## 2 Methodology  
### InSAR Observations and Processing  
In this work, we used Sentinel-1 (ESA Copernicus project) data in Interferometric Wide (IW) swath mode to retrieve the ground displacement field induced by the Genaveh earthquake; it acquires data with a 250 km swath at a 5 m by 20 m spatial resolution (single look). IW mode captures three sub-swaths using Terrain Observation with Progressive Scans SAR (TOPSAR). A white rectangle in Figure 1 indicates the footprints of SAR images covering the area of the event. We generated four interferograms, each with a temporal baseline of 12 days, to measure the mainshock and the M\({}_{\rm W}\) 5.0 aftershock deformations, both from ascending and descending orbits (Table 2).  
Co-seismic processing was carried out with ENVI(r) SARScape(r) (Sarmap, CH, Version 5.5, distributed by HARRIS Geospatial Solutions, Switzerland, Retrieved from [[http://www.sarmap.ch/](http://www.sarmap.ch/)]([http://www.sarmap.ch/](http://www.sarmap.ch/))) software, using the two-pass InSAR method to produce the interferograms [26]. The Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) digital elevation model (DEM) with 30 m resolution (Available online: [[https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/](https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/)]([https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/](https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/)) (accessed on 5 May 2021)) was used to remove the topographic phase contributions [27], precise orbits (Available online: [[https://qc.sentinel1.eo.esa.int](https://qc.sentinel1.eo.esa.int)]([https://qc.sentinel1.eo.esa.int](https://qc.sentinel1.eo.esa.int)) (accessed on 19 May 2021)) were used for orbital corrections and the Goldstein filtering method was also applied to wrapped fringes [28] to reduce the interferometric phase noise. A phase unwrapping and displacement maps were created using the minimum cost flow (MCF) algorithm [29] and the slant range maps were eventually geocoded to UTM zone 39, with a pixel size of 30 m. The interferograms and the displacement maps are shown in Figure 2; due to the favorable conditions (dry soil, short temporal and spatial baselines), the interferometric coherence is very high and the coverage is continuous.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Event**} & **Interferogram** & **Master Date** & **Slave Date** & **Pass Direction** & **Orbit Number** & **Normal Spatial** & **Temporal Baseline (Day)** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Mainshock} & 1 & 14 April 2021 & 26 April 2021 & Ascending & 101 & 41.21 & 12 \\ \cline{2-7}  & 2 & 10 April 2021 & 22 April 2021 & Descending & 35 & 39.18 & 12 \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Aftershock} & 1 & 20 May 2021 & 01 June 2021 & Ascending & 101 & 6.73 & 12 \\ \cline{2-7}  & 2 & 16 May 2021 & 28 May 2021 & Descending & 35 & 39.92 & 12 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Sentinel-1 pairs used to detect the permanent deformations of the Genaveh mainshock and the aftershock.  
Figure 2: Interferometric fringes (**a**,**b**) and displacement maps (**c**,**d**) for ascending (left) and descending (right) orbits for the 2021 Genaveh mainshock. Positive displacement indicates a movement toward the satellite (e.g., uplift), whereas negative displacement indicates a movement away from the satellite (e.g., subsidence).  
We also considered the possibility that the M\({}_{\rm W}\) 5.0 occurred on May 21 st induced a detectable surface effect; the two displacement maps, obtained from the processing of images listed in Table 2, are shown in Figure 3. The two maps show a small, but clear, signal of a few centimeters that can be ascribed to several different causes, and we will investigate through their modeling in the next section.