Skip to main content
Log in

Uncertainty estimates in broadband seismometer sensitivities using microseisms

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Seismology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The midband sensitivity of a seismic instrument is one of the fundamental parameters used in published station metadata. Any errors in this value can compromise amplitude estimates in otherwise high-quality data. To estimate an upper bound in the uncertainty of the midband sensitivity for modern broadband instruments, we compare daily microseism (4- to 8-s period) amplitude ratios between the vertical components of colocated broadband sensors across the IRIS/USGS (network code IU) seismic network. We find that the mean of the 145,972 daily ratios used between 2002 and 2013 is 0.9895 with a standard deviation of 0.0231. This suggests that the ratio between instruments shows a small bias and considerable scatter. We also find that these ratios follow a standard normal distribution (R 2 = 0.95442), which suggests that the midband sensitivity of an instrument has an error of no greater than ±6 % with a 99 % confidence interval. This gives an upper bound on the precision to which we know the sensitivity of a fielded instrument.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson K, Willemann RJ, Simpson DW (2011) Modernization of instrumentation of the Global Seismographic Network, 2011 Monitoring research review: ground-based nuclear explosion monitoring technologies, 408–413

  • Aster RC, Borchers B, Thurber CH (2005) Parameter estimation and inverse problems. Elsevier, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Aster RC, McNamara DE, Bromirski PD (2010) Global trends in extremal microseism intensity. Geophys Res Lett. doi:10.1029/2010GL043472

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyreuther M, Barsch R, Krischer L, Megies T, Behr Y, Wassermann J (2010) ObsPy: a python toolbox for seismology. Seismol Res Lett 81:530–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler R, Creager K, Earl P, Fischer K, Gaherty J, Laske G, Leith W, Park J, Ritzwoller M, Tromp J, Wen W (2004) The Global Seismographic Network surpasses its design goal. Eos Trans AGU 85:225–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis P, Berger J (2007) Calibration of the Global Seismographic Network using tides. Seismol Res Lett 78:454–459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis P, Berger J (2012) Initial impact of the Global Seismographic Network quality initiative on metadata accuracy. Seismol Res Lett 83:697–703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis P, Ishii M, Masters G (2005) An assessment of the accuracy of GSN sensor response information. Seismol Res Lett 76:678–683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekstrom G, Dalton CA, Nettles M (2006) Observations of time-dependent errors in long-period instrument gain at global seismic stations. Seismol Res Lett 77:12–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes G, Earle PS, Benz HM, Wald DJ, Briggs RW (2011) 88 hours: the U.S. Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center response to the 11 March 2011 Mw=9.0 Tohoku earthquake. Seismol Res Lett 82:481–493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutt CR, Ringler AT (2011) Some possible causes and corrections for STS-1 response changes in the Global Seismographic Network. Seismol Res Lett 82:560–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IDA, and USGS (2010) GSN Calibration, http://www.iris.edu/hq/files/programs/gsn/gsnqual/GSN_20calibration_20summary.v8.pdf. Last Accessed Sept 2014

  • Richards PG, Kim W-Y (2005) Equivalent volume sources for explosions at depth: theory and observations. Bull Seismol Soc Am 95:401–407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ringler AT, Hutt CR (2010) Self-noise models of seismic instruments. Seismol Res Lett 81:972–983

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ringler AT, Gee LS, Hutt CR, McNamara DE (2010) Temporal variations in global seismic station ambient noise power levels. Seismol Res Lett 81:605–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ringler AT, Hutt CR, Aster R, Bolton H, Gee LS, Strom T (2012) Estimating pole/zero errors in GSN-IRIS/USGS network calibration metadata. Bull Seismol Soc Am 102:836–841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ringler AT, Hutt CR, Persefield K, Gee LS (2013) Seismic station installation orientation errors at ANSS and IRIS/USGS stations. Seismol Res Lett 84:926–931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherbaum F (2006) Of poles and zeros: fundamentals of digital seismology. Springer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Widmer R, Master G, Freeman G (1991) Spherically symmetric attenuation within the Earth from normal mode data. Geophys J Int 104:541–553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wielandt E, Steim J (1986) A digital very broad band seismograph. Ann Geophys 4:227–232

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Luciana Astiz, Thomas Braun, Hunter Knox, Jill McCarthy, Janet Slate, Valerie Thomas, and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful reviews that ultimately improved the content and presentation of this manuscript. We also thank Tom VanZandt for useful discussions regarding some of the phenomena related to linear drift.

The Global Seismographic Network (GSN) is a cooperative scientific facility operated jointly by the Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the National Science Foundation (NSF). Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. T. Ringler.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ringler, A.T., Storm, T., Gee, L.S. et al. Uncertainty estimates in broadband seismometer sensitivities using microseisms. J Seismol 19, 317–327 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10950-014-9467-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10950-014-9467-7

Keywords

Navigation