✦ LIBER ✦

A Comparison of Seismic Array Processing Methods

✍ Scribed by P. E. Green Jr.; E. J. Kelly Jr.; M. J. Levin

Book ID: 108733080
Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
Year: 1966
Tongue: English
Weight: 709 KB
Volume: 11
Category: Article
ISSN: 0956-540X
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-246x.1966.tb03493.x

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES

Digital processing of seismic array data

✍ D.W. King; R.F. Mereu; K.J. Muirhead 📂 Article 📅 1974 🏛 Elsevier Science ⚖ 59 KB

Automatic Processing of Multi-Array Long

Automatic Processing of Multi-Array Long-Period Seismic Data

✍ Mack, Harry ;Smart, Eugene 📂 Article 📅 2009 🏛 Wiley (Blackwell Publishing) ⚖ 489 KB

Stable nonlinear methods for sensor arra

Stable nonlinear methods for sensor array processing;

✍ Byrne, C.; Steele, A. 📂 Article 📅 1985 🏛 IEEE 🌐 English ⚖ 498 KB

A comparison of sputum processing/fixati

A comparison of sputum processing/fixation methods

✍ Khabbaz, N; Otsuka, C; Webster, R 📂 Article 📅 2000 🏛 Elsevier Science 🌐 English ⚖ 120 KB

A comparison of two methods of encoding

A comparison of two methods of encoding arrays

✍ D. Wood 📂 Article 📅 1978 🏛 Springer Netherlands 🌐 English ⚖ 515 KB

Comparison of two methods for seismic ha

Comparison of two methods for seismic hazard assessment in a low-seismicity area

✍ Th. Crook; J. J. Egozcue 📂 Article 📅 1992 🏛 Springer Netherlands 🌐 English ⚖ 477 KB

The EGO method, developed by Egozcue et al. and the SRAMSC method, originally developed by Cornell and later programmed by McGuire, to assess the seismic hazard, are compared for the low seismicity area 'Belgium, The Netherlands, and NW Germany'. Using the same input data, the results of the EGO met