yamashina K. 1978. Induced earthquakes in the Izu Peninsula by Izu-Hanto-Oki earthquake of 1974, Japan [J]. Tectonophysics, 51(3/4):
139~154.
ZENG Ju, LUO Lan-ge, HOU Jian-ming. 1988. The Xingtai, Hebei Province, earthquakes of M=6.8 of March 8 and M=7.2 of March 22,
1966 [A]. In ZHANG Zhao-cheng ed. Earthquake Cases in China (1966~1975) [C]. Beijing: Seismological Press, 1~19 (in Chinese).
ZHANG Zhao-cheng, LUO Yong-sheng, ZHENG Da-lin. 1990. July 28, 1976, Tangshan M=7.8 earthquake in Hebei province [A]. In
ZHANG Zhao-cheng ed. Earthquake Cases in China (1976~1980) [C]. Beijing: Seismological Press, 59~104 (in Chinese).
ZHANG Zhi-li, LI Qin-zu, GU Ji-cheng, et al. 1980. The fracture processes of the Tangshan earthquake and its mechanical analysis [J].
Acta Seismologica Sinica, 2(2): 111~129 (in Chinese with English abstract).

View publication stats