Automation of shear-wave splitting parameter determination of local earthquakes at Yellowstone : application as indicator of crustal stress and temporal variation

Shear-wave splitting can be a useful technique for determining crustal stress fields in volcanic settings and temporal variations associated with activity. Splitting parameters were determined for a subset of local earthquakes recorded from 2000-2010 at Yellowstone. Analysis was automated using an unsupervised cluster analysis technique to determine optimum splitting parameters from 270 analysis windows for each event. Six stations clearly exhibit preferential fast polarization values sub-orthogonal to the direction of minimum horizontal compression. Yellowstone deformation results in a local crustal stress field differing from the regional field dominated by NE-SW extension, and fast directions reflect this difference rotating around the caldera maintaining perpendicularity to the rim. One station exhibits temporal variations concordant with identified periods of caldera subsidence and uplift. From splitting measurements, we calculated a crustal anisotropy of ~17-23% and crack density ~0.12-0.17 possibly resulting from stress-aligned fluid filled microcracks in the upper crust and an active hydrothermal system.

Exploration of Ground Penetrating Radar and Time Domain Reflectometry Methods for the Determination of Pavement Dielectric Constant

Traditionally, densities of newly built roadways are checked by direct sampling (cores) or by nuclear density gauge measurements. For roadway engineers, density of asphalt pavement surfaces is essential to determine pavement quality. Unfortunately, field measurements of density by direct sampling or by nuclear measurement are slow processes. Therefore, I have explored the use of rapidly-deployed ground penetrating radar (GPR) as an alternative means of determining pavement quality. The dielectric constant of pavement surface may be a substructure parameter that correlates with pavement density, and can be used as a proxy when density of asphalt is not known from nuclear or destructive methods. The dielectric constant of the asphalt can be determined using ground penetrating radar (GPR). In order to use GPR for evaluation of road surface quality, the relationship between dielectric constants of asphalt and their densities must be established. Field measurements of GPR were taken at four highway sites in Houghton and Keweenaw Counties, Michigan, where density values were also obtained using nuclear methods in the field. Laboratory studies involved asphalt samples taken from the field sites and samples created in the laboratory. These were tested in various ways, including, density, thickness, and time domain reflectometry (TDR). In the field, GPR data was acquired using a 1000 MHz air-launched unit and a ground-coupled unit at 200 and 500 MHz. The equipment used was owned and operated by the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) and available for this study for a total of four days during summer 2005 and spring 2006. The analysis of the reflected waveforms included “routine” processing for velocity using commercial software and direct evaluation of reflection coefficients to determine a dielectric constant. The dielectric constants computed from velocities do not agree well with those obtained from reflection coefficients. Perhaps due to the limited range of asphalt types studied, no correlation between density and dielectric constant was evident. Laboratory measurements were taken with samples removed from the field and samples created for this study. Samples from the field were studied using TDR, in order to obtain dielectric constant directly, and these correlated well with the estimates made from reflection coefficients. Samples created in the laboratory were measured using 1000 MHz air-launched GPR, and 400 MHz ground-coupled GPR, each under both wet and dry conditions. On the basis of these observations, I conclude that dielectric constant of asphalt can be reliably measured from waveform amplitude analysis of GJPR data, based on the consistent agreement with that obtained in the laboratory using TDR. Because of the uniformity of asphalts studied here, any correlation between dielectric constant and density is not yet apparent.

A SURVEY OF DISTANCE MAGIC GRAPHS

In this report, we survey results on distance magic graphs and some closely related graphs. A distance magic labeling of a graph G with magic constant k is a bijection l from the vertex set to {1, 2, . . . , n}, such that for every vertex x Σ l(y) = k,y∈NG(x) where NG(x) is the set of vertices of G adjacent to x. If the graph G has a distance magic labeling we say that G is a distance magic graph. In Chapter 1, we explore the background of distance magic graphs by introducing examples of magic squares, magic graphs, and distance magic graphs. In Chapter 2, we begin by examining some basic results on distance magic graphs. We next look at results on different graph structures including regular graphs, multipartite graphs, graph products, join graphs, and splitting graphs. We conclude with other perspectives on distance magic graphs including embedding theorems, the matrix representation of distance magic graphs, lifted magic rectangles, and distance magic constants. In Chapter 3, we study graph labelings that retain the same labels as distance magic labelings, but alter the definition in some other way. These labelings include balanced distance magic labelings, closed distance magic labelings, D-distance magic labelings, and distance antimagic labelings. In Chapter 4, we examine results on neighborhood magic labelings, group distance magic labelings, and group distance antimagic labelings. These graph labelings change the label set, but are otherwise similar to distance magic graphs. In Chapter 5, we examine some applications of distance magic and distance antimagic labeling to the fair scheduling of tournaments. In Chapter 6, we conclude with some open problems.