Estimating the Recurrence Periods of Earthquake Data in Turkey

DOI: 10.4236/ojer.2013.21002   PDF   HTML   XML   4,383 Downloads   11,539 Views   Citations


In this paper, the 231 earthquake data of magnitude 5 and higher, between north (39.00o-42.00o) and east (26.00o-45.00o) coordinates in Turkey from July 12, 1900 to October 23, 2011 are statistically analyzed. The probability density function and cumulative function of the magnitude are derived. It is shown that magnitude random variable is distrib-uted as the exponential distribution. The recurrence periods is also calculated. Recurrence period is estimatedapproxi-matelytwo times a year for an earthquake having magnitude 5.2. Using the Gutenberg-Richter function, the relation between magnitude and frequency is represented.

Share and Cite:

H. Konşuk and S. Aktaş, "Estimating the Recurrence Periods of Earthquake Data in Turkey," Open Journal of Earthquake Research, Vol. 2 No. 1, 2013, pp. 21-25. doi: 10.4236/ojer.2013.21002.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] D. R. Brillinger, “Earthquake Risk and Insurance,” Environmetrics, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1993, pp. 1-21. doi:10.1002/env.3170040102
[2] S. Abe and N. Suzuki, “Scale-Free Statistics of Time Interval between Successive Earthquakes,” Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, Vol. 350, No. 2-4, 2005, pp. 588-596.
[3] R. Gutenberg and C. F. Richter,“Frequencies of Earthquakes in California,” Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 34, No. 4, 1944, pp. 185-188 .
[4] R. Kasap and U. Gurlen, “Deprem Magnitudleri Icin Tekrarlanma Yillarinin Elde Edilmesi: Marmara Bolgesi Ornegi,” Dogus Universitesi Dergisi, Vol. 4, No. 2, 2003, pp. 157-166.
[5] Y. Ogata,“Statistical Models for Earthquake Occurrences and Residual Analysis for Point Processes,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 83, No. 401, 1988, pp. 9-27. doi:10.1080/01621459.1988.10478560
[6] T. Utsu, “Estimation of Parameters for Recurrence Models of Earthquakes,” Bulletin of the Earthquake Research Institute, Vol. 59, 1984, pp. 53-66.
[7] S. Aktas, H. Konsuk and A. Yigiter, “Estimation of Change Point and Compound Poisson Process Parameters for the Earthquake Data in Turkey,” Environmetrics, Vol. 20, No. 4, 2009, pp. 416-427. doi:10.1002/env.937
[8] Y. Bayrak, S. Ozturk, H Cinar, D. Kalafat, T. M. Tsapano, G. Ch. Koravos and G. A. Leventakis, “Estimating Earthquake Hazard Parameters from Instrumental Data for Different Regions in and around Turkey,” Engineering Geology, Vol. 105, No. 3-4, 2009, pp. 200-210. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2009.02.004
[9] S. Ozturk, Y. Bayrak, G. Ch. Koravos and T. M. Tsapanos, “A Quantitative Appraisal of Earthquake Hazard Parameters Computed from Gumbel I Method for Different Regions in and around Turkey,” Natural Hazards, Vol. 47, No. 3, 2008, pp. 471-495. doi:10.1007/s11069-008-9234-6
[10] Y. Bayrak, S. Ozturk, G. Ch.Koravo, G. A. Leventakis and T. M. Tsapanos, “Seismicity Assessment for the Different Regions in and around Tyrkey Based on Instrumental Data: Gumbel First Asymptotic Distribution and Gutenberg-Richter Cumulative Frequency Law,” NHESS, Vol. 8, 2008, pp. 1090-1122.
[12] J. H. Wang and C. H. Kuo,“On the Frequency Distribution of Interoccurence Times of Earthquakes” Journal of Seismology, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1988, pp. 351-358. doi:10.1023/A:1009774819512

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2020 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.