Geomagnetic observatories in Japan used in the study.
Abstract
We consider two kinds of signals preceding earthquake (EQ): intensification of internal electromagnetic (EM) field – lithosphere emission (LE) and change of the Earth interior response function (RF). Several cases of LE before strong EQs were reviewed and analyzed, and preliminary portrait of LE precursor was compiled. LE can appear several times with lead time month(s), weeks, days, and hours and can attain amplitude of several hundreds of nT which not uniformly decreases with increasing distance from the source. Typical LE frequency content/maximum is 0.01–0.5 Hz. Data of 19 Japanese geomagnetic observatories for 20 years preceding the Tohoku EQ on March 11, 2011 were analyzed, and RFs (mainly induction vector) were calculated. At six observatories in 2008–2010, anomalous variations of RF were separated which can be identified as middle-term precursors. Applying the original method developed in Ukraine, a short-term two-month-long precursor of bay-like form was separated by phase data of observatory KNZ in the Boso peninsula where electrical conductivity anomaly was also discovered. Hypothetical explanation based on tectonic data is advanced: Boso anomaly connects two large-scale conductors—Pacific seawater and deep magma reservoir beneath a volcanic belt. Between two so different conductors, an unstable transition zone sensitive to changes of stress before strong EQs can be expected.
Keywords
- geomagnetic field
- lithosphere emission
- conductivity structure
- induction vector
- earthquake precursor
1. Introduction
One of the long lasting challenges for the Earth sciences is earthquake (EQ) prediction. EQ precursors deliver unique information which is necessary for the solution of two interconnected fundamental problems—EQ prediction (humanitarian practical aspect) and support to the development of EQ theory (scientific aspect).
The history of the EQ precursor study goes back to antiquity. But even now their study remains purely empirical, and any precursor even recorded with perfect instrument can be treated as not related with seismicity (skepticism to prediction widely spread now), and it is difficult to prove that it is genuine EQ precursor because physics of EQ preparation process is still not well understood. The causes of such situation are (1) the complexity of the real Earth and processes in it, (2) the absence of direct information from the place of EQ preparation, nucleation, and occurrence in the Earth interior. Nevertheless, consider the unique case of the successful EQ prediction—Haicheng prediction.
1.1 Haicheng EQM7.3
The Haicheng EQM7.3 occurred on February 4, 1975 at 19:35 local time in northeast China. After 1965, activation of seismicity occurred in an area of 120 km to SSW from Beijing with several destructive EQsM > 6. After this
Multiparameter monitoring and strong scientific efforts of the last decades reveal some unexpected features of precursors: (1) Long-distance appearance up to thousands km from EQ epicenter. (2) Spatial selectivity: EQ precursors can be observed in some sensitive zones (usually fault zones) and be not observable in vast territories even not far from impending EQ. (3) Spatial–temporal migration of precursors: initially it appears in one locality, and then it appears in the next locality, usually with changed parameters. Such features did not find explanation in the framework of simple dominant ideas in the middle of the twentieth century about geological media. These features evidenced the complexity of geological media, and in the second half of the twentieth century, several new concepts have appeared to explain new data (Sadovsky MA, Varotsos P, Gufeld IL and many others).
For effective EQ prediction, we need automatic system of monitoring, processing, and analysis of all observed precursory parameters, their cross-correlation analysis to estimate probability of expected EQ (taking into account all previous global, regional, and local analyzes). High-level scientific team must keep contact with decision-making authorities for providing public announcement of the EQ prediction and plan of emergency measures. Such system needs great funds. Some elements of such system are created in few regions (California, China, ex-USSR countries).
1.2 Goal and scope of the chapter
Multitude of EQ precursors is the unique base for EQ prediction. Complexity of the earth and poor understanding of seismicity process enforce us to use as many kinds of precursors as possible. Two approaches are perspective for the fishing of the precursory signals from geomagnetic data: (1) Direct observation of the lithosphere emission (LE) of the internal electromagnetic fields arising in the course of EQ preparation and nucleation process and (2) transformation of the time series of the observed three components of geomagnetic field into time series of response functions of the Earth’s interior conductivity.
In the next sub-section, we review few case stories of the most reliable records of ultralow-frequency (ULF) LE.
In Section 2, we shortly outline the rather sophisticated methodology of response function (RF) approach referring for details to few monographs [2, 3, 4, 5].
In Sections 3 and 4, we apply RF method to the Japanese geomagnetic observatories data in the attempt to separate the precursors of great Tohoku EQM9 11.03.2011, wherein obtained quite reliable result on the Boso conductivity anomaly and advance its tectonic interpretation.
In Section 5, we discuss the results obtained.
In Section 6, we summarize the results and give the recommendations for the improvement of the low-frequency EM precursor study.
1.3 Case stories of LE records before strong EQs
There are many reports on LE registration, in particular before EQs. Consider fortunate cases when EM observations turned out to be located in the places where LE field was well above magnetotelluric (MT) field+noise background and can be easily identified.
1.3.1 Great Alaska EQM9.2 on March 28, 1964
Geomagnetic observatory in the city of Kodiak was located in the distance of 440 km from the epicenter of the EQ and only in 30 km from the fault zone along which displacement occurred. The full field proton magnetometer recorded several magnetic disturbances. The strongest one with intensity 100nT appeared 1 h 06 min before the EQ [6].
1.3.2 Loma Prieta EQM7.1 on October 18, 1989
One of the most convincing cases of LE precursors was recorded before that EQ [7]. The monitoring system of Stanford University (created for traffic noise study) operated since October 1987 at the distance of 7 km from the future EQ epicenter. The system included induction coils and special computer which calculated half-hourly averages of the magnetic field power spectra in each of nine narrow frequency bands covering the overall range 0.01–10 Hz.
During 23 months record was normal with low noise. After September 12, 1989, anomalous signal began to appear in two frequency bands: 0.05–0.1 and 0.1–0.2 Hz and grew up to 1.5 nT. In October 5, a large increase of amplitude appeared at all frequencies with the strongest one at the lowest frequency 0.01 Hz, where it reached 30 times the normal level. On the last several days before EQ , anomaly gradually diminishes (a quiescence!), and 3 h before the EQ , very large amplitude appeared only at periods longer 0.5 Hz, exceptionally large at frequency 0.01 Hz. We must emphasize that instrumentation of Stanford University which allowed to get results every half an hour is very good for LE monitoring. Unfortunately, it did not continue the operation for EQ prediction.
1.3.3 Caucasus
Kopytenko et al. [8, 9] developed three-component magnetometers for frequency range 0.005–10 Hz. The first instrument started the record 23 days before destroying Spitak EQM6.9 at 7.41 UT, on December 7, 1988, in geomagnetic observatory at Dusheti, 129 km to the north from the EQ epicenter. It recorded intensive
In the time interval November 14, 1988 to March 5, 1989 in frequency range 0.1–1 Hz 59 unusual noise-like bursts of LE with an amplitude well higher the background noise (0.03 nT) and the duration ranging from several minutes to several hours (mean duration ≈30 min) were recorded mainly before the strong aftershocks. Decrease in aftershock activities and
The next strong event was Racha EQM6.9 at 9.13 UT, on April 29, 1991, occurred at the epicentral distance of 90 km from Dusheti where no pronounced
In the conclusion we like to emphasize that magnetometers in described studies can register variations in the frequency band of 0.005–10 Hz, but they recorded most intensive
1.3.4 Taiwan
The island-wide geomagnetic network consisted of three-component geomagnetic observatory LP in the seismically quiet area and seven full field stations equipped by proton magnetometers with 0.1 nT sensitivity and sampling rate of 10 min distributed in areas of high seismicity [12]. Chi-Chi EQM7.6 occurred on September 21, 1999, in the middle of Taiwan. Stations LY turned out to be just near to surface rupture of the EQ along Chelungpu fault and recorded the strongest LE which clearly separated from comparison with records of remote observatory LP. LE begun more than a month before the EQ and attained in maximum 200 nT, and then its amplitudes gradually weakened, and the disturbance level reduced to that of a quiet period almost right after the second strong Chia-Yi EQM6.4 that occurred near the southern end of the Chelungpu fault on October 22, 1999 [12].
1.3.5 Greece
In Greece in the early 1980s for the registration of the LE electric components, the so-called seismic electric signals (SES) special network was created by Prof. P. Varotsos [11, 13]. The network consists of 10–15 stations. Each station included several (from 6 up to 100) grounded electrical dipoles with the length from 50 m up to 20 km that allows to study spatial characteristics of observed field and separate SES from MT field and noise. In the course of continuous monitoring for more than 35 years, Prof. Varotsos and collaborators identified (as the result of a posteriori analysis) many SES before the following EQs and studied their regularities [11], for example, the selectivity effect: SES can be observed in some sensitive zones and be not observable in vast territories even not far from impending EQ. Prof. Varotsos made a number of correct EQ predictions registered officially before the event. We show interesting case of joint registration SES and horizontal magnetic components recorded on April 19, 1995, 25 days before Grevena-Kozani EQM6.6 on May 13, 1995 (Figure 2). Magnetic components look as derivative of electrical impulses that are clearly seen in the lower graph (b) with expanded time scale. In the latter years, Prof. Varotsos’ group develops deeper insight in the physics of LE: entropy and natural time analysis for the better understanding of the EQ preparation process and for the distinguishing LE signals from similarly looking variations of MT and noise origin [14, 15].
2. Basic concepts and definitions. Methodology
2.1 Varying geomagnetic field
Varying geomagnetic field
2.2 Main sources of observed geomagnetic field
where
Thus,
Such subdividing of secondary internal field is rather artificial, but it is used in geoelectromagnetic methods:
After the conventional processing using Fourier transform, a
2.3 Response function
Response function is the term widely used in natural sciences and mathematics. In the geoelectromagnetic studies of
2.3.1 Induction vector
Induction vector C =
2.3.2 Anomalous horizontal magnetic variation tensor
Anomalous horizontal magnetic variation tensor [M] is determined from the linear system of equations Bx(
2.4 The processing of observed geomagnetic field
The processing of observed geomagnetic field
2.5 The theory of geoelectromagnetic methods
The theory of geoelectromagnetic methods [2, 3, 4] is developed for natural source field in the form of vertically incident plane wave (Tikhonov-Cagniard (T-C) model), which usually holds for an external source field of magnetosphere-ionosphere origin (named as magnetotelluric field) for the periods less than 104 s. Ideally RF depends only on the Earth’s conductivity distribution which is sensitive to the stress variations and therefore to geodynamic processes including the earthquake preparation.
3. Variations of geomagnetic response functions (mainly induction vector) before the 2011 Tohoku earthquake
RFs and their variations, especially in relation with EQs preparation, were studied in Japan for many years and were described in many works among which we cite only few [16, 17, 18]. In the last two decades, the RF approach became less used for EQ studies because of strong noise at Japanese observatories. After the catastrophic Tohoku EQ on March 11, 2011, near Japan, we analyzed the available geomagnetic data to obtain some EQ precursors using the RF method. Some results were presented in Russian [19, 20, 21], which together with the latest results of our study will be summarized below.
Code | Station name | Geom. lat. | Geom. long. | Geogr. lat. | Geogr. long. | Processed years |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MMB | Memambetsu | 35.44 | 148.24 | 43.910 | 144.189 | 1993–2012 |
AKA | Akaigawa | 34.31 | 151.09 | 43.072 | 140.815 | 2001–2012 |
YOK | Yokohama | 32.28 | 150.43 | 40.993 | 141.240 | 2001–2012 |
ESA | Esashi | 30.55 | 150.09 | 39.237 | 141.355 | 1997–2012 |
MIZ | Mizusawa | 30.41 | 150.21 | 39.112 | 141.204 | 1997–2015 |
HAR | Haramachi | 28.90 | 150.25 | 37.615 | 140.953 | 2001–2015 |
SIK | Shika | 28.04 | 153.96 | 37.082 | 136.773 | 2001–2012 |
KAK | Kakioka | 27.47 | 150.78 | 36.232 | 140.186 | 1956–2015 |
HAG | Hagiwara | 26.98 | 153.47 | 35.985 | 137.186 | 2001–2012 |
OTA | Otaki | 26.54 | 150.63 | 35.292 | 140.230 | 2001–2015 |
KNZ | Kanozan | 26.48 | 150.87 | 35.256 | 139.956 | 1996–2016 |
YOS | Yoshiwa | 25.12 | 157.87 | 34.476 | 132.176 | 2001–2012 |
TTK | Totsukawa | 24.83 | 154.52 | 33.932 | 135.802 | 2001–2015 |
HTY | Hatizyo | 24.30 | 150.75 | 33.073 | 139.825 | 1991–2008 |
MUR | Muroto | 24.10 | 155.99 | 33.319 | 134.122 | 2004–2012 |
KUJ | Kuju | 23.65 | 158.58 | 33.061 | 131.260 | 2001–2015 |
KNY | Kanoya | 22.00 | 158.80 | 31.424 | 130.88 | 1991–2016 |
3.1 Results of processing for separation of middle-term precursors
Analyzing large material of processed data for 15 years from 2001 till 2015, we found that aperiodic variations (or enhancement of annual variation) of induction vectors were observed at periods 225, 450, and 900 s during 3–5 years before the Tohoku EQ at stations: HAR, KAK, OTA, KNZ, and TTK, most clearly at period 450 s presented in Figure 4. We should emphasize that no such aperiodic variations were observed at other stations including ESA and MIZ, which are the nearest to the EQ epicenter. The best correlation of middle-term anomalies is observed between the two most remote (620 km) from each other stations HAR and TTK: at both we see strong synchronous variations of induction vectors with maxima in the end of 2008, the end of 2009, with several maxima in 2010, in the beginning of 2011, and return to the previous level after the Tohoku EQ. We may suppose that these aperiodic variations can be the middle-term precursors of the Tohoku EQ. These observatories are located not at the shortest distance from the EQ , which is in agreement with well-known phenomenon of spatial selectivity of EQ precursors known during the centuries for hydrological precursors and recently proven for LE registered in the form of seismic electric signal [11, 13].
Having 1 min time series, we can analyze only geomagnetic variations with period T > 3 min, and the most interesting shorter part of ULF spectra (0.01–10 Hz), where strongest
3.2 Boso conductivity anomaly
Processing of records from 18 observatories (16 of them are shown in Figure 3 and KYS and UCU in Figure 5) for the determination of horizontal tensors [M] with KAK as the base station yields the absence of noticeable horizontal tensor anomalies in ESA, MIZ, HAR, TTK, and MUR but reveals their existence in KNZ, UCU, OTA, and KYS (Figure 4a). In KNZ and OTA the enhancement of real tensor components Mxx and Myy equals to ≈40% and ≈30% correspondingly at periods T < 500 s decreasing at longer periods. This result was supported by direct visual measurements described below. At closely located observatories KNZ and OTA, the latitudinal (E-W) component of induction vector at period 450 s and shorter increased (in 2011 comparatively to 2001) in opposite directions: westward in KNZ and eastward in OTA (see Figure 3b). It means that between these two observatories, an additional current (of geodynamic origin) appeared in 2011.
3.2.1 Visual analysis of geomagnetic records
Considering the geomagnetic field synchronous records (Figure 3a), we noticed that magnetotelluric field appears synchronously at all observatories, while noise appears locally at each one. The stations most contaminated by noise are UCU and KNZ which are the nearest to DC railways. But during the after-midnight time interval from ≈1:30 to ≈4:30 LT (16:30–19:30 UT) the strong noise from DC railways almost disappears.
Direct measurements of the strong MT amplitude variations in each component provide a check (not precise but very reliable) of the results obtained by processing. So, the enhancement of Bx at KNZ and OTA at approximately 30–40% exists, and it can be interpreted only by the electrical conductivity anomaly under the observatories, i.e. under the central part of the Boso peninsula.
3.3 Comparison with geology and tectonic evidence
The relation between Mxx and Myy anomalies in KNZ defines WNW-ESE strike of the Boso conductivity anomaly. Geological data [25, 26] presented in Figure 4b–csuggest the existence of anomalous conductor of WNW-ESE strike in Miura Group sediments of the Kanto plain at depth 0–4 km. Relations between Mxx and Myy in UCU, OTA, and KYS are different as seen in Figure 6a. It means that the direction of anomalous currents is also different under each observatory. Calculations show that at least 50% of anomalous currents should be located near the surface in the sediments of the Kanto plain to fit the received data.
On the other hand, the plate tectonic evidences that the Boso anomaly is located over the Sagami trough, structure at the depth 15–20 km in the complex junction of three lithosphere plates (Figure 3a). Strike of the trough is the same, WNW-ESE, so some part of the anomalous conductor can be located in the Sagami trough.
The eastern part of both conductors (shallow sediments and deep trough) has contact with seawater, while the western one can contact with a magma reservoir. In such a circuit it can be some unstable area(s) with conductivity strongly dependent on stress and sensitive to stress changes related with EQs.
In Figure 6b, vectors are shown for a period of about an hour (4000 s), at which industrial noise is practically absent and vectors adequately reflect the heterogeneity of geoelectric structure. In Figure 6c, vectors at the period 25 s are built with dominated noise field, which is greater than MT field on four observatories considered. Real and imaginary vectors at periods 16, 25, 50, and partly at 200 s (Figure 6d) are directed to the source of noises—the nearest railway. To reduce influence of the noise, night records and remote reference technique were used (Figure 6f). Received corrected vectors appeared still very scattered (Figure 6e) and for monitoring of geodynamic processes can be used cautiously. However, vectors averaged over a long period of time can be used for clarifying of the geoelectric structure. Corrected real vector in KNZ at the shortest periods directs to north. It means that the most conductive part of Boso electrical conductivity anomaly is located to south of KNZ, apparently near the southern side of the asymmetric “N.8 half graben fills” of the Miura Group sediments [26].
Results of the single station and nighttime records processing at KNZ are given in Figure 6f. We see that full-day and nighttime results significantly differ from each other only for
4. Short-term precursor separation
4.1 Introductory remarks
The induction vector derived from very noisy records, practically from noise field, has small stable phase. Therefore, if some other magnetic fields, which are usually not so stable (let it be a precursor field), are superimposed on the field of noise, exactly the phase of induction vector will be the most sensitive component for a precursor separation.
Below we apply a new approach developed by Tregubenko [27], who used it for processing the data of seismo-prognosis monitoring network in Ukraine. He separated precursors before few strongest (M ≈ 4) Crimean EQs occurred during 15 years, in particular before the Sudak, Crimea EQM3.9 on January 24, 2005 [27]. We applied this approach to KNZ, KAK, and ESA 1-s data, but the precursor was found only in KNZ. We can explain this by the spatial selectivity of the precursors: high sensitivity of KNZ place is quite natural in virtue of Boso electrical conductivity anomaly located just under KNZ observatory.
4.2 Processing of KNZ data
The processing was made with the use of Varentsov’s [22] program. Coherences were used as weight estimates for averaging the results. To minimize the effect of noise, the estimates with multiple coherences less than 0.7 were ignored that allowed us to obtain minimally shifted estimates of induction vector’s components. Maximum anomalous effect before the Tohoku EQ was observed for the phase of the induction vector northern component—arg(
4.3 Discussion of short term precursor
The variations of arg(
Time of beginning of a bay-like precursory variation and its duration depends on the magnitude of an expected EQ. This time is equal to approximately 2 weeks for the processed Crimean EQs with magnitude approximately 4 [27] and 2 months for Tohoku EQ with magnitude 9 according to our study.
Kopytenko et al. [24] compared nighttime records of KAK and UCU observatories (see Figures 3, 6) in frequency range of 0.33–0.01 Hz for the interval of 21 days before the Tohoku EQ , that is, since February 2, 2011 till March 3, 2011. They found the appearance of anomalous changes on February 22, 2011 (18 days before EQ): decrease of the correlation coefficients between geomagnetic components of KAK and UCU observatories and rise of Bz component in sub-diapason 0.033–0.01 Hz. It was interpreted as appearance LE.
Now let us see Figure 5b. It presents nighttime records on February 24, 2011, 16 days before the Tohoku EQ , in geomagnetically quite interval with rather good temporal and amplitude resolution. MT variations in the horizontal components are almost the same at all presented observatories distributed at the territory 2000 km long. In the records of UCU and KNZ (separated by 17 km) we see strong varitations with frequencies of 0.002–0.1 Hz and amplitude of 0.2 and 0.5 nT, respectively, and even more strong variations in Bz component. All of this is in good agreement with the results of [24]. Variations in KNZ and UCU cover approximately the same frequency diapason as in [24], slightly correlate one with the other, and are not observed at other observatories. All signs of LE! But we cannot exclude that there are some remainders of the daytime noise from DC traffic. We need several more observatories (as SES network in Greece) for more definite conclusions.
5. Discussion of LE features
To use the LE for EQ prediction, one needs to know its lead time, amplitude, frequency characteristic, and expected distribution of sensitive places in the Earth surface. This knowledge can be obtained now only empirically. We can extract the necessary properties from the data presented in Section 1.3 supplementing them with other published data. An attempt of such extraction is presented in Table 2.
Earthquake | ∆r, km | ∆t, day or hour | A, nT | f, Hz | A/∆r, nT/km |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Alaska M9.2 | 440 (30) | 1 h | 100 | 0.28 (3.3) | |
Loma Prieta M7.1 | 7 | 36 day, 13 day, 3–0 h |
1.5, 2, 5 |
0.01–0.5 | 0.21 0.29 0.71 |
Taiwan Chi-Chi M7.6 | 80 (≈5) | >32 day, 10–2 days |
200 | 2.5 (40) | |
Spitak M6.9 | 130 | 4 h | 0.1 | 0.1–1 | 0.001 |
Racha aftershock M6.2 | ≈50 | 4–1 days, few h | ≈1 | 0.1–1 | 0.02 |
Racha aftershock M4 | 35 | Hours | 1 | 0.1–1 | 0.029 |
Greneva-Kozani M6.6 | 80 | 25 days | ≈1? | ≈0.05? |
The results depend of the conditions of observation. So, sampling rate of 10 min and compressed time scale in [12] describing two EQs in Taiwan exclude frequency content estimation. Important parameter – lead time ∆t is properly determined only before Loma Prieta EQ when signal-to-noise ratio was large during long time that allowed separate three stages of the precursor appearance. Spatial selectivity complicates the formulation of the LE spatial regularities. Thus, we are in the very beginning of LE phenomenon study and use.
6. Conclusions
We have calculated induction vectors using data from Japanese observatories for many years preceding the 2011 Tohoku EQ. In 2008–2010 at six observatories, we found anomalous variations of induction vectors, which are regarded as middle-term EQ precursors. Those observatories are located not at the shortest distances from the EQ epicenter, which is in general agreement with the well-known phenomenon of spatial selectivity of EQ precursors. The analysis of horizontal tensors reveals a conductivity anomaly under the central part of the Boso peninsula with a WNW-ESE strike coinciding both with the Sagami trough strike and well conducting 3-km-thick sediment strike. A joint analysis of geoelectric and tectonic data leads to a preliminary conclusion that the Boso conductivity anomaly connects two large-scale conductors: Pacific seawater and a deep magma reservoir beneath a volcanic belt. Similar anomaly was found earlier in Kamchatka [21]. Then, applying original data analysis with the elimination of annual and monthly variations, we separated two-month-long short-term EQ precursor of the Tohoku EQ.
Several cases of lithosphere emission LE before strong EQs were reviewed and analyzed, and preliminary portrait of LE precursor was compiled: LE can appear several times with lead time a month(s), weeks, days, hours, and minutes and can attain amplitude several hundreds of nT which rapidly and not uniformly diminishes with moving away from the source. Typical frequency content/maximum is 0.01–0.5 Hz. As it is widely accepted [5], LE is generated by the process of microcracks opening in the course of EQ preparation and should be a rather common phenomenon. It is not quite clear how high-frequency microcrack radiation propagates through many kilometers of the Earth’s crust to be recorded at the Earth surface. Seemingly, the radiation finds the optimal pathways leading to sensitive places on the earth surface where signal can be observed. Then, the search of sensitive spots opens new channel of information for the Earth interior study.
Recommendation on the LE monitoring for the strong EQ prediction
Network must allow the gradient measurements, so a minimum of three magnetometers must be installed for synchronous records [24].
The best but very expensive is the SES monitoring network in Greece. Electrical dipoles can be supplemented or replaced by magnetometers. We recommended for use the practice of sensitive places search and use [11] and the methodology of LE sophisticated analysis developing by Prof. Varotsos’ team [14, 15].
RF approach is a valuable supplement to LE. It has lower temporal resolution but yields additional information on the conductivity variations in the EQ preparation zone.
References
- 1.
Wang K, Chen Q-F, Sun S, Wang A. Predicting the 1975 Haicheng earthquake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. June 2006; 96 (3):757-795. DOI: 10.1785/0120050191 - 2.
Rokityansky II. Geoelectromagnetic Investigation of the Earth’s Crust and Mantle. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer-Verlag; 1982. 381 p - 3.
Berdichevsky MN, Dmitriev VI. Models and Methods of Magnetotellurics. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2008. 564 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-77814-1 - 4.
Chave AD, Jones AG, editors. The Magnetotelluric Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012. 584 p. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139020138.002 - 5.
Surkov V, Hayakawa M. Ultra and Extremely Low Frequency Electromagnetic Fields. London: Springer Geophysics; 2014. 486 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-4-431-54367-1 - 6.
Moore GW. Magnetic disturbances preceding the 1964 Alaska earthquake. Nature. 1964; 203 :508-509. DOI: 10.1038/203508b0 - 7.
Frather-Smith AC, Bernardi A, McGill PR, Ladd ME, Helliwell RA, Villard OG Jr. Low-frequency magnetic field measurements near the epicenter of the Ms 7.1 Loma Prieta earthquake. Geophysical Research Letters. 1990; 17 (9):1465-1468. DOI: 10.1029/GL017i009p01465 - 8.
Kopytenko YA, Matiashvili TG, Voronov PM, Kopytenko EA, Molchanov OA. Detection of ultra-low-frequency emissions connected with Spitak earthquake and its aftershock activity, based on geomagnetic pulsations data at Dusheti and Vardzia observatories. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors. 1993; 77 :85-95 - 9.
Kopytenko YA, Matiashvili TG, Voronov PM, Kopytenko EA. Observation of electromagnetic ultralow-frequency lithospheric emission in the Caucasian seismically active zone and their connection with earthquakes. In: Hayakawa b M, Fujinawa Y, editors. Electromagnetic Phenomena Related to Earthquake Prediction. Tokyo: Terra Scientific Publishing Company (TERRAPUB); 1994. pp. 175-180 - 10.
Rokityansky II. Spatial selectivity of earthquake’s precursors. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth. 2006; 31 :204-209. DOI: doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2006.02.028 - 11.
Varotsos AP. The Physics of Seismic Electric Signals. Tokyo, Japan: TERRAPUB; 2005. 338 p - 12.
Tsai YB, Liu JY, Ma KF, Yen HY, Chen KS, Chen YI, et al. Precursory phenomena associated with the 1999 chi-chi earthquake in Taiwan as identified under the ISTEP program. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth. 2006; 31 :365-377 - 13.
Varotsos P, Alexopoulos K, Lazaridou M. Latest aspects of earthquake prediction in Greece based on seismic electric signals, II. Tectonophysics. 1993; 224 :1-37. DOI: 10.1016/0040-1951(93)90055-O - 14.
Varotsos PA, Sarlis NV, Skordas ES, Lazaridou MS. Seismic electric signals: An additional fact showing their physical interconnection with seismicity. Tectonophysics. 2013; 589 :116-125. DOI: 10.1016/j.tecto.2012.12.020 - 15.
Sarlis NV, Skordas ES, Varotsos PA, Nagao T, Kamogawa M, Tanaka H, et al. Minimum of the order parameter fluctuations of seismicity before major earthquakes in Japan. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2013; 110 :13734-13738. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1312740110 - 16.
Yanagihara K, Nagano T. Time changes of transfer function in the Central Japan anomaly of conductivity with special reference to earthquake occurrences. Journal of Geomagnetism and Geoelectricity. 1976; 28 (2):157-163 - 17.
Fujita S. Monitoring of time changes of conductivity anomaly transfer functions at Japanese magnetic observatory network. Memoirs of the Kakioka Magnetic Observatory. 1990; 23 :53-87 - 18.
Fujiwara S. Temporal changes of geomagnetic transfer functions using data obtained mainly by the geographical survey institute. Bull Bulletin of the Geographical Survey Institute. 1996; 41 :1-25 - 19.
Rokityansky II, Tregubenko VI, Babak VI, Tereshyn AV. Induction vector and horizontal tensor components variations before the Tohoku earthquake on the 11th march 2011 according to the data of Japanese geomagnetic observatories. Geophysical Journal. 2013; 35 (3):115-130. (in Russian) - 20.
Rokityansky II, Babak VI, Tereshyn AV. Geomagnetic activity impacts on the results of the induction vector calculations. Geophysical Journal. 2015; 37 (6):86-98. (in Russian) - 21.
Rokityansky II, Babak VI, Tereshyn AV. An analysis of geomagnetic response functions prior to the Tohoku, Japan earthquake. Journal of Volcanology and Seismology. 2016; 10 (6):78-91 - 22.
Varentsov IM. Arrays of simultaneous EM soundings: Design, data processing and analysis. In: Spichak V, editor. EM Sounding of the Earth’s Interior. Methods in Geochemistry and Geophysics. Vol. 40. Heidelberg, London: Elsevier; 2007. pp. 259-275. DOI: 10.1016/S0076-6895(06)40010-X - 23.
Klymkovych TA. Peculiarities of temporal variations of anomalous magnetic field and induction vectors in the Transcarpathian seismic-active trough [PhD thesis] Kiev: Institute of Geophysics; 2009 (in Ukrainian) - 24.
Kopytenko YA, Ismaguilov VS, Hattori K, Hayakawa M. Anomaly disturbances of the magnetic fields before the strong earthquake in Japan on march 11, 2011. Annals of Geophysics (Italy). 2012; 55 (1):101-107. DOI: 10.4401/ag-5260 - 25.
Suzuki H. Underground geological structure beneath the Kanto plain, Japan. National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, Japan. 2002; 63 :1-19 - 26.
Takahashi M, Yanagisawa Y, Hayashi H, Kasahara K, Ikawa T, Kawanaka T, et al. Miocene subsurface half-grabens in the Kanto plain, Central Japan. Proceeding of International Workshop on Strong Ground Motion Prediction and Earthquake Tectonics in Urban Areas. 2005:65-74 - 27.
Tregubenko VI. Seismoprognostic researches. In: Goshovsky SV, editor. 50 Years of Ukrainian State Geological Institute (1957-2007). Anniversary Directory. Kyiv: Ukr SGPI; 2007. pp. 52-56 (in Ukrainian)