English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

We have revisited the fragment-asperity interaction model recently introducedby Sotolongo-Costa and Posadas (Physical Review Letters 92, 048501, 2004) byconsidering a different definition for mean values in the context of Tsallisnonextensive statistics and introducing a new scale between the earthquakeenergy and the size of fragment $\epsilon \propto r^3$. The energy distributionfunction (EDF) deduced in our approach is considerably different from the oneobtained in the above reference. We have also tested the viability of this newEDF with data from two different catalogs (in three different areas), namely,NEIC and Bulletin Seismic of the Revista Brasileira de Geof\'{\i}sica. Althoughboth approaches provide very similar values for the nonextensive parameter $q$,other physical quantities, e.g., the energy density differs considerably, byseveral orders of magnitude.Comment: 5 Pages, 1 figure, To appear in Phys. Rev.

Nonextensive models for earthquakes