Proceedings of the International Symposium on Engineering Lessons Learned fromthe 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, March 1-4, 2012, Tokyo, JapanSEISMOLOGICAL AND GEODETIC ASPECTS OFTHE 2011 TOHOKU EARTHQUAKE AND GREATEAST JAPAN EARTHQUAKE DISASTER
Kazuki KOKETSU1
1Professor, Earthquake Research Institute, University of Tokyo,Tokyo, Japan, koketsu@eri.u-tokyo.ac.jp

ABSTRACT: One general feature and three specific features were pointed out for the2011 Tohoku earthquake and Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster. The three specificfeatures are: (1) “Observed by dense networks of geophysical instruments,” (2) “Severetsunami damage but moderate ground motion damage”, and (3) “They had not been
forseen at all.” These have been explained in detail as the seismological and geodetic
aspects of the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster.
Key Words: Tohoku earthquake, Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster, seismology,
geodesy

INTRODUCTION
A super large earthquake occurred on 11 March 2011 (UTC) in the subduction zone along the Japan
Trench. This earthquake was officially named “2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku Earthquake” bythe Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA, 2011a), but we abbreviate it as “2011 Tohoku earthquake”
because of its awkward length. Its moment magnitude (Mw) of 9.0 (JMA, 2011b) to 9.1 (Global CMTProject, 2011) is the largest ever recorded in Japan and the fourth in “Largest Earthquakes in the World
Since 1900” compiled by the United States Geological Survey (USGS, 2011a).
The 2011 Tohoku earthquake caused a huge disaster, which was officially named “Great East
Japan Earthquake Disaster” by the Cabinet of Japan (2011). This disaster resulted in 16,131 fatalities,
3,240 missing, 5,994 injured, and 128,497 house collapses as of 13 January 2012 including the tollfrom the aftershocks and triggered events (Fire and Disaster Management Agency of Japan, 2012).
The number of fatalities is the second for Japanese earthquakes in “Earthquakes with 1,000 or More
Deaths since 1900” (USGS, 2011b), preceded by only the 1923 Kanto earthquake. Therefore, the moststriking general feature of the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster is ofcourse their hugeness.
The 2011 Tohoku earthquake is a megathrust event in a subduction zone like most others in the listof “Large Earthquakes in the World Since 1900” but the first that was observed by dense networks ofgeophysical instruments. This is the first specific feature of the earthquake and disaster. Since morethan 90% of the fatalities were from drowning (Kyodo News, 2011), and the number of injured people
is relatively small, the second specific feature of the earthquake and disaster is severe tsunami damage
but moderate ground motion damage. Many large aftershocks and triggered earthquakes also caused1ground motion damage. The third specific feature is that the earthquake and disaster had not been
foreseen at all. We will explain these specific features in turn as the seismological and geodetic aspectsof the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster.

OBSERVED BY DENSE NETWORKS OF GEOPHYSICAL INSTRUMENTS
Abundant data obtained from the dense networks include teleseismic, strong motion, geodetic, andtsunami datasets. For example, the strong motion seismometers of K-NET and KiK-net (NationalResearch Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention (NIED), 2008) observed groundaccelerations from the earthquake at stations shown in Fig. 1A. Gauges that observed the tsunami arealso shown in Fig. 1A with the associated waveforms, though many of these stations stopped recording
early because of power failure or tsunami damage. The tsunami dataset consists of these waveforms
and observations at remote stations (Fujii et al., 2011). The GEONET (Geospatial Information
Authority of Japan (GSI), 2010), which is a nation-wide network of 1,200 GPS-based control stations,observed crustal deformations due to the earthquake as shown by static displacements in Fig. 2.

Fig. 1. (A) Strong motion stations operated by NIED (small white and red circles) and local tsunami
gauges (black inverted triangles) associated with observed waveforms (black traces). Theorange star denotes the epicenter determined by JMA (2011c). (B) Section of grounddisplacements obtained by double integration of accelerations observed at the red stations.
Three pulses can be seen and their arrival times (blue, red, and brown dots) suggest threezones of large slip (blue, red, and brown ellipses in the panel A (Koketsu et al., 2011).
The strong motion records at 31 stations selected along the Pacific coast (red circles in Fig. 1A)
were doubly integrated into ground displacements using highpass filter with a corner period of 100 s.

2

They were aligned along the coast to form the record section in Fig. 1B. Three pulses, two of which
are distinct but the other is not, can be seen in this record section, and their arrival times indicated byblue, red, and brown dots suggest that they were generated in the zones drawn with the same colors inFig. 1A. The first two zones are located around the epicenter of the mainshock determined by JMA(2011c), while the third zone is 150 to 180 km south of the epicenter. The static displacements in Fig.
2 point toward these zones, though they cannot distinguish the first two zones because of their limited
resolving power.

Fig. 2. Horizontal static displacements observed by GEONET (red arrows) suggest two zones of large
slip (blue and brown ellipses). The source fault (rectangular grid) is assumed based on thedistribution of smaller earthquakes during the initial 24 hours (yellow circles). The orange star,orange and white circles denote the epicenters of the mainshock, aftershocks with magnitudes
greater than 7.0, and a foreshock, respectively. The white narrow rectangle is an extension of
the source fault for the tsunami inversion (Koketsu et al., 2011).
Fig. 2 also shows smaller earthquakes in the 24 hours after the mainshock of the Tohoku
earthquake. We considered those in the black rectangular grid to be aftershocks and this rectangle of
480 × 150 km2 was adopted with a strike of 200° and a dip of 12° to model the source fault of themainshock. The two large events with JMA magnitudes of 7.7 and 7.4 (JMA, 2011c) were included,
but some events adjacent to the western side of the rectangle were excluded, because their depths (5 to30 km) are much shallower than the depth of the upper boundary of the subducting Pacific plate
beneath them (50 to 70 km in the Japan Integrated Velocity Structure Model (JIVSM) (Koketsu et al.,32008). On the eastern side, there is a gap between the model rectangle and the axis of the Japan Trench,as shown by a white narrow rectangle. However, we did not extend the source fault model to this area
for the inversions of teleseismic, strong motion, and geodetic datasets, because there was almost noseismicity there in the 24 hours after the mainshock. Another reason is that only the 1896 Sanriku
earthquake is known to be a large plate-boundary event in this area and it is a typical tsunami
earthquake which radiates small seismic energy but large tsunami (Kanamori, 1972; Tanioka andSatake, 1996).
In addition, the strong motion dataset already shows that observed ground motions are smaller
than estimates by existing ground motion prediction equations (Si et al., 2012; Miyake et al., 2012), asshown in Fig. 3. Therefore, a resultant source model can include a reason for the moderate groundmotion damage.

Fig. 3. Comparisons of PGAs (left) and PGVs (right) for the 2011 Tohoku and 2003 Tokachi-oki
earthquakes (Si et al., 2012).

SEVERE TSUNAMI DAMAGE BUT MODERATE GROUND MOTION DAMAGE
Yokota et al. (2011) carried out source inversions of the various datasets mentioned in the previoussection. Their results in Fig. 4 indicate that the earthquake consists of three main ruptures. After small
bilateral rupture in the initial 40 s (0 – 40 s), the first main rupture propagated to the easternmost
shallow area and generated the compact shallow slip (40 – 60 s). Later, the second main rupture began
to propagate northwestward and southward and became dominant with the largest final slip of 35 m
(60 – 100 s). At this time, the slip propagated to the westernmost area including the Miyagi-oki region.
The southward rupture finally reached west off Fukushima Prefecture, approximately 200 km south of
the hypocenter during the third main rupture stage (100 – 120 s).
The first and second main ruptures expanded at a slow speed of 1.5 ∼ 1.8 km/s. The slow rupture
growth of the earthquake source required larger fracture energy, therefore the resultant radiated energy
became smaller based on the energy budget (Kanamori and Heaton, 2000). Thus, one feature of theearthquake and disaster, which is moderate ground motion damage, can be explained by the slow
rupture speed. The other feature, which is severe tsunami damage, can be explained by large slips
close to the Japan Trench (white ellipse in Fig. 4a).
In addition to the super large mainshock, many large aftershocks and triggered earthquakes haveoccurred causing extra ground motion damage (Fig. 5). The JMA defined the 600 × 350 km2
aftershock area and is counting the numbers of aftershocks with various JMA magnitudes (M). Six M7,
ninety M6, and four hundred eighty four M5 aftershocks were reported to occur from 11 March 2011
to 10 January 2012. Among the above M7 events in 2011, M7.5 on 11 March, M7.2 on 7 April, and4

Fig. 4. (a) Slip distributions
obtained by a joint inversion. The
yellow circles denote aftershocks
in the initial 24 hours. Theorange star and the orange andwhite circles denote the epicenterof the mainshock, aftershocks
with magnitudes greater than 7.0,
and a foreshock, respectively.
The white ellipse denotes
shallow large slips. (b) The
progress of the source rupture isrepresented by the snapshots ofthe slip distribution every 10 safter rupture initiation (Yokota etal., 2011).

M7.1 on 11 April have focal mechanisms
different from that of the mainshock. Thus,
in a narrow sense, they are not aftershocks
but triggered earthquakes like the events
far away from the aftershock area (Fig. 5),though the M7.2 and M7.1 events close to
the Tohoku district caused ground motion
damage.

Fig. 5 Earthquakes from 11 March to 14
April 2011 including the mainshock(yellow star), foreshock (purple star),aftershocks (black boxes), and triggered
earthquakes (red boxes) (by Drs. Oki andNishida).
Triggered inland earthquakes such as theM6.7 on 12 March and M6.4 on 15 March
also caused ground motion damage.

THEY HAD NOT BEEN FORESEEN AT ALL
The 2011 Tohoku earthquake is a megathrust event along the Japan Trench, where the Pacific plateis subducting beneath the Tohoku district. The national seismic hazard assessment program, which had
been initiated by the Japanese government after the 1995 Kobe earthquake (Headquarters forEarthquake Research Promotion, 1999) based on the characteristic earthquake model (Schwartz andCoppersmith, 1984) and the asperity model (Lay and Kanamori, 1981), was unable to foresee thisearthquake (Geller, 2011). For example, the program merely identified a cycle of six M7 to M8characteristic earthquakes in the landside of the Miyagi-oki region; further, the program only reported
the high probability of another M7 earthquake occurrence in the region (Fig. 6).

5

Fig. 6. Results of the national seismic hazard assessment program for the Tohoku district (EarthquakeResearch Committee, 2005).
In addition, the Japanese government installed nation-wide dense arrays of seismometers and GPS
receivers (Figs. 1 and 2) after the Kobe earthquake (Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion,1999). In their study, Nishimura et al. (2004) estimated the annual rates of back slip (defined as thedrag of the overriding plate due to interplate coupling) using GPS data during a calm period before the2011 Tohoku earthquake. The coseismic slip distribution by Koketsu et al. (2011) bears a close
resemblance to the distribution of these back slip rates (Fig. 7). According to previous studies, an areawith large back slip rates was thought to be related to characteristic earthquakes. However, our result
demonstrates that such an area is related to a megathrust earthquake.

Fig. 7. Comparison of the distributions of coseismic slips during the 2011 Tohoku earthquake andback slip rates by Nishimura et al. (2004).

6Therefore, we believe that the 2011 Tohoku earthquake could have been foreseen with respect to atleast its location and extent if the GPS array data had been monitored considering their relation to amegathrust earthquake. We also believe that this foreseeability can be applied to megathrustearthquakes in other subduction zones where GPS arrays have been installed. Subsequently, it is themost important for seismic hazard assessments in these subduction zones to identify past megathrustearthquakes.

CONCLUSIONS
We have pointed out the one general feature and three specific features of the 2011 Tohoku earthquake
and Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster. We have then explained the details of the three specificfeatures as the seismological and geodetic aspects of the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and Great East
Japan Earthquake Disaster.

REFERENCES
Cabinet of Japan (2011). Press Conference by Prime Minister Naoto Kan(http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/kan/statement/201104/01kaiken_e.html).
Earthquake Research Committee (2005). National Seismic Hazard Maps for Japan,(http://www.jishin.go.jp/main/chousa/06mar_yosoku-e/NationalSeismicHazardMaps.pdf).
Fire and Disaster Management Agency of Japan (2012). The 143rd report (13 January 2012)(http://www.fdma.go.jp/bn/2012/detail/691.html).
Fujii, Y., Satake, K., Sakai, S., Shinohara, M. and Kanazawa, T. (2011). Tsunami source of the 2011
off the Pacific coast of Tohoku, Japan earthquake, Earth Planets Space, 63, 815-820.
Geller, R. J. (2011). Shake-up time for Japanese seismology, Nature, 472, 407-409.
Global CMT Project (2011). Global CMT Catalog Search(http://www.globalcmt.org/CMTsearch.html).
GSI (2010). Geodetic survey (http://www.gsi.go.jp/ENGLISH/page_e30030.html).
Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion (1999). The Promotion of Earthquake Research,(http://www.jishin.go.jp/main/suihon-e/sogo.pdf ).
JMA (2011a). On the Sanriku-oki earthquake at 14:46 on 11 March 2011 ~2nd report~(http://www.jma.go.jp/jma/press/1103/ 11c/201103111620.html).
JMA (2011b). The 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku Earthquake ~28th report~(http://www.jma.go.jp/jma/press/1103/25b/201103251730.html).
JMA (2011c). Seismological and Volcanological Bulletin of Japan for March 2011(http://www.hinet.bosai.go.jp/REGS/JMA/list/).
Kanamori, H. (1972). Mechanism of tsunami earthquakes, Phys. Earth Planet. Interiors, 6, 346-359.
Kanamori, H. and Heaton, T. H. (2000). Microscopic and macroscopic physics of earthquakes, inGeoComplexity and the Physics of Earthquakes, Geophysical Monograph 120, 147-163.
Koketsu, K., Miyake, H., Fujiwara, H., Hashimoto, T. (2008). Progress towards a Japan integrated
velocity structure model and long-period ground motion hazard map, Proceedings of the 14thWorld Conference on Earthquake Engineering, S10-038.
Koketsu, K., Yokota, Y., Nishimura, N., Yagi, Y., Miyazaki, S., Satake, K., Fujii, Y., Miyake, H., Sakai,S., Yamanaka, Y. and Okada, T. (2011). A unified source model for the 2011 Tohoku earthquake,
Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 310, 480-487.
Kyodo News (2011). Over 90% of March 11 victims died from drowning(http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/over-90-of-march-11-victims-died-from-dro
wning-npa).
Lay, T. and Kanamori, H. (1981). An asperity model of large earthquake sequences, in Earthquake7Prediction ⎯ An international review, Maurice Ewing Series 4, 579-592.
Miyake, H., Yokota, Y., Si, H. and Koketsu, K. (2012). Ground motion aspects of the 2011 Tohoku
earthquake: Crack-like ruptures with down-dip short-period phases, Geophys. Res. Lett., inrevision.
NIED (2008). (K-NET, KiK-net) (http://www.kyoshin.bosai.go.jp/index_en.html).
Nishimura, T., Hirasawa, T., Miyazaki, S., Sagiya, T., Tada, T., Miura, S. and Tanaka, K. (2004).
Temporal change of interplate coupling in northeastern Japan during 1995–2002 estimated fromcontinuous GPS observations, Geophys. J. Int., 157, 901-916.
Schwartz, D. P. and Coppersmith, K. J. (1984). Fault behavior and characteristic earthquakes:
Examples from the Wasatch and San Andreas fault zones, J. Geophys. Res., 89, 5681-5698.
Si, H., K. Koketsu and Miyake, H. (2012). Oversaturation of ground motion from megathrustearthquakes, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., submitted.
Lorito, S., Romano, F., Atzori, S., Tong, X., Avallone, A., McCloskey, J., Cocco, M., Boschi, E. andPiatanesi, A. (2011). Limited overlap between the seismic gap and coseismic slip of the great2010 Chile earthquake, Nature Geoscience, 4, 173-177.
Tanioka, Y. and Satake, K. (1996). Fault parameters of the 1896 Sanriku tsunami earthquake estimatedfrom tsunami numerical modeling, Geophys. Res. Lett., 23, 1549-1552.
USGS (2011a). Largest Earthquakes in the World Since 1900
(http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/10_largest_world.php).
USGS (2011b). Earthquakes with 1,000 or More Deaths since 1900
(http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/world_deaths.php).
Yokota, Y., Koketsu, K., Fujii, Y., Satake, K., Sakai, S., Shinohara, M. and Kanazawa, T. (2011). Joint
inversion of strong motion, teleseismic, geodetic, and tsunami datasets for the rupture process ofthe 2011 Tohoku earthquake, Geophys. Res. Lett., L00G21, doi:10.1029/2011GL050098.

8