<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0" article-type="research-article">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">NHESS</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">NHESS</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1684-9981</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/nhess-23-447-2023</article-id><title-group><article-title>Characteristics of consecutive tsunamis and resulting tsunami behaviors in southern Taiwan induced by the Hengchun earthquake doublet on 26 December 2006</article-title><alt-title>Characteristics of the 2006 Hengchun tsunami in southern Taiwan</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Characteristics of the 2006 Hengchun tsunami in southern Taiwan}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{A.-C. Cheng et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Cheng</surname><given-names>An-Chi</given-names></name>
          <email>cheng.anchi.r6@dc.tohoku.ac.jp</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7898-6162</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2 aff3">
          <name><surname>Suppasri</surname><given-names>Anawat</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Pakoksung</surname><given-names>Kwanchai</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2 aff3">
          <name><surname>Imamura</surname><given-names>Fumihiko</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Civil and Environmental Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Tohoku University, 6-6-06 Aoba,<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Aramaki-Aza, Aoba, Sendai 980-0845, Japan</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>WISE Program for sustainability in the Dynamic Earth, Tohoku
University, 6-3 Aoba,<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Aramaki Aza, Aoba, Sendai 980-8578, Japan</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>International Research Institute of Disaster Science, Tohoku
University, 468-1 Aoba,<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Aramaki-Aza, Aoba, Sendai 980-0845, Japan</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">An-Chi Cheng (cheng.anchi.r6@dc.tohoku.ac.jp)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>3</day><month>February</month><year>2023</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>23</volume>
      <issue>2</issue>
      <fpage>447</fpage><lpage>479</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>22</day><month>April</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>27</day><month>April</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>12</day><month>September</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>20</day><month>January</month><year>2023</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2023 An-Chi Cheng et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2023</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023.html">This article is available from https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d1e128">Consecutive <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">L</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.0 submarine earthquakes occurred offshore of the Hengchun Peninsula, Taiwan, on 26 December 2006. A small tsunami was generated and recorded at tide gauge stations. This important event attracted public interest, as it was generated by an earthquake doublet and produced a tsunami risk for Taiwan. This study analyzed tide gauge tsunami waveforms and numerical simulations to understand the source characteristics
and resulting behaviors of tsunamis. The maximum wave heights at the three
nearest stations were 0.08 m (Kaohsiung), 0.12 m (Dongkung), and 0.3 m
(Houbihu), and only Houbihu recorded the first wave crest as the largest.
The tsunami duration was 3.9 h at Dongkung and over 6 h at Kaohsiung and
Houbihu. Spectral analyses detected dominant periodic components of spectral peaks on the tsunami waveforms. The period band from 13.6–23.1 min was identified as the tsunami source spectrum, and the approximate fault area for the consecutive tsunamis was estimated to be 800 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, with central fault depths of 20 km (first earthquake, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.0) and 33 km (second earthquake, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 6.9). The focal mechanisms of the first earthquake, with
a strike of 319<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, dip of 69<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and rake of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>102<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the second earthquake, with a strike of 151<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, dip of 48<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and rake of 0<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, could successfully
reproduce the observed tsunami waveforms. Numerical simulations suggested
that the tsunami waves were coastally trapped on the south coast of Taiwan
during the tsunami's passage. The trapped waves propagated along the coast
as edge waves, which repeatedly reflected and refracted among the shelves,
interfered with incoming incident wave, and resonated with the fundamental
modes of the shelves, amplifying and continuing the tsunami wave
oscillation. These results elucidated the generation and consequential
behaviors of the 2006 tsunami in southern Taiwan, contributing essential
information for tsunami warning and coastal emergency response in Taiwan to
reduce disaster risk.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e244">Taiwan is located at the southeast margin of the Eurasian plate and the
Philippine Sea plate. The abrupt movement of plates results in active
seismic activity at the boundary area, such as in the Manila Trench and
Ryukyu Trench. The Manila Trench and Ryukyu Trench are located offshore of
Taiwan and have been identified as hazardous tsunamigenic regions as both
have the potential to generate megathrust earthquakes and cause severe
tsunami impacts on coastal plains (Liu
et al., 2009; Megawati et al., 2009; Wu and Huang, 2009; Li et al., 2016;
Qiu et al., 2019; Sun et al., 2018). In addition to potential megathrust
earthquakes, historical earthquake tsunamis in Taiwan are well recorded in
ancient and written documents. Examples include the 1781/1782 Jiateng Harbor
flooding and tsunami event (Li<?pagebreak page448?> et al., 2015; Liu et al., 2022) and the 1867 northern Taiwan earthquake (Cheng et al.,
2016; Sugawara et al., 2019).</p>
      <p id="d1e247">Two large earthquakes occurred off the coast of Hengchun Peninsula, Taiwan,
on 26 December 2006. The first earthquake occurred at 12:26:21 UTC (i.e.,
20:26:21 national standard time) and was followed by a second earthquake 8 min
later at 12:34:15 UTC (i.e., 20:34:15 national standard time). The Central
Weather Bureau (CWB) catalog (R.O.C. – Republic of China) located the epicenter of the first
shock at 21.69<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and 120.56<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E and that of the second
shock at 21.97<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N and 120.42<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E. The locations of the
Hengchun Peninsula and the epicenters of the successive earthquakes are
shown in Fig. 1.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e288">Map of the Hengchun Peninsula, Taiwan. The red stars illustrate
the epicenters of the doublet earthquakes, and the solid red lines
illustrate the subduction zones of the Manila Trench and the Ryukyu Trench.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e300">The tectonic settings of the 2006 earthquake doublet. The red
stars denote the epicenters of the successive earthquakes. The beach balls
denote the focal mechanisms of the two earthquakes estimated from the GCMT
and USGS moment tensor solutions. The yellow circles show the aftershock
distribution for 1 d from the USGS earthquake catalog. The green
triangles represent the locations of the CWB tide gauge stations.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f02.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e309">The respective magnitudes of these two earthquakes were suggested to be
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">L</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.0 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.0 in the Global Centroid Moment Tensor (GCMT) catalog) for the former and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">L</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.0 (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 6.9 in the GCMT catalog) for the latter. From a seismological perspective, pairs of
large earthquakes with equivalent fault sizes that occur in similar spatial
and temporal proximities are referred to as doublets (Lay
and Kanamori, 1980; Kagan and Jackson, 1999). As they shared similar
earthquake magnitudes and very close epicenters and occurrence times, the
successive earthquakes on 26 December 2006 are considered an earthquake
doublet event (Ma and Liang,
2008; Wu et al., 2008). These 2006 earthquakes in southern Taiwan were
considered the largest event in the past 100 years. Several casualties
and some structural damages were reported in southern Taiwan during this
seismic event (Wu et al., 2009). The tectonic
settings of the 2006 earthquake doublet are shown in Fig. 2.</p>
      <p id="d1e385">A small tsunami was generated after the successive strong motions of these
earthquakes. The tsunami propagated toward and reached the western coast of
southern Taiwan immediately after the earthquakes. Although no coastal
run-up or inundation was reported, tsunami signals were instrumentally
recorded at CWB tide gauge stations in southern Taiwan for the first time.
The December 2006 tsunami was an important event that attracted public
interest, as it was unique not only because it was generated by earthquakes
in short succession but also because it was a new occurrence for ordinary
citizens in Taiwan. This recent tsunami not only corroborates the tsunami
risk in Taiwan but also increases awareness of the need for disaster risk
management, such as preparedness and mitigation countermeasures for future
tsunamis.</p>
      <p id="d1e388">The tsunami observations that were reported following the 26 December 2006
tsunami also raised some questions. First, the first tsunami wave crest was
not shown to be the largest at some stations. This amplified tsunami wave is
considered an important issue for tsunami warnings, as a higher later wave
could suddenly upgrade the threat level of the tsunami
(Suppasri et al., 2017). Second, the tsunami
oscillation recorded at some stations lasted for more than 6 h following the
earthquakes. This indicated that the high-energy waves persisted along the
coast without decay during the 2006 tsunami and were considered one of the
cascading risks of tsunamis, as they could further intensify the damaging
impacts of the tsunamis on the coastal region.</p>
      <p id="d1e391">The other issue was to identify which source models could better explain the
successive tsunamis compared to the recorded observations in southern
Taiwan. Wu et al. (2008) simulated the tsunami from this event using
several possible fault plane mechanisms. They numerically computed the
tsunami propagation on three nested grids and compared their simulated
tsunami waveforms with observational data from tide gauge stations. Although
the source models for this tsunami event have been specified and modeled in
previous studies, the uncertainty and variability aspects of these models
and the bathymetry have not been thoroughly investigated. These
uncertainties in earthquake fault parameters and significant differences
among open-source bathymetries can exaggerate the modeled results compared
to the predictions of previous studies of the 2006 tsunami. Therefore, it is
critical to discuss these model performances from a sensitivity perspective
because it is desirable to obtain a tsunami source model and understand the
reliability of bathymetry data that are utilized for numerical simulation to
reasonably estimate the tsunami wave activities of the 2006 tsunami.</p>
      <p id="d1e394">Based on the above background, the primary intent of this article is to
address all aforementioned issues related to the 2006 tsunami that have not
been previously discussed and to<?pagebreak page449?> provide some results. The content of this
article is organized as follows. First, the observed tsunami waveforms are
analyzed to determine the physical characteristics of the tsunami and
employed as inputs for root mean square (RMS) analyses to detect the tsunami
duration. Second, spectral analyses are performed to detect the periodic
components of the tsunami waves based on the identification of the tsunami
source spectrum and resonance modes. Then, a sensitivity analysis of the
source models and open-source bathymetries is conducted based on the
simulated waveforms from forward tsunami simulations. The mechanism of
tsunami wave trapping around southern Taiwan is examined based on the
comparison of modeled results from numerical experiments using real and
manipulated bathymetry. The December 2006 earthquake tsunami represents a
unique and recent incident in Taiwan; therefore, this reconstruction and
these findings could not only help further clarify tsunami generation and
the important behaviors responsible for tsunami hazards facing the island of
Taiwan but also have implications for tsunami warning and disaster risk
management.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Data and methods</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Tide gauge tsunami data</title>
      <p id="d1e412">Time history data of sea levels that are recorded at coastal sites provide
one source of information that we can use to study tsunami patterns. To
investigate the characteristics of the 2006 tsunami, sea level records from
tide gauge stations were employed for analysis in the present study. For
this purpose, the recorded data from three tide gauge stations (Kaohsiung,
Dongkung, and Houbihu) located in southern Taiwan were obtained. These tide
gauge stations are operated and maintained by the CWB, R.O.C. All stations
recorded sea levels at a sampling interval of 6 min. In this doublet event,
the first and second earthquakes occurred at 20:26:21 and 20:34:15 (national
standard time), respectively. Hence, 28 h of tide gauge records (from 08:00
on 26 December 2006 to 12:00 on 27 December 2006, national standard time) were
adopted for analysis. To approximate the wave components of the tsunami and
to remove the low-frequency noise that was attributed to the tidal effect,
the sea level records at the tide gauge stations were de-tided by removing
the long-period (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2 h) tidal constituents. The original data
recorded at the tide gauge stations in southern Taiwan are shown in Fig. 2a, and the de-tided data are presented in Fig. 2b. The locations of the
tide gauge stations are shown in Fig. 3.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e424">The <bold>(a)</bold> original and <bold>(b)</bold> de-tided sea levels recorded at tide gauge stations in southern Taiwan during the 26 December 2006 tsunami event. The vertical, dashed red lines indicate the earthquake occurrence time (EOT). The gray shaded areas illustrate the tide gauge data used for de-tide processing. The data shown in the graphs were drawn based on national standard time.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page450?><p id="d1e439">The tsunami duration represents the observation time of high-energy tsunami
waves persisting at a coastal site. The tsunami durations at all the
stations were identified based on a calculation of root mean square (RMS)
sea levels, indicating the elapsed time of the wave amplitude above the
normal oscillation level before the tsunami wave arrived (Hayashi
et al., 2012; Heidarzadeh and Satake, 2014; Heidarzadeh et al., 2019, 2021).
The RMS analysis calculated the moving average of the recorded sea level
along a moving time window of 24 min. The calculation for RMS sea level is
presented in Eq. (1).
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M25" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>w</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mstyle scriptlevel="+1"><mml:mfrac><mml:mi>w</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mstyle scriptlevel="+1"><mml:mfrac><mml:mi>w</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mi>h</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          In this equation, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the RMS sea level at time step <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>h</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> denotes the recorded sea level at time <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mi>w</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> stands for the moving time
window. In the present study, the length of the tsunami data employed for
RMS analysis is 12 h, which includes 120 data points, ranging from 17:00 on
26 December 2006 to 05:00 on 27 December 2006 (national standard time).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Spectral analyses</title>
      <p id="d1e558">To apply spectral analyses to the tsunami data, two types of analyses were
included and processed in this study: Fourier analysis and wavelet
(time–frequency) analysis. The Fourier analysis is based on the fast Fourier
transform (FFT) algorithm and applied based on the updated open-source
library, NumPy, in the Python package (Harris
et al., 2020). Fourier analysis was performed to estimate the spectral
components of the time history data of the tsunami waveform. The entire
dataset of the tsunami waveform inputted for Fourier analysis covered 600 min, which included 100 data points ranging from 5 h before to 5 h after the
tsunami, as the sampling rate of the data was 6 min. The Fourier analysis
was separately applied to the de-tided background (i.e., 5 h data before the
tsunami arrival) and the tsunami signals (i.e., 5 h data after tsunami
arrival) to identify significant changes in the spectral energy associated
with the tsunami. Additionally, the spectral ratio was computed for the
tsunami spectra to exclude the local modes of coastal sites from the
periodic components. Wavelet analysis was computed based on the Morlet
mother function (Torrence and Compo, 1995). Wavelet analysis
detects the periodic change in spectral peaks over time. The length of the
tsunami data input in the wavelet analysis was 15 h (15:00 on 26 December
2006 to 06:00 on 27 December 2006, national standard time). A similar method
has been widely applied to solve time–frequency problems for many tsunami
events, such as the 1945 Makran earthquake tsunami and the 2020 Alaska
earthquake tsunami (Heidarzadeh
and Satake, 2015; Heidarzadeh and Mulia, 2021).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Numerical tsunami simulation</title>
      <p id="d1e569">Numerical simulation is a computer-based method that describes equations for
the motion of tsunami wave propagation. Tsunami wave propagation can be
numerically modeled based on various theories, including shallow water and
dispersive wave theories. Among those theories, the shallow<?pagebreak page451?> water equations
are some of the most commonly used methods to model tsunami propagation from
the source to nearshore areas. Various computational models have been
developed to solve shallow water equations, and the TUNAMI (Tohoku
University Numerical Analysis Model for Investigation of tsunamis) code is
one of the widely used models to numerically simulate both far-field and
near-field tsunamis (Suppasri et al.,
2012, 2014). The second version of the TUNAMI code (TUNAMI-N2) was mainly
developed to deal with near-field tsunamis by applying the nonlinear theory
of shallow water equations, which is solved using a leap-frog scheme
(Imamura, 1995). Since the 2006 tsunami presented as a near-field tsunami in
Taiwan, the TUNAMI-N2 model was used in this study to simulate the 2006
tsunami with nonlinear shallow water equations. The nonlinear shallow water
equations on the Cartesian coordinate system are presented in Eqs. (2)–(4), and the nonlinear equations are solved by applying the finite
difference method.

                <disp-formula specific-use="gather" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M31" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E2"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>2</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">η</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E3"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>3</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mtable class="split" rowspacing="0.2ex" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">η</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mfrac><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E4"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>4</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mtable rowspacing="0.2ex" class="split" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">χ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">η</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∂</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mfrac><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            In these equations, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">η</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the water level, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mi>M</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> are the discharge
fluxes in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> directions, respectively, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the total water depth, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mi>g</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the gravitational acceleration, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is Manning's roughness coefficient. The
bottom friction term was represented by the Manning roughness coefficient,
which was set as 0.025 s m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, assuming that the seafloor in the model domain is in perfect condition. The numerical tsunami simulations were
conducted with a time interval of 0.1 s and grid intervals of 450 m. The
entire model domain covered the source region and southern Taiwan, which
comprised mesh numbers of 538 and 631 in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> directions,
respectively. The time interval and grid intervals were set up to satisfy
the Courant–Friedrichs–Lewy (CFL) condition to ensure the stability of the
simulation. The CFL condition is presented in Eq. (5):
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><label>5</label><mml:math id="M43" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>h</mml:mi><mml:mo>max⁡</mml:mo></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the time interval, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the grid spacing, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>h</mml:mi><mml:mo>max⁡</mml:mo></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the maximum water depth in the model domain. As the initial
condition inputted for numerical tsunami simulation, the initial water level
distribution was calculated from the earthquake fault parameters using
Okada's theory (Okada, 1985). In addition, the horizontal
deformation contribution to tsunami generation on steep bathymetric slopes
was included (Tanioka and Satake, 1996). The calculation
conditions for the numerical tsunami simulation are summarized in Table 1.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e1044">Calculation conditions for the numerical tsunami simulation.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="2">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Calculation condition for the numerical tsunami simulation</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Governing equation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Two-dimensional nonlinear shallow water equations (TUNAMI-N2 model)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Numerical integration method</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Leap-frog finite difference method</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Initial condition</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Initial water level calculated from fault parameters using the theory of Okada (1985)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">considering the contribution of horizontal coseismic displacement</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Coordination system</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Cartesian coordinate system</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Boundary condition</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Radiation boundary condition</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Stability criterion</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Courant–Friedrichs–Lewy (CFL) condition</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Time interval</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.1 s</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Mesh size</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">450 m</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Mesh number (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(538, 631)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <label>2.4</label><title>Sensitivity analyses of source models</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4.SSS1">
  <label>2.4.1</label><title>Single fault models</title>
      <p id="d1e1187">Multiple forward tsunami simulations were conducted using single fault
models with different fault depths and fault orientations. The main goal of
the multiple forward tsunami simulations was to find a single fault model
that could produce tsunami waveforms that were highly consistent with the
tide gauge station observations in southern Taiwan.</p>
      <p id="d1e1190">There were two moment tensor solutions available from the Global Centroid
Moment Tensor (GCMT) project and United States Geological Survey (USGS) for
the successive earthquakes on 26 December 2006 (Fig. 2). Each solution
suggested two possible fault planes for those earthquakes. The focal
mechanisms for the two earthquakes estimated by the GCMT and USGS are
summarized in Table 2.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1196">Focal mechanisms for successive earthquakes estimated by GCMT and
USGS.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center" colsep="1">Earthquake 1 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col5" nameend="col6" align="center">Earthquake 2 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">NP1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">NP2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">NP1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">NP2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">GCMT</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Long (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center" colsep="1">120.52 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col5" nameend="col6" align="center">120.4 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Lat (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center" colsep="1">21.81 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col5" nameend="col6" align="center">22.02 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Strike (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">165</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">329</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">151</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">61</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Dip (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">90</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Rake (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>76</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">138</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Depth (km)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center" colsep="1">20 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col5" nameend="col6" align="center">33 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">USGS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Long (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center" colsep="1">120.55 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col5" nameend="col6" align="center">120.49 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Lat (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center" colsep="1">21.8 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col5" nameend="col6" align="center">21.97 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Strike (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">171</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">319</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">151</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">61</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Dip (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">90</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Rake (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>102</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">138</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Depth (km)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center" colsep="1">25 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col5" nameend="col6" align="center">33 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e1585">Through the analysis of the tsunami waveforms simulated by the multiple
forward tsunami simulations, one of those fault planes could be chosen as
the appropriate fault plane for the respective earthquakes of the 2006
earthquake doublet. A similar approach has been applied in a previous study
to obtain the optimum fault plane for the 2016 Fukushima normal faulting
earthquake (Gusman et al., 2017).</p>
      <p id="d1e1588">Wu et al. (2008) computed synthetic tsunami waveforms based on single fault
models using different fault planes of the GCMT solutions. They found that
the nodal plane (NP) of NP2 of the first earthquake, with a strike of
329<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, dip of 61<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and rake of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>98<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the
fault plane of NP1 for the second earthquake, with a strike of
151<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, dip of 48<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and rake of 0<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, produced
tsunami waveforms that better fit the observed data.</p>
      <p id="d1e1653">Based on the study conducted by Wu et al. (2008), the focal mechanisms of
NP2 for the first earthquake and NP1 for the second earthquake from the GCMT
solution were used for a sensitivity analysis of fault depths. An
approximated fault area 40 km long and 20 km wide (800 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)
was estimated for the successive earthquakes based on the empirical formula
with tsunami source periods. The methods by which the fault area of the two
earthquakes was obtained are discussed in Sect. 4.1. For the given moment
magnitude (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) values of the 7.0 and 6.9 earthquakes, the amount of average slip can be estimated to be 1.66 m for the first earthquake (i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.0) and 1.17 m for the second earthquake (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 6.9), assuming a rigidity of 30 GPa. The centroid depths of the GCMT (20 km) and USGS (25 km)
solutions for the first earthquake are significantly different, while a
similar depth of 33 km was estimated from both solutions for the second
earthquake. Therefore, for the sensitivity analysis of central<?pagebreak page452?> fault depth,
the central fault depths of 15, 20, 25, and 35 km of the first earthquake
were evaluated.</p>
      <p id="d1e1698">After determining the best central fault depth for the single fault models
of the two earthquakes, multiple tsunami forward simulations were applied to
all possible fault planes from the moment tensor solutions estimated by GCMT
and USGS using a single fault model. The misfit of observed and simulated
tsunami waveforms from the multiple tsunami forward simulations was
calculated and compared to examine the focal mechanisms that better explain
the observed tsunami data. The misfit of the observed and simulated tsunami
waveforms can be calculated using Eq. (6):
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E6" content-type="numbered"><label>6</label><mml:math id="M73" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Obs</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Sim</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Obs</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the misfit of the observed and synthetic tsunami
waveforms, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the total number of data points, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Obs</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the
observed data at time step <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Sim</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the simulated data at time step <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. Equation (6) calculates <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> for one station. For cases with several stations, the overall misfit is obtained from the mean of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ε</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values computed from all the stations.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4.SSS2">
  <label>2.4.2</label><title>Multiple fault models</title>
      <p id="d1e1837">After determining the best central fault depths and fault orientations of a
single fault, the area of each single fault was subdivided into eight subfaults
with areas of 10 km <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10 km, with four and two subfaults along the strike
and dip axes, respectively. The locations of each subfault in the fault
model of the two earthquakes are shown in Fig. 4. The top depths for the
two earthquakes are 15.3 and 29.1 km, which correspond to subfaults 1–4
in each fault model (Fig. 4a, b). The rest of the depths from the
shallowest to the deepest portion along the dip axis are derived using fault
parameters of width dimensions and dip angles. The respective fault
parameters of each subfault in the fault models of the two earthquakes are
summarized in Table 3.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e1849">Fault models for the two earthquakes. <bold>(a)</bold> Subfault locations of the first earthquake (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.0) using NP2 of USGS's moment tensor solution. <bold>(b)</bold> Subfault locations of the second earthquake (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 6.9) using NP1 of USGS's moment tensor solution.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=184.942913pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f04.png"/>

          </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e1889">Parameters of the subfaults for the two earthquakes of the 2006
earthquake doublet.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="10">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Sub</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Long</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Lat</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Length</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Width</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Depth</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Strike</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Dip</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">Rake</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">fault</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(km)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">(km)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">(km)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Earthquake 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.619</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.588</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">15.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">319</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>102</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.556</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.657</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">15.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">319</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>102</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.492</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.724</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">15.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">319</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>102</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.429</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.792</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">15.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">319</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>102</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.692</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.648</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">24.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">319</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>102</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.629</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.716</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">24.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">319</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>102</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.565</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.784</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">24.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">319</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>102</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.501</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.852</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">24.7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">319</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">69</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>102</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Earthquake 2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.726</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.989</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">29.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">151</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.642</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.946</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">29.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">151</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.557</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.902</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">29.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">151</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.473</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.858</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">29.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">151</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.680</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">22.068</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">29.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">151</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.595</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">22.024</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">36.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">151</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.510</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.980</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">36.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">151</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120.426</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">21.936</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">36.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">151</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e2617">The tsunami sensitivity to the non-uniform slip distribution of the fault
model was evaluated. For that purpose, two slip levels for each subfault
were established, namely the large (asperity) slip and the background slip
region of the entire fault. The large slip and background slip region should
satisfy the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to avoid overestimation. The slip amount in each region was obtained using the following procedures. First, the amount of average slip (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) was calculated using the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the entire fault area (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), and a rigidity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) of 30 GPa, per Eqs. (7)–(8) introduced by Kanamori and Anderson (1975).
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E7" content-type="numbered"><label>7</label><mml:math id="M103" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>log⁡</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.5</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <?pagebreak page453?><p id="d1e2696"><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E8" content-type="numbered"><label>8</label><mml:math id="M104" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            Next, the amount of large slip (2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) was assumed to be twice that of the average slip. The total area of the large slip area (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) was set to be 25 % of the entire fault area, and the seismic moment of the large slip area (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) can be obtained using Eq. (8). Then, the slip amount of
the background area (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) can be estimated using the area of the
background region (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) following Eqs. (9)–(10).

                  <disp-formula specific-use="gather" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M110" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E9"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>9</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E10"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>10</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

              The details of the slip amount in each region for the two earthquakes are
summarized in Table 4a.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Table 4</label><caption><p id="d1e2855"><bold>(a)</bold> Details of the average slip, large slip, and background slip for the two earthquakes. <bold>(b)</bold> Asperity locations of multiple fault models for the two earthquakes.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.94}[.94]?><oasis:tgroup cols="3">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col3"><bold>(a)</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Earthquake 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Earthquake 2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Moment magnitude (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">7.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">6.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Entire fault size (km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">800</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">800</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Rigidity (GPa)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">30</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">30</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Average slip <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.66</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.17</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Large slip 2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3.32</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.35</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Background slip (m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.78</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?>

  <?xmltex \begin{scaleboxenv}{.94}[.94]?><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="center" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="center"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col7"><bold>(b)</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Scenario</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col4" colsep="1">Asperity location of </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col5" nameend="col7">Asperity location of </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col4" colsep="1">earthquake 1 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col5" nameend="col7">earthquake 2 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">North</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Central</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">South</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">North</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Central</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">South</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">LS1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">LS2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">LS3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">LS4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">LS5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">LS6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">LS7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">LS8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">LS9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mo>○</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup><?xmltex \end{scaleboxenv}?></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e3375"><bold>(a)</bold> Map of subfault boundaries with different asperity locations for the first earthquake (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.0). <bold>(b)</bold> Coseismic crustal vertical
displacement calculated using the fault parameters of the subfaults. The
beach ball denotes the focal mechanisms of USGS's NP2 nodal planes for the
first earthquake. The subfaults in red represent large slip areas, and the
subfaults in yellow represent background slip areas. The large slip area was
located only at the shallow part of the entire fault area. The blue stars
represent the epicenter of the first earthquake, and the green circles
represent the aftershocks. The tide gauge stations are plotted as green
triangles.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f05.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e3403"><bold>(a)</bold> Map of subfault boundaries with three different locations of large slip areas for the second earthquake (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 6.9). <bold>(b)</bold> Coseismic
crustal vertical displacement calculated using the fault parameters of the
subfaults. The beach ball denotes the focal mechanisms of USGS's NP2 nodal
planes for the first earthquake. The subfaults in red represent large slip
areas, and the subfaults in yellow represent background slip areas. The
large slip area was located only at the shallow part of the entire fault
area. The blue stars represent the epicenter of the first earthquake, and
the green circles represent the aftershocks. The tide gauge stations are
plotted as green triangles.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f06.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e3428">After determining the slip amount of the asperity and background regions,
the tsunami sensitivity to the asperity location was studied. The asperity
area with the large slip was assumed at the shallow portion of the entire
fault area, focusing on the north (subfaults 3–4), central (subfaults 2–3),
and south (subfaults 1–2) parts of each earthquake fault model. Assuming
different asperity locations for the two earthquakes, a total of nine scenarios
were simulated. The multiple fault models and the generated tsunamis of each
earthquake are shown in Figs. 5 and 6. The asperity locations of multiple
fault models for the two earthquakes in each scenario are summarized in
Table 4b.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS5">
  <label>2.5</label><title>Tsunami simulation using open-source bathymetry data</title>
      <p id="d1e3442">In addition to the fault parameters of the source models, bathymetry data
are needed for simulating tsunami wave propagation. Simulated tsunami
propagation results<?pagebreak page454?> are known to be sensitive to the accuracy and resolution
of bathymetry data. Although it can be expected that bathymetry data with a
higher accuracy and resolution can produce simulated results that better fit
the actual values, such data are not always available and freely accessible.
Due to this limitation, open-source datasets have often been utilized for
modeling tsunamis in many previous studies (Koshimura
et al., 2008; Li et al., 2016; Otake et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2022; Ren et
al., 2022).</p>
      <p id="d1e3445">Unfortunately, open-source datasets are sometimes problematic and
insufficient for the accurate simulation of tsunami waves because they lack
accurate, quality data (Griffin et al.,
2015). A similar issue has been reported by previous studies in simulating
the 2018 Sulawesi tsunami and the 2018 Anak Krakatoa tsunami
(Heidarzadeh et al., 2019;
Zengaffinen et al., 2020). Significant differences in various sources of
datasets can also result in modeled results that contrast estimated values
from previous studies. Therefore, for the purpose of tsunami hazard
assessment, it is important to assess and note different available
open-source bathymetries in relation to model performances, using the 2006
tsunami as an example.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e3450">Bathymetry map of the model domain from GEBCO and ETOPO1
bathymetry data. The green triangles denote the locations of the tide gauge
stations. The red stars represent the epicenters of the two earthquakes.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=364.195276pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3460">For this purpose, a tsunami simulation was separately applied to two
different sources of bathymetry data, namely General Bathymetric Chart of
the Oceans (GEBCO) data and ETOPO1 data, and the misfit between the modeled
results was evaluated. The GEBCO data contain bathymetry data with grid
intervals of 15 arcsec, while ETOPO1 data have sea depth data with a
resolution of 1 arcmin. To fairly investigate the model performances
from different datasets, bathymetry data from the two datasets were
converted to 450 m grids and used as the input for the numerical tsunami
simulations. Figure 7 shows the bathymetry data of the modeled domain
obtained from GEBCO and ETOPO1 data. As the initial condition, the initial
water distribution of the tsunami generated by the proposed multiple fault
model (LS2) was used for these simulations, in which the asperity locations
of the two earthquakes were assumed to be at the center of the entire fault
area.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS6">
  <label>2.6</label><title>Evaluation of the bathymetry effect on tsunami wave trapping</title>
      <p id="d1e3471">To examine any significant change in tsunami wave transmission that could be
attributed to the bathymetry effect during the passage of the 2006 tsunami,
numerical experiments (MS, EXP1, EXP2) for tsunami propagation were
conducted using actual and manipulated bathymetry data. For the main
simulation (MS) numerical experiment, actual GEBCO bathymetry data with a
resolution of 450 m derived from sea depth data with grid intervals of 15 arcsec were used. For the manipulated bathymetry data that were used
for numerical experiment EXP1, sea depths greater than 500 m were replaced
with 500 m depths. For numerical experiment EXP2, the bathymetry data were
manipulated by removing sea depth data with a flattened sea bottom at a
depth of 500 m. The 500 m depth was specified because the bathymetric slopes
are very gentle at sea depths shallower than 500 m near southern Taiwan, and
the area is therefore considered a shelf region. Figure 8 shows the
map-manipulated bathymetry of the model domain for numerical experiments
EXP1 and EXP2. The details of the bathymetry data used for numerical
experiments MS, EXP1, and EXP2 are summarized in Table 5.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e3476">Maps of the manipulated bathymetry of the model domain for
numerical experiments <bold>(a)</bold> EXP1 and <bold>(b)</bold> EXP2.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=335.74252pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Table 5</label><caption><p id="d1e3494">Details of the bathymetry data used for the numerical experiments
MS, EXP1, and EXP2.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="4">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col4" align="center">Numerical experiments </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">MS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">EXP1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">EXP2</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Bathymetry source</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col4" align="center">GEBCO data </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Grid size</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col4" align="center">450 m </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Mesh number (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col4" align="center">(538, 631) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Description of</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Sea depths from</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Sea depths larger than</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Sea depths of entire</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">bathymetry conditions</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">GEBCO data</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">500 m were replaced</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">domain were replaced</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">with 500 m depths</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">with 500 m depths.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e3623">The results of the numerical experiments were compared to examine how
tsunami wave directivity could change due to the bathymetric effect and to
evaluate how much tsunami wave energy could be coastally trapped in
different bathymetric conditions during the passage of the 2006 tsunami.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page457?><sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Analyses of tsunami waveforms and durations</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Physical characteristics of tsunami waveforms</title>
      <p id="d1e3643">The December 2006 earthquake tsunami was observed at several tide gauges
located along the southwestern coast of Taiwan. The tsunami observations are
plotted in Fig. 9a. The initial wave arrived at all three tide stations in
southern Taiwan with an amplitude sign of a trough wave. The travel times of
the initial wave to all the stations were recorded: 16 min to Houbihu, 28 min to Dongkung, and 52 min to Kaohsiung. The initial wave was recorded as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.12 m in Houbihu, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.09 m in Dongkung, and 0.06 m in Kaohsiung.<?pagebreak page458?> Following
the trough sign of the initial wave, the first wave crest record at Houbihu
was 0.3 m, which was approximately 3 times greater than that at Dongkung and
4 times larger than that at Kaohsiung. This was natural because Houbihu was
the station closest to the epicentral region and therefore had an earlier
arrival time and was relatively sensitive to the surface elevation change in
sea level that was induced by the tsunami. The maximum wave heights were
recorded as 0.08 m (Kaohsiung), 0.12 m (Dongkung), and 0.3 m (Houbihu). In
Kaohsiung and Dongkung, the maximum height was not recorded for the initial
wave. The maximum wave height appeared 36 min after the initial wave arrived
at Kaohsiung and after 24 min at Dongkung, indicating a pattern of wave
amplification at these stations. These results suggest that different
propagation effects existed at these coastal sites during the passage of the
2006 tsunami. In addition to significant differences in wave amplitude and
arrival time, the tsunami records at each station also varied in terms of
visible wave periods. The visible period of the tsunami wave at Kaohsiung
was recorded from 30–48 min based on the tsunami waveform, which was
approximately 2 times longer than those observed at Dongkung and Houbihu
(from 18–24 min). This indicated that wave components with shorter periods
were not well recorded in Kaohsiung. The locations and details of the tide
gauge observations are summarized in Table 6a for wave amplitude and Table 6b for arrival time and visible period.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e3662"><bold>(a)</bold> The observed tsunami waveforms and <bold>(b)</bold> diagrams of root mean square (RMS) sea levels of the 2006 tsunami at the Kaohsiung, Dongkung, and Houbihu tide gauge stations. The vertical, dashed red lines indicate the earthquake occurrence time (EOT). The blue circles denote the arrival of the maximum crest wave that was recorded at all sites. The pink arrows mark the first wave crest. The green arrows represent the trough sign of the first wave arrival. The solid blue lines represent the normal sea level oscillation before the tsunami arrived (i.e., the mean value of sea level before the earthquake occurrence). The high-energy wave is illustrated in cyan-blue shaded areas. The orange arrows show the elapsed time of tsunami
duration.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Table 6</label><caption><p id="d1e3679"><bold>(a)</bold> Details of the tide gauge stations and physical characteristics of tsunami waveforms during the 2006 tsunami. <bold>(b)</bold> Details of the tide gauge stations and physical characteristics of tsunami waveforms during the 2006 tsunami.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col6"><bold>(a)</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Station</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Longitude</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Latitude</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col6" align="center">Tsunami wave amplitude (m) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">First trough</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">First wave</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Maximum</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">sign</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">crest</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">wave crest</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Kaohsiung</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">120.28</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">22.61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.07</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.08</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Dongkung</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">120.43</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">22.46</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.12</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Houbihu</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">120.74</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">21.94</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup>

  <oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry namest="col1" nameend="col6"><bold>(b)</bold></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Station</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col4" align="center">Arrival time (national standard time) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Delay of maximum</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Visible wave</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">First trough</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">First wave</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Maximum</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">wave crest (min)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">period (min)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">sign</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">crest</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">wave crest</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Kaohsiung</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">21:18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">21:44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">22:54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">70</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">30–48</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Dongkung</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20:54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">21:18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">22:18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">18–24</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Houbihu</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">20:42</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">20:48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">20:48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">18–24</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Tsunami durations</title>
      <p id="d1e4036">Another issue was to determine the tsunami duration at each station because
it can help to identify the length of wave oscillations at a coastal site
due to the tsunami. Typically, the tsunami duration describes the elapsed
time during which a high-energy wave at a tide gauge station exceeds the
mean sea level of a normal oscillation. The normal oscillation was defined
as the site-specific oscillation at each station before the tsunami arrived.
RMS analysis was applied to the recorded sea level data at each station. The
results of the RMS analysis are plotted in diagrams shown in Fig. 9b.</p>
      <p id="d1e4039">The RMS sea level diagram illustrates how long the high-energy wave
persisted at each station. Accordingly, the tsunami duration was determined
through a comparison of the RMS sea level and the basic oscillation in sea
level at each station. The maximum RMS sea level derived at the Houbihu
station was estimated to be 2–3 times higher than those at the Dongkung and
Kaohsiung stations. The calculated tsunami duration at Dongkung was as much
as 3.9 h, while the tsunami continued for more than 6 h in Kaohsiung and
Houbihu.</p>
      <p id="d1e4042">Generally, several oscillation modes are expected to be induced during a
tsunami event associated with the tsunami source, propagation path, and
topographic effects (Rabinovich,
1997; Rabinovich et al., 2013). An island setting such as Taiwan, where
continental shelves and gentle slopes exist, commonly traps waves over the
shelf during the passage of tsunamis (Munger
and Cheung, 2008; Roeber et al., 2010). The trapped waves propagate along
the coastline and normally trigger various oscillation modes in the coastal
water due to the interference of wave reflection at the edge of the
continental shelves (Yamazaki and Cheung, 2011). The wave
resonance of these oscillation modes with the fundamental modes can enhance
coastal hazards with amplified amplitudes and long tsunami durations
(Tanioka
et al., 2019; Yamanaka and Nakamura, 2020; Wang et al., 2021, 2022). The
triggered oscillation modes are expected to be mixed with the tsunami source
spectrum in the observation records from the coastal sites. To identify
these modes from the tsunami source spectrum, spectral analyses were
performed on the observation records at all three tide gauge stations in
southern Taiwan, as detailed in the next section.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Spectral analysis</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Tsunami source spectra</title>
      <p id="d1e4061">To examine the spectral characteristics of the tsunami waves, Fourier
analysis was applied to 10 h of de-tided observed data (i.e., 5 h before and after the tsunami's arrival) that were recorded at all the tide gauge
stations in southern Taiwan.<?pagebreak page459?> The background spectra were calculated in
addition to the spectra of the observed tsunami waveform to identify the
tsunami effect. The background spectra were the spectral components
calculated from observed data 5 h before the tsunami's arrival, and the
spectral components of the observed tsunami waveform were computed using the
5 h of data recorded at the tide gauge after the tsunami wave arrived.
Figure 10 shows the respective spectra of the observed tsunami waveform and
background signals at each tide gauge station.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F10" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e4066">Respective spectra of the observed tsunami waveform (solid blue
lines) at each tide gauge station. The solid black lines are spectra for the
background signals before tsunami arrivals at each station. The red circles
denote the dominant periods of the background spectra.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=384.112205pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page461?><p id="d1e4075">At all the stations, the spectral peaks of the observed tsunami spectra were
estimated to be different from those of the background spectra. A visible
gap also appeared in the spectral energy between the observed tsunami and
the background spectra, revealing the energy generated by the arrival of
tsunami waves. To examine the spectral components induced by the arrival of
the tsunami waves, the spectral ratio of the observed tsunami and background
spectra was derived using Eq. (11).
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E11" content-type="numbered"><label>11</label><mml:math id="M143" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">bg</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          In this equation, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">obs</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the spectral component of the
observed tsunami waveform, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">bg</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the background spectrum, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the spectral component induced by the arrival of
the tsunami waves. Figure 11 shows the spectral ratios for the tsunami
spectra at all the stations. Equation (11) assumes equivalent background
spectra before and after the tsunami's arrival, indicating that there was no
large change in the coastal topography during the tsunami event. Although
earlier studies have reported that coastal topography might be largely changed
during a massive event like the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami
(Masaya et al., 2020), this was not the case for the
2006 Hengchun tsunami because the tsunami wave was small. Therefore, the
dominant peaks of the spectral ratio were connected to either the tsunami
source or perhaps the wave oscillation induced by the non-source phenomenon.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11"><?xmltex \currentcnt{11}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e4168">Respective spectral ratios for the tide gauge spectra. The solid
black line is the calculated mean spectral ratio of the three tide gauge
spectra. The red circles represent the dominant periods of the mean spectral
ratio.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f11.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4177">Tsunami source periods are periodic components that primarily appear in
coastal observations close to the tsunami source region
(Rabinovich, 1997). Accordingly, the tsunami source
periods can be estimated from the mean of the spectral ratios calculated
from all three stations (i.e., the solid black line shown in Fig. 11).
From the analysis result of the spectral ratio, the periods of 13.6,
16.7, and 23.1 min are distinct in comparison to other periodic
components. The periods within this band most likely presented the source
periods of the 2006 tsunami since the periodic components within this band
were mostly visible at all stations.</p>
      <p id="d1e4180">In general, a larger earthquake can ordinarily generate a larger tsunami
wave with a longer period. For instance, the major periods of the 2011
Tohoku-Oki earthquake tsunami were reported to be 37–67 min associated
with that magnitude <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 9.0 earthquake
(Heidarzadeh and Satake, 2013), while shorter
dominant periods of 10–22 min were found for the 2013 Santa Cruz tsunami, a
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 8.0 earthquake (Heidarzadeh and Gusman, 2021). According to Rabinovich's theory (Rabinovich, 1997), the approximate dimensions of the
fault rupture can be estimated from the source periods using the empirical
formula defined in Eq. (12):
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E12" content-type="numbered"><label>12</label><mml:math id="M149" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mi>h</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mi>g</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> stands for the gravitational acceleration and is set to a constant
value of 9.81 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mi>h</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the seafloor depth around the tsunami source region, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> denotes the fault rupture dimensions of length or width, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the source period. The approximate source region could be illustrated
based on the aftershock distribution 1 d after the first earthquake
occurred. Assuming that the sea depths around the tsunami source region
range from 0–600 m and the source periods are 13.6, 16.7, 20.0,
and 23.1 min, the relationship between the fault rupture dimensions and sea
depths can be derived from Eq. (12). The correlation derived from
Eq. (12) is plotted in Fig. 12.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12"><?xmltex \currentcnt{12}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 12</label><caption><p id="d1e4272">Correlation of earthquake fault dimensions and sea depth around
the tsunami source region derived from the empirical formula proposed by
Rabinovich (1997).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f12.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4281">Assuming that the mean sea depth around the tsunami source region is 300 m,
the fault rupture dimensions for the two earthquakes can be estimated to be
20–40 km. The approximate fault size of these two earthquakes was estimated
to be 800 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, for which a longer dimension of 40 km was considered the
fault length and 20 km was considered the fault width. The estimation of
fault size was fairly consistent with the results derived from the empirical
scaling relations of Papazachos et al. (2004), with a fault area of 794 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> associated with the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.0 normal fault earthquake (first earthquake) and 738 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> associated with the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 6.9 strike-slip
fault (second earthquake).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Resonance modes induced by tsunami trapping waves</title>
      <p id="d1e4341">In addition to the Fourier analyses, wavelet (time–frequency) analyses were
also applied to 15 h of de-tided observed data (i.e., from 15:00 on 26 December 2006 to 06:00 on 27 December 2006, national standard time) at all the stations. Wavelet analyses are commonly employed as a method to examine
periodic variations over time series through the distribution of tsunami
spectral energy. Figure 13 shows the tsunami wavelets derived from the
tsunami records observed at each station. According to the wavelet plots at
all the stations, period bands of 13.6–23.1 min were clearly recorded after
the first wave arrived at all the stations. This also confirmed that the
period bands of 13.6–23.1 min were<?pagebreak page462?> associated with the source periods. At
Kaohsiung, the tsunami energy became apparent with periods of 16 and 36 min approximately 3 h after the arrival of the first wave. In the period
channel of 16 min, the oscillation was preserved for approximately 5 h,
while the 36 min channel was occupied by a high-energy wave for more than 9 h. At Houbihu, more energy was channeled than at other stations in the
period bands of 13.6–23.1 min soon after the first earthquake. This was
reasonable because Houbihu was the closest station to the epicentral region
and was therefore considered to be more sensitive to the tsunami source than
the other stations were. Following the arrival of the first wave, the
persistent oscillation (i.e., lasting more than 4 h) was visible
approximately 2 h after the first earthquake in the period channels of 16, 16.4, 20, 22.5, 25.7, 30, 36, and 60 min. These
periodic components were considered as possible modes of trapped tsunami
waves resonating within the shelf since the wave resonance commonly requires
some time to be formed (Heidarzadeh et al.,
2021). Among these periods, the 16 and 36 min periods most likely
presented the resonance mode since that mode is visible at only the
Kaohsiung and Houbihu stations, where tsunami durations of more than 6 h
were recorded (Fig. 9b). From the wavelet analysis of the observed data
recorded at the tide gauge stations, the persisting wave oscillations at the
Kaohsiung and Houbihu stations might be attributed to tsunami resonance.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F13" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{13}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 13</label><caption><p id="d1e4346">Wavelet (time–frequency) diagrams of tsunami data for the 26 December 2006 tsunami event at the <bold>(a)</bold> Kaohsiung, <bold>(b)</bold> Dongkung, and <bold>(c)</bold> Houbihu tide gauge stations. The color map represents the log2 spectral
energy at various times and tsunami periods. The vertical, dashed black
lines indicate the earthquake occurrence time (EOT). The black arrows denote
the arrival time of the first tsunami wave at each station.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f13.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <label>5</label><title>Sensitivity analyses of source models and bathymetry data</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS1">
  <label>5.1</label><title>Single fault models</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS1.SSS1">
  <label>5.1.1</label><title>Tsunami sensitivity to fault depths</title>
      <p id="d1e4388">The sensitivity of simulated tsunami waveforms to fault depth was evaluated
by varying the central fault depths of the first earthquake. Fault
dimensions of 40 km <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 20 km were applied to the two earthquakes. The single fault model of the two earthquakes was constructed using the GCMT
solution of nodal plane NP2 for the first earthquake and NP1 for the second
earthquake. The tide gauge stations of Dongkung and Houbihu were chosen for
this sensitivity analysis because they were the closest stations to the source
region and were therefore more sensitive to the tsunami source. The single
fault models of the two earthquakes and the locations of the near-field tide
gauge stations that were used for the sensitivity analysis of fault depths
are shown in Fig. 14a.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F14" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{14}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 14</label><caption><p id="d1e4400"><bold>(a)</bold> Single fault models with fault dimensions (length <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> width) of 40 km <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 20 km of the first earthquake using the GCMT NP2 nodal plane and the second earthquake using the GCMT NP1 nodal plane. The central fault depths of the single fault models for the first earthquake are set as 15, 20, 25, and 35 km, and the central fault depth is fixed at 33 km for the single fault models of the second earthquake for the tsunami sensitivity test. <bold>(b)</bold> Observed and simulated tsunami waveforms at the Dongkung and Houbihu stations using single fault models with the different central fault depths of the first earthquake.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=384.112205pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f14.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e4428">Figure 14b shows the observed and simulated tsunami waveforms at the
Dongkung and Houbihu stations using different fault depths of the first
earthquake. At the Dongkung station, the first circle of simulated tsunami
waveforms matched the observed data well regardless of the fault depths. At
the Houbihu station, the first wave crest of the simulated waveform from a
fault depth of 35 km was half the size of the observed value. Simulated
tsunami waveforms with shallower depths of 15 and 20 km produced
significantly higher amplitudes during the arrival of the first crest wave.
These results revealed that coastal sites with a shorter distance to the
source are more sensitive to earthquake fault depths. The simulated
waveforms from a central fault depth of 20 km fit the observed data better
than other simulations did, and therefore, this was considered the best
fault depth for simulation.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS1.SSS2">
  <label>5.1.2</label><title>Comparison of eight models</title>
      <p id="d1e4439">Single fault models with fault dimensions of 40 km <inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 20 km and
central depths of 20 km for the first earthquake and 33 km for the second
earthquake were used in tsunami simulations using eight different sets of
focal mechanisms for the two earthquakes estimated from GCMT and USGS data.
The single fault models of the two earthquakes with different focal
mechanisms are plotted in Figs. 15 and 16. The details of the eight
different sets of earthquake focal mechanisms are listed in Table 7.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F15" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{15}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 15</label><caption><p id="d1e4451">Simple fault models of the first earthquake (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.0) using the focal mechanisms from GCMT and USGS. The green triangles indicate the tide gauge stations, red stars indicate the epicenter, yellow circles
indicate aftershocks, and the black rectangles indicate the fault model.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f15.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F16" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{16}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 16</label><caption><p id="d1e4473">Simple fault models of the second earthquake (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 6.9) using the focal mechanisms from GCMT and USGS. The green triangles indicate the tide gauge stations, red stars indicate the epicenter, yellow circles
indicate aftershocks, and the black rectangles indicate the fault model.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f16.png"/>

          </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Table 7</label><caption><p id="d1e4497">Validation of the simulated tsunami waveforms using single fault
models with eight different models of focal mechanisms estimated by GCMT and
USGS.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Scenario</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Moment tensor</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col3" nameend="col4" align="center">Nodal plane </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Misfit of simulated</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">solution</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Earthquake 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Earthquake 2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">tsunami waveforms</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">S1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">GCMT</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">NP1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">NP1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.591</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">S2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">NP1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">NP2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.632</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">S3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">NP2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">NP1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.530</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">S4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">NP2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">NP2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.661</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">S5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">USGS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">NP1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">NP1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.529</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">S6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">NP1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">NP2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.604</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">S7</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">NP2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">NP1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.493</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">S8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">NP2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">NP2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.735</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F17" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{17}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 17</label><caption><p id="d1e4695">Comparison of simulated tsunami waveforms at the Dongkung and
Houbihu stations using single fault models with eight different models of
focal mechanisms estimated by GCMT and USGS.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f17.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e4704">In general, the simulated tsunami waveforms from all eight sets of
earthquake focal mechanisms matched the observed data well. Figure 17 shows
the observed and simulated tsunami waveforms at the Dongkung and Houbihu
stations using the eight different sets of earthquake focal mechanisms. The
simulated tsunami waveform from the earthquake focal mechanisms of S3
(misfit <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.530), S5 (misfit <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.529), and S7 (misfit <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.493) showed
a better fit to the observations than the other simulations did  (Table 7).
Among them, the earthquake focal mechanisms of S7 were found to be the best
fitting scenario with the smallest misfit from the observations. Scenario S7
contained the fault orientations of NP2 for the first earthquake and NP1 for
the second earthquake from USGS's moment tensor solution (Figs. 15d, 16c).</p>
      <p id="d1e4728">While the single fault models can produce simulated tsunami waveforms that
are consistent with the observations, the poorly sampled (i.e., 6 min
interval) signals recorded at the coastal stations also raised some
questions, as one would expect some potential high tsunami waves behind the
observed signals. To that sense, overestimation of the modeled results was
expected, but the simulated tsunami waveforms using single fault models
presented the opposite results. This indicates that the single fault models
(i.e., with uniform fault slip) may not be sufficient and that the asperity
area (i.e., with a large fault slip) on the fault should be evaluated. The
tsunami sensitivity to asperity locations of multiple fault models is
discussed in the next section.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS2">
  <label>5.2</label><title>Tsunami sensitivity to uniform and non-uniform fault slip models</title>
      <p id="d1e4740">The sensitivity of simulated tsunami waveforms to non-uniform fault slip
distribution was evaluated based on the best fitting fault geometry of S7.
The fault model with uniform slip was also modeled to identify the
significant<?pagebreak page463?> differences in the modeled results from the uniform and
non-uniform slip fault models.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F18" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{18}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 18</label><caption><p id="d1e4745">Comparison of simulated tsunami waveforms at the Dongkung and
Houbihu stations using nine cases of multiple fault models (solid blue lines)
and a single fault model of S7 (solid red lines). The simulated tsunami
waveforms using the multiple fault model (LS2) are shown as dashed blue
lines. The white circles represent the observational data.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=381.266929pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f18.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page465?><p id="d1e4754">Figure 18 shows the observed and simulated tsunami waveforms at the Dongkung
and Houbihu stations using non-uniform slip models (nine cases in total) and a
uniform slip model. At the Dongkung station, the simulated tsunami waveforms
from multiple fault models were not much different from those of the single
fault models. Both models could produce tsunami waveforms in good agreement
with the observed values recorded at this station. At the Houbihu station,
the non-uniform slip models produced a significantly higher first wave crest
than the observations. The simulated wave peaks from the non-uniform slip
models produced wave heights approximately twice those simulated using the
uniform slip. These results indicated that the near-field station of Houbihu
was rather sensitive to the effect of the fault slip distribution, and some
high tsunami waves might have been missing from the recorded signals at the
Houbihu station during the 2006 tsunami.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS3">
  <label>5.3</label><title>Tsunami simulation using open-source bathymetric data</title>
      <p id="d1e4765">To analyze the tsunami sensitivity to different sources of open-source,
accessible bathymetry data, numerical simulations were applied using GEBCO
and ETOPO1 data. The differences between the modeled results using these
different bathymetry data were evaluated to compare the modeled wave peaks
and waveforms of the 2006 tsunami.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F19" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{19}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 19</label><caption><p id="d1e4770">Simulated maximum tsunami height using open-source bathymetry
data: <bold>(a)</bold> GEBCO and <bold>(b)</bold> ETOPO1 data. <bold>(c)</bold> The variation and <bold>(d)</bold> the percent
variation in the simulated maximum tsunami height using two sources of
bathymetry data. The black circles indicate the locations of the tide gauge
stations. The bathymetry contour is 500 m based on the GEBCO or ETOPO1
bathymetric data.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f19.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4791">Figure 19a and b show the spatial distribution of the maximum wave
heights simulated using two bathymetric grids, the GEBCO data and ETOPO1
data. To evaluate the differences between the modeled wave peaks, the
variation and percent change in the variation were calculated, which can be
defined in Eqs. (13) and (14):

                <disp-formula specific-use="gather" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M169" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E13"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>13</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Var</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Peak</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">GEBCO</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Peak</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ETOPO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E14"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>14</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Var</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Peak</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">GEBCO</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Peak</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ETOPO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Peak</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">GEBCO</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Var</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the variation in the modeled wave peaks calculated at each computational grid with GEBCO and ETOPO1 data, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Peak</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">GEBCO</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Peak</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ETOPO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are defined as the calculated wave peaks of
progressive waves in a unit area of the free surface. Figure 19c and d
illustrate the spatial distribution of the variation and percent change in
the variation of the modeled wave peaks in the model domain, indicating the
differences in the modeled results using the two bathymetries. The results
suggested that the variation in the modeled wave peaks using the two
bathymetries was greater<?pagebreak page466?> than 0.05 m and that the percent change was greater than
50 % between the modeled results for areas with sea depths of less than
500 m.</p>
      <p id="d1e4914">Figure 20 shows the modeled tsunami waveforms at the three coastal stations
(i.e., black circles in Fig. 19) using the two bathymetric grids. At
Kaohsiung, the modeled waveforms from the two bathymetries matched each
other well; however, the modeled wave peak from the ETOPO1 data was
significantly smaller than that from the GEBCO data. The bathymetries from
the GEBCO and ETOPO1 data could produce tsunami waveforms at Dongkung and
Houbihu that were similar in both wave periods and peaks. Table 8 summarizes
the details of the coastal stations and the peak variation percentage of the
modeled results from the two bathymetries.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F20"><?xmltex \currentcnt{20}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 20</label><caption><p id="d1e4919">Simulated tsunami waveforms at the <bold>(a)</bold> Kaohsiung, <bold>(b)</bold> Dongkung, and <bold>(c)</bold> Houbihu stations using two different open-source bathymetry datasets, GEBCO and ETOPO1.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=213.395669pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f20.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T8" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><label>Table 8</label><caption><p id="d1e4940">Details of the locations of the simulated tsunami waveforms and
misfit of model results using different open-source bathymetry data at three
tide gauge stations.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Station</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center" colsep="1">Sea depth (m) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center">Simulated wave  </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Var</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">%</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Var</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">peak</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center" colsep="1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center">peak (m) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">GEBCO</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">ETOPO1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">GEBCO</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">ETOPO1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Kaohsiung</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">10</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.163</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.084</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.079</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">48.45</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Dongkung</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">14</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.171</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.17</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.001</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.58</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Houbihu</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.493</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.414</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.079</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">16.02</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6">
  <label>6</label><title>The mechanism of tsunami wave trapping</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS1">
  <label>6.1</label><title>Bathymetry effect on tsunami wave directivity</title>
      <p id="d1e5134">It is commonly understood that tsunami velocities are mainly governed by
seafloor depths. A tsunami propagates at a slower speed when the tsunami
wave enters shallow water from deeper water. The significant change in
propagation speed allows the tsunami to change its wave direction. To assess
the bathymetry effect on tsunami wave directivity during propagation,
simulations were applied using actual (MS) and manipulated bathymetry
experiments (EXP1 and EXP2).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F21" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{21}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 21</label><caption><p id="d1e5139">Tsunami propagation snapshots from the numerical experiment MS.
The tide gauge stations are plotted in green triangles. The bathymetry
contour is 500 m.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=429.636614pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f21.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page468?><p id="d1e5148">Simulated snapshots of tsunami wave propagation using actual (MS) bathymetry
data are shown in Fig. 21. The continental shelves in front of Hengchun
Peninsula have shallow depths compared to the open ocean. Figure 21a and b
present how tsunami waves repeatedly changed their directions among the
shelves and then refracted into the west coast embayment. The tsunami waves
were reflected from the coast after arrival and tended to radiate offshore.
However, they did not fully radiate offshore; instead, they were reflected
again at the boundary of the shelf and refracted north toward Kaohsiung and
Dongkung (Fig. 21c, d). The high-energy waves repeatedly reflected and
refracted among the shelves. Only rarely were tsunamis transmitted back to the
open ocean or to the east coast. These results indicated that the tsunami
waves were trapped over the shelves during their passage in the 2006 tsunami
event. Due to this fluctuation, the high-energy tsunami wave remained along
the western coast for a long time, which could be clearly seen at 75 and
90 min after the occurrence of the first earthquake (Fig. 21e, f).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F22" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{22}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 22</label><caption><p id="d1e5154">Tsunami propagation snapshots from the numerical experiment EXP1.
The tide gauge stations are plotted as green triangles. The bathymetry
contour at a depth of 500 m is shown as a solid gray line.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=429.636614pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f22.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e5163">Figure 22 shows snapshots of the simulated tsunami wave propagation using
manipulated (EXP1) bathymetry. In this situation, the transmission of
tsunami waves in the shallow area was similar to those simulated using the
actual (MS) bathymetry, in which the tsunami waves were persistent and
repeatedly reflected and refracted among the shelves, but more reflected
waves from the coast radiated to the open sea (Fig. 22b–f). This is
because the tsunami source was located in an area with sea depths over 500 m, and bathymetry data<?pagebreak page469?> with sea depths over 500 m were replaced with a 500 m depth in this hypothetical situation.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F23" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{23}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 23</label><caption><p id="d1e5168">Tsunami propagation snapshots from the numerical experiment EXP2.
The tide gauge stations are plotted as green triangles. The corresponding
bathymetry contour of 500 m depth from GEBCO data is shown as a dashed gray
line.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=429.636614pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f23.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e5177">Aside from the numerical experiment EXP1, a rather hypothetical situation
(EXP2) was conducted to simulate tsunami wave propagation on a bathymetry
with a flat sea bottom and a sea depth of 500 m. Figure 23 shows snapshots
of simulated tsunami wave propagation using the manipulated (EXP2)
bathymetry. An inspection of the tsunami wave transmission in the shallow
area indicated that the reflected tsunami waves from the coast radiated
homogeneously offshore, and the wave reflection and refraction could not be
clearly seen. In addition, the tsunami waves propagated at a rather fast
speed (i.e., in comparison to MS and EXP1) and mostly radiated out of the
model domain at 75 and 90 min after the occurrence of the first
earthquake (Fig. 23d, e).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS2">
  <label>6.2</label><title>Tsunami wave energy trapped on the shelf</title>
      <p id="d1e5188">While the past section specified that tsunami waves are trapped over shelves
due to the wave directivity change associated with the configuration of
coastal bathymetry, the question remains of how much wave energy can be
trapped over the shelves in front of southern Taiwan during the passage of
tsunamis. To quantitatively evaluate the wave energy trapped over the
shelves, the trapped ratio was used to indicate the tsunami energy trapped
in bathymetric situations, as calculated in Eq. (15):
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E15" content-type="numbered"><label>15</label><mml:math id="M175" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Shelf</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Total</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the ratio of tsunami energy trapped, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Shelf</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the calculated tsunami potential energy on the shelves (i.e., shallow areas with sea depths under 500 m), and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Total</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the calculated total tsunami
potential energy of the model domain at each time step. The tsunami
potential energy was determined assuming that the energy flux of the tsunami
wave progressed in a unit region of the free sea surface and was determined
using Eq. (16) (Nosov et al., 2014):​​​​​​​
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E16" content-type="numbered"><label>16</label><mml:math id="M179" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∯</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">η</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the tsunami potential energy, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ρ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the water density of the ocean, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mi>g</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the gravitational acceleration (set as 9.81 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>),
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">η</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the surface integral of the ocean surface disturbance
at each time step. The ratio of trapped tsunami energy was calculated from
the snapshots of tsunami simulations using actual (MS) and manipulated (EXP1
and EXP2) bathymetry. Figure 24 shows the calculated trapped ratio from
simulated tsunami propagation snapshots every 15 min using actual (MS) and
manipulated (EXP1 and EXP2) bathymetry. Note that for calculating the
trapped ratio from simulations using manipulated bathymetry (EXP1 and EXP2),
the shelf region corresponding to the actual bathymetry (MS) was used (i.e.,
the shallow area illustrated by the solid and dashed black lines shown in
Figs. 22 and 23). According to Eqs. (15) and (16), the simulations
yielded a ratio of trapped tsunami energy of more than 50 % when using
actual bathymetry (MS) and manipulated bathymetry (EXP1) but a smaller
trapped ratio of 20 % when using manipulated bathymetry (EXP2). These
results quantitatively provided another confirmation that the coastally
trapped tsunami wave energy was related to the shape of the bathymetry.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F24" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{24}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 24</label><caption><p id="d1e5345">Trapped ratio calculated from tsunami propagation snapshots every
15 min from numerical experiments <bold>(a)</bold> MS, <bold>(b)</bold> EXP1, and <bold>(c)</bold> EXP2.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=469.470472pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f24.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS3">
  <label>6.3</label><title>Comparison of simulated tsunami waveforms</title>
      <p id="d1e5371">To understand any significant change in tsunami waveforms that can be
recognized with and without wave trapping, tsunami waveforms simulated from
actual (MS) and manipulated bathymetry (EXP1 and EXP2) were compared. Figure 25 shows the simulated tsunami waveforms at the three coastal stations in southern Taiwan using actual and manipulated bathymetry.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F25"><?xmltex \currentcnt{25}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 25</label><caption><p id="d1e5376">Simulated tsunami waveforms at the <bold>(a)</bold> Kaohsiung, <bold>(b)</bold> Dongkung, and <bold>(c)</bold> Houbihu stations from numerical experiments MS, EXP1, and EXP2.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=213.395669pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f25.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page473?><p id="d1e5394">Using the manipulated bathymetry (EXP1), the first few circles of simulated
tsunami waveforms at all the stations were consistent with those simulated
using actual bathymetry (MS) but produced slightly smaller later-phase
amplitudes. An inspection of the simulated waveforms using the manipulated
bathymetry (EXP2) indicated an earlier arrival time of the first wave and
smaller amplitudes of the later phase than those of the simulation results
using actual (MS) bathymetry. These results indicated that the persistent
high-energy waves along the south coast of Taiwan were associated with the
mechanism of tsunami wave trapping.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6.SS4">
  <label>6.4</label><title>Amplified and persistent high-energy waves along the coast</title>
      <p id="d1e5405">As described in the previous sections, the tsunami wave was trapped over the
shelves and transmitted along the coast as edge waves during the 2006
tsunami. This section describes how tsunami waves behave as edge waves and
to what extent such wave fluctuations influence the amplified and persisting
high-energy waves along the south coast of Taiwan. Figure 26 shows the
shelves in front of south Taiwan and the simulated tsunami heights of the
2006 tsunami from the main simulation (MS).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F26" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{26}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 26</label><caption><p id="d1e5410">Zoomed map of the <bold>(a)</bold> bathymetry around southern Taiwan and <bold>(b)</bold> simulated maximum tsunami height using a multiple fault model (LS2). Green triangles indicate the locations of tide gauge stations, and pink circles denote numerical wave gauges at a sea depth of 20 m. The solid white lines are contour lines, and the dashed black line represents the bathymetric contour at a depth of 20 m.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f26.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F27" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{27}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 27</label><caption><p id="d1e5427">Time–distance diagram of the <bold>(a)</bold> tsunami wave and <bold>(b)</bold> normalized energy along the 20 m bathymetry contour from numerical wave gauges A to F and time series measurements of the <bold>(c)</bold> tsunami amplitude and <bold>(d)</bold> normalized
energy at numerical wave gauges C and E. The dashed black lines indicate the
distances of numerical wave gauges C and E from A. For interpretation of the
references, please refer to Fig. 26a.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/23/447/2023/nhess-23-447-2023-f27.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e5449">To study the behaviors of edge waves along the south coast during the 2006
tsunami, a time–distance diagram of tsunami waves is shown. Figure 27a shows
the time–distance diagram of the tsunami wave along the contour of the 20 m
sea depth (i.e., dashed black line in Fig. 26a). Based on the phase shift
of the tsunami wave, the propagation path and the travel time curve of edge
waves are illustrated (i.e., green arrow in Fig. 27a). According to the
travel time curve, the edge waves propagated along the coast at a speed of
50 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. The edge waves propagated along the coast and were
iteratively reflected at the shelf edge. The coupling of the edge waves and
the later-arriving incident waves amplified the tsunami waves and maintained
the wave oscillation in the later phase. These were visible from simulated
tsunami waveforms at numerical wave gauges C and E, as shown in Fig. 27c.</p>
      <p id="d1e5464">To understand the persisting high-energy waves along the south coast of
Taiwan during the 2006 tsunami, the<?pagebreak page474?> decreasing tendency of the tsunami wave
energy along the 20 m sea depth contour was analyzed. The temporal tsunami
wave energy was first determined using Eq. (16) and then normalized
according to the maximum temporal tsunami energy in the time series. Figure 27b shows the time–distance diagram of the normalized tsunami energy along the 20 m sea depth contour (i.e., dashed black line in Fig. 26a). Figure 27d shows the normalized tsunami energy at numerical wave gauges C and E. At the numerical wave gauge C, the normalized tsunami energy achieved its
greatest value at approximately 40 min after the first earthquake occurred.
However, this high-energy channel did not decrease with time after the first
wave arrived; instead, a persisting channel of strong energy was visible.
This energy channel lasted for more than 60 min, and the wave energy
repeatedly reached the maximum value in this channel. Beyond this channel,
the energy commenced to decrease with a rate of energy loss of 50 % at 110 min and 20 % at 270 min after the occurrence time of the first earthquake.
At the numerical wave gauge E, the normalized tsunami energy achieved its
greatest value approximately 30 and 120 min after the first wave
arrived. Beyond this channel, the energy commenced to decrease at a rather
fast rate of energy loss of 80 % at 150 min and 70 % at 215 min after the occurrence time of the first earthquake. Accordingly, the tsunami decay process in this region was expected to last for more than 300 min. These results indicated that the wave amplification and persistent high-energy
waves along the coast during the 2006 tsunami were connected to tsunami wave
trapping and the influence of edge waves. According to these behaviors,
southern Taiwan could be affected by intensified coastal hazards and severe
impacts from tsunamis.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S7" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>7</label><title>Conclusions</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S7.SS1">
  <label>7.1</label><title>Main findings</title>
      <p id="d1e5483">In this article, the characteristics of the consecutive tsunamis on 26 December 2006 and the resulting tsunami behaviors in southern Taiwan were
investigated and clarified. The methodology comprised analyses of tide gauge
tsunami waveforms, spectral analyses, and numerical tsunami simulations. The
main findings are summarized as follows.
<list list-type="order"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e5488">The physical characteristics of the tsunami waveforms at all three tide
gauge stations in southern Taiwan during the December 2006 tsunami were
analyzed. The initial tsunami wave arrived at Kaohsiung, Dongkung, and
Houbihu at 21:18, 20:54, and 20:42 national standard time, respectively, with
a trough sign of tsunami amplitude. Following the initial wave trough, the
initial wave crests were 0.07 m (Kaohsiung), 0.09 m (Dongkung), and 0.3 m (Houbihu). The maximum tsunami wave heights at the three tide gauge stations at Kaohsiung, Dongkung, and Houbihu were 0.08, 0.12, and 0.3 m,
respectively, and the maximum tsunami wave heights at Kaohsiung and Dongkung
were not recorded with the first waves. The approximate tsunami duration in
Dongkung was 3.9 h, while the tsunami lasted for more than 6 h in Kaohsiung
and Houbihu.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e5492">Based on the spectral analyses of tsunami waveforms, a period band of
13.6–23.1 min was attributed to the tsunami source spectrum. The periods of 16 and 36 min were considered the modes of trapped tsunami waves
resonating with the fundamental modes of the shelves.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <?pagebreak page475?><p id="d1e5496">A tsunami source model for the 2006 earthquake doublet tsunami was proposed. The fault size of the successive earthquakes was estimated to be 800 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, comprising a length of 40 km and a width of 20 km. Uniform slips of 1.66 m (first earthquake, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 7.0) and 1.17 m (second earthquake, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">w</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 6.9) were estimated. The respective central fault depths of the two
earthquakes were 20 and 33 km. The focal mechanisms of the first
earthquake, with a strike of 319<inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, dip of 69<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
rake of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>102<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the second earthquake, with a strike of
151<inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, dip of 48<inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and rake of 0<inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, could
successfully produce the observed tsunami waveforms. Moreover, the tsunami
sensitivity of the non-uniform fault slip distribution indicated that some
tsunami signals might have been missing from the record signals due to the
poor sampling rate (6 min intervals), and the wave peaks at Houbihu station
might have reached twice the values of those observed during the 2006
tsunami.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e5593">A comparison of tsunami propagation simulations using actual (MS) and
manipulated bathymetry (EXP1 and EXP2) revealed that the tsunami waves were
coastally trapped during the passage of the 2006 tsunami. The trapped
tsunami waves iteratively reflected and refracted among the shelves. The
trapped waves interfered with incident waves and resonated with the
fundamental modes of the shelves, resulting in an amplified and persistent
oscillation of tsunami waves. This explained why the observed tsunami waves
recorded at some stations in southern Taiwan were amplified and had a
tsunami duration of more than 6 h during the 2006 tsunami.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e5597">Tsunamis are one of the most dangerous coastal hazards and can cause
destructive damage and loss of life in coastal regions. Taiwan is at risk of
tsunamis and is exposed to potential near-field tsunamis generated from the
Manila Trench on the South China Sea (SCS) side and the Ryukyu Trench on the
Pacific Ocean side. The results of the present study based on the 2006
tsunami revealed that the tsunami wave was trapped over the insular shelves
around southern Taiwan during the passage of the tsunami. Wave couplings and
resonant features might result in unexpected amplification of tsunami
heights and persistent wave oscillation in southern Taiwan. In other words,
even if the initial wave heights are small, the tsunami waves that arrive
later are expected to be higher and more persistent along the coast of
southern Taiwan. Therefore, decision makers and people in southern Taiwan
should be aware of this possibility and stay clear of coastal regions for a
long time as an emergency response to future tsunamis, even if the wave
height of an initially arriving tsunami wave is small. These findings are
important and valuable for improving the existing system of tsunami warnings
and coastal planning for disaster risk management.</p></list-item></list></p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S7.SS2">
  <label>7.2</label><title>Limitations and future improvements</title>
      <p id="d1e5608">In this study, the characteristics of the December 2006 tsunami and
resulting tsunami behaviors in southern Taiwan were explored using available
data from tide gauge tsunami waveforms and numerical tsunami simulations.
Nevertheless, the analyses in this article had some limitations. The first
limitation was related to the tsunami data recorded at the tide gauge
stations, which were employed as input data for the spectral analyses (i.e.,
Fourier analyses and wavelet analyses) and compared with the numerical
results. The sampling interval of the tide gauge data recorded at all CWB
tide gauge stations was 6 min, indicating that tsunami wave components with
shorter periods might not be well recorded in the tide gauge data. Due to
this existing limitation, spectral analyses might cause discrepancies in
detecting periodic components<?pagebreak page476?> of tsunami spectra. This limitation could be
improved by including tsunami data with more frequent sampling rates.</p>
      <p id="d1e5611">Another limitation was related to the simulation grid size (i.e., 450 m) for
the tsunami propagation simulation. Although the simulated tsunami waveforms
were reasonably consistent with the observed values recorded at the tide
gauge stations in terms of wave amplitude and arrival time, the
reproducibility of the numerical results for the 2006 tsunami could be
further improved by constructing a finer grid of bathymetric data.</p>
      <p id="d1e5614">All the limitations mentioned above suggest further improvements to research
to provide a more detailed investigation of long-lived edge wave and shelf
resonance issues, especially in the region of southern Taiwan. In addition,
more fundamental studies on the complex wave mechanisms of tsunami
reflection and refraction, shoaling effects, and wave trapping by insular
shelves are planned for future work.</p>
</sec>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="codedataavailability"><title>Code and data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e5622">The second version of the TUNAMI code (TUNAMI-N2) used in this research is currently not an open-source model but is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. The recorded sea level data at tide gauge stations can be  obtained from the Central Weather Bureau, R.O.C., through reasonable request. The seismic information is available in publicly accessible catalogs of the Global Centroid Moment Tensor (<uri>https://www.globalcmt.org/CMTsearch.html</uri>, last access: 14 January 2022; Global CMT, 2022​​​​​​​) project and United States Geological Survey  (<uri>https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/usp000f114#general_summary</uri>, last access: 14 January 2022; USGS, 2022a; <uri>https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/usp000f115/executive#general_summary</uri>, last access: 14 January 2022; USGS, 2022b), as mentioned in the body of the article. The topographic and bathymetric data of GEBCO and ETOPO1 used for the numerical tsunami simulations are publicly accessible at General Bathymetric Chart of the Ocean (<uri>https://www.gebco.net/data_and_products/gridded_bathymetry_data/</uri>, last access: 14<?pagebreak page477?> January 2022; GEBCO, 2022) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (<uri>https://ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/global/relief/ETOPO1/tiled/</uri>, last access: 14 January 2022; NOAA, 2009).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e5643">All authors read, reviewed, and approved the manuscript. ACC wrote the manuscript, performed numerical simulation, and analyzed the results. FI and AS supervised the research and editing. KP provided constructive suggestions to the numerical simulation and the analyses of this study.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e5649">The contact author has declared that none of the authors has any competing interests.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e5655">Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="sistatement"><title>Special issue statement</title>

      <p id="d1e5661">This article is part of the special issue “Tsunamis: from source processes to coastal hazard and warning”. It is not associated with a conference.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e5668">The authors thank Shyh-Fang Liu and Cheng-Lin Huang for their great
support in collecting the observation data used in this work. The authors
also thank Yo Fukutani from Kanto Gakuin University, Japan, for his
valuable suggestions on conducting the sensitivity analysis of the fault
models. We appreciate American Journal Expert for editing the draft of the manuscript.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e5673">This research has been supported (in part) by the MEXT WISE Program for Sustainability in the Dynamic Earth.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e5679">This paper was edited by Mohammad Heidarzadeh and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cheng, S. N., Shaw, C. F., and Yeh, Y. T.: Reconstructing the 1867 Keelung earthquake and Tsunami based on historical documents, Terr. Atmos. Ocean. Sci., 27, 431–449, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3319/TAO.2016.03.18.01(TEM)" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3319/TAO.2016.03.18.01(TEM)</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>GEBCO: Global Ocean &amp; land terrain models, GEBCO [code], <uri>https://www.gebco.net/data_and_products/gridded_bathymetry_data/</uri>, last access: 14 January 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Global CMT: CMT Catalog Citation Information, Global CMT [data set], <uri>https://www.globalcmt.org/CMTsearch.html</uri>, last access: 14 January 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Griffin, J., Latief, H., Kongko, W., Harig, S., Horspool, N., Hanung, R.,
Rojali, A., Maher, N., Fuchs, A., Hossen, J., Upi, S., Edi Dewanto, S.,
Rakowsky, N., and Cummins, P.: An evaluation of onshore digital elevation
models for modeling tsunami inundation zones, Front. Earth Sci., 3, 32,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2015.00032" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3389/feart.2015.00032</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gusman, A. R., Satake, K., Shinohara, M., Sakai, S., and Tanioka, Y.: Fault
Slip Distribution of the 2016 Fukushima Earthquake Estimated from Tsunami
Waveforms, Pure Appl. Geophys., 174, 2925–2943,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-017-1590-2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00024-017-1590-2</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., Gommers, R., Virtanen,
P., Cournapeau, D., Wieser, E., Taylor, J., Berg, S., Smith, N. J., Kern,
R., Picus, M., Hoyer, S., van Kerkwijk, M. H., Brett, M., Haldane, A., del
Río, J. F., Wiebe, M., Peterson, P., Gérard-Marchant, P., Sheppard,
K., Reddy, T., Weckesser, W., Abbasi, H., Gohlke, C., and Oliphant, T. E.:
Array programming with NumPy, Nature, 585, 357–362, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hayashi, Y., Koshimura, S., and Imamura, F.: Comparison of decay features of
the 2006 and 2007 Kuril Island earthquake tsunamis, Geophys. J. Int., 190,
347–357, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2012.05466.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1365-246X.2012.05466.x</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Heidarzadeh, M. and Gusman, A. R.: Source modeling and spectral analysis of
the Crete tsunami of 2nd May 2020 along the Hellenic Subduction Zone,
offshore Greece, Earth, Planets Sp., 73, 74,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-021-01394-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1186/s40623-021-01394-4</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Heidarzadeh, M. and Mulia, I. E.: Ultra-long period and small-amplitude
tsunami generated following the July 2020 Alaska Mw 7.8 tsunamigenic
earthquake, Ocean Eng., 234, 109243, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.109243" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.109243</ext-link>,
2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Heidarzadeh, M. and Satake, K.: Waveform and Spectral Analyses of the 2011
Japan Tsunami Records on Tide Gauge and DART Stations Across the Pacific
Ocean, Pure Appl. Geophys., 170, 1275–1293,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-012-0558-5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00024-012-0558-5</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Heidarzadeh, M. and Satake, K.: Excitation of Basin-Wide Modes of the
Pacific Ocean Following the March 2011 Tohoku Tsunami, Pure Appl. Geophys.,
171, 3405–3419, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-013-0731-5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00024-013-0731-5</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Heidarzadeh, M. and Satake, K.: New Insights into the Source of the Makran
Tsunami of 27 November 1945 from Tsunami Waveforms and Coastal Deformation
Data, Pure Appl. Geophys., 172, 621–640, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-014-0948-y" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00024-014-0948-y</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Heidarzadeh, M., Muhari, A., and Wijanarto, A. B.: Insights on the Source of
the 28 September 2018 Sulawesi Tsunami, Indonesia Based on Spectral Analyses
and Numerical Simulations, Pure Appl. Geophys., 176, 25–43,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-018-2065-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00024-018-2065-9</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Heidarzadeh, M., Pranantyo, I. R., Okuwaki, R., Dogan, G. G., and Yalciner,
A. C.: Long Tsunami Oscillations Following the 30 October 2020 Mw 7.0 Aegean
Sea Earthquake: Observations and Modelling, Pure Appl. Geophys., 178,
1531–1548, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-021-02761-8" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00024-021-02761-8</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Imamura, F.: Review of tsunami simulation with a finite difference method, in: Long-Wave Runup Models, edited by: Yeh, H., Liu, P., and Synolakis, C., World Scientific Publishing, Hackensack, NJ, 25–42, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814530330" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1142/9789814530330</ext-link>, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kagan, Y. Y. and Jackson, D. D.: Worldwide doublets of large shallow
earthquakes, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 89, 1147–1155,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1785/bssa0890051147" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1785/bssa0890051147</ext-link>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kanamori, H. and Anderson, D. L.: Theoretical basis of some em- pirical
relations in seismology, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 65, 1073–1095, 1975.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page478?><ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Koshimura, S., Hayashi, Y., Munemoto, K., and Imamura, F.: Effect of the
Emperor seamounts on trans-oceanic propagation of the 2006 Kuril Island
earthquake tsunami, Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L02611, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL032129" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007GL032129</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lay, T. and Kanamori, H.: Earthquake Doublets In The Solomon Islands,
Phys. Earth Planet. In., 21, 283–304, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9201(80)90134-X" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/0031-9201(80)90134-X</ext-link>, 1980.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, L., Switzer, A. D., Wang, Y., Weiss, R., Qiu, Q., Chan, C. H., and
Tapponnier, P.: What caused the mysterious eighteenth century tsunami that
struck the southwest Taiwan coast?, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 8498–8506,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL065567" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015GL065567</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, L., Switzer, A. D., Chan, C. H., Wang, Y., Weiss, R., and Qiu, Q.: How
heterogeneous coseismic slip affects regional probabilistic tsunami hazard
assessment: A case study in the South China Sea, J. Geophys. Res.-Sol.
Ea., 121, 6250–6272, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JB013111" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016JB013111</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, P. L. F., Wang, X., and Salisbury, A. J.: Tsunami hazard and early
warning system in South China Sea, J. Asian Earth Sci., 36, 2–12,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.12.010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.12.010</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, T.-C., Wu, T.-R., and Hsu, S.-K.: Historical tsunamis of Taiwan in the 18th century: the 1781 Jiateng Harbor flooding and 1782 tsunami event, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 2517–2530, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2517-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-22-2517-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ma, K. F. and Liang, W. T.: Preface to the 2006 Pingtung Earthquake Doublet Special Issue, Terr Atmos. Ocean. Sci., 19, I–III, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3319/TAO.2008.19.6.I(PT)" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3319/TAO.2008.19.6.I(PT)</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Masaya, R., Suppasri, A., Yamashita, K., Imamura, F., Gouramanis, C., and Leelawat, N.: Investigating beach erosion related with tsunami sediment transport at Phra Thong Island, Thailand, caused by the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 2823–2841, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-2823-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-20-2823-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Megawati, K., Shaw, F., Sieh, K., Huang, Z., Wu, T. R., Lin, Y., Tan, S. K.,
and Pan, T. C.: Tsunami hazard from the subduction megathrust of the South
China Sea: Part I. Source characterization and the resulting tsunami, J.
Asian Earth Sci., 36, 13–20, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.11.012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.11.012</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Munger, S. and Cheung, K. F.: Resonance in Hawaii waters from the 2006 Kuril
Islands Tsunami, Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L07605, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL032843" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2007GL032843</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>NOAA: ETOPO1 1 Arc-Minute Global Relief Model, National Geophysical Data Center, NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information [code], <uri>https://ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/global/relief/ETOPO1/tiled/</uri> (last access: 14 January 2022), 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Nosov, M. A., Bolshakova, A. V., and Kolesov, S. V.: Displaced Water Volume, Potential Energy of Initial Elevation, and Tsunami Intensity: Analysis of Recent Tsunami Events, Pure Appl. Geophys., 171, 3515–3525, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-013-0730-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00024-013-0730-6</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Okada, Y.: Surface deformation due to shear and tensile faults in a half-space, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 75, 1135–1154, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0750041135" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1785/BSSA0750041135</ext-link>, 1985.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Otake, T., Chua, C. T., Suppasri, A., and Imamura, F.: Justification of
possible casualty-reduction countermeasures based on global tsunami hazard
assessment for tsunami-prone regions over the past 400 years, J. Disaster
Res., 15, 490–502, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2020.p0490" ext-link-type="DOI">10.20965/jdr.2020.p0490</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Papazachos, B. C., Scordilis, E. M., Panagiotopoulos, D. G., Papazachos, C. B., and Karakaisis, G. F.: Global Relations between seismic fault parameters and moment magnitude of earthquakes, Bulletin of the Geological Society of Greece, 36, 1482–1489, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.12681/bgsg.16538" ext-link-type="DOI">10.12681/bgsg.16538</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Qiu, Q., Li, L., Hsu, Y.-J., Wang, Y., Chan, C.-H., and Switzer, A. D.: Revised earthquake sources along Manila trench for tsunami hazard assessment in the South China Sea, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 1565–1583, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-1565-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-19-1565-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rabinovich, A. B.: Spectral analysis of tsunami waves: Separation of source
and topography effects, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 102, 12663–12676,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97JC00479" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/97JC00479</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rabinovich, A. B., Candella, R. N., and Thomson, R. E.: The open ocean
energy decay of three recent trans-Pacific tsunamis, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
40, 3157–3162, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50625" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/grl.50625</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ren, Z., Liu, H., Jimenez, C., and Wang, Y.: Tsunami resonance and standing
waves in the South China Sea, Ocean Eng., 262, 112323,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.112323" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.112323</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Roeber, V., Yamazaki, Y., and Cheung, K. F.: Resonance and impact of the
2009 Samoa tsunami around Tutuila, American Samoa, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L21604, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL044419" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010GL044419</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sugawara, D., Yu, N. T., and Yen, J. Y.: Estimating a Tsunami Source by
Sediment Transport Modeling: A Primary Attempt on a Historical/1867
Normal-Faulting Tsunami in Northern Taiwan, J. Geophys. Res.-Earth Surf.,
124, 1675–1700, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JF004831" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2018JF004831</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sun, Y.-S., Chen, P.-F., Chen, C.-C., Lee, Y.-T., Ma, K.-F., and Wu, T.-R.: Assessment of the peak tsunami amplitude associated with a large earthquake occurring along the southernmost Ryukyu subduction zone in the region of Taiwan, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2081–2092, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2081-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-18-2081-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Suppasri, A., Futami, T., Tabuchi, S., and Imamura, F.: Mapping of
historical tsunamis in the Indian and Southwest Pacific Oceans, Int. J.
Disaster Risk Reduct., 1, 62–71, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2012.05.003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.ijdrr.2012.05.003</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Suppasri, A., Muhari, A., Futami, T., Imamura, F., and Shuto, N.: Loss
Functions for Small Marine Vessels Based on Survey Data and Numerical
Simulation of the 2011 Great East Japan Tsunami, J. Waterw. Port C. Div., 140, 5, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)ww.1943-5460.0000244" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1061/(asce)ww.1943-5460.0000244</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Suppasri, A., Leelawat, N., Latcharote, P., Roeber, V., Yamashita, K.,
Hayashi, A., Ohira, H., Fukui, K., Hisamatsu, A., Nguyen, D., and Imamura,
F.: The 2016 Fukushima earthquake and tsunami: Local tsunami behavior and
recommendations for tsunami disaster risk reduction, Int. J. Disast. Risk
Reduct., 21, 323–330, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2016.12.016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.ijdrr.2016.12.016</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tanioka, Y. and Satake, K.: Tsunami generation by horizontal displacement of
ocean bottom, Geophys. Res. Lett., 23, 861–864, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96GL00736" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/96GL00736</ext-link>, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tanioka, Y., Shibata, M., Yamanaka, Y., Gusman, A. R., and Ioki, K.:
Generation mechanism of large later phases of the 2011 Tohoku-oki tsunami
causing damages in Hakodate, Hokkaido, Japan, Prog. Earth Planet. Sci., 6, 30, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-019-0278-x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1186/s40645-019-0278-x</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page479?><ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Torrence, C. and Compo, G. P.: A Practical Guide to Wavelet Analysis, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 79, 61–78, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1998)079&lt;0061:APGTWA&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0477(1998)079&lt;0061:APGTWA&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>USGS: M 7.1 – 30 km SW of Hengchun, Taiwan, USGS [data set], <uri>https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/usp000f114#general_summary</uri>, last access: 14 January 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>USGS: M 6.9 – 26 km W of Hengchun, Taiwan, USGS [data set], <uri>https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/usp000f115/executive#general_summary</uri>, lass access: 14 January 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wang, Y., Zamora, N., Quiroz, M., Satake, K., and Cienfuegos, R.: Tsunami
Resonance Characterization in Japan Due to Trans-Pacific Sources: Response
on the Bay and Continental Shelf, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 126, e2020JC017037, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JC017037" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020JC017037</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wang, Y., Su, H. Y., Ren, Z., and Ma, Y.: Source Properties and Resonance
Characteristics of the Tsunami Generated by the 2021 M 8.2 Alaska
Earthquake, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 127, e2021JC018308, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JC018308" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2021JC018308</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wu, T. R. and Huang, H. C.: Modeling tsunami hazards from Manila trench to
Taiwan, J. Asian Earth Sci., 36, 21–28, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.12.006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.12.006</ext-link>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wu, T. R., Chen, P. F., Tsai, W. T., and Chen, G. Y.: Numerical study on
tsunamis excited by 2006 Pingtung earthquake doublet, Terr. Atmos. Ocean.
Sci., 19, 705–715, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3319/TAO.2008.19.6.705(PT)" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3319/TAO.2008.19.6.705(PT)</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wu, Y. M., Zhao, L., Chang, C. H., Hsiao, N. C., Chen, Y. G., and Hsu, S.
K.: Relocation of the 2006 Pingtung Earthquake sequence and seismotectonics
in Southern Taiwan, Tectonophysics, 479, 19–27,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2008.12.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.tecto.2008.12.001</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yamanaka, Y. and Nakamura, M.: Frequency-dependent amplification of the
Sanriku tsunamis in Ryori Bay, Earth, Planets Sp., 72, 6,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-019-1128-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1186/s40623-019-1128-1</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yamazaki, Y. and Cheung, K. F.: Shelf resonance and impact of near-field
tsunami generated by the 2010 Chile earthquake, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L12605, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL047508" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011GL047508</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zengaffinen, T., Lovholt, F., Pedersen, G. K., and Muhari, A.: Modelling
2018 Anak Krakatoa Flank Collapse and Tsunami: Effect of Landslide Failure
Mechanism and Dynamics on Tsunami Generation, Pure Appl. Geophys., 177, 2493–2516, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-020-02489-x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00024-020-02489-x</ext-link>, 2020.​​​​​​​</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Characteristics of consecutive tsunamis and resulting tsunami behaviors in southern Taiwan induced by the Hengchun earthquake doublet on 26 December 2006</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
      
Cheng, S. N., Shaw, C. F., and Yeh, Y. T.: Reconstructing the 1867 Keelung earthquake and Tsunami based on historical documents, Terr. Atmos. Ocean. Sci., 27, 431–449, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3319/TAO.2016.03.18.01(TEM)" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3319/TAO.2016.03.18.01(TEM)</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
      
GEBCO: Global Ocean &amp; land terrain models, GEBCO [code], <a href="https://www.gebco.net/data_and_products/gridded_bathymetry_data/" target="_blank"/>, last access: 14 January 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
      
Global CMT: CMT Catalog Citation Information, Global CMT [data set], <a href="https://www.globalcmt.org/CMTsearch.html" target="_blank"/>, last access: 14 January 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
      
Griffin, J., Latief, H., Kongko, W., Harig, S., Horspool, N., Hanung, R.,
Rojali, A., Maher, N., Fuchs, A., Hossen, J., Upi, S., Edi Dewanto, S.,
Rakowsky, N., and Cummins, P.: An evaluation of onshore digital elevation
models for modeling tsunami inundation zones, Front. Earth Sci., 3, 32,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2015.00032" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2015.00032</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
      
Gusman, A. R., Satake, K., Shinohara, M., Sakai, S., and Tanioka, Y.: Fault
Slip Distribution of the 2016 Fukushima Earthquake Estimated from Tsunami
Waveforms, Pure Appl. Geophys., 174, 2925–2943,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-017-1590-2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-017-1590-2</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
      
Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., van der Walt, S. J., Gommers, R., Virtanen,
P., Cournapeau, D., Wieser, E., Taylor, J., Berg, S., Smith, N. J., Kern,
R., Picus, M., Hoyer, S., van Kerkwijk, M. H., Brett, M., Haldane, A., del
Río, J. F., Wiebe, M., Peterson, P., Gérard-Marchant, P., Sheppard,
K., Reddy, T., Weckesser, W., Abbasi, H., Gohlke, C., and Oliphant, T. E.:
Array programming with NumPy, Nature, 585, 357–362, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hayashi, Y., Koshimura, S., and Imamura, F.: Comparison of decay features of
the 2006 and 2007 Kuril Island earthquake tsunamis, Geophys. J. Int., 190,
347–357, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2012.05466.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2012.05466.x</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
      
Heidarzadeh, M. and Gusman, A. R.: Source modeling and spectral analysis of
the Crete tsunami of 2nd May 2020 along the Hellenic Subduction Zone,
offshore Greece, Earth, Planets Sp., 73, 74,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-021-01394-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-021-01394-4</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
      
Heidarzadeh, M. and Mulia, I. E.: Ultra-long period and small-amplitude
tsunami generated following the July 2020 Alaska Mw 7.8 tsunamigenic
earthquake, Ocean Eng., 234, 109243, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.109243" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.109243</a>,
2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
      
Heidarzadeh, M. and Satake, K.: Waveform and Spectral Analyses of the 2011
Japan Tsunami Records on Tide Gauge and DART Stations Across the Pacific
Ocean, Pure Appl. Geophys., 170, 1275–1293,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-012-0558-5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-012-0558-5</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
      
Heidarzadeh, M. and Satake, K.: Excitation of Basin-Wide Modes of the
Pacific Ocean Following the March 2011 Tohoku Tsunami, Pure Appl. Geophys.,
171, 3405–3419, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-013-0731-5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-013-0731-5</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
      
Heidarzadeh, M. and Satake, K.: New Insights into the Source of the Makran
Tsunami of 27 November 1945 from Tsunami Waveforms and Coastal Deformation
Data, Pure Appl. Geophys., 172, 621–640, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-014-0948-y" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-014-0948-y</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
      
Heidarzadeh, M., Muhari, A., and Wijanarto, A. B.: Insights on the Source of
the 28 September 2018 Sulawesi Tsunami, Indonesia Based on Spectral Analyses
and Numerical Simulations, Pure Appl. Geophys., 176, 25–43,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-018-2065-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-018-2065-9</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
      
Heidarzadeh, M., Pranantyo, I. R., Okuwaki, R., Dogan, G. G., and Yalciner,
A. C.: Long Tsunami Oscillations Following the 30 October 2020 Mw 7.0 Aegean
Sea Earthquake: Observations and Modelling, Pure Appl. Geophys., 178,
1531–1548, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-021-02761-8" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-021-02761-8</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
      
Imamura, F.: Review of tsunami simulation with a finite difference method, in: Long-Wave Runup Models, edited by: Yeh, H., Liu, P., and Synolakis, C., World Scientific Publishing, Hackensack, NJ, 25–42, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814530330" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814530330</a>, 1995.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kagan, Y. Y. and Jackson, D. D.: Worldwide doublets of large shallow
earthquakes, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 89, 1147–1155,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1785/bssa0890051147" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1785/bssa0890051147</a>, 1999.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kanamori, H. and Anderson, D. L.: Theoretical basis of some em- pirical
relations in seismology, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 65, 1073–1095, 1975.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
      
Koshimura, S., Hayashi, Y., Munemoto, K., and Imamura, F.: Effect of the
Emperor seamounts on trans-oceanic propagation of the 2006 Kuril Island
earthquake tsunami, Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L02611, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL032129" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL032129</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lay, T. and Kanamori, H.: Earthquake Doublets In The Solomon Islands,
Phys. Earth Planet. In., 21, 283–304, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9201(80)90134-X" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9201(80)90134-X</a>, 1980.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
      
Li, L., Switzer, A. D., Wang, Y., Weiss, R., Qiu, Q., Chan, C. H., and
Tapponnier, P.: What caused the mysterious eighteenth century tsunami that
struck the southwest Taiwan coast?, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 8498–8506,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL065567" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL065567</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
      
Li, L., Switzer, A. D., Chan, C. H., Wang, Y., Weiss, R., and Qiu, Q.: How
heterogeneous coseismic slip affects regional probabilistic tsunami hazard
assessment: A case study in the South China Sea, J. Geophys. Res.-Sol.
Ea., 121, 6250–6272, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JB013111" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JB013111</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
      
Liu, P. L. F., Wang, X., and Salisbury, A. J.: Tsunami hazard and early
warning system in South China Sea, J. Asian Earth Sci., 36, 2–12,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.12.010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.12.010</a>, 2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
      
Liu, T.-C., Wu, T.-R., and Hsu, S.-K.: Historical tsunamis of Taiwan in the 18th century: the 1781 Jiateng Harbor flooding and 1782 tsunami event, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 2517–2530, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2517-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2517-2022</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ma, K. F. and Liang, W. T.: Preface to the 2006 Pingtung Earthquake Doublet Special Issue, Terr Atmos. Ocean. Sci., 19, I–III, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3319/TAO.2008.19.6.I(PT)" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3319/TAO.2008.19.6.I(PT)</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
      
Masaya, R., Suppasri, A., Yamashita, K., Imamura, F., Gouramanis, C., and Leelawat, N.: Investigating beach erosion related with tsunami sediment transport at Phra Thong Island, Thailand, caused by the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 2823–2841, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-2823-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-2823-2020</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
      
Megawati, K., Shaw, F., Sieh, K., Huang, Z., Wu, T. R., Lin, Y., Tan, S. K.,
and Pan, T. C.: Tsunami hazard from the subduction megathrust of the South
China Sea: Part I. Source characterization and the resulting tsunami, J.
Asian Earth Sci., 36, 13–20, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.11.012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.11.012</a>, 2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
      
Munger, S. and Cheung, K. F.: Resonance in Hawaii waters from the 2006 Kuril
Islands Tsunami, Geophys. Res. Lett., 35, L07605, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL032843" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL032843</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
      
NOAA: ETOPO1 1 Arc-Minute Global Relief Model, National Geophysical Data Center, NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information [code], <a href="https://ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/global/relief/ETOPO1/tiled/" target="_blank"/> (last access: 14 January 2022), 2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
      
Nosov, M. A., Bolshakova, A. V., and Kolesov, S. V.: Displaced Water Volume, Potential Energy of Initial Elevation, and Tsunami Intensity: Analysis of Recent Tsunami Events, Pure Appl. Geophys., 171, 3515–3525, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-013-0730-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-013-0730-6</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
      
Okada, Y.: Surface deformation due to shear and tensile faults in a half-space, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 75, 1135–1154, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0750041135" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0750041135</a>, 1985.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
      
Otake, T., Chua, C. T., Suppasri, A., and Imamura, F.: Justification of
possible casualty-reduction countermeasures based on global tsunami hazard
assessment for tsunami-prone regions over the past 400 years, J. Disaster
Res., 15, 490–502, <a href="https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2020.p0490" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2020.p0490</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
      
Papazachos, B. C., Scordilis, E. M., Panagiotopoulos, D. G., Papazachos, C. B., and Karakaisis, G. F.: Global Relations between seismic fault parameters and moment magnitude of earthquakes, Bulletin of the Geological Society of Greece, 36, 1482–1489, <a href="https://doi.org/10.12681/bgsg.16538" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.12681/bgsg.16538</a>, 2004.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
      
Qiu, Q., Li, L., Hsu, Y.-J., Wang, Y., Chan, C.-H., and Switzer, A. D.: Revised earthquake sources along Manila trench for tsunami hazard assessment in the South China Sea, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 1565–1583, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-1565-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-1565-2019</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
      
Rabinovich, A. B.: Spectral analysis of tsunami waves: Separation of source
and topography effects, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 102, 12663–12676,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97JC00479" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/97JC00479</a>, 1997.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
      
Rabinovich, A. B., Candella, R. N., and Thomson, R. E.: The open ocean
energy decay of three recent trans-Pacific tsunamis, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
40, 3157–3162, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50625" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.50625</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ren, Z., Liu, H., Jimenez, C., and Wang, Y.: Tsunami resonance and standing
waves in the South China Sea, Ocean Eng., 262, 112323,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.112323" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.112323</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
      
Roeber, V., Yamazaki, Y., and Cheung, K. F.: Resonance and impact of the
2009 Samoa tsunami around Tutuila, American Samoa, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L21604, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL044419" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL044419</a>, 2010.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
      
Sugawara, D., Yu, N. T., and Yen, J. Y.: Estimating a Tsunami Source by
Sediment Transport Modeling: A Primary Attempt on a Historical/1867
Normal-Faulting Tsunami in Northern Taiwan, J. Geophys. Res.-Earth Surf.,
124, 1675–1700, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JF004831" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JF004831</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
      
Sun, Y.-S., Chen, P.-F., Chen, C.-C., Lee, Y.-T., Ma, K.-F., and Wu, T.-R.: Assessment of the peak tsunami amplitude associated with a large earthquake occurring along the southernmost Ryukyu subduction zone in the region of Taiwan, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2081–2092, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2081-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2081-2018</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
      
Suppasri, A., Futami, T., Tabuchi, S., and Imamura, F.: Mapping of
historical tsunamis in the Indian and Southwest Pacific Oceans, Int. J.
Disaster Risk Reduct., 1, 62–71, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2012.05.003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2012.05.003</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
      
Suppasri, A., Muhari, A., Futami, T., Imamura, F., and Shuto, N.: Loss
Functions for Small Marine Vessels Based on Survey Data and Numerical
Simulation of the 2011 Great East Japan Tsunami, J. Waterw. Port C. Div., 140, 5, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)ww.1943-5460.0000244" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)ww.1943-5460.0000244</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
      
Suppasri, A., Leelawat, N., Latcharote, P., Roeber, V., Yamashita, K.,
Hayashi, A., Ohira, H., Fukui, K., Hisamatsu, A., Nguyen, D., and Imamura,
F.: The 2016 Fukushima earthquake and tsunami: Local tsunami behavior and
recommendations for tsunami disaster risk reduction, Int. J. Disast. Risk
Reduct., 21, 323–330, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2016.12.016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2016.12.016</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
      
Tanioka, Y. and Satake, K.: Tsunami generation by horizontal displacement of
ocean bottom, Geophys. Res. Lett., 23, 861–864, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96GL00736" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/96GL00736</a>, 1996.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
      
Tanioka, Y., Shibata, M., Yamanaka, Y., Gusman, A. R., and Ioki, K.:
Generation mechanism of large later phases of the 2011 Tohoku-oki tsunami
causing damages in Hakodate, Hokkaido, Japan, Prog. Earth Planet. Sci., 6, 30, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-019-0278-x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-019-0278-x</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
      
Torrence, C. and Compo, G. P.: A Practical Guide to Wavelet Analysis, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 79, 61–78, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1998)079&lt;0061:APGTWA&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1998)079&lt;0061:APGTWA&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1995.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
      
USGS: M 7.1 – 30&thinsp;km SW of Hengchun, Taiwan, USGS [data set], <a href="https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/usp000f114#general_summary" target="_blank"/>, last access: 14 January 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
      
USGS: M 6.9 – 26&thinsp;km W of Hengchun, Taiwan, USGS [data set], <a href="https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/usp000f115/executive#general_summary" target="_blank"/>, lass access: 14 January 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wang, Y., Zamora, N., Quiroz, M., Satake, K., and Cienfuegos, R.: Tsunami
Resonance Characterization in Japan Due to Trans-Pacific Sources: Response
on the Bay and Continental Shelf, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 126, e2020JC017037, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JC017037" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JC017037</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wang, Y., Su, H. Y., Ren, Z., and Ma, Y.: Source Properties and Resonance
Characteristics of the Tsunami Generated by the 2021 M 8.2 Alaska
Earthquake, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 127, e2021JC018308, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JC018308" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JC018308</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wu, T. R. and Huang, H. C.: Modeling tsunami hazards from Manila trench to
Taiwan, J. Asian Earth Sci., 36, 21–28, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.12.006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.12.006</a>, 2009.


    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wu, T. R., Chen, P. F., Tsai, W. T., and Chen, G. Y.: Numerical study on
tsunamis excited by 2006 Pingtung earthquake doublet, Terr. Atmos. Ocean.
Sci., 19, 705–715, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3319/TAO.2008.19.6.705(PT)" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3319/TAO.2008.19.6.705(PT)</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wu, Y. M., Zhao, L., Chang, C. H., Hsiao, N. C., Chen, Y. G., and Hsu, S.
K.: Relocation of the 2006 Pingtung Earthquake sequence and seismotectonics
in Southern Taiwan, Tectonophysics, 479, 19–27,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2008.12.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2008.12.001</a>, 2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
      
Yamanaka, Y. and Nakamura, M.: Frequency-dependent amplification of the
Sanriku tsunamis in Ryori Bay, Earth, Planets Sp., 72, 6,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-019-1128-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-019-1128-1</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
      
Yamazaki, Y. and Cheung, K. F.: Shelf resonance and impact of near-field
tsunami generated by the 2010 Chile earthquake, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L12605, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL047508" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL047508</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zengaffinen, T., Lovholt, F., Pedersen, G. K., and Muhari, A.: Modelling
2018 Anak Krakatoa Flank Collapse and Tsunami: Effect of Landslide Failure
Mechanism and Dynamics on Tsunami Generation, Pure Appl. Geophys., 177, 2493–2516, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-020-02489-x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-020-02489-x</a>, 2020.​​​​​​​

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
