We use space geodetic data to investigate coseismic and postseismic deformation due to the 2015 M_w 7.8 Gorkha earthquake that occurred along the central Himalayan arc. Because the earthquake area is characterized by strong variations in surface relief and material properties, we developed finite element models that explicitly account for topography and 3‐D elastic structure. We computed the line‐of‐sight displacement histories from three tracks of the Sentinel‐1A/B Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) satellites, using persistent scatter method. InSAR observations reveal an uplift of up to ∼70 mm over ∼20 months after the main shock, concentrated primarily at the downdip edge of the ruptured asperity. GPS observations also show uplift, as well as southward movement in the epicentral area, qualitatively similar to the coseismic deformation pattern. Kinematic inversions of GPS and InSAR data and forward models of stress‐driven creep suggest that the observed postseismic transient is dominated by afterslip on a downdip extension of the seismic rupture. A poroelastic rebound may have contributed to the observed uplift and southward motion, but the predicted surface displacements are small. We also tested a wide range of viscoelastic relaxation models, including 1‐D and 3‐D variations in the viscosity structure. Models of a low‐viscosity channel previously invoked to explain the long‐term uplift and variations in topography at the plateau margins predict opposite signs of horizontal and vertical displacements compared to those observed. Our results do not preclude a possibility of deep‐seated viscoelastic response beneath southern Tibet with a characteristic relaxation time greater than the observation period (2 years).

We use surface deformation measurements including Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar data acquired by the ALOS‐2 mission of the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency and Global Positioning System (GPS) data to invert for the fault geometry and coseismic slip distribution of the 2015 M_w 7.8 Gorkha earthquake in Nepal. Assuming that the ruptured fault connects to the surface trace of the Main Frontal Thrust (MFT) fault between 84.34°E and 86.19°E, the best fitting model suggests a dip angle of 7°. The moment calculated from the slip model is 6.08 × 10²⁰ Nm, corresponding to the moment magnitude of 7.79. The rupture of the 2015 Gorkha earthquake was dominated by thrust motion that was primarily concentrated in a 150 km long zone 50 to 100 km northward from the surface trace of the Main Frontal Thrust (MFT), with maximum slip of ∼ 5.8 m at a depth of ∼8 km. Data thus indicate that the 2015 Gorkha earthquake ruptured a deep part of the seismogenic zone, in contrast to the 1934 Bihar‐Nepal earthquake, which had ruptured a shallow part of the adjacent fault segment to the east.

The 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence culminated in the largest seismic event in California since the 1999 Mw 7.1 Hector Mine earthquake. Here, we combine geodetic and seismic data to study the rupture process of both the 4 July Mw 6.4 foreshock and the 6 July Mw 7.1 mainshock. The results show that the Mw 6.4 foreshock rupture started on a northwest-striking right-lateral fault, and then continued on a southwest-striking fault with mainly left-lateral slip. Although most moment release during the Mw 6.4 foreshock was along the southwest-striking fault, slip on the northwest-striking fault seems to have played a more important role in triggering the Mw 7.1 mainshock that happened ∼34 hr later. Rupture of the Mw 7.1 mainshock was characterized by dominantly right-lateral slip on a series of overall northwest-striking fault strands, including the one that had already been activated during the nucleation of the Mw 6.4 foreshock. The maximum slip of the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake was ∼5 m, located at a depth range of 3–8 km near the Mw 7.1 epicenter, corresponding to a shallow slip deficit of ∼20%–30%. Both the foreshock and mainshock had a relatively low-rupture velocity of ∼2 km/s, which is possibly related to the geometric complexity and immaturity of the eastern California shear zone faults. The 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake produced significant stress perturbations on nearby fault networks, especially along the Garlock fault segment immediately southwest of the 2019 Ridgecrest rupture, in which the coulomb stress increase was up to ∼0.5 MPa. Despite the good coverage of both geodetic and seismic observations, published coseismic slip models of the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence show large variations, which highlight the uncertainty of routinely performed earthquake rupture inversions and their interpretation for underlying rupture processes.

The 2019 $Mw$ 6.4 and 7.1 Ridgecrest, California, earthquake sequence (July 2019) ruptured consecutively a system of high‐angle strike‐slip cross faults (northeast‐ and northwest‐trending) within 34 hr. The complex rupture mechanism was illuminated by seismological and geodetic data, bringing forward the issue of the interdependency of the two fault systems both at depth and at the surface, and of its effect on the final surface displacement pattern. Here, we use high‐resolution (WorldView and Pleiades) optical satellite image correlation to measure the near‐fault horizontal and vertical surface displacement fields at 0.5 m ground resolution for the two earthquakes. We point out significant differences with previous geodetic‐ and geologic‐based measurements, and document the essential role of distributed faulting and diffuse deformation in producing the observed surface displacement patterns. We derive strain fields from the horizontal displacement maps, and highlight the predominant role of rotation and shear strain in the surface rupture process. We discuss the segmentation of the rupture based on the fault geometry and along‐strike slip variations. We also image several northeast‐trending faults with similar orientation to the deeply embedded shear fabric identified in aftershock studies, and show that these cross faults are present all along the rupture, including at a scale <100 m. Finally, we compare our results to kinematic slip inversions, and show that the surface diffuse deformation is primarily associated with areas of shallow slip deficit; however, this diffuse deformation cannot be explained using elastic modeling. We conclude that inelastic processes play an important role in contributing to the total surface deformation associated with the 2019 Ridgecrest sequence.

Tectonic research of the Tibetan Plateau has long focused on its deformation style and mechanisms. The 2008 Mw7.9 Wenchuan earthquake ruptured the Longmen Shan fault located at the eastern rim of the plateau and excited a viscoelastic response of the lithosphere. We infer a three‐dimensional (3D) rheological structure of eastern Tibet from modeling nine years of postseismic displacements observed by GPS. Our solution provides tight constraints on the lower‐crustal and upper‐mantle steady‐state viscosities of the Songpan‐Ganzi Terrane as (5.0 ± 0.7) × 10¹⁸ and (1.3 ± 0.3) × 10¹⁹ Pa s, respectively, consistent with a “jelly sandwich” model of Tibet, but not with some crustal channel flow models featuring much lower viscosities. The inferred lower‐crustal and upper‐mantle transient viscosities are (5.0 ± 1.3) × 10¹⁷ and (5.0 ± 1.5) × 10¹⁸ Pa s, respectively, suggesting nonlinear deformation mechanisms. The adjacent West Qinling and Sichuan blocks feature an order‐of‐magnitude higher rheological strength, which is consistent with the changes in the crustal material properties and interseismic deformation style across the East Kunlun‐Tazang and Longmen Shan faults. Our results enable us to propose a conceptual 3D tectonic deformation model, in which the eastward extrusion of Tibet is absorbed in the Songpan‐Ganzi crust mainly by E‐W shortening and N‐S extension, accommodated through faulting of conjugate strike‐slip faults in the upper crust and distributed shear in the lower crust.

The 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence initiated on July 4th with a series of foreshocks, including an M_w 6.4 event, that culminated a day later with the M_w 7.1 mainshock and resulted in rupture of a set of cross‐faults. In this study, we use subpixel correlation of optical satellite imagery to measure the displacement, finite strain, and rotation of the near‐field coseismic deformation to understand the kinematics of strain release along the surface ruptures. We find the average off‐fault deformation along the mainshock rupture is 34% and is significantly higher along the foreshock rupture (56%), suggesting it is a less structurally developed fault system. Measurements of the 2D dilatational strain along the mainshock rupture show a dependency of the width of inelastic strain with the degree of fault extension and contraction, indicating wider fault zones under extension than under shear. Measurements of the vorticity along the main, dextral rupture show that conjugate sinistral faults are embedded within zones of large clockwise rotations caused by the transition of strain beyond the tips of dextral faults leading to bookshelf kinematics. These rotations and bookshelf slip can explain why faults of different shear senses do not intersect one another and the occurrence of pervasive and mechanically unfavorable cross‐faulting in this region. Understanding the causes for the variation of fault zone widths along surface ruptures has importance for reducing the epistemic uncertainty of probabilistic models of distributed rupture that will, in turn, provide more precise estimates of the hazard distributed rupture poses to nearby infrastructure.