2025年西藏定日MW7.1地震破裂过程反演

doi:10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2025.03.20250037

地震地质 ›› 2025, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (3): 777-788.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2025.03.20250037

2025年西藏定日M_W7.1地震破裂过程反演

刘胜¹^,²^,³⁾(), 谈洪波¹^,²^,³⁾^,^*(), 杨光亮¹^,²^,³⁾, 孟恒舟¹^,²^,³⁾, 秦海涛¹^,²^,³⁾, 王嘉沛¹^,²^,³⁾, 黄敏夫¹^,²^,³⁾

1)中国地震局地震研究所, 武汉 430071
2)湖北省地震局, 武汉 430071
3)中国地震局地震大地测量重点实验室, 武汉 430071

收稿日期:2025-01-26 修回日期:2025-03-11 出版日期:2025-06-20 发布日期:2025-08-13
通讯作者: *谈洪波, 男, 1983年生, 副研究员, 主要从事重力与断层构造活动反演研究, E-mail: thbhong@163.com。
作者简介:
刘胜, 男, 1999年生, 现为中国地震局地震研究所固体地球物理学专业在读研究生, 主要从事地震数据处理以及相关反演研究, E-mail: liusheng233@mails.ucas.ac.cn。
基金资助:
中国地震局地震科技星火计划项目(XH23014YC); 国家自然科学基金(41774015); 国家自然科学基金(42174104); 国家自然科学基金(U1939204); 科技部科技基础资源调查专项(2023FY10150502); 湖北省自然科学基金(2022CFB350)

INVERSION OF THE RUPTURE PROCESS OF THE XIZANG DINGRI M_W7.1 EARTHQUAKE IN 2025

LIU Sheng¹^,²^,³⁾(), TAN Hong-bo¹^,²^,³⁾^,^*(), YANG Guang-liang¹^,²^,³⁾, MENG Heng-zhou¹^,²^,³⁾, QIN Hai-tao¹^,²^,³⁾, WANG Jia-pei¹^,²^,³⁾, HUANG Min-fu¹^,²^,³⁾

1)Institute of Seismology, China Earthquake Administration, Wuhan 430071, China
2)Hubei Earthquake Agency, Wuhan 430071, China
3)Key Laboratory of Earthquake Geodesy, China Earthquake Administration, Wuhan 430071, China

Received:2025-01-26 Revised:2025-03-11 Online:2025-06-20 Published:2025-08-13

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 2025年1月7日西藏定日发生 M_W7.1 地震, 该地震造成重大人员伤亡, 对该地震进行破裂过程反演可为地震灾害分析、地震应急救援、震后地震趋势分析等提供参考。文中基于USGS发布的震源机制参数(走向、倾向、滑动角分别为187°、 49°、 -78°)及IRIS提供的远场地震波数据, 利用迭代反褶积和叠加(IDS)方法反演得到定日地震的破裂过程。结果显示, 震源破裂呈现非对称双侧破裂特征, 与余震精定位一致性较好, 其破裂区域位于地表附近, 最大滑动量约2.3m, 破裂主要影响深度范围为0~9km; 释放总地震矩为5.5×10¹⁹N·m, 震级为 M_W7.1, 地震持续29s, 地震矩释放率于16s时达到顶峰, 28s后大部分区域停止破裂。研究表明, 本次地震为发生在申扎-定结断裂带上的正断型地震, 滑动分布浅层集中趋势反映了地表结构较深层更为脆弱, 表明该区域浅部断层活动可能主导强震能量释放, 这可能是此次地震破坏性较强、震害严重的原因之一。

关键词: 定日地震, 波形反演, 破裂过程, 滑动分布

Abstract:

According to the United States Geological Survey(USGS), a moment magnitude(M_W)7.1 earthquake struck Dingri County, Xigaze City, Xizang(28.65°N, 87.36°E)at 01:05:16 UTC on January 7, 2025(09:05:16 Beijing Time). The earthquake occurred at a focal depth of 10km and resulted in significant casualties: As of the afternoon of the same day, 126 deaths were confirmed, and approximately 61, 500 individuals were affected.

The Dingri earthquake occurred in the southern Qinghai-Xizang Plateau, a region characterized by intense tectonic activity due to the ongoing subduction of the Indian Plate beneath the Eurasian Plate. This area exhibits the typical seismic pattern of “frequent large earthquakes and persistent smaller events.” The epicenter is situated near the intersection of the Shenzha-Dingjie fault zone, south of the Yarlung Zangbo fault zone, and the South Xizang Detachment fault zone. The Dangra Yongco-Xuru Fault lies to the west, and the Shenzha-Dingjie Fault to the east, the latter exhibiting a north-south extensional structure that divides the South Xizang Detachment Fault into eastern and western segments. GPS observations indicate extension rates of 4~5mm/a for both the Dangra Yongco-Xuru and Yadong-Gulu fault zones, while the Shenzha-Dingjie fault exhibits a slower rate of 1~2mm/a. According to historical USGS records, over 700 earthquakes with magnitudes above M3 have occurred in this region since the 20th century, including 604 events in the M3-M5 range, 101 in the M5-M7 range, and two above M7. Most of these events are concentrated along the Himalayan Orogenic Belt and near the Shenzha-Dingjie fault zone. The occurrence of the Dingri earthquake underscores the region’s seismic complexity and highlights the importance of studying rupture dynamics for understanding earthquake mechanisms and assessing seismic hazards. There is a close correlation between the source rupture process and the earthquake expansion law. In-depth study of the source rupture process is helpful for a comprehensive understanding and analysis of the inducing factors of earthquake rupture, the complexity of the source environment, and its potential impact. Therefore, the inversion of the rupture process of this earthquake can provide a reference for earthquake disaster analysis, earthquake emergency rescue, and post-earthquake seismic trend analysis.

This study utilizes the rupture process inversion of the Dingri earthquake based on the source mechanism parameters(strike/dip/rake=187°/49°/-78°)provided by USGS and far-field waveform data from 51 stations within 30°~90° epicentral distances, sourced from the IRIS database. The analysis employs the AK135f global 1-D velocity model and the Iterative Deconvolution and Stacking(IDS)method proposed by Zhang (2014). The IDS method integrates advantages of both network-based and back-projection approaches and enables automated rupture process inversion without preset rupture time constraints. It has been successfully applied to events such as the 2015 Nepal and 2017 Jiuzhaigou earthquakes. The inversion results indicate an asymmetric bilateral rupture pattern with shallow rupture propagation. The maximum slip reached approximately 2.3 meters, with the rupture occurring primarily within a 0~9km depth range. The total seismic moment was 5.5×10¹⁹ N·m, corresponding to an M_W of 7.1. The rupture lasted 29 seconds, peaking in moment release at 16 seconds, with most rupture ceasing by 28 seconds.

The above results of this study align well with those of other studies, showing a maximum variation in magnitude of 0.1(range: M_W7.0-7.2)and a slip difference of less than 1 meter(range: 1.5~3.2m). Despite this agreement, however, debate remains regarding whether the rupture was unilateral or bilateral. Contributing factors include variations in input source parameters, rupture initiation locations, station distribution, and inversion uncertainties. However, the distribution of aftershocks on both sides of the rupture supports the bilateral rupture interpretation. Based on these findings, this earthquake is interpreted as a normal-faulting event with an asymmetric bilateral rupture along the Shenzha-Dingjie fault zone. The concentration of slip near the surface suggests that upper crustal structures are more fragile and play a key role in seismic energy release, potentially explaining the severity of the disaster. These results emphasize the need for closer monitoring of near-surface fault slip potential in this region.

Key words: The 2025 Dingri earthquake, waveform inversion, rupture process, slip distribution

刘胜, 谈洪波, 杨光亮, 孟恒舟, 秦海涛, 王嘉沛, 黄敏夫. 2025年西藏定日M_W7.1地震破裂过程反演[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 777-788.

LIU Sheng, TAN Hong-bo, YANG Guang-liang, MENG Heng-zhou, QIN Hai-tao, WANG Jia-pei, HUANG Min-fu. INVERSION OF THE RUPTURE PROCESS OF THE XIZANG DINGRI M_W7.1 EARTHQUAKE IN 2025[J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2025, 47(3): 777-788.

图/表 7

图1 2025年定日地震构造背景历史地震目录数据来自USGS

Fig. 1 The tectonic setting of the 2025 Dingri earthquake.

图2 地震台站分布红色五角星为定日地震震源位置, 蓝色三角形为各远震台站

Fig. 2 The distribution of the seismic stations.

表1 USGS 2025年定日 MW7.1 震源机制解

Table 1 Focal mechanism solutions of the 2025 Dingri MW7.1 earthquake released by USGS

东经	北纬	深度/km	节面	走向/(°)	倾向/(°)	滑动角/(°)	震级/M_W
87.36°	28.65°	10	Ⅰ	349	42	-103	7.1
			Ⅱ	187	49	-78

图3 2025年定日地震反演结果 a 震源时间函数; b 断层面滑动分布

Fig. 3 The inversion results of the 2025 Dingri earthquake.

图4 反演断层面时空破裂过程结果 a 破裂累计滑动量; b 破裂区间滑动量

Fig. 4 Inversion results for the spatiotemporal rupture process on the fault.

图5 定日地震远震数据合成波形(黑)与观测波形(红)对比

Fig. 5 Comparison of synthetic waves(black) and observed waves(red).

图6 余震分布

Fig. 6 Aftershock distribution.

参考文献 32

[1]	白勇, 张省举, 董义国, 等. 2012. 青藏高原定日-木孜塔格峰地区重力场特征与断裂构造[J]. 地质论评, 58(2): 237-249.
	BAI Yong, ZHANG Sheng-ju, DONG Yi-guo, et al. 2012. Characteristics of the gravity field and faults in Tingri-Muztagata[J]. Geological Review, 58(2): 237-249 (in Chinese).
[2]	陈鲲, 杨婷, 王永哲, 等. 2025. 2025年1月7日西藏定日6.8级地震的快速产出参数[J]. 地震科学进展, 55(3): 164-171.
	CHEN Kun, YANG Ting, WANG Yong-zhe, et al. 2025. Quick output parameters related to the 7 January 2025 M6.8 earthquake in Dingri County, Xizang[J]. Progress in Earthquake Sciences, 55(3): 164-171 (in Chinese).
[3]	何玉梅, 郑天愉, 单新建. 2001. 1996年3月19日新疆阿图什6.9级地震: 单侧破裂过程[J]. 地球物理学报, 44(4): 510-519.
	HE Yu-mei, ZHENG Tian-yu, SHAN Xin-jian. 2001. The 1996 Artux, Xinjiang, Earthquake: A Unilateral Rupture Event[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 44(4): 510-519 (in Chinese).
[4]	李琦, 李承涛, 赵斌, 等. 2024. 2020年西藏定日 M_W5.6 地震震源参数估计和应力触发研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 67(1): 172-188.
	LI Qi, LI Cheng-tao, ZHAO Bin, et al. 2024. Estimated seismic source parameters for 2020 Dingri M_W5.6 earthquake in Xizang and study on the stress triggering[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 67(1): 172-188 (in Chinese).
[5]	李雨森, 李为乐, 许强, 等. 2025. 2025年1月7日西藏定日 M_S6.8 地震InSAR同震形变探测与断层滑动分布反演[J]. 成都理工大学学报(自然科学版), 52(2): 199-211.
	LI Yu-sen, LI Wei-le, XU Qiang, et al. 2025. InSAR co-seismic deformation detection and fault slip distribution inversion of the M_S6.8 earthquake in Dingri, Tibet on January 7, 2025[J]. Journal of Chengdu University of Technology(Science & Technology Edition), 52(2): 199-211 (in Chinese).
[6]	梁明剑, 董芸希, 左洪, 等. 2025. 2025年西藏定日6.8级地震登么错段地表变形特征及其成因[J]. 地震地质, 47(1): 80-89. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2025.01.006.
	LIANG Ming-jian, DONG Yun-xi, ZUO Hong, et al. 2025. Surface deformation characteristics and causes of the Dengmecuo segment in the Xizang Dingri M_S6.8 earthquake[J]. Seismology and Geology, 47(1): 80-89 (in Chinese). DOI
[7]	毛燕, 刘娜, 段洪杰, 等. 2008. 震源破裂过程反演研究综述[J]. 地震研究, 31(S2): 642-645.
	MAO Yan, LIU Na, DUAN Hong-jie, et al. 2008. Summary of inversion study of source rupture process[J]. Journal of Seismological Research, 31(S2): 642-645 (in Chinese).
[8]	石峰, 梁明剑, 罗全星, 等. 2025. 2025年1月7日西藏定日6.8地震发震构造与同震地表破裂特征[J]. 地震地质, 47(1): 1-15. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2025.01.001.
	SHI Feng, LIANG Ming-jian, LUO Quan-xing, et al. 2025. Seismogenic fault and coseismic surface deformation of the Dingri M_S6.8 earthquake in Tibet, China[J]. Seismology and Geology, 47(1): 1-15 (in Chinese). DOI
[9]	田婷婷, 吴中海. 2023. 西藏申扎-定结裂谷南段丁木错正断层的最新史前大地震事件及其地震地质意义[J]. 地质论评, 69(S1): 53-55.
	TIAN Ting-ting, WU Zhong-hai. 2023. Recent prehistoric major earthquake event of Dingmucuo Normal fault in the southern segment of Shenzha-Dingjie Rift and its seismic geological significance[J]. Geological Review, 69(S1): 53-55 (in Chinese).
[10]	王楠, 李永生, 申文豪, 等. 2025. 2025年1月7日西藏定日 M_S6.8 地震震源机制InSAR反演及强地面运动快速模拟[J]. 武汉大学学报(信息科学版), 50(2): 404-411.
	WANG Nan, LI Yong-sheng, SHEN Wen-hao, et al. 2025. Source parameters and rapid simulation of strong ground motion of the M_S6.8 earthquake on January 7, 2025 in Dingri(Xizang, China)derived from InSAR Observation[J]. Geomatics and Information Science of Wuhan University, 50(2): 404-411 (in Chinese).
[11]	王永哲, 陈石, 陈鲲. 2021. InSAR数据约束的2020年西藏定日 M_W5.7 地震源模型及构造意义[J]. 地震, 41(1): 116-128.
	WANG Yong-zhe, CHEN Shi, CHEN Kun. 2021. Source model and tectonic implications of the 2020 Dingri M_W5.7 earthquake constrained by InSAR data[J]. Earthquake, 41(1): 116-128 (in Chinese).
[12]	温少妍, 单新建, 张国宏, 等. 2018. 基于InSAR和远场地震波联合反演2008年 M_W6.3 大柴旦地震震源破裂过程[J]. 地球物理学报, 61(6): 2301-2309. DOI
	WEN Shao-yan, SHAN Xin-jian, ZHANG Guo-hong, et al. 2018. Rupture history of the 2008 M_W6.3 Da Qaidam earthquake by joint inversion of teleseismic data and InSAR measurements[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 61(6): 2301-2309 (in Chinese).
[13]	许才军, 王乐洋. 2010. 大地测量和地震数据联合反演地震震源破裂过程研究进展[J]. 武汉大学学报(信息科学版), 35(4): 457-462.
	XU Cai-jun, WANG Le-yang. 2010. Progress of joint inversion of geodetic and seismological data for seismic source rupture process[J]. Geomatics and Information Science of Wuhan University, 35(4): 457-462 (in Chinese).
[14]	许力生, 陈运泰. 2002. 震源时间函数与震源破裂过程[J]. 地震地磁观测与研究, 23(6): 1-8.
	XU Li-sheng, CHEN Yun-tai. 2002. Source time function and rupture process of earthquake[J]. Seismological and Geomagnetic Observation and Research, 23(6): 1-8 (in Chinese).
[15]	杨婷, 王世广, 房立华, 等. 2025. 2025年1月7日西藏定日 M_S6.8 地震余震序列特征与发震构造[J]. 地球科学(待刊).
	YANG Ting, WANG Shi-guang, FANG Li-hua, et al. 2025. Analysis of earthquake sequence and seismogenic structure of the 2025 M_S6.8 Dingri Earthquake in Tibetan plateau[J]. Earth Science(in press) (in Chinese).
[16]	张进江, 郭磊, 丁林. 2002. 申扎-定结正断层体系中、南段构造特征及其与藏南拆离系的关系[J]. 科学通报, (10): 738-743.
	ZHANG Jin-jiang, GUO Lei, DING Lin. 2002. The structural characteristics of the southern section in the Shenzha-Dingjie normal fault system and its relationship with the South Tibet Detachment System[J]. Chinese Science Bulletin, (10): 738-743 (in Chinese).
[17]	张进江. 2007. 北喜马拉雅及藏南伸展构造综述[J]. 地质通报, 26(6): 639-649.
	ZHANG Jin-jiang. 2007. A review on the extensional structures in the northern Himalaya and southern Tibet[J]. Geological Bulletin of China, 26(6): 639-649 (in Chinese).
[18]	张晏浩. 2021. 利用大地测量与地震波数据研究2018年 M_W7.1 安克雷奇地震震源机制及破裂模型[D]. 武汉: 武汉大学.
	ZHANG Yan-hao. 2021. Studying on focal mechanism and source rupture model of 2018 M_W7.1 anchorage earthquake using geodetic and seismic wave data[D]. Wuhan University, Wuhan (in Chinese).
[19]	张旭, 许力生. 2015. 利用视震源时间函数反演尼泊尔 M_S8.1 地震破裂过程[J]. 地球物理学报, 58(6): 1881-1890. DOI
	ZHANG Xu, XU Li-sheng. 2015. Inversion of the apparent source time functions for the rupture process of the Nepal M_S8.1 earthquake[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 58(6): 1881-1890 (in Chinese).
[20]	张勇. 2008. 震源破裂过程反演方法研究[D]. 北京: 北京大学.
	ZHANG Yong. 2008. Study on the inversion methods of source rupture process[D]. Peking University, Beijing (in Chinese).
[21]	张勇, 许力生, 陈运泰. 2009. 提取视震源时间函数的PLD方法及其对2005年克什米尔 M_W7.6 地震的应用[J]. 地球物理学报, 52(3): 672-680.
	ZHANG Yong, XU Li-sheng, CHEN Yun-tai. 2009. PLD method for retrieving apparent source time function and its application to the 2005 Kashmir M_W7.6 earthquake[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 52(3): 672-680 (in Chinese).
[22]	张勇, 许力生, 陈运泰, 等. 2014. 2014年8月3日云南鲁甸 M_W6.1 (M_S6.5)地震破裂过程[J]. 地球物理学报, 57(9): 3052-3059. DOI
	ZHANG Yong, XU Li-sheng, CHEN Yun-tai, et al. 2014. Rupture process of the 3 August 2014 Ludian, Yunnan, M_W6.1(M_S6.5)earthquake[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 57(9): 3052-3059 (in Chinese).
[23]	张勇, 许力生, 陈运泰. 2015. 2015年尼泊尔 M_W7.9 地震破裂过程: 快速反演与初步联合反演[J]. 地球物理学报, 58(5): 1804-1811. DOI
	ZHANG Yong, XU Li-sheng, CHEN Yun-tai. 2015. Rupture process of the 2015 Nepal M_W7.9 earthquake: Fast inversion and preliminary joint inversion[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 58(5): 1804-1811 (in Chinese).
[24]	周仕勇, Kojiro I. 2005. 近震源地震波波形资料反演震源破裂过程的可靠性分析[J]. 地球物理学报, 48(1): 124-131.
	ZHOU Shi-yong, Kojiro I. 2005. Analysis on the reliability of the earthquake rupture process inferred from near source waveforms[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 48(1): 124-131 (in Chinese).
[25]	郑绪君, 张勇, 汪荣江. 2017. 采用IDS方法反演强震数据确定2017年8月8日九寨沟地震的破裂过程[J]. 地球物理学报, 60(11): 4421-4430. DOI
	ZHENG Xu-jun, ZHANG Yong, WANG Rong-jiang. 2017. Estimating the rupture process of the 8 August 2017 Jiuzhaigou earthquake by inverting strong-motion data with IDS method[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 60(11): 4421-4430 (in Chinese).
[26]	Cirella A, Piatanesi A, Cocco M, et al. 2009. Rupture history of the 2009 L'Aquila(Italy)earthquake from non-linear joint inversion of strong motion and GPS data[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 36(19): L19304.
[27]	Ishii M, Shearer P M, Houston H, et al. 2005. Extent, duration and speed of the 2004 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake imaged by the Hi-Net array[J]. Nature, 435(7044): 933-936.
[28]	Kennett B L N, Engdahl E R, Buland R. 1995. Constraints on seismic velocities in the Earth from traveltimes[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 122(1): 108-124.
[29]	Sekiguchi H, Iwata T. 2002. Rupture process of the 1999 Kocaeli, Turkey, earthquake estimated from strong-motion waveforms[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 92(1): 300-311.
[30]	Wang R, Heimann S, Zhang Y, et al. 2017. Complete synthetic seismograms based on a spherical self-gravitating Earth model with an atmosphere-ocean-mantle-core structure[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 210(3): 1739-1764.
[31]	Wang H, Wright T J, Liu-Zeng J, et al. 2019. Strain rate distribution in south-central Tibet from two decades of InSAR and GPS[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 46(10): 5170-5179. DOI
[32]	Zhang Y, Wang R, Zschau J, et al. 2014. Automatic imaging of earthquake rupture processes by iterative deconvolution and stacking of high-rate GPS and strong motion seismograms[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 119(7): 5633-5650.

2025年西藏定日M_W7.1地震破裂过程反演

INVERSION OF THE RUPTURE PROCESS OF THE XIZANG DINGRI M_W7.1 EARTHQUAKE IN 2025

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 32

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	张达, 石峰, 罗全星, 乔俊香, 王鑫, 易文星, 李涛, 李安. 西藏定日M_S6.8地震最大地表同震垂直位移量及其地表变形样式[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 707-717.
[2]	许月怡, 徐贝贝, 徐晨雨, 邵志刚, 胡朝忠. 基于远震P波、强震波形和InSAR联合反演2025年西藏定日M_S6.8地震破裂过程[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 734-746.
[3]	陈翰林, 王勤彩, 高锦瑞, 李君. 2025年西藏定日M_S6.8地震序列发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 747-760.
[4]	孟恒舟, 杨光亮, 秦海涛, 谈洪波, 刘胜, 王嘉沛, 黄敏夫, 张明辉. 2025定日M_S6.8地震震源区及其邻区偏应力与岩石圈弹性厚度特征[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 761-776.
[5]	万永革, 王润妍, 靳志同, 兰从欣. 2025年1月7日定日地震震源特性及对申扎-定结裂谷活动的启示[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 806-819.
[6]	尹欣欣, 左可桢, 赵翠萍, 蔡润. 西藏定日 M_S6.8 地震重定位及前震序列识别[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 850-868.
[7]	王鹏, 戴宗辉, 孔雪, 李铂, 徐长朋, 张梦昕. 西藏定日 M_S6.8 地震序列应力场演化特征分析[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 881-896.
[8]	袁小祥, 林旭川, 陈子峰, 张建龙, 窦爱霞, 肖本夫, 杜浩国, 余思汗, 丁香, 方杰, 王书民. 基于遥感和震害仿真的2025年西藏定日6.8级地震建筑物震害对比[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 932-948.
[9]	陈子龙, 刘刚, 李琦, 陈威, 赵昕宇, 林牧, 陶隆文, 乔学军, 聂兆生. 2024年乌什M_W7.0地震InSAR同震形变与发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(2): 429-447.
[10]	盛书中, 王倩茹, 李振月, 李红星, 张小娟, 葛坤朋, 宫猛. 基于构造应力场研究2025年西藏定日6.8级地震的发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(1): 49-63.
[11]	徐晶, 季灵运, 刘传金. 2022年泸定M_S6.8地震震前区域变形背景及同震形变特征[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(3): 645-664.
[12]	缪思钰, 张海江, 古宁, 李俊伦, 谭玉阳, 华思博, 张勇. 基于地震和InSAR联合反演2018年M_L5.7兴文地震破裂过程[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(2): 397-413.
[13]	刘建欢, 陈建业, 赵吉海, Deyan Draganov. 基于指数相位相关性目标函数的全波形反演[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(1): 48-62.
[14]	邓文泽, 刘杰, 杨志高, 孙丽, 张雪梅. 青海玛多M_S7.4地震震源破裂过程反演结果的初步分析[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(4): 1059-1070.
[15]	邱江涛, 季灵运, 刘雷, 刘传金. 2020年西藏尼玛M_W6.3地震的InSAR同震形变与构造意义[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(6): 1586-1599.

2025年西藏定日MW7.1地震破裂过程反演

INVERSION OF THE RUPTURE PROCESS OF THE XIZANG DINGRI MW7.1 EARTHQUAKE IN 2025

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 32

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

2025年西藏定日M_W7.1地震破裂过程反演

INVERSION OF THE RUPTURE PROCESS OF THE XIZANG DINGRI M_W7.1 EARTHQUAKE IN 2025