ABSTRACT

Reasenberg and Jones (1989) introduced a statistical model for aftershock rate following a mainshock along with estimates of “generic” California parameter values based on past aftershock sequences. The Reasenberg and Jones (1989) model has been used for decades to issue aftershock forecasts following M5 mainshocks in California. Here, we update the “generic” parameters for California through a fit to the aftershock sequences of M5 mainshocks occurring since 1980. We find aftershock productivity values that are lower on average than the generic productivity reported by Reasenberg and Jones (1989), likely because low‐productivity sequences were omitted from their analysis and possibly because of a trade‐off between productivity and b‐value. We confirm the observation of Llenos and Michael (2017) that southern California sequences are more productive on average than northern California sequences. The Mendocino area is much less productive; the hydrothermal areas in Long Valley, Coso, and the Salton Sea, in contrast, are much more productive. We also quantify the variability of the Reasenberg and Jones (1989) productivity parameter a between sequences with a normal distribution. This distribution of a‐values can be used to compute aftershock forecasts that include epistemic uncertainty and can be used as the prior for Bayesian updating of the a‐value as a sequence progresses.

You do not currently have access to this article.