The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Tsunami-generated magnetic fields may constrain focal mechanisms of earthquakes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep28603 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Issei Kawashima, Hiroaki Toh |
| Abstract |
A geomagnetic observatory named SFEMS is being operated on the deep seafloor in the northwest Pacific since August, 2001. SFEMS is capable of measuring both scalar and vector geomagnetic fields as well as the seafloor instrument's precise attitudes, which makes it a powerful tool in detecting the so-called oceanic dynamo effect. It was found that SFEMS captured clear magnetic signals generated by the giant tsunamis of the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake even for an epicentral distance of larger than 1500 km. Here we report estimates of the focal mechanism of a closer tsunamigenic earthquake in January, 2007 on the seaward slope of the Kuril Trench using tsunami-generated variations in the observed downward magnetic component. Three-dimensional solutions of the tsunami-generated magnetic components were calculated by a new numerical code based on non-uniform thin-sheet approximation and particle motions of seawater using the linear Boussinesq approximation. As a result, a southeast dipping fault alone reproduced the dispersive nature of the downward magnetic component, while any northwest dipping faults could not. This implies that the tsunami-generated electromagnetic fields are useful for determination of focal mechanisms of tsunamigenic earthquakes, since fault dips are one of the most difficult source parameters to estimate even in modern seismology. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Italy | 1 | 13% |
| Australia | 1 | 13% |
| South Africa | 1 | 13% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 1 | 13% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 30% |
| Researcher | 3 | 30% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 1 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 6 | 60% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 10% |
| Psychology | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 50. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2016.
All research outputs
#791,195
of 24,410,879 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#8,500
of 132,905 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,760
of 358,927 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#257
of 3,745 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,410,879 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 132,905 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 358,927 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,745 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.