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 Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The acoustic emission activity associated with recent rock fractureexperiments under different conditions has indicated that some features ofevent-event triggering are independent of the details of the experiment and thematerials used and are often even indistinguishable from tectonic earthquakes.While the event-event triggering rates or aftershock rates behave pretty muchidentical for all rock fracture experiments at short times, this is not thecase for later times. Here, we discuss how these differences can be aconsequence of the aftershock identification method used and show that the trueaftershock rates might have two distinct regimes. Specifically, tests on amodified Epidemic Type Aftershock Sequence model show that the model ratescannot be correctly inferred at late times based on temporal information onlyif the activity rates or the branching ratio are high. We also discuss both theeffect of the two distinct regimes in the aftershock rates and the effect ofthe background rate on the inter-event time distribution. Our findings shouldbe applicable for inferring event-event triggering rates for many other typesof triggering and branching processes as well.

Are Triggering Rates of Labquakes Universal? Inferring Triggering Rates From Incomplete Information