<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>Z. Lu</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Charles Wicks</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>Tim J. Wright</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2004</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;The&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;i&gt;M&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;w&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;7.9, Denali fault earthquake (&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="sc"&gt;DFE&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;) is the largest continental strike-slip earthquake to occur since the development of Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (In&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="sc"&gt;SAR&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;). We use five interferograms, constructed using radar images from the Canadian Radarsat-1 satellite, to map the surface deformation at the western end of the fault rupture. Additional geodetic data are provided by displacements observed at 40 campaign and continuous Global Positioning System (&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="sc"&gt;GPS&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;) sites. We use the data to determine the geometry of the Susitna Glacier fault, thrusting on which initiated the&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="sc"&gt;DFE&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;, and to determine a slip model for the entire event that is consistent with both the In&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="sc"&gt;SAR&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;and&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="sc"&gt;GPS&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;data. We find there was an average of 7.3 &amp;plusmn; 0.4 m slip on the Susitna Glacier fault, between 1 and 9.5 km depth on a 29 km long fault that dips north at 41 &amp;plusmn; 0.7&amp;deg; and has a surface projection close to the mapped rupture. On the Denali fault, a simple model with large slip patches finds a maximum of 8.7 &amp;plusmn; 0.7 m of slip between the surface and 14.3 &amp;plusmn; 0.2 km depth. A more complex distributed slip model finds a peak of 12.5 &amp;plusmn; 0.8 m in the upper 4 km, significantly higher than the observed surface slip. We estimate a geodetic moment of 670 &amp;plusmn; 10 &amp;times; 10&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;18&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;N m (&lt;/span&gt;&lt;i&gt;M&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;w&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;7.9), consistent with seismic estimates. Lack of preseismic data resulted in an absence of In&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="sc"&gt;SAR&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;coverage for the eastern half of the&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="sc"&gt;DFE&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;rupture. A dedicated geodetic In&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="sc"&gt;SAR&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;mission could obviate coverage problems in the future.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1785/0120040623</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>Seismological Society of America</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Constraining the slip distribution and fault geometry of the M&lt;sub&gt;w&lt;/sub&gt; 7.9, 3 November 2002, Denali fault earthquake with Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar and Global Positioning System data</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>