【摘要】 选取新疆地区1970年以来15次MS6.0以上地震作为源地震,MS4.0以上余震作为目标余震,对地震静态应力触发模型进行检验分析。结果表明,地震静态应力触发模型在新疆地区存在问题,80%的源地震发生后,其ΔCFS正区目标余震数量少于负区目标余震数量;33%的源地震发生后,其正区目标余震数量远少于负区目标余震数量(前者不到后者的一半);只有13.3%的源地震发生后,其正区目标余震数量远多于负区目标余震数量(前者是后者的2倍以上)。即使考虑源地震的震源深度、断层面走向、倾向和滑动角的不确定性因素,基本结果相同。在大多数震例中,发生在ΔCFS负区的目标余震数量多于发生在正区的目标余震数量,与地震静态应力触发模型不一致。作者进一步推论认为,基于应力、应变的增量变化进行地震短期预测是有局限性的。更多还原

【Abstract】 We select 15 earthquakes with MS≥6.0 in Xinjiang since 1970 as "source earthquakes",and aftershocks of MS≥4.0 as target aftershocks.Test analysis has been done on the static stress triggering model.The results show that the static stress triggering model is not so applicable in the Xinjiang region.For 80%of source earthquakes,the number of target aftershocks in positive ΔCFS area is less than that in negative area;for 33%of source earthquakes,the number of target aftershocks in positive ΔCFS area is far less than that in negative area(the former is less than half of the latter);only for 13.3%of the source earthquakes,the number of target aftershocks in positive ΔCFS area is far more than that in negative area(the former is twice of the latter).Even the uncertainties are considered,e.g.the focal depth of the source earthquakes,the fault plane orientation and the slip angle,the results are basically the same.In most shock events,target earthquakes in negative ΔCFS area are more in number than that occurred in the positive area,which does not accord with static stress triggering model.The further inference is that the short-term earthquake prediction based on stress and strain increment changes is limited.更多还原