сотрудник с 01.01.2024 по настоящее время
Институт океанологии им. П.П. Ширшова РАН (Лаборатория цунами им. С.Л. Соловьева, старший научный сотрудник)
с 01.01.2023 по настоящее время
Москва, г. Москва и Московская область, Россия
Москва, г. Москва и Московская область, Россия
с 01.01.2020 по настоящее время
Московский государственный университет имени М.В.Ломоносова (Физический факультет, кафедра физики Земли, студент)
с 01.01.2018 по 01.01.2023
Москва, г. Москва и Московская область, Россия
Институт теории прогноза землетрясений и математической геофизики Российской академии наук
Геофизический центр Российской академии наук
Москва, Россия
ВАК 1.6 Науки о Земле и окружающей среде
УДК 55 Геология. Геологические и геофизические науки
УДК 550.34 Сейсмология
УДК 550.383 Главное магнитное поле Земли
ГРНТИ 37.31 Физика Земли
ГРНТИ 37.01 Общие вопросы геофизики
ГРНТИ 37.15 Геомагнетизм и высокие слои атмосферы
ГРНТИ 37.25 Океанология
ГРНТИ 38.01 Общие вопросы геологии
ГРНТИ 36.00 ГЕОДЕЗИЯ. КАРТОГРАФИЯ
ГРНТИ 37.00 ГЕОФИЗИКА
ГРНТИ 38.00 ГЕОЛОГИЯ
ГРНТИ 39.00 ГЕОГРАФИЯ
ГРНТИ 52.00 ГОРНОЕ ДЕЛО
ОКСО 05.06.01 Науки о Земле
ББК 26 Науки о Земле
ТБК 6323 Сейсмология
ТБК 63 Науки о Земле. Экология
BISAC SCI082000 Earth Sciences / Seismology & Volcanism
BISAC SCI SCIENCE
The July 29(30), 2025 Kamchatka earthquake occurred only 73 years after the major November 4, 1952 event in the same subduction zone, highlighting the relatively short interval between two large ruptures in this segment. The 2025 earthquake (MW 8.8) ruptured approximately 480 km of the Kuril-Kamchatka Trench, generating a moderate tsunami with maximum recorded wave heights of ~4–5 m, smaller than expected for an event of this magnitude. Based on synthetic earthquake catalogs generated using stochastic modeling of background seismicity and ETAS-type aftershock sequences, the most likely location and depth of a future earthquake with MW ≥ 7.7 were identified as early as October 2024 in this region. Moreover, our prior calculations of accumulated seismogenic potential in this segment of the subduction zone, based on 28 years of continuous GNSS observations, indicated that an earthquake of this magnitude was indeed possible. GNSS-derived estimates of accumulated elastic strain indicate that the July 29(30), 2025 mainshock released the majority of the stored seismogenic potential, while large September 13 and 18, 2025 aftershocks likely redistributed stress along the subduction interface, partially releasing previously accumulated strain. Estimates of remaining seismogenic potential suggest that areas north of the 2025 rupture remain capable of producing large earthquakes (MW ≈ 8), emphasizing the importance of continuous geodetic and seismic monitoring, and demonstrating that combining long-term probabilistic seismic modeling with GNSS-based strain measurements can improve the anticipation of large earthquakes.
Kuril–Kamchatka subduction zone, 2025 Kamchatka megathrust earthquake, earthquake forecasting, probabilistic seismic modeling, interplate coupling, seismogenic potential, numerical modeling, GNSS
1. Ammon C. J., Kanamori H. and Lay T. A great earthquake doublet and seismic stress transfer cycle in the central Kuril islands // Nature. — 2008. — Vol. 451, no. 7178. — P. 561–565. — https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06521
2. Bilek S. L. and Lay T. Subduction zone megathrust earthquakes // Geosphere. — 2018. — Vol. 14, no. 4. — P. 1468– 1500. — https://doi.org/10.1130/ges01608.1
3. Chebrov V. N., Droznin D. V., Kugaenko Yu. A., et al. The system of detailed seismological observations in Kamchatka in 2011 // Journal of Volcanology and Seismology. — 2013. — Vol. 7, no. 1. — P. 16–36. — https://doi.org/10.1134/s0742046313010028
4. DeMets C., Gordon R. G. and Argus D. F. Geologically current plate motions // Geophysical Journal International. — 2010. — Vol. 181, no. 1. — P. 1–80. — https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246x.2009.04491.x
5. Dolgikh G. I., Kulchin Yu. N., Dolgikh S. G., et al. Deformation Anomalies of the Tsunamigenic Earthquake of July 29, 2025 // Doklady Earth Sciences. — 2025. — Vol. 525, no. 2. — P. 1–3. — https://doi.org/10.1134/s1028334x2560879x
6. Dziewonski A. M. and Anderson D. L. Preliminary reference Earth model // Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors. — 1981. — Vol. 25, no. 4. — P. 297–356. — https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9201(81)90046-7
7. Fedotov S. A. and Solomatin A. V. The long-term earthquake forecast for the Kuril-Kamchatka island arc for the September 2013 to August 2018 period; the seismicity of the arc during preceding deep-focus earthquakes in the sea of Okhotsk (in 2008, 2012, and 2013 at M = 7.7, 7.7, and 8.3) // Journal of Volcanology and Seismology. — 2015. — Vol. 9, no. 2. — P. 65–80. — https://doi.org/10.1134/s0742046315020025
8. Hanks T. C. and Kanamori H. A moment magnitude scale // Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. — 1979. — Vol. 84, B5. — P. 2348–2350. — https://doi.org/10.1029/jb084ib05p02348
9. Iinuma T. Postseismic Uplift Along the Pacific Coast of Tohoku and Kanto Districts Associated with the 2011 off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake // Journal of Disaster Research. — 2018. — Vol. 13, no. 3. — P. 496–502. — https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2018.p0496
10. Klein E., Vigny C., Nocquet J.-M., et al. A 20 year-long GNSS solution across South-America with focus in Chile // BSGF – Earth Sciences Bulletin. — 2022. — Vol. 193. — P. 5. — https://doi.org/10.1051/bsgf/2022005
11. Kostenko I. S., Zaytsev A. I. and Pelinovsky E. N. Tsunami on July 29 (30), 2025 in the Kamchatka-Kuril Zone: Instrumental Observation and Modeling // Doklady Earth Sciences. — 2025. — Vol. 525, no. 2. — https://doi.org/10.1134/s1028334x25608648
12. Kreemer C., Blewitt G., Hammond W. C., et al. Global deformation from the great 2004 Sumatra-Andaman Earthquake observed by GPS: Implications for rupture process and global reference frame // Earth, Planets and Space. — 2006. — Vol. 58, no. 2. — P. 141–148. — https://doi.org/10.1186/bf03353370
13. Lin Yu.-N., Sladen A., Ortega-Culaciati F., et al. Coseismic and postseismic slip associated with the 2010 Maule Earthquake, Chile: Characterizing the Arauco Peninsula barrier effect // Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. — 2013. — Vol. 118, no. 6. — P. 3142–3159. — https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrb.50207
14. Mikhailov V. O., Konvisar A. M., Smirnov V. B., et al. The Rupture Surface Model of the July 29, 2025 Mw 8.8 Kamchatka Earthquake Based on Satellite Geodesy and Interferometry Data // Doklady Earth Sciences. — 2025. — Vol. 525, no. 2. — https://doi.org/10.1134/s1028334x25608752
15. Nikolaidis R. Observation of Geodetic and Seismic Deformation with the Global Positioning System : PhD thesis / Nikolaidis R. — San Diego, 2002. — 305 p.
16. Nishimura T., Munekane H. and Yarai H. The 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku Earthquake and its aftershocks observed by GEONET // Earth, Planets and Space. — 2011. — Vol. 63, no. 7. — P. 631–636. — https://doi.org/10.5047/eps.2011.06.025
17. Okada Y. Surface deformation due to shear and tensile faults in a half-space // Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. — 1985. — Vol. 75, no. 4. — P. 1135–1154. — https://doi.org/10.1785/bssa0750041135
18. Pollitz F. F. Coseismic Deformation From Earthquake Faulting On A Layered Spherical Earth // Geophysical Journal International. — 1996. — Vol. 125, no. 1. — P. 1–14. — https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246x.1996.tb06530.x
19. Savage J. C. A dislocation model of strain accumulation and release at a subduction zone // Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. — 1983. — Vol. 88, B6. — P. 4984–4996. — https://doi.org/10.1029/jb088ib06p04984
20. Shebalin P. N., Baranov S. V., Vorobieva I. A., et al. Seismicity Modeling in Tasks of Seismic Hazard Assessment // Doklady Earth Sciences. — 2024. — Vol. 515, no. 1. — P. 514–525. — https://doi.org/10.1134/s1028334x23603115
21. Shebalin P. N., Gvishiani A. D., Malyutin P. A., et al. A Synthetic Earthquake Catalog for the Eastern Sector of the Russian Arctic Zone // Journal of Volcanology and Seismology. — 2025. — Vol. 19, no. 2. — P. 113–126. — https://doi.org/10.1134/s0742046325700083
22. Shebalin P. N., Narteau C. and Baranov S. V. Earthquake productivity law // Geophysical Journal International. — 2020. — Vol. 222, no. 2. — P. 1264–1269. — https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggaa252
23. Sorokhtin O. G. and Lobkovsky L. I. Mechanism for pulling of sediments in subduction zone of lithospheric plates // Izvestiya of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Physics of the Solid Earth. — 1976. — Vol. 12, no. 5. — P. 3–10.
24. Steblov G. and Vladimirova I. Geodetic Inversions and Applications in Geodynamics // Applications of Data Assimilation and Inverse Problems in the Earth Sciences. — Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2023. — P. 278–292. — https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009180412.019
25. Steblov G. M., Vasilenko N. F., Prytkov A. S., et al. Dynamics of the Kuril-Kamchatka subduction zone from GPS data // Izvestiya, Physics of the Solid Earth. — 2010. — Vol. 46, no. 5. — P. 440–445. — https://doi.org/10.1134.s1069351310050095
26. United States Geological Survey (USGS). M 8.8 – 2025 Kamchatka Peninsula, Russia Earthquake. — URL: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us6000qw60 (visited on 11/02/2025).
