Paper detail

Rank-Ordering Statistics of Extreme Events: Application to the Distribution of Large Earthquakes

Rank-ordering statistics provides a perspective on the rare, largest elements of a population, whereas the statistics of cumulative distributions are dominated by the more numerous small events. The exponent of a power law distribution can be determined with good accuracy by rank-ordering statistics from the observation of only a few tens of the largest events. Using analytical results and synthetic tests, we quantify the systematic and the random errors. We also study the case of a distribution defined by two branches, each having a power law distribution, one defined for the largest events and the other for smaller events, with application to the World-Wide (Harvard) and Southern California earthquake catalogs. In the case of the Harvard moment catalog, we make more precise earlier claims of the existence of a transition of the earthquake magnitude distribution between small and large earthquakes; the $b$-values are $b_2 = 2.3 \pm 0.3$ for large shallow earthquakes and $b_1 = 1.00 \pm 0.02$ for smaller shallow earthquakes. However, the cross-over magnitude between the two distributions is ill-defined. The data available at present do not provide a strong constraint on the cross-over which has a $50\%$ probability of being between magnitudes $7.1$ and $7.6$ for shallow earthquakes; this interval may be too conservatively estimated. Thus, any influence of a universal geometry of rupture on the distribution of earthquakes world-wide is ill-defined at best. We caution that there is no direct evidence to confirm the hypothesis that the large-moment branch is indeed a power law. In fact, a gamma distribution fits the entire suite of earthquake moments from the smallest to the largest satisfactorily. There is no evidence that the earthquakes of the Southern California catalog have a distribution with two

preprint1995arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.