See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274246373

FuncLab: A MATLAB Interactive Toolbox for

Handling Receiver Function Datasets

Article in Seismological Research Letters · May 2012

DOI: 10.1785/gssrl.83.3.596

CITATIONS READS

16 244

2 authors:

Kevin C. Eagar Matthew J. Fouch

Shell Oil USA Samara/Data
10 PUBLICATIONS 114 CITATIONS 150 PUBLICATIONS 3,357 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Contiguous U.S. lithosphere View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Matthew J. Fouch on 10 August 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 E L E C T R O N I C

S E I S M O L O G I S T
Electronic Seismologist

FuncLab: A MATLAB Interactive Toolbox with receiver function data. We describe the structural build-
ing blocks that make FuncLab an efficient computational sys-
for Handling Receiver Function Datasets tem, features of the primary GUIs, and three additional mod-
ules for commonly employed analysis for regional network and
Kevin C. Eagar1,2 and Matthew J. Fouch1,3
single station studies.
INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW AND DATASET PREPARATION
Receiver functions have become a widely used tool to study
FuncLab is a data management system that works in the
the seismic velocity structure beneath a single station by imag-
MATLAB environment. It is a suite of tools designed to man-
ing impedance boundaries where mode conversions from P
age receiver function data and metadata, visually inspect indi-
to S waves occur. In recent years, the community has seen an
vidual receiver functions and seismograms for quality control,
increase in the amount of broadband seismic data available
and visualize the results of the quality-controlled data. The
through systems such as the IRIS Data Management Center
package also includes a number of add-on modules that handle
(IRIS DMC), requiring new approaches to managing and han-
post-processing analysis and stacking. We use this module-
dling large datasets in computationally efficient ways. Many
based approach to provide the opportunity for future develop-
receiver function studies have focused on tectonic and geody-
ment of new FuncLab add-ons by the community.
namic questions on regional scales of a few hundred square kilo-
Prior to using FuncLab, the user usually computes receiver
meters (e.g., Zandt et al. 1995; Sheehan et al. 1995; Dueker and
functions and performs signal processing functions, where the
Sheehan 1997). These studies typically have utilized data from
choice of parameters is completely user-dependent. Generally
temporary networks operating on time scales of a few months
speaking, a typical receiver function computation utilizes
to a few years. Others have concentrated on global trends, using
three-component broadband seismic data of a recorded earth-
data from increasing numbers stations that have operated for
years or decades (e.g., Andrews and Deuss 2008; Lawrence and
Shearer 2006; Tauzin et al. 2008). Over the last several years, 3000
the seismological community has seen a rapid increase in the
number of deployed passive broadband seismic stations and a
2500
resulting increase in data available for receiver function analysis.
Large initiatives such as EarthScope’s USArray Transportable
# BB Stations

Array enable immediate open access to data and have provided 2000
the community with an order of magnitude more data than in
the previous three decades (Figure 1) based on smaller regional
1500
temporary studies using data from IRIS PASSCAL-style field
experiments (e.g., Suckale et al. 2009; Wilson et al. 2005).
While the computation of receiver functions has been 1000
well studied and is a relatively straightforward and rapid pro-
cess, an efficient method to analyze and further evaluate very
500
large receiver function datasets is not widely available. In this
paper, we present an efficient workflow and MATLAB toolbox
for organizing receiver function data, which we call FuncLab. 0
FuncLab is a package of m-files (MATLAB scripts) written for 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

the purpose of providing a management system to interface Year

1. Arizona State University, School of Earth and Space Exploration,
Tempe, Arizona, U.S.A.
2. Now at Shell Exploration and Production Company, Houston, Texas
3. Now at Department of Terrestrial Magnetism, Carnegie Institution
of Washington, Washington, DC
▲▲ Figure 1. Number of broadband seismic stations reporting
data to the IRIS Data Management Center (DMC). Data were
gathered on 5 March 2012 using an IRIS SeismiQuery data sum-
mary query for all broadband stations reporting to the DMC
(http://www.iris.edu/SeismiQuery/summaries.htm).

596  Seismological Research Letters  Volume 83, Number 3  May/June 2012 doi: 10.1785/gssrl .83.3.596
quake in the range of 30°–95° distance from the station. The
horizontal recordings are rotated along the free surface to the
point in the radial and tangential directions from the backazi-
muth of the earthquake. A method of source normalization is
then performed by deconvolving the vertical seismogram from
the radial seismogram. The FuncLab package includes a set of
C-shell scripts that outline the basic preprocessing steps using
the Seismic Analysis Code (SAC) and iterative deconvolution
receiver function computation using a Fortran 77 code devel-
oped and distributed by C. Ammon (Ligorria and Ammon
1999) with parameters used for upper mantle and crustal stud-
ies of the Pacific Northwest (Eagar et al. 2010; 2011). FuncLab
requires data in SAC format (Goldstein et al. 2003) and auto-
matically handles little and big endian byte ordering of the
binary files. Currently, other data formats are not supported.
Data must be organized in a formal directory structure
before working with it in FuncLab. This structure was origi-
nally used for data gathered using the Standing Order for
Data (SOD) data request tool (Owens et al. 2004), and there-
fore FuncLab was designed with this structure in mind. An
example SOD recipe is also included on the FuncLab Web
site, http://geophysics.asu.edu/funclab. FuncLab also expects
that the seismogram and receiver function files have a specific
naming convention, which partly arose from the original use
of the iterative time-domain deconvolution code (Ligorria and
Ammon 1999). The radial and transverse receiver functions,
as well as the original vertical, radial, and transverse seismo-
grams, are needed to utilize the full functionality of the pack-
age. More details regarding proper setup of data directories and
SAC file processing, including necessary header information,
can be found in the User Manual.
The IRIS Data Management Center (DMC) distrib-
utes a data product providing fully automated computation
of receiver functions for all open broadband seismic stations
(http://www.iris.edu/dms/products/ears/). The purpose of the
EarthScope Automated Receiver Survey (EARS) (Crotwell
and Owens 2005) is to provide automated analysis of bulk
crustal properties using the well-established method of H-κ
stacking (Zhu and Kanamori 2000). The DMC now includes
a method for downloading all EARS receiver functions on a
station-by-station basis. We provide a shell script to convert
EARS-formatted files and directory structure to a format read-
able by FuncLab, allowing users easy access to receiver func-
tion data without computing the time series themselves. The
script includes instructions for direct download of EARS data.
FuncLab therefore provides a straightforward application to
customize receiver function analysis that leverages EARS data
products beyond the automated design of the EARS system.
TOOLBOX DESCRIPTION
This section describes aspects of the primary FuncLab data
management system. FuncLab is compatible with MATLAB
version 7.1.0.21 and above, but at the time of publication has
not been tested beyond version 7.11 (R2010b). At present,
FuncLab is not compatible on Windows platforms given dif-
Seismological Research Letters  Volume 83, Number 3  May/June 2012  597
ferences in directory structure. No additional MATLAB tool-
boxes are required, but it is recommended that the Mapping
Toolbox be installed in order to use all the plotting capabilities.
The package contains a collection of m-files designed around
the concept of a project, or a complete dataset that can be pro-
cessed and analyzed collectively.
A FuncLab project contains a set of related imported
seismic data, files used to organize metadata and store proj-
ect information, and other files created during data analyses.
Each project in FuncLab is housed in a separate directory with
an organized structure created when the project is initiated.
FuncLab is designed so that the main part of the program is
responsible for managing the data and metadata within a proj-
ect and basic visualization of the dataset. Additional analytical
tools are not contained in the main program, but instead are
incorporated as separate add-on modules that utilize conven-
tions specified in FuncLab to operate on the data.
Main FuncLab GUI
Once receiver function data are organized with the FuncLab
conventions described in the FuncLab User Manual, the user
invokes the main FuncLab Graphical User Interface (GUI)
at the MATLAB command line using the funclab command.
The GUI is used from this point forward. The start of a new
project requires at least one directory containing data that has
been preprocessed as described above and in the User Manual.
FuncLab automatically creates the project directory and struc-
ture while importing data directories to the project.
FuncLab saves the metadata for each station-earthquake
pair of waveform files in the Project.mat MAT-file. Metadata
for the records, such as station name, event origin time, time-
series sample rate, and SAC file pathname, are stored within
this file. One of the most common limitations of the MATLAB
environment is its inefficiency in storing large amounts of data
in memory, since heavy memory usage slows dramatically the
performance of computations. Instead of storing the seismic
waveform data from an entire FuncLab project, we optimize
our algorithms by loading data only when needed for viewing
or computation. This strategy significantly speeds up processes
and enables the development of larger project datasets.
The main FuncLab GUI allows the user to interact with
the entire dataset (Figure 2). A drop-down menu defines the
manner in which receiver function metadata is organized
for visualization in the GUI (we refer to these structures as
“tables,” although FuncLab is not a formal relational database
management system). Records common to a particular sta-
tion are viewed in “Station Tables.” The stations are then listed
and selectable in the left-hand panel. The records within the
“Station Table” are listed by the event origin time in the cen-
ter panel. The total number of records and number of active
records are listed below the panel. Metadata about the selected
record in the center panel are then listed in the right-hand
panel. The user can also view the records organized by event
origin by selecting the “Event Tables” in the drop-down menu.
Other options in the drop-down menu become available when
using add-on analysis tools discussed below.
▲▲ Figure 2. Black and white screenshot of main FuncLab GUI. Actual FuncLab window is in color. Top-left drop-down box lists the
types of tables used to organize receiver function records. Tables are listed in the left panel. Records in the selected table (highlighted
in left panel) are listed in the center panel. Metadata for the selected record (highlighted in center panel) are shown in the right panel.
Information about number of tables, records, and active records are listed below the left and center panels, respectively. Text dis-
played at the bottom is used to convey short messages to the user about ongoing or finished processes.

Trace Editor
FuncLab provides the powerful aspect of organization and effi-
ciency through its ability to visualize many data at once. One
of the main interactive visualization tools is the Trace Editor
(Figure 3). The primary function of the Trace Editor is to
evaluate and select waveforms efficiently for further analysis.
Selecting the Manual Trace Edit GUI will read in the receiver
function SAC files of the records in the selected table in the
left-hand panel. Receiver functions are also normalized to the
largest positive amplitude for each trace. The trace editing GUI
displays the receiver functions as time series waveforms with
time increasing down the y-axis and each record one unit wide
across the x-axis.
Each record’s status can be changed in the GUI, allowing
the user complete flexibility to specify good records that will
be used in future analyses (i.e., stacking and visualization pro-
cesses). Records with status “off” are not used in subsequent
analyses but remain part of the dataset and are not deleted
from the project. This approach has the advantage of greater
freedom to perform multiple stages of trace editing or easily
change the status of a record at the user’s discretion. The color
of the waveform is another indicator of the record’s status.
New data that have not yet been evaluated through the Trace
Editor are colored red, while data previously viewed in the GUI
are colored blue. All records with status “off” are shaded gray.
Furthermore, right-clicking the waveform brings up a menu to
start another GUI for visualizing the seismograms and radial
receiver function changing the record status, and displaying
event and record information useful in determining the appro-
priate status of the record (Figure 4).
FuncLab also allows for automated trace editing, which is
currently based on two criteria, and is intended to be a first pass
through a new receiver function dataset. First, a record’s status
is set to “on” if the maximum amplitude after one pulse width
from time zero is above a chosen threshold. The pulse width is
defined as
1
PW = , (1)
α 2 ln2
where α is the Gaussian parameter. The second criterion is a
minimum fit or measure of uncertainty in the receiver func-
tion, set in the SAC header (see User Manual). All other records
that do not meet these criteria are set to “off.”

598  Seismological Research Letters  Volume 83, Number 3  May/June 2012

▲▲ Figure 3. Black and white screenshot of FuncLab Trace Editing GUI. Actual FuncLab window is in color. Waveform time series
records in a selected table are displayed with colored fill denoting positive amplitudes and dark gray fill denoting negative amplitudes.
Check boxes above waveforms allow the user to change the record status to “on” (selected) or “off” (unselected). Unselected records
are shaded light gray. Scrollbar at the bottom allows the user to scan through all records listed in the table. The “Save Edits” button
saves the record status to the project file.

▲▲ Figure 4. Screenshot of trace editing system. Vertical, radial, and transverse seismograms and the associated radial receiver func-
tion are displayed. Event magnitude, distance, and depth are listed at top left. Status check box allows the user to change the record
status to “on” (checked) or “off” (unchecked). This screen is accessed by right-clicking a waveform in the trace editing GUI.

Seismological Research Letters  Volume 83, Number 3  May/June 2012  599

Data Visualizations
A number of data plotting functions are available to help guide
data analyses and are accessible from the main FuncLab GUI.
Figure 5 shows three examples of the kinds of visualizations
provided with this package. The Seismograms and Record
Section plots (Figure 5A) display the vertical, radial, and trans-
verse seismograms and radial and transverse receiver func-
tions. The RF Moveout Record Section plot displays receiver
function traces of active records vs. ray parameter, and the RF
Moveout Image plot (Figure 5B) displays stacked records into
ray parameter bins with amplitudes shown by a color scale. RF
Backazimuth Record Section and RF Backazimuth Image plots
(Figure 5C) are similar except that records are displayed vs.
backazimuth. The Dataset Statistics visualization is not a true
graph, but displays text summarizing various statistics about
the dataset, such as the number of total active records. Another
data coverage visualization is the Ray Parameter/Backazimuth
Diagram that displays these metadata on a polar plot. Finally,
two mapping options, a Station Map and a Global Event Map,
are available if the MATLAB Mapping Toolbox is installed.
A log file is initiated when the project is first created
within the FuncLab project and maintains information about
each process performed on the dataset. The log file can be
viewed from the main FuncLab GUI but is a text file that can
be viewed by any text viewer. Dates and times of processes are
logged, as well as the name of the process and certain prefer-
ences set to run the process. The log file should not be edited
and is only intended for user guidance.
ADD-ON MODULES
FuncLab is designed to allow new analysis tools to be built
around the data and metadata management environment of the
main FuncLab GUI and project file. Therefore, analyses that
involve stacking and other processing algorithms are included
as add-on modules. The functionality of the main FuncLab
GUI and trace editing GUI are not dependent upon the add-
ons; however, each add-on must contain m-files of a certain
structure, reference the metadata variables in the Project.mat
file, and reference data files contained in the RAWDATA
directory in order to interact with the main FuncLab GUI. In
this first public release of FuncLab, we provide three built-in
add-on modules of commonly employed analysis tools, includ-
ing common conversion point stacking, Gaussian-weighted
common conversion point stacking, and H-κ stacking. These
tools can be accessed from the main FuncLab GUI and are
described in more detail in this section.
Add-on modules follow a certain form and set of conven-
tions in order to work with FuncLab. We include a set of tem-
plate m-files to help users develop their own add-on FuncLab
modules. Additional details regarding add-on development
can be found in the User Manual.
Common Conversion Point Stacking
Common conversion point (CCP) stacking of receiver functions
is a method used to image smooth regional topography on sub-
600  Seismological Research Letters  Volume 83, Number 3  May/June 2012
horizontal interfaces. It is a back-projection method in which
the receiver function amplitudes are placed in the appropriate
position along the raypath based on a time-to-depth conversion.
These amplitudes are binned at each depth based on the posi-
tion of the ray piercing point and then stacked to enhance the
signal originating from that approximate position. The stacking
algorithms are described in detail elsewhere (e.g., Dueker and
Sheehan 1997; Eagar et al. 2010, 2011). Here, the focus is on the
implementation and examples of these algorithms in FuncLab.
M-files for this add-on are found in the subdirectory addons/ccp.
The CCP GUI contains editable parameters on the left-
hand side and functional pushbuttons for data processing on
the right-hand side. The user may set parameters for bootstrap
stacking, which is a repeating process of randomly resampling
the data a fixed number of times and linearly stacking receiver
function amplitudes to produce a mean stack and 95% confi-
dence interval (Efron and Tibshirani 1986, 1991). The imaging
volume is defined from the latitude, longitude, and depth range
input. The CCP bin spacing and width (circular radius) is also
set in the parameters window. The user can specify the receiver
functions to include in the stacks from ranges of both backa-
zimuth and ray parameter. This add-on package also includes
1-D ray tracing and time-to-depth conversion that uses a cho-
sen 1-D velocity model. Included in the package are the global
1-D models AK135 (Kennett et al. 1995), IASP91 (Kennett
and Engdahl 1991), and PREM (Dziewonski and Anderson
1981). Further details on how to define other models are
described within the software manual. Also included is a linear
travel time correction algorithm that utilizes a seismic waves-
peed tomography model to account for 3-D heterogeneities in
the imaging volume. We currently provide only one regional
tomography model, published in Roth et al. (2008); however,
the User Manual provides details on how to define other mod-
els. Finally, a number of visualization tools, including plots of
CCP bin stacks and bin histograms from bootstrapping, are
accessible from the menu at the top of the CCP GUI.
The “CCP Processes” buttons are ordered to follow an
established workflow for producing CCP stacked images.
Subsequent processes use the matrices generated during the
initial processing steps, so if the status of records changes
from trace editing, the CCP Processes workflow needs to be
reinitiated. The user must first perform 1-D ray tracing, which
requires the maximum depth of the imaging volume, depth
increment spacing, and 1-D velocity model to be set. The cor-
rection for 3-D heterogeneity is an optional step and requires
the user to choose a tomography model, which can be defined
or imported by the user as explained in the User Manual. The
next step in CCP processing is the time-to-depth conversion
of the receiver functions. This process assigns receiver function
amplitudes to CCP bins at each depth increment specified by
the user. The final step in the workflow is CCP stacking. The
user may choose a range of backazimuths and ray parameters
over which to stack, although the default is the entire dataset,
from 0 to 360° and 0.04 to 0.08 sec/km, respectively. Each
defined range will create a separate CCP bin stack, which
allows the user to explore azimuthal and ray angle variations
 (A)

(B)

(C)

▲▲ Figure 5. Examples of data visualization output included in FuncLab. (A) Record section of station XC-OR087 table (data from Eagar
et al. 2011), including (from left to right) the vertical, radial, and transverse time series, followed by the radial and transverse receiver
functions. (B) Stacked receiver function amplitudes in ray parameter bins. Blue denotes positive amplitudes and red denotes negative
amplitudes. Left panels are the radial receiver functions. Right panels are the transverse receiver functions. Top panels show histogram
of receiver functions per bin. (C) Stacked receiver function amplitudes in backazimuth bins. Color and histograms are the same as in (B).

Seismological Research Letters  Volume 83, Number 3  May/June 2012  601

that may indicate complexities such as anisotropy or dipping
layers. The drop-down menu in the main FuncLab GUI then
allows the user to view records of CCP bins in the same man-
ner as receiver function records.
Gaussian-Weighted Common Conversion Point Stacking
Also included is an enhancement to the CCP add-on that uti-
lizes a Gaussian weighting scheme as developed and described
in Eagar et al. (2011). Gaussian-weighted common conversion
point (GCCP) stacking modifies basic CCP stacking by weight-
ing the receiver functions within the stacks by the distance of
the piercing point from the image point, which is the same as
the center point of the CCP bin. The weight is determined from
a 2-D Gaussian function whose one standard deviation width is
chosen appropriately by the array aperture and/or Fresnel zone
at the imaging target. The GCCP GUI is quite similar to the
CCP GUI with only a few minor differences, such as the choice
of the Gaussian width and weighting function.
H-κ Stacking
H-κ stacking is a grid searching method that stacks receiver
function amplitudes for a given seismic station at predicted
arrival times of crustal phases based on the Moho depth (H)
and Vp/Vs ratio (κ) of the crust (Zhu and Kanamori 2000). The
P-to-S conversion at the Moho (Ps) and reverberations within
the crust (PpPs and PpSs+PsPs) are used to reduce the inher-
ent tradeoffs between H and κ (Zandt and Ammon 1995).
Additional details of this method can be found elsewhere (e.g.,
Zhu and Kanamori 2000; Eagar et al. 2011).
The H-κ Stacking Analysis GUI is similar to the other
add-ons described here and includes parameters that control
the stacking on the left-hand side and processing functions
on the right-hand side. Two options are provided for stacking
and error analysis, selected from the “Error” drop-down menu.
One option is a bootstrap method much like that described in
the section on CCP stacking, which requires the user to set
the number of times to resample and the percentage of data
to resample. The other option is a linear stack, where error is
determined from the contour of one standard deviation below
the maximum value in the H-κ grid (Eaton et al. 2006). Several
parameters that affect the resulting stack, such as the weights
of the Ps, PpPs, and PpSs+PsPs phases, and the assumed Vp, can
also be defined. The time, depth, and Vp/Vs parameters only
affect the grid-search range and not necessarily the first-order
result. As with CCP stacking, the user can specify the receiver
functions included in the stack by a range of backazimuths
and ray parameters. The results of these procedures are saved as
separate MAT-files for each stack and store the amplitudes in
the H-κ grid, the grid space axes, and the list of events that are
included in the stack. Several visualizations to aid the user in
the analysis are included in the package.
CONCLUSION
Receiver functions have become a commonly used imaging
technique for studying sharp seismic velocity contrasts beneath
602  Seismological Research Letters  Volume 83, Number 3  May/June 2012
seismic stations. The increase in the amount of data available to
the seismological community has presented new challenges in
dealing with large datasets. Here we present a new GUI-based
MATLAB toolbox for organizing and analyzing receiver func-
tion data. The main FuncLab package provides a management
system around which analysis tools may be written as add-on
modules. We provide three add-on modules to enable com-
mon analysis techniques, including common conversion point
stacking, Gaussian-weighted common conversion point stack-
ing, and H-κ stacking. A conversion script is included to enable
users to request receiver functions directly from the IRIS Data
Management Center. This user-friendly environment will
allow a range of researchers, from students new to seismic data
analysis to seasoned scientists, to obtain useful results from
receiver function analyses quickly and easily.
ACCESSING FuncLab
The FuncLab distribution is maintained at http://geophysics.
asu.edu/funclab/. The MATLAB codes are packaged in a tar file
for download. We also provide a User Manual for quickly get-
ting started using the codes. Links to other supporting sources
of information and data can also be found at the Web site.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Rick Aster and Gary Pavlis for organizing extremely
helpful MATLAB tutorials on receiver functions for the 2006
IRIS/EarthScope Imaging Science Workshop at Washington
University, which first inspired KCE to deal with this prob-
lem in MATLAB. We would also like to thank Mike Thorne
for his original SACLAB codes (http://web.utah.edu/thorne/
software.html) for importing SAC files into MATLAB, many
of which were modified for use with FuncLab. Discussions with
John West provided valuable insight into proper documentation
and programming style. Many thanks go to Philip Crotwell
(U. South Carolina), as well as Manochehr Bahavar and Chad
Trabant (IRIS Data Management Center), for extensive help
in providing EarthScope Automated Receiver Survey (EARS)
data products that are directly compatible with FuncLab. Beta
testers spent many valuable hours testing the code while in
development; we would like to acknowledge those who par-
ticipated, especially Eun-Sun Chong, Jonathan Delph, Chelsea
Allison, Maggie Benoit, Kelsey Brunner, and Eli Raymond. This
research was supported by National Science Foundation awards
EAR-0548288 (MJF EarthScope CAREER grant) and EAR-
0507248 (MJF Continental Dynamics High Lava Plains grant).
REFERENCES
Andrews, J., and A. Deuss (2008). Detailed nature of the 660 km
region of the mantle from global receiver function data. Journal of
Geophysical Research 113; doi: 10.1029/2007JB005111.
Crotwell, H. P., and T. J. Owens (2005). Automated receiver function
processing. Seismological Research Letters 76, 702–708.
Dueker, K. G., and A. F. Sheehan (1997). Mantle discontinuity struc-
ture from midpoint stacks of converted P to S waves across the
 Yellowstone hotspot track. Journal of Geophysical Research 102,
8,313–8,327.
Dziewonski, A. M., and D. L. Anderson (1981). Preliminary reference
Earth model. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors 25, 297–
356.
Goldstein, P., D. Dodge, M. Firpo, and L. Minner (2003). SAC2000:
Signal processing and analysis tools for seismologists and engi-
neers. In The IASPEI International Handbook of Earthquake and
Engineering Seismology, ed. W. H. K. Lee, H. Kanamori, P. C.
Jennings, and C. Kisslinger, 1,613–1,614. Boston and Amsterdam:
Academic Press.
Eagar, K. C., M. J. Fouch, and D. E. James (2010). Receiver function
imaging of upper mantle complexity beneath the Pacific Northwest,
United States. Earth and Planetary Science Letters; doi:10.1016/j.
epsl .2010.1006.1015.
Eagar, K. C., M. J. Fouch, D. E. James, and R. W. Carlson (2011). Crustal
structure beneath the High Lava Plains of eastern Oregon and
surrounding regions from receiver function analysis. Journal of
Geophysical Research 116; doi:10.1029/2010JB007795.
Eaton, D. W., S. Dineva, and R. Mereu (2006). Crustal thickness and Vp/
Vs variations in the Grenville orogen (Ontario, Canada) from analy-
sis of teleseismic receiver functions. Tectonophysics 420, 223–238.
Efron, B., and R. Tibshirani (1986). Bootstrap methods for standard
errors, confidence intervals, and other measures of statistical accu-
racy. Statistical Science 1, 54–77.
Efron, B., and R. Tibshirani (1991). Statistical data analysis in the com-
puter age. Science 253, 390–395.
Kennett, B. L. N., and E. R. Engdahl (1991). Traveltimes for global
earthquake location and phase identification. Geophysical Journal
International 105, 429–465.
Kennett, B. L. N., E. R. Engdahl, and R. Buland (1995). Constraints
on seismic velocities in the Earth from travel times. Geophysical
Journal International 122, 108–124.
Lawrence, J. F., and P. M. Shearer (2006). A global study of transition
zone thickness using receiver functions. Journal of Geophysical
Research 111; doi: 10.1029/2005JB003973.
Ligorria, J. P., and C. J. Ammon (1999). Iterative deconvolution and
receiver-function estimation. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America 89, 1,395–1,400.
Owens, T. J., H. P. Crotwell, C. Groves, and P. Oliver-Paul (2004).
SOD: Standing Order for Data. Seismological Research Letters 75,
515–520.
Kevin C. Eagar and Matthew J. Fouch
Seismological Research Letters  Volume 83, Number 3  May/June 2012  603
View publication stats
Roth, J. B., M. J. Fouch, D. E. James, and R. W. Carlson (2008).
Three-dimensional seismic velocity structure of the north-
western United States. Geophysical Research Letters 35;
doi:10.1029/2008GL034669.
Sheehan, A. F., G. A. Abers, C. H. Jones, and A. L. Lerner-Lam (1995).
Crustal thickness variations across the Colorado Rocky Mountains
from teleseismic receiver functions. Journal of Geophysical Research
100, 20,391–20,404.
Suckale, J., S. Rondenay, M. Sachpazi, M. Charalampakis, A. Hosa,
and L. H. Royden (2009). High-resolution seismic imaging of
the western Hellenic subduction zone using teleseismic scat-
tered waves. Geophysical Journal International 178, 775–791; doi:
10.1111/j.1365-1246X.2009.04170.x.
Tauzin, B., E. Debayle, and G. Wittlinger (2008). The mantle transition
zone as seen by global Pds phases: No clear evidence for a thin tran-
sition zone beneath hotspots. Journal of Geophysical Research 113;
doi:10.1029/2007JB005364.
Wilson, D., R. Aster, J. Ni, S. Grand, M. West, W. Gao, W. S. Baldridge,
and S. Semken (2005). Imaging the seismic structure of the crust
and upper mantle beneath the Great Plains, Rio Grande Rift, and
Colorado Plateau using receiver functions. Journal of Geophysical
Research 110; doi:10.1029/2004JB003492.
Zandt, G., and C. J. Ammon (1995). Continental crust composition
constrained by measurements of crustal Poisson’s ratio. Nature 374,
152–154.
Zandt, G., S. C. Myers, and T. C. Wallace (1995). Crust and mantle
structure across the Basin and Range–Colorado Plateau boundary
at 37°N latitude and implications for Cenozoic extensional mecha-
nism. Journal of Geophysical Research 100, 10,529–10,548.
Zhu, L., and H. Kanamori (2000). Moho depth variation in south-
ern California from teleseismic receiver functions. Journal of
Geophysical Research 105, 2,969–2,980.
Department of Terrestrial Magnetism
Carnegie Institution of Washington
5241 Broad Branch Road, NW
Washington, DC 20015 U.S.A.
fouch@dtm.ciw.edu
(M. F.)