Frequency-Dependent Scattering Observed

in P- and Surface-Wave Arrivals From

South India

A.K.Rai

Pure and Applied Geophysics

pageoph

ISSN 0033-4553
Volume 174
Number 3

Pure Appl. Geophys. (2017) 174:895-905

DOI 10.1007/s00024-016-1426-5

1 23
Your article is protected by copyright and
all rights are held exclusively by Springer
International Publishing. This e-offprint is
for personal use only and shall not be self-
archived in electronic repositories. If you wish
to self-archive your article, please use the
accepted manuscript version for posting on
your own website. You may further deposit
the accepted manuscript version in any
repository, provided it is only made publicly
available 12 months after official publication
or later and provided acknowledgement is
given to the original source of publication
and a link is inserted to the published article
on Springer's website. The link must be
accompanied by the following text: "The final
publication is available at link.springer.com.

1 23
 Author's personal copy
Pure Appl. Geophys. 174 (2017), 895905
 2016 Springer International Publishing
DOI 10.1007/s00024-016-1426-5
Frequency-Dependent Scattering Observed in P- and Surface-Wave Arrivals From South India
A. K. RAI1
AbstractAnomalies in polarization angles of teleseismic
waves have been used to understand effect of scattered arrivals
from subsurface heterogeneities. Seismological data recorded in
southern India show polarization anomalies up to 5 for several
stations. These anomalies are most pronounced for earthquakes
from western and southern azimuths. Furthermore, stations located
near the boundary of Dharwar craton and southern Granulites are
more affected by scattered waves. Considering that many of the
nearby stations show similar patterns of polarization anomalies, it
is likely that the source of scattered energy is located at shallower
depths. The non-stationary nature of seismic arrivals warrants
determination of frequency-dependent polarization. Result
obtained using multi-taper spectral analysis method indicates that
data are contaminated at frequencies greater than *2 Hz for most
of the stations. Furthermore, surface-wave records also indicate off-
azimuth arrivals, and quasi-Love waves indicating heterogeneities
or anisotropy in the subsurface. These small-scale heterogeneities
that may be located in crust may be important for studies using
converted phases and ground motion prediction studies.
Key words: Heterogeneity, scattering, multi-taper spectral
analysis, India.
1. Introduction
The peninsular India is an amalgamation of a num-
ber of Archaean cratons, Proterozoic mobile belts, intra-
cratonic sedimentary basins (e.g., Cuddapah) and large
igneous flood basalt province, such as Deccan volcanics
(Fig. 1). The grade of metamorphism gradually
increases from low-grade granite-gneiss greenstone
(*3.4 Ga) rocks of Dharwar craton in the north, to
*2.5 Ga-old high-grade granulites in the southern part
(Ramakrishnan and Vaidyanathan 2008). Various ter-
ranes of the Indian shield are traversed by a number of
shear zones and lineaments in the lithosphere. The
shield region has experienced episodic deformation
1
Indian Institute of Technology Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar
751007, India. E-mail: akrai@iitbbs.ac.in
Pure and Applied Geophysics
during its geologic history and a major tectono-thermal
stress at the ProterozoicPaleozoic boundary
(*600 Ma). These are recognized by isotopic re-setting
of minerals and whole rock assemblages of older pro-
toliths, and lithospheric deformations evident from
seismological observations (Rai et al. 2009).
The presence of anisotropy and scattering in seis-
mic data has been reported from various parts of India
and elsewhere (Rai et al. 2008; Deshpande and Mohan
2016). While seismic anisotropy produces azimuthal
variation of seismic arrivals, shear-wave birefrin-
gence, and apparent discrepancy between Love and
Rayleigh waves (Anderson 1961; Backus 1962),
effects of scattering due to small-scale heterogeneities
are usually random on seismic arrivals. Analysis of
polarization of first arrivals in three component seismic
waveform can be used to determine dominant orien-
tation of arriving waves. Estimates of deviations of
arrival azimuths from expected directions are often
interpreted as due to contamination of seismic records
from off-azimuth arrivals. These off-azimuth arrivals
are primarily caused by scattering due to the presence
of structural features, such as sedimentary basins and
crustal faults (Crampin et al. 1982; Hu and Menke
1994; Farra and Begat 1995; Bokelmann 1995;
Morozov and Din 2008; Kawahara 2011). Thus,
information on polarization of teleseismic body and
surface waves provides important information about
seismic characteristics in the vicinity of the recording
stations (receiver-side effects).
One of the qualitative ways to determine orienta-
tion of dominant arrival of seismic phases is by visual
inspection of the particle motion plotted for two pairs
of the three component seismograms. The linearity of
the motion indicates whether the incident arrival rep-
resents a plane polarized, or a pure state (Samson
1983a), whereas the inclination of motion allows
estimation of the azimuth and inclination of that
 Author's personal copy
896 A. K. Rai Pure Appl. Geophys.

Figure 1
Location of stations (left) shown by red triangles. The locations of earthquakes recorded by the stations (small circles) are shown on right. The
two circles denote distances of 30 and 90 from of the center (star). DVP Deccan Volcanic Province, EGMB Eastern Ghat Mobile Belt, WDC
& EDC Western and Eastern Dharwar Craton, SGT Southern Granulite Terrane

particular arrival. If the seismic instruments are prop-
erly aligned, the main reasons for changes in wave
polarization (or propagation directions) are refractions
and reflections in the subsurface from randomly dis-
tributed geological features. These scattering effects or
anomalies are mostly interpreted to be due to receiver-
side effects, because polarization anomalies due to
source-side scattering are small because of large dis-
tances. Furthermore, different dimensions of
heterogeneities would affect different frequencies.
Therefore, it is important to remove contaminating
signal for obtaining results of high accuracy in obser-
vational seismology, such as study of structure of the
lithosphere using Ps and Sp converted phases. Such
contaminations can be easily determined by polariza-
tion analysis and frequency-domain multi-taper
spectral analysis (Thomson 1982; Samson 1983b; Park
1987), as described in the following sections.
2. Data and Analysis
Earthquake records from seismic stations located in
southern part of India were used in this work (Fig. 1).
The seismographs were temporarily installed and oper-
ated jointly by the National Geophysical Research
Institute, University of Cambridge, UK and few other
institutes at sites distributed in the Indian shield region
(Rai et al. 2008, 2009). Data were recorded at sampling
frequency of 20 Hz; therefore, signals up to 10 Hz are
preserved without aliasing effect. A large number of
earthquakes that were recorded by the network were
either from Andaman-Sumatra subduction zone in
south-east direction or from the Japan trench in the
north-east. Earthquakes from western and southern azi-
muths are recorded less frequently. About 1000 station-
event pairs that were within an epicentral distance of 30o
and 90o were analyzed in this study. The time-domain
principal component analysis or eigenvalue analysis is
one method to determine polarization of seismic waves
and gain insights into the nature of the seismic arrivals
and their interactions within the subsurface.
Using a wide frequency signal to determine
polarization may result in estimates that are domi-
nated by peak amplitudes in a specific frequency
band. Multi-taper spectral analysis method has been
used to determine the polarization characteristics of
seismic waves as a continuous function of frequency.
This provides an important constraint on scale of
heterogeneity in the subsurface and information that
is independent from those obtained from travel times,
shear-wave splitting, and coda analysis.
 Author's personal copy
Vol. 174, (2017) Frequency-Dependent Scattering Observed in P- and Surface-Wave Arrivals From South India
2.1. The Principal Component Analysis
In one-dimensional, radially stratified, isotropic,
and homogeneous Earth, primary or P waves are
expected to be polarized in the direction of wave
propagation. However, the real earth is significantly
different from these ideal cases, and seismic records
are contaminated with back-ground noise, scattered
waves from small-scale heterogeneity, refracted,
reflected, converted phases that immediately follow
direct arrivals and contaminate the same. The
discrepancy between the predicted and observed
polarization of teleseismic P waves can be used to
study effect of inhomogeneity in subsurface and
contamination of direct arrivals with scattered
energy. The predicted azimuth of arrival can be
determined by the known station-earthquake loca-
tions. The eigenvalue analysis of first few seconds
(one cycle) of the three component P waveform
provides a quantitative estimate of the degree of
linearity of the particle motion. The direction of
approach (azimuth) and angle of incidence (inclina-
tion) can be estimated by the analysis of the
covariance matrix of the three components of ground
motion (Kanasewich 1975; Jurkevics 1988).
For a three component seismic time series (Z, N,
E), the covariance matrix (S) is given by
0 1
VarZ  CovZ; N  CovZ; E
S @ CovN; Z  VarN  CovN; E A:
CovE; Z  CovE; N  VarE
If V1, V2, and V3 are three eigenvectors corre-
sponding to the three eigenvalues k1, k2, and k3, such
that k1  k2 and k3, then the largest eigenvalue (k1)
corresponds to the dominant direction of incident
energy. Then, the azimuth of approach (Baz) and
angle of incidence (Inc) are
  
V1E V rad
Baz arctan N ; Inc arctan 1Z
V1 V1
where VE1 , VN Z rad
1 , V1 , and V1 are components of the
eigenvector corresponding to the largest eigenvalues
in the east, north, vertical, and radial directions,
respectively. The component Vrad 1 can be derived once
back azimuth (Baz) is known from Eq. 2. Similarly,
rectilinearity of the motion is defined as
897
 
k2 k3
Rectilinearity 1  : 3
2k1
Rectilinearity takes the value 1.0 when there is only
one non-zero eigenvalue as for pure P wave, the value
is 0.5 when k1 = k2, k3 = 0 (i.e., circular polariza-
tion), and it is 0 when k1 = k2 = k3 (i.e., spherical
polarization). A schematic representation of the polar-
ization ellipsoid associated with a seismic arrival
exhibiting elliptical motion is presented in Fig. 2.
Here, the azimuth of approach is measured clockwise
from north and the angle of incidence is measured from
vertical.
There are several sources of errors that may affect
calculation of the azimuthal anomalies. For example,
uncertainties in the epicentral locations will lead to
uncertainties in the calculated azimuth and are
relatively small. The reliability of polarization mea-
surements also depends on analysis window length,
since multiple reflected and converted phases gener-
ated in the near surface can affect the results. In
practice, only the first cycle of the direct P wave is
windowed. An example of a typical onset window is
shown in Fig. 2. The degree of linearity is also a
guiding factor in determining window length for the
analysis. However, in most of the cases, the window
of analysis extends one cycle of dominant period of
motion both before and after the P-wave onset. For
the typical seismogram and window length shown in
1
Fig. 2, the rectilinearity is 0.98. The P waveforms
were manually picked considering above factors. An
example of P-wave polarization measurements for
some of the stations is shown in Fig. 3. The data are
plotted at two (0.060.2 and 0.332.0 Hz) frequen-
cies and as a function of azimuth of arrivals to the
station. The figure gives an indication that southern
and western directions show higher misfit between
the observed and predicted back azimuths. It is
observed that stations located on different tectonic
2
units (e.g., Dharwar craton, granulite terrane, etc)
show similar patterns of polarization anomalies.
2.2. Frequency-Domain Multi-Taper Analysis
The amplitudes of seismic signals vary strongly
with frequency due to scattered waves of different
wavelengths from structural heterogeneities of
 Author's personal copy
898
Polarization ellipsoid (left) indicating directions of back azimuth (Baz) and angle of incidence (Inc). On the right panel, polarization analysis
window (top) and corresponding particle motions in three orthogonal directions (bottom) for bandpass filtered data (515 s) is shown
various dimensions (Park et al. 1987; Park 1987).
Therefore, it is important to understand the effect of
scattering as a function of frequency. The angle of
polarization as a function of frequency can be
determined by singular value decomposition of the
matrix of eigenspectra. Samson (1983a) suggested
estimate of the spectral density matrix S(f) having
components:
j k
Sjk f y f :y f where j; k 1; 2; 3
and
1 XN 1
y j f xn x j nT ei2PfnT
NT n0
as the Fourier transform of jth component of
the time-series X(t), and the chosen data taper
(xn). Moving average is applied in frequency
domain to smooth the matrix S(f), and eigenvectors
and eigenvalues of smoothed matrix are calculated.
The largest eigenvalue and the corresponding
eigenvector represent the direction of polarization
at frequency f. To separate effects of later arrivals
that may travel through different paths, polariza-
tion of short-time windows around seismic phases
is computed. The taper (xn) applied to data before
its transformation. In brief, data are multiplied
with several leakage-resistant tapers. The tapers
are constructed in such a way that each taper
A. K. Rai Pure Appl. Geophys.
Figure 2
Figure 3 c
Back azimuths for stations BGL, GBA, and KOD. Frequency band
used in principal component analysis is given adjacent to figures.
The circles denote distances of 30, 60, 90, and 120. The blue
and red lines are back-azimuth directions computed from known
event-station locations, and principal component analysis of P
wave, respectively
samples the time series in a different manner while
being resistant to spectral leakage. The data dis-
carded by the first taper are partially recovered by
the second, and higher order taper and the infor-
mation discarded by the first two tapers are
4 partially retrieved by the third higher order tapers
and so on. Thus, using several tapers (Slepian
1978), a spectral estimate can be computed which
is not significantly hampered by the trade-off
between spectral leakage and variance that affects
single taper estimation.
The eigentapers are defined by their order and
time-bandwidth product which governs the width of
the frequency band about a center frequency outside
which the spectral leakage is minimized and the
resolution available in the frequency domain. For
example, a taper with time-bandwidth product equal
to 4 will minimize spectral leakage at frequency f0
from outside the band jf  f 0j  4=NT, where NT is
length of the time series. This method allows us to
identify the frequencies at which plane P arrivals
 Author's personal copy
Vol. 174, (2017) Frequency-Dependent Scattering Observed in P- and Surface-Wave Arrivals From South India 899
 Author's personal copy
900 A. K. Rai Pure Appl. Geophys.

Table 1
Summary of P-wave polarization analysis at low- and high-frequency bands

Station name Low freq. observations High freq. observations

No. (N) Baz gap (deg.) MD No. (N) Baz-gap (deg.) MD

BGL 58 165 2.8 54 165 2.4

GBA 87 030 3.3 67 030 3.3
KOD 55 180 2.2 54 180 2.2
SLM 54 050 2.2 54 050 2.1
MBN 93 030 2.2 115 030 2.2
KIL 64 175 2.2 59 175 3.2
BKR 8 170 4.0 9 170 3.5
BOM 10 190 5.5 10 190 5.0
CRP 29 120 3.3 29 120 3.8
CUD 45 120 1.5 49 120 1.5
DHR 22 250 1.2 22 250 1.4
DVG 8 200 1.1 8 200 1.3
GDP 23 115 2.3 24 115 3.4
GOA 8 265 3.0 8 265 3.3
GRR 136 060 3.6 137 060 4.2
KBC 13 150 1.0 14 150 2.1
KDM 44 110 3.3 45 110 4.2
KSL 40 190 4.2 41 190 4.2
KRD 25 210 1.3 26 210 1.3
KOL 15 120 1.1 16 120 1.3
LTV 83 090 2.2 71 090 3.1
MDR 19 090 3.3 20 090 3.3
MTP 27 090 2.3 28 090 2.4
MYS 24 170 1.4 25 170 1.4
NTR 10 260 1.4 11 260 1.4
PCH 11 140 2.3 12 140 2.5
PLK 26 120 2.1 27 120 2.0
PUN 35 090 1.1 36 090 1.3
TMK 43 060 1.4 44 060 1.3
TPT 135 060 1.2 137 060 1.4
TRV 31 175 4.8 31 175 4.3
N number of observations, MD mean deviation of computed back azimuths from predicted back azimuths

become contaminated by scattered or converted
phases.
3. Results and Discussions
The analysis results of polarizations of the P
waveforms for some of the stations are shown in
Fig. 3. Calculated and predicted back azimuths
obtained from polarization analysis and station-
event locations, respectively, are illustrated as a
function of frequency, azimuth, and epicentral
distance. The results indicate that the deviations of
computed azimuths from those of the predicted
azimuths are more pronounced from the NW and
SW directions, generally less than 5 for most of
the station-event pairs. Furthermore, deviations are
more at the higher frequencies. Stations located on
Dharwar craton (e.g., GBA) indicate deviations in
polarization directions for events recorded from
southern and western azimuths. The data from
seismic stations located on high-grade granulite
terrane (KOD and PALK) indicate mostly on-az-
imuth arrivals and least sign of deviations. In
summary, polarization anomalies are relatively
more for stations located on Dharwar craton (EDC
and WDC), Cuddapah basin (CB), and Eastern
Ghats (EGMB) than those of southern Granulites
 Author's personal copy
Vol. 174, (2017) Frequency-Dependent Scattering Observed in P- and Surface-Wave Arrivals From South India 901

Figure 4
Multi-taper analysis of a record at station BGL. Signal versus noise amplitude spectra (black and red lines, respectively) is shown on the top
for vertical, northsouth, and eastwest components. Eigenvalues, angles of incidence and back azimuths are shown at bottom with
corresponding error bars

Table 2
Multi-taper analysis results for some of the analyzed earthquakes

Station name Evt. name (YYYJDAYHHMMSS) Dist. (deg.) Baz. (deg.) Freq. band

BGL 1998313053014 54.7 108.23 0.01.75

BKR 2001016132501 32.0 131.50 0.01.70
KIL 1999019033533 78.8 098.60 0.01.75
PLK 2001115144006 53.8 054.48 0.02.00
BOM 2001055072349 55.0 102.01 0.01.65
CRP 2001342202937 51.7 064.26 0.01.50
CUD 1999132175922 62.0 048.81 0.02.45
DHR 2001225201123 63.0 051.56 0.01.75
DVG 2002064211609 48.0 094.83 0.01.25
GDP 2001352040258 45.0 067.98 0.03.00
GRR 2001045133639 72.1 042.94 0.03.00
GBA 1998271133430 40.9 119.86 0.04.00
LTV 1999339220034 47.5 063.90 0.02.00
MBN 1999077175543 60.6 052.02 0.03.00
SLM 2000162182329 40.4 072.05 0.01.75
The frequency band within which the computed and expected polarizations are same is given
 Author's personal copy
902 A. K. Rai Pure Appl. Geophys.

Figure 5
Three component (transverse, radial, and vertical components), low-pass filtered (100 s), seismic record of station KOD (Evt.
1998333141031). The small signal (shown by asterisk mark) on vertical component shows the quasi-love waveform anomaly

(SGT) and Deccan Volcanics (DVP). The results Figure 6 c

are summarized in Table 1.
Multi-taper analysis has provided further insights
into deviations of arrivals azimuths and incidence angles
as a function of frequency. An example of multi-taper
measurements of back azimuth and angle of incidence
for stations Bangalore (BGL) is shown in Fig. 4. Results
indicate that at frequencies, above 2 Hz noise deterio-
rates the data quality as evident from signal and noise
amplitude spectra (Fig. 4, top). Therefore, the eigen-
values are seen to converge after *2.0 Hz (Fig. 4,
bottom). Obtained values of back azimuths remarkably
match the expected values calculated from station-event
locations only up to frequency of *2.0 Hz. A summary
of the multi-taper measurement for other stations is
presented in Table 2. Frequencies within which values
of back azimuth and angle of incidence are in good
agreement with expected values indicate that arrivals
may only be considered plane polarized below *2 Hz.
Long period surface-wave data (radial, transverse, and vertical
components) (Evt. 1998148211144, station: KOD) (top panel).
Vertical lines at A and F denote time window chosen for multi-
taper spectral analysis. a Three eigenvalues and b ellipticity of the
particle motion obtained by multi-taper surface-wave polarization
analysis of the data, c azimuth of arrivals, and d tilt of the particle
motion
The decrease in signal-to-noise ratio of the data above
*2.0 Hz could be due to scattered energy arising from
subsurface heterogeneities present in the vicinity of the
station. Therefore, earthquake records from south India
having frequencies greater than *2.0 Hz should be
used carefully.
Surface-wave observations also indicate anoma-
lous arrivals in recorded seismograms. Earlier studies
indicate that the presence of anisotropy and lateral
heterogeneity in the subsurface could cause refrac-
tion, scattering, focusing, defocussing, and mode
 Author's personal copy
Vol. 174, (2017) Frequency-Dependent Scattering Observed in P- and Surface-Wave Arrivals From South India 903
 Author's personal copy
904 A. K. Rai
coupling resulting characteristic anomalies in phase,
amplitude, and polarization of surface waves
(Woodhouse and Wong 1986; Park 1987; Park and
Yu 1992, 1993; Laske and Masters 1996). Some of
the seismograms recorded in the study area show the
presence of quasi-Love waves on long-period sur-
face-wave data indicating that surface waves have
been affected by the presence of anisotropy or lateral
heterogeneity in the subsurface (Fig. 5). The multi-
taper method indicates at least 1015 deviation of
surface-wave polarization from their expected back
azimuths (Fig. 6). Although the source of such
anomalies and perturbations cannot be defined with
greater accuracy only by polarization measurements,
these observations indicate the extent of anomalies
present in the data. Therefore, surface-wave studies
should carefully estimate effects of lateral hetero-
geneity and azimuthal anisotropy that may
contaminate the seismic records in the southern India.
4. Conclusions
The Indian lithosphere, which is an amalgamation
of a variety of low-grade and high-grade terrains of
ages ranging from Archaean to neo-Proterozoic, has
experienced episodic deformation during the geologic
history. Therefore, crust and mantle are likely to be
highly heterogeneous dominated by structural fea-
tures of various dimensions. These features
distributed at various depths and dimensions are the
most likely source of scattering observed in the
seismic data. Following are the main conclusions of
this study:
Teleseismic waveforms recorded in the Indian
shield indicate polarization anomalies and contam-
ination of direct arrivals.
Although deviations in arrival azimuths for most of
the station-event pairs are less than 5, this
indicates the presence of seismic heterogeneities
in the subsurface that appear to scatter seismic
energy in out-of-plane directions and contaminat-
ing direct arrivals.
The multi-taper spectral estimates of back azimuth
and incidence angle as a function of frequency
identifies the frequency bands (\2.0 Hz) within
Pure Appl. Geophys.
which the earth structure beneath the seismic
stations may be considered relatively
homogeneous.
Surface wave also shows indications of anomalous
phases, such as quasi-love waves and polarization
anomalies.
The contaminations of direct arrivals from out-of-
plane energy are not an exception but are likely to be
present in most of the cases in almost all tectonic
settings. Therefore, analysis of seismological data
must consider these effects.
Acknowledgements
The author thanks to the various academic and
research institutes for providing seismological data
for completing this work. Special thanks to Prof.
K. Priestley and Dr. S.S. Rai for providing invaluable
suggestions and guidance during this work. My
sincere thanks are also due to the two anonymous
reviewers whose constructive suggestions immensely
improved the original manuscript. Figures were cre-
ated using GMT (Wessel and Smith 1991).
REFERENCES
Anderson, D. L. (1961). Elastic wave propagation in layered ani-
sotropic media. Journal Geophysical Research, 66, 29532963.
Backus, G. E. (1962). Long-wave elastic anisotropy produced by
horizontal layering. Journal Geophysical Research, 67,
44274440.
Bokelmann, G. (1995). P-wave array polarization analysis and
effective anisotropy of the brittle crust. Geophysical Journal
International, 120, 145162.
Crampin, S., Stephen, R., & McGonigle, R. (1982). The polariza-
tion of P-waves in anisotropic media. Geophysical Journal
International, 68, 477485.
Deshpande, A. A., & Mohan, G. (2016). Seismic evidence of
crustal heterogeneity beneath the northwestern Deccan volcanic
province of India from joint inversion of Rayleigh wave dis-
persion measurements and P receiver functions. Journal of Asian
Earth Sciences, 128, 5463.
Farra, V., & Begat, S. (1995). Sensitivity of qP-wave traveltimes
and polarization vectors to heterogeneity, anisotropy and inter-
faces. Geophysical Journal International, 121, 371384.
Hu, G., & Menke, W. (1994). Polarization tomography for P wave
velocity structure in southern Calfornia. Journal Geophysical
Research, 99, 1524515256.
Jurkevics, A. (1988). Polarization analysis of three-component
array data. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 78,
17251743.
 Author's personal copy
Vol. 174, (2017) Frequency-Dependent Scattering Observed in P- and Surface-Wave Arrivals From South India 905

Kanasewich, E. R. (1975). Time sequence analysis in geophysics
(pp. 292296). Edmonton: The University of Alberta Press.
Kawahara, J. (2011). Scattering attenuation of elastic waves due to
low-contrast inclusions. Wave Motion, 48, 290300.
Laske, G., & Masters, G. (1996). Constraints on global phase
velocity maps from long period polarization data. Journal Geo-
physical Research, 101, 1605916075.
Morozov, I., & Din, M. (2008). Use of receiver functions in wide-
angle controlled-source crustal data sets. Geophysical Journal
International, 173, 299308.
Park, J. (1987). Multitaper spectral analysis of high-frequency
seismogram. Journal Geophysical Research, 92, 1267512684.
Park, J., Vernon, F., & Lindberg, C. (1987). Frequency dependent
polarization analysis of high-frequency seismogram. Journal
Geophysical Research, 92, 1266412674.
Park, J., & Yu, Y. (1992). Anisotropy and coupled free oscillations:
simplified models and surface wave observations. Geophysical
Journal International, 110, 401420.
Park, J., & Yu, Y. (1993). Seismic determination of elastic aniso-
tropy and mantle flow. Science, 261, 11591162.
Rai, A., Rai, S., & Gaur, V. (2008). Crustal stress patterns: analysis
of Ps splitting for seismic anisotropy. Current Science, 94(7),
911915.
Rai, A., Rai, S., Gaur, V., & Priestley, K. (2009). Seismic char-
acteristics of the south Indian granulite crust. Journal of Virtual
Explorer, Geological Anatomy of Indian and the Middle East,.
doi:10.3809/jvirtex.2009.00252.
Ramakrishnan, M., & Vaidyanathan, R. (2008). Geology of India
(Vol. 1). Bangalore: Geological Society of India.
Samson, J. (1983a). Pure states, polarized waves and principal
components in the spectra of multiple, geophysical time-series.
Geophysical Journal International, 72, 647664.
Samson, J. (1983b). The spectral matrix, eigenvalues and principal
components in the analysis of multichannel geophysical data.
Annales Geophysicae, 1, 115119.
Slepian, D. (1978). Prolate spheroidal wave functions, Fourier
analysis and uncertainty. Bell System Technical Journal, 57,
13711429.
Thomson, D. (1982). Spectrum estimation and harmonic analysis.
Annales Geophysicae, 70, 10551096.
Wessel, P., & Smith, W. H. F. (1991). Free software helps map and
display data. EOS Transactions of the American Geophysical
Union, 72, 441.
Woodhouse, J., & Wong, Y. (1986). Amplitude, phase and path
anomalies of mantle waves. Geophysical Journal International,
87, 753773.

(Received May 26, 2016, revised October 31, 2016, accepted November 3, 2016, Published online December 20, 2016)