@misc{DahmBeckerBischoffetal.2013,
  author    = {Dahm, Torsten and Becker, Dirk and Bischoff, Monika and Cesca, Simone and Dost, B. and Fritschen, R. and Hainzl, Sebastian and Klose, C. D. and Kuhn, D. and Lasocki, S. and Meier, Thomas and Ohrnberger, Matthias and Rivalta, Eleonora and Wegler, Ulrich and Husen, Stephan},
  title     = {Recommendation for the discrimination of human-related and natural seismicity},
  series = {Journal of seismology},
  volume    = {17},
  journal   = {Journal of seismology},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Dordrecht},
  issn      = {1383-4649},
  doi       = {10.1007/s10950-012-9295-6},
  pages     = {197 -- 202},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {Various techniques are utilized by the seismological community, extractive industries, energy and geoengineering companies to identify earthquake nucleation processes in close proximity to engineering operation points. These operations may comprise fluid extraction or injections, artificial water reservoir impoundments, open pit and deep mining, deep geothermal power generations or carbon sequestration. In this letter to the editor, we outline several lines of investigation that we suggest to follow to address the discrimination problem between natural seismicity and seismic events induced or triggered by geoengineering activities. These suggestions have been developed by a group of experts during several meetings and workshops, and we feel that their publication as a summary report is helpful for the geoscientific community. Specific investigation procedures and discrimination approaches, on which our recommendations are based, are also published in this Special Issue (SI) of Journal of Seismology.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{CescaBraunMaccaferrietal.2013,
  author    = {Cesca, Simone and Braun, Thomas and Maccaferri, Francesco and Passarelli, Luigi and Rivalta, Eleonora and Dahm, Torsten},
  title     = {Source modelling of the M5-6 Emilia-Romagna, Italy, earthquakes (2012 May 20-29)},
  series = {Geophysical journal international},
  volume    = {193},
  journal   = {Geophysical journal international},
  number    = {3},
  publisher = {Oxford Univ. Press},
  address   = {Oxford},
  issn      = {0956-540X},
  doi       = {10.1093/gji/ggt069},
  pages     = {1658 -- 1672},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {On 2012 May 20 and 29, two damaging earthquakes with magnitudes M-w 6.1 and 5.9, respectively, struck the Emilia-Romagna region in the sedimentary Po Plain, Northern Italy, causing 26 fatalities, significant damage to historical buildings and substantial impact to the economy of the region. The earthquake sequence included four more aftershocks with M-w, >= 5.0, all at shallow depths (about 7-9 km), with similar WNW-ESE striking reverse mechanism. The timeline of the sequence suggests significant static stress interaction between the largest events. We perform here a detailed source inversion, first adopting a point source approximation and considering pure double couple and full moment tensor source models. We compare different extended source inversion approaches for the two largest events, and find that the rupture occurred in both cases along a subhorizontal plane, dipping towards SSW Directivity is well detected for the May 20 main shock, indicating that the rupture propagated unilaterally towards SE. Based on the focal mechanism solution, we further estimate the co-seismic static stress change induced by the May 20 event. By using the rate-and-state model and a Poissonian earthquake occurrence, we infer that the second largest event of May 29 was induced with a probability in the range 0.2-0.4. This suggests that the segment of fault was already prone to rupture. Finally, we estimate peak ground accelerations for the two main events as occurred separately or simultaneously. For the scenario involving hypothetical rupture areas of both main events, we estimate M-w = 6.3 and an increase of ground acceleration by 50 per cent. The approach we propose may help to quantify rapidly which regions are invested by a significant increase of the hazard, bearing the potential for large aftershocks or even a second main shock.},
  language  = {en}
}