Figure 4. A slip distribution model for the April 23, 2025 magnitude 6.2 earthquake. The moment rate function is shown in the upper left corner of the figure. The arrows in the lower left denote the fault motion direction of the hanging wall; the arrow sizes are proportional to the slip amount derived for each grid cell. The waveform fitting between the observed and calculated seismograms is shown on the right. Credit: Erdik et al., 2025, CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Figure 4. A slip distribution model for the April 23, 2025 magnitude 6.2 earthquake. The moment rate function is shown in the upper left corner of the figure. The arrows in the lower left denote the fault motion direction of the hanging wall; the arrow sizes are proportional to the slip amount derived for each grid cell. The waveform fitting between the observed and calculated seismograms is shown on the right. Credit: Erdik et al., 2025, CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Figure 4. A slip distribution model for the April 23, 2025 magnitude 6.2 earthquake. The moment rate function is shown in the upper left corner of the figure. The arrows in the lower left denote the fault motion direction of the hanging wall; the arrow sizes are proportional to the slip amount derived for each grid cell. The waveform fitting between the observed and calculated seismograms is shown on the right. Credit: Erdik et al., 2025, CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Follow her
Latest posts by Alka Tripathy-Lang, Ph.D. (see all)