The finite-difference and finite-element modeling of seismic wave propagation and earthquake motion

214 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The ShakeOut earthquake scenario: Verification of three simulation sets (2010, methodology): “The numerical methods just described are those actually used in the codes tested for this study, and do not incorporate all of the most recent mathematical refinements that are known to improve accuracy in certain problem classes (see, e.g. Moczo et al. 2007, review).”
3‐D finite‐difference, finite‐element, discontinuous‐Galerkin and spectral‐element schemes analysed for their accuracy with respect to P‐wave to S‐wave speed ratio (2011, background): “For example, Moczo et al. (2000) investigated condition for propagation of a plane harmonic wave with a constant amplitude by the fourth-order DS staggered grid FD scheme.”
Full Seismic Waveform Modelling and Inversion (2011, methodology): “For an excellent review of finite-difference methods for wave propagation the reader is referred to Moczo et al. (2007).”
An hp-adaptive discontinuous Galerkin finite-element method for 3-D elastic wave modelling (2010, methodology): “1 I N T RO D U C T I O N Over the last decades, simulations of wave propagation in complex media have been efficiently tackled with finite-difference methods (FDMs) and applied with success to numerous physical problems (Graves 1996; Moczo et al. 2007).”