HOW COMPLETE ARE HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKE RECORDS IN CENTRAL EUROPE?
Mainly two different approaches have been proposed for checking completeness of seismic catalogues: Temporal course of earthquake frequency (TCEF), generally used in Europe, and the completeness method proposed by Stepp (1972), based on statistical analysis of mean earthquake recurrence interval for varying time windows. We compared systematically the effects of those different methods on the GR relation, as well as the influence of removing fore- and aftershocks.
For this purpose, we created a new composite catalogue for Austria and the Vienna Basin, based on four different earthquake catalogues of different record length. The new composite catalogue includes data from surrounding regions such as the Vienna Basin outside Austria and a buffer region 100km outside the boundary of the Austria and Vienna basin. The composite catalogue covers data between 1048 - 2009AD. This newly compiled composite catalogue has been declustered manually using magnitude-dependent space and time windows.
The derived a and b-parameters depend strongly on the completeness method we used. To avoid the ambiguities related to different local intensity magnitude conversions, the completeness checks are made for intensity. Stepp method seems to be more reliable because it does not include the highest intensity (I = X), because the observation period is too short for constraining a stable recurrence interval. On the other hand TCEF includes higher intensity classes for estimation of a and b-parameters of GR relation. Both completeness methods have been applied also on Vienna Basin source zone, a subset of the composite catalogue. Comparison shows that completeness of the entire dataset is apparently overestimated, especially for smaller intensities.