Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tectonophysics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tecto

Modulation of fault strength during the seismic cycle by grain-size evolution T

around contact junctions
Sylvain Barbot
University of Southern California, United States of America

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Earthquake prediction is fundamentally hampered by insufficient knowledge of the constitutive behavior of
Rate-state friction faults. Laboratory and theoretical work by Dieterich (1978) and Ruina (1983) formed the basis of rate-and-state
Rheology friction, a constitutive framework that captures the healing and weakening of frictional contacts. The rate-and-
Fault dynamics state law successfully explains the frictional behavior of a wide range of rocks and many phenomena associated
Fault physics
with fault slip. The physics underlying the rate-and-state friction law is not fully understood, but it is generally
accepted that several micro-mechanisms operate depending on the texture, maturity, fluid content, and other
physical and kinematic conditions of the fault. Here, I formulate a constitutive framework that unifies a number
of laboratory experiments on silicate rocks, and the gouges derived from these rocks, that describe the effect of
grain-size, temperature, real area of contact, gouge thickness, and fault roughness. Fundamental to the model is
that fault strength is controlled by the area of the interfacial contact junctions that support the shear and normal
loads. The curvature of asperities weakly controls the area of their contact junction and the resulting fault
strength. As a result, the dynamics of grain-size evolution around micro-asperities enables the seismic cycle. The
model quantitatively explains the correlation between the characteristic weakening distance and the gouge
thickness (Marone and Kilgore, 1993), the correlation of the static friction coefficient with the rate-dependence
parameters (Ikari et al., 2011), the dependence of frictional resistance to sub-solidus temperatures (Chester,
1994), and predicts a range of grain sizes that is compatible with observations at exposed fault zones. However,
the dynamics of grain-size evolution is still challenging to verify experimentally. The model features a reg-
ularization at vanishing slip speeds that implies distinct dynamics at low strength. For friction coefficients lower
than 0.1, seismic cycle simulations predict the emergence of frictional instabilities with complex source time-
functions. This is a significant departure from the predictions of rate-and-state friction that is most relevant to
the dynamics of décollements, serpentinized shear zones, and other low-strength faults.

1. Introduction
Friction intervenes in virtually every aspect of our lives. It is a topic
of great practical importance for many engineering applications and it
controls the dynamics of earthquakes (Brace and Byerlee, 1966). The
static force that applies at solids in stationary contact has been de-
scribed experimentally first by Da Vinci, Amontons (1699) and
Coulomb (1785). Dieterich (1978, 1979) recognized how the velocity of
sliding and contact aging affect the frictional resistance and, together
with Ruina (1983), formulated the rate-and-state friction law, a con-
stitutive framework that successfully describes the behavior of many
materials such as rocks, paper, metals, and glass for a wide range of
experimental conditions (Baumberger et al., 1997; Berthoud et al.,
1999; Blanpied et al., 1991; Dieterich, 1972; Heslot et al., 1994; Kilgore
et al., 1993; Leeman et al., 2016; Scholz, 1998; Scuderi et al., 2017) and
explains many phenomena associated with fault slip (Barbot et al.,
2012; Duan et al., 2017; Hori et al., 2004; Horowitz and Ruina, 1989;
Kaneko et al., 2016; Lapusta and Barbot, 2012; Lapusta and Rice, 2003;
Liu and Rice, 2005; Mele Veedu and Barbot, 2016; Qiu et al., 2016; Rice
and Ben-Zion, 1996; Rice and Ruina, 1983; Tse and Rice, 1986; Wei
et al., 2013), including in the quasi-static regime (Agata et al., 2019;
Barbot et al., 2009; Bürgmann et al., 2002; Hsu et al., 2006; Marone
et al., 1991; Masuti et al., 2016; Perfettini and Avouac, 2004; Perfettini
and Avouac, 2007; Rousset et al., 2012; Salman et al., 2017; Wei et al.,
2015).
The experiments of Logan and Teufel (1986) and Teufel and Logan
(1978) with thermodyes and those of Dieterich and Kilgore (1994,
1996) on transparent materials, shortly supported by several others
(Ben-David et al., 2010; Goldsby et al., 2004; Persson, 2016; Rubinstein
et al., 2004), revealed that the dynamics of frictional sliding is governed

E-mail address: sbarbot@usc.edu.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2019.05.004
Received 25 January 2019; Received in revised form 9 April 2019; Accepted 9 May 2019
Available online 30 May 2019
0040-1951/ © 2019 The Author. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY/4.0/).
S. Barbot Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145

by the physics of the inter-granular contacts that support the load. A Gouge model
These micro-asperities emerge due to the roughness of the material
surface at the micro- or even nano-scale (Bennett et al., 2017; Candela Gouge
Sliding
thickness W
and Brodsky, 2016; Candela et al., 2012; Harbord et al., 2017; Maegawa velocity V
et al., 2015; Pei et al., 2005; Persson et al., 2004; Persson, 2001), such
that only a minute fraction of the macroscopic interfacial area is in
Gouge
contact with the opposing wall. The evolution of the real area of contact
during fault slip also explains the modulation of electrical conductivity,
coda waves, and acoustic transmissivity across fault contacts
(Fukuyama et al., 2019; Kocharyan et al., 2018; Nagata et al., 2008; Country Strain-rate
Rouet-Leduc et al., 2018; Yamashita et al., 2014). These observations rock
explain why few surfaces are adhesive, i.e., strong in tension, despite
B Bare surface model
the potential importance of attraction forces, such as chemical bonding
(Dieterich and Conrad, 1984; Li et al., 2011) or van der Waals forces
(Pastewka and Robbins, 2014), the so-called adhesion paradox Surface
Sliding
roughness W
(Ciavarella et al., 2019; Lorenz et al., 2013). velocity V
The real area of contact is controlled at first order by the macro-
scopic normal stress (Dieterich and Kilgore, 1994; Dieterich and
Kilgore, 1996; Krick et al., 2012; Logan and Teufel, 1986; Lorenz et al.,
2013; Maegawa et al., 2015; Pastewka and Robbins, 2014; Persson, Bare surface

2016; Teufel and Logan, 1978; Yastrebov et al., 2015), but the area of
contact of the microasperities grows logarithmically during stationary
contact under confining pressure and decreases under shear (Dieterich
and Kilgore, 1994; Dieterich and Kilgore, 1996; Sahli et al., 2018).
Stationary healing of the micro-asperities is also observed in nano-in-
dentation experiments that mimic a single inter-granular contact
(Goldsby et al., 2004; Thom et al., 2018). The variations of strength at
the contact level provide a micro-mechanism for the modulation of
frictional resistance during the seismic cycle.
One of the remaining challenges is to combine all these laboratory
observations into a physics-based constitutive framework at the con-
tinuum level. Recent experimental work, however, has shed light on the
limitations of the rate-and-state friction framework, as processes acti-
vated by shear heating substantially reduce the frictional resistance of
the fault at high slip velocity (Beeler et al., 2008; Ferri et al., 2010;
Goldsby and Tullis, 2011; Han et al., 2007; Kitajima et al., 2011; Noda,
2008; Rowe et al., 2019; Sulem and Famin, 2009; Toro et al., 2004;
Toro et al., 2006). Other observations, particularly on carbonate
gouges, exhibit a unique sensitivity to temperature that is not readily
explained by rate-and-state friction, presumably due to the important
role of pressure-solution enhanced compaction and dilatation (Chen
and Spiers, 2016; Chen et al., 2015; Fagereng and den Hartog, 2016;
Niemeijer and Spiers, 2007) or because localization is prevented
(Nakatani and Scholz, 2004a; Nakatani and Scholz, 2004b). Other
colleagues model the rheology of fault gouge outside the framework of
rate-and-state friction (Daub and Carlson, 2010; den Hartog and Spiers,
2014; Lieou et al., 2014; Lieou et al., 2017; Niemeijer and Spiers, 2007).
In this paper, I focus on explaining the framework of rate-and-state
friction with the aging law within its applicable range of conditions.
Naturally, the resulting model does not explain all these other ob-
servations, which will require further attention.
Many colleagues have already proposed a physical model for rate-
and-state friction based on the shared principle that the true area of
contact along frictionally slipping surfaces is considerably less than the
apparent area, but most of this work has focused on the direct effect or
steady-state, modeled as the result of a thermally activated rheology
with an activation energy and an activation volume (Aharonov and
Scholz, 2018; Baumberger and Caroli, 2006; Baumberger et al., 1997;
Heslot et al., 1994; Nakatani, 2001; Putelat et al., 2011). A unified
model for rate-and-state friction based on grain-level physics was pro-
posed by Sleep (1997) based on the gouge model of Sleep and Blanpied
(1992), where they associate the state variable with porosity and the
aging law describes compaction and dilatation of the gouge layer filling
the fault core. As variations in pore space affect fluid pressure and fault
Strain-rate
C Contact model
Grain-size Grain
(local radius
of curvature)
Contact junction
Real area of contact density
scales with normal stress
and grain size
Fig. 1. Schematic for the relationship between grain-size and real area of
contact in a shear zone or for bare surfaces in direct frictional contact. A) In a
gouge, the frictional strength is supported by closed grains in direct contact.
The strain-rate is approximated by the ratio of the sliding velocity to the gouge
thickness W. B) For bare surfaces in frictional contact, the strength is supported
by micro-asperities that form a small fraction of the nominal surface. The grain
is defined as the material immediately surrounding the contact junction. The
macroscopic strain-rate is taken as the ratio of the sliding velocity to a wave-
length characteristic of the fault roughness W. C) Grain-size is defined as the
local radius of curvature at the contact junction (brown lines). In the proposed
contact model, normal stress and grain-size control the real area of contact.
Grain-size affects fault strength by modulating the real area of contact. Grain
growth corresponds to time-dependent processes that flatten the surface.
Reduction in real area of contact accompanies comminution. (For interpretation
of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web
version of this article.)
stability, this approach has been useful to explain the slow-slip phe-
nomenon for a wide range of physical conditions (Segall and Rice,
1995; Segall et al., 2010) and the low strength of continental strike-slip
faults (Sleep and Blanpied, 1992). In this paper, I present a friction
model based on the physics of inter-granular contacts that applies to
both bare contacts and fault gouges.
In the following sections, I start with the physical model description,
show its mathematical equivalence with the classic formulation of
Dieterich (1979) and Ruina (1983) with the aging law in isothermal
conditions, and with the formulation of Chester (1994) for non-iso-
thermal conditions. I then constrain the constitutive properties with
laboratory data, and finally discuss some implications on fault dy-
namics.

130
S. Barbot
A Hertzian contact (Hertz, 1890)
Micro-asperity
Real area of contact A
Area of contact
d
Fig. 2. Fault strength controlled by the asperities that support the load at the microscopic level. A) Hertz's theory describes the real area of contact for a single
2
spherical asperity under normal stress, predicting the real area of contact A~d ¯ 3 , where is the effective normal stress. B) The rough contact model assumes a fractal
distribution of asperities of decreasing size (Archard, 1957). C) The rough surface model assumes a random distribution of asperity heights (Greenwood and
Williamson, 1966). Both the rough fault and the rough contact models predict a linear dependence of fault strength on normal stress and a weak dependence on
asperity size.
2. Constitutive model
I start with the assumption that the normal load and shear stress
across two solids in contact is supported by a small fraction of the
macroscopic surface consisting of a finite number of micro-asperities
(Bowden and Tabor, 1964). I refer to a micro-asperity, or a grain, as the
topographic high of local radius of curvature d surrounding and in-
cluding a contact junction (Fig. 1). The real area of contact is the area of
the contact junction. In a fault gouge, a grain may form a closed vo-
lume. If the grain is spherical, d represents the radius of the grain before
deformation. For contacts along two bare surfaces, the grain is loosely
defined as the region of sharp topography around the contact junction
that is most affected by the local stress concentration. The fate of other
grains in the rock matrix that are not directly participating in the
contact is irrelevant and ignored.
Fault strength is controlled by the asperities that support the load at
the microscopic level. Assuming a spherical geometry of the sur-
rounding asperity, Hertz's theory (Timoshenko and Goodier, 1951)
should describe the real area of contact at these junctions (Fig. 2A).
However, Hertzian contacts fail to predict the linear relationship be-
tween the real area of contact, frictional resistance, and normal stress
that is explicit in Amonton's law. This paradox is resolved by fault
roughness in two end-member models that assume either a fractal
distribution of micro-asperities (Archard, 1957) or a random distribu-
tion of asperity heights (Greenwood and Williamson, 1966). In a
2 order of 60. The linear form (c + µ 0 )/ is compatible with the for-
Hertzian contact, the area of contact scales with A d 3 , where is
the effective normal stress that includes the effect of pore pressure. Not
only does this model violate Amonton's law, but it also predicts a strong
dependence of fault strength on grain-size that is incompatible with
experimental findings (Biegel et al., 1989; Dieterich, 1979; Logan and
Teufel, 1986; Marone and Kilgore, 1993; Teufel and Logan, 1978).
Archard (1957) assumes that the grain surface is made of a succession
1 8
of smaller asperities (Fig. 2B) and finds A d 3 9 . He then assumes
131
Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145
B Rough contact (Archard, 1957)
d2
d1
d3
Micro-asperity
d1
C Rough surface (Greenwood & Williamson, 1966)
Micro-asperities
d
d
d d d
that the latter are themselves made of even smaller asperities and for
1 26
this configuration finds A d 9 27 . The power exponents change de-
pending on the geometrical assumptions, but his results show that in-
creasing contact roughness leads to an asymptotic linear relationship
between the area of contact and normal stress and an asymptotically
vanishing dependence on grain-size. Greenwood and Williamson
(1966) simply assume a random distribution of asperity heights
1
(Fig. 2C) and find A d 2 for the statistically expected value. These
models suggest that the local radius of curvature of an asperity exerts a
weak control on the area of contact that can be captured with a power-
law relationship.
Considering the density of the real area of contact A , i.e., the ratio
of the real area of contact to the macroscopic or nominal contact area, I
propose the following dependence on cohesion, normal stress, and grain
size
m
c + µ0 d n
A= ,
d0 (1)
where 0 A 1 is the contact density, c is the cohesion, μ0 is the
coefficient of friction, χ is the indentation hardness of the material
(Brace, 1960; Dieterich and Kilgore, 1996; Goldsby et al., 2004), d is the
grain size, d0 is a reference grain size, and m/n is a power exponent with
∣m ∣ ≪ n. Typical values of m are in the range from 1 to 4, but negative
values are not excluded theoretically. The power exponent n is of the
mulation of Bowden and Tabor (1964) and captures Amonton's law for
a moderate range of normal stress (Byerlee, 1978; Lorenz et al., 2013;
Stesky, 1978; Yastrebov et al., 2015). A more general relationship that
captures the full range of the area of contact, including near saturation
(i.e., as A approaches 1) and at vanishing normal stress, is outside the
scope of the study. In particular, the range of normal stress leading to
saturation of the real area of contact corresponds to depths in the Earth
where plastic flow dominates. The multiplicative factor (d/d0)m/n
S. Barbot
represents the effect of the curvature of the grain that surrounds the
contact junction (Archard, 1957; Greenwood and Williamson, 1966).
Although it is second-order, this effect is important for the seismic cycle
(Rice, 1983).
With the accumulation of fine-grain material associated with com-
minution, wear, and the abrasion of the fault walls (Biegel and Sammis,
2004; Chester and Logan, 1986; Giger et al., 2008), the macroscopic
contact may be represented by simple shear in a narrow zone delineated
by two more cohesive surfaces (Fig. 1). The deformation within the
gouge layer (cataclastic rock or breccia, wear, and their alteration
products) can be treated as the shearing of a granular material at the
continuum mechanics level (Barbot and Fialko, 2010; Byerlee and
Savage, 1992; Chester, 1994; Paterson and Wong, 2005; Scott et al.,
1994; Sleep, 1997). For bare contacts, we can define the strain-rate as
the instantaneous velocity of sliding divided by a characteristic wave-
length defined by the fault roughness (Dieterich, 1979; Harbord et al.,
2017; Power et al., 1987; Sammis and Biegel, 1989; Scholz, 1988). The
slip behavior for both slip on clear, machine-finished surfaces and slip
across surfaces separated by a gouge layer (Dieterich, 1979; Marone
and Kilgore, 1993; Marone et al., 1990; Marone et al., 2009) can then
be described with the same physical model based on inter-granular
contacts (Fig. 1).
The area of contact controls fault strength and strain-rate, through
the proposed power-law stress-strain-rate relationship
n
Q (e.g., Bush et al., 1975; Persson, 2001; Rozel et al., 2011), but the ex-
= 0 exp ,
A RT (2)
where is the plastic strain-rate within the shear zone, τ is the norm of
the shear traction vector parallel to the fault, A is the reference stress,
and an Arrhenius law is assumed for the thermal activation with the
activation energy Q, the absolute temperature T, and the universal gas
constant R, as was proposed by Chester (1994, 1995). The constant 0 is
a reference strain-rate. The power exponent n ≫ 1 is large, typically of
the order of 60, to represent the fact that sliding is catastrophic when
the shear traction exceeds a fraction of the material strength defined by
the real contact area density. However, no macroscopic shear de-
formation occurs in the absence of shear traction. Combining Eqs. (1)
and (2), we obtain the following flow law in multiplicative form
n m
d Q
= 0 exp , stitutive model for the evolution of velocity, stress, and the state of the
c + µ0 d0 RT (3)
where the size of the asperities bearing the contact junctions has been
made explicit. Because the area of contact depends inversely on the
indentation hardness (A 1/ ) and the macroscopic yield strength
depends linearly on indentation hardness ( A ), this material
property is absent in the final flow law (Eq. (3)).
The remaining constituent of the model is to allow grain-size, or
equivalently, the local radius of curvature, to vary dynamically.
Microfracturing leads to grain-size reduction within the fault zone
(Sammis et al., 1987; Sammis and Biegel, 1989). But this is counter-
acted by other, time-dependent processes acting at longer times scales,
such as surface migration, lattice diffusion, surface diffusion (Atkinson,
1988), intra-crystalline plasticity (Hulikal et al., 2015; Mitchell et al.,
2013; Perfettini and Molinari, 2017), static recrystallization (Chester,
1989), chemical bounding (Li et al., 2011; Liu and Szlufarska, 2012), or
diffusion of the elastic energy stored in the grains, that lead to time-
dependent grain growth, or equivalently, flattening. Viscoelastic effects
are possible in the brittle field at the micro-scale level because the loads
endured by the micro-asperities are an order of magnitude higher than
the macroscopic stress and close to the yield limit (e.g., Teufel and
Logan, 1978). A constitutive framework that captures this behavior is
the thermally activated grain-size evolution law
G0 H state friction in isothermal conditions, I define a state variable for the
d= exp d,
p dp 1 RT (4)
132
Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145
where d is the size of the asperities involved in inter-granular contacts,
p is a power exponent in the range from 1 to 3 depending on the
dominant mechanism (Atkinson, 1988), G0 a characteristic rate of
growth, H is the activation enthalpy, and 1/λ is a critical strain for
microstructural evolution that controls the rate of grain-size reduction
and associated weakening. For later convenience, I also define
G = G0 exp
H
,
RT (5)
which represents an effective rate of growth. The first term on the right-
hand side of Eq. (4) assumes that the rate of grain growth depends on
the current grain curvature (Atkinson, 1988). This term assumes a
single, dominant healing mechanism. More realistic models could in-
corporate more mechanisms, each with its own activation energy. The
second term in Eq. (4) represents comminution and is proportional to
the plastic strain-rate.
The evolution law is parameterized with a single dynamic variable
to represent the grain-size distribution. This may be an over-simplifi-
cation, but as such, it implies either that the surface is self-similar
(Candela et al., 2012; Power et al., 1987; Sammis et al., 1987; Sammis
and Biegel, 1989; Sammis and King, 2007) or that this parameter re-
presents the maximum grain-size, that is, the grain-size above which
the power-law breaks down. Describing the continuous distribution of
grain-size brings great complications and is an area of improvement
perimental work by Badt et al. (2016) indicates that the power-law
scaling of fractal surfaces is stable under shear, hence the distribution
can be represented by a single scaling factor that increases with normal
stress and decreases with shear (Badt et al., 2016).
Even though this mechanism is not specifically invoked, Eq. (4) is
the same as for dynamic recrystallization (Chester, 1989; De Bresser
et al., 1998; De Bresser et al., 2001; Hall and Parmentier, 2003; Montési
and Hirth, 2003; Nishihara et al., 2006), which is important in the
ductile substrate at lower-crustal and mantle depths, because the phy-
sics describing grain-size evolution, for example, surface tension or
minimization of surface energy, can take the same functional form for a
solid-solid phase intra-granular interface and for the solid-fluid phase
interface at the grain boundary (Atkinson, 1988).
The combination of Eqs. (3) and (4) represents a closed-form con-
contact junctions bearing the load. The proposed constitutive frame-
work incorporates physical quantities such as particle size or the
thickness of the shear layer, that are measurable in the laboratory or in
the field, at least in principle (Fagereng and Sibson, 2010; Sone et al.,
2012). The model represents an alternative to the one proposed by
Sleep (1997) and Sleep and Blanpied (1992) based on the evolution of
porosity in the gouge layer. However, the two models may not be
mutually exclusive as bulging and flattening of the surface surrounding
the contact junctions may not occur without significant changes in
porosity or micro-crack length.
3. Correspondence with rate-and-state friction
The constitutive framework based on Eqs. (3) and (4) can be shown
to closely match the rate-and-state friction formulation of Dieterich
(1979) and Ruina (1983) with the aging law under isothermal condi-
tions. The correspondence with the logarithmic form of rate-and-state
friction is immediate if we notice that power-laws of the form xy with
y ≪ 1 can be written xy = exp (y ln (x)) and then approximated by the
linear terms of the Taylor series expansion of exp (x), i.e.,
x y = 1 + y ln (x ) + O (ln2 (x )) .
First, to connect the grain-size with the state variable of rate-and-
age of the grain, or equivalently, the duration of grain growth, as
S. Barbot Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145

=
1 p
d . halite can be approximated by a power-law and a similar result for
G (6) shear zones was discussed by Montési and Hirth (2003) using different
The instantaneous and reference strain-rates are then associated with physical assumptions. It is likely that a and b depend on temperature, as
the velocity across the shear zone has been shown for amorphous materials (Ronsin and Coeyrehourcq,
2001) and carbonate rocks (Chen and Spiers, 2016; Chen et al., 2015).
V = 2W (7)
Healing may also be mediated by the growth and welding of contact
and the reference velocity junctions mediated by pressure solution creep (Chester and Higgs,
1992; Yasuhara et al., 2005) but we do not include these effects in this
Q
V0 = 2W 0 exp , study.
RT (8)
The classic formulation of rate-and-state friction appears to be an
where W is the characteristic wavelength of the system (Fig. 1). Com- approximation of a power-law rheology under isothermal conditions.
bining Eqs. (1) and (6), linearizing Eq. (1), neglecting cohesion, and Allowing temperature to vary, defining the age of the grains, or the age
defining the reference grain-size adequately, we obtain the following of contact, as follows
relationship for the real area of contact (see Appendix A)
1 H
= exp d p,
µ0 m V0 G0 RT0 (15)
A= 1+ ln ,
pn L (9) with the reference velocity
which was proposed by Ronsin and Coeyrehourcq (2001). This first Q
result indicates that the age of the grain (Eq. (6)) coincides with the age V0 = 2W 0 exp ,
RT0 (16)
of contact defined by Dieterich (1979). We can recast Eq. (3) as an
expression for strength as a function of velocity and state and otherwise following the same steps as above, we find the following
1 m
constitutive behavior (see Appendix B)
V n
V0 pn
= µ0 , V Q 1 1 V0
V0 L (10) µ = µ 0 + a ln + + b ln ,
V0 R T T0 L (17)
where the terms in parenthesis with their exponent are of order one,
compatible with the approximation µ 0 used as a simple failure with the evolution law
criterion. Indeed, the effects of the state variable and sliding velocity on H 1 1 V
strength are small, of the order of a few percents, but sufficient to en- = exp ,
R T T0 L (18)
able frictional instabilities and the seismic cycle (Rice, 1983; Ruina,
1983). For sufficiently large power exponent n, one can reduce Eq. (10) which corresponds to the thermally-activated rate-state formulation
to the linear terms of its power series. The additive, logarithmic form proposed by Chester and Higgs (1992) and Chester (1994) based on
directly emerges (see Appendix A) extensive experimental data. By extension, the proposed multiplicative,
thermally-activated form of rate-and-state friction explains the relevant
V V0
= µ 0 + a ln + b ln . observations of these studies and provides a specific micro-physical
V0 L (11) framework to justify the thermal activation.
Finally, combining Eqs. (4) and (6), we obtain the aging law of
Dieterich (1979) exactly, 4. Laboratory constraints on physical parameters

V The proposed framework (Eqs. (3)–(4)) satisfies a number of see-

=1 .
L (12)
The relationships between the parameters of the multiplicative form
Eqs. (3) and (4) with the classic parameters of rate-and-state friction in
additive form Eqs. (11) and (12) are found by identification
µ0
a= , in stationary contact and during sliding. I then explain the correlation
n
m between the kinematic and the static friction coefficients found by Ikari
b = a.
p (13)
The characteristic weakening distance
2W
L=
p (14)
is proportional to the characteristic wavelength of the system (see
Methods). The gouge model of Sleep (1995) also predicts a linear cor-
relation between the characteristic weakening distance and the gouge
thickness, which emerges naturally when the weakening term is pro-
portional to the anelastic strain-rate.
This concise derivation proves the mathematical equivalence be-
tween the constitutive framework (Eqs. (3)–(4)) and the classic rate-
and-state formulation (Eqs. (11)–(12)) upon the change of variable (Eq.
(6)) and a truncated power-series expansion. From a practical stand-
point, a power-law form is more adequate because the logarithmic form
is ill-posed for vanishing velocities (Bizzarri, 2011; Rice and Ben-Zion,
1996), and therefore not applicable for the full parameter range.
Chester (1989) showed that the velocity-strengthening behavior of
mingly unrelated constraints from laboratory observations. The con-
stitutive parameters can be uniquely estimated combining insight from
several key experiments. In this section, I start by considering the
findings of Dieterich and Kilgore (1994) and Dieterich and Kilgore
(1996) that document the effect of surface preparation on fault strength
et al. (2011) and Ikari et al. (2016). I discuss the dependence of friction
on temperature that was previously analyzed by Chester and Higgs
(1992) and Chester (1994). Finally, I compare the predictions of grain-
size of the physical model based on numerical simulations with those
found in fault zones (e.g., Chester and Logan, 1986; Frost et al., 2009).
The laboratory experiments of Dieterich and Kilgore (1994) and
Dieterich and Kilgore (1996) using transparent materials indicate a
dependence between the real area of contact and macroscopic normal
stress, a “logarithmic” increase of surface area with hold time during
stationary contact, and its correlation with the state variable of the
aging law during the seismic cycle.
The experimental data of Dieterich and Kilgore (1996) on the static
strength of bare contacts between transparent materials indicate a first-
order, linear dependence of the real area of contact on normal stress
and a second-order, but systematic dependence on grain-size. Different
surfaces are prepared using grits of increasing number, which largely
eliminate the asperities above a fixed size. To model these observations
with Eq. (1), I simply assume that grain-size is inversely proportional to
grit number. The data of Dieterich and Kilgore (1996) is explained

133
S. Barbot Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145

3.5
Data (D&K96) Grit # Model Grit #
60 60
100 100
3.0 240 240
Acrylic
Calcite
Glass
Quartz

2.5
Area of contact (%)

Acrylic
2.0

1.5

Calcite
1.0

Glass
0.5

Quartz
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Normal stress (MPa)

Fig. 3. Effect of loading and grain-size on the real area of contact in stationary
contact. The experimental data of Dieterich and Kilgore (1996) on acrylic,
calcite, glass, and quartz (open and closed symbols) are explained by Eq. (1).
The profiles are for grit #60 (solid), #100 (long dashed), and #240 (short
dashed).
Table 1
Material properties controlling the dependence of the real area of contact of
bare surfaces on confining pressure and grain size based on the experimental
findings of Dieterich and Kilgore (1996) and the physical model Eq. (1). A
friction coefficient of μ0 = 0.6 is assumed for all experiments. †The indentation
hardness for these materials is measured independently on different samples
(e.g., Brace, 1963; Dieterich and Kilgore, 1994; Dieterich and Kilgore, 1996;
Ferguson et al., 1987; Marsh, 1964).
Material Cohesion c Reference stress χ
(MPa) (MPa)
Acrylic 1 460
Calcite 4 1500
Glass 15 7300
Quartz 5 10,000
(Fig. 3) assuming μ0 = 0.6 for all materials and the material properties
shown in Table 1. In all these cases, the parameter χ is found close to
the indentation hardness of these materials (Brace, 1963; Dieterich,
1979; Dieterich and Kilgore, 1994; Dieterich and Kilgore, 1996;
Ferguson et al., 1987; Marsh, 1964) and the grain-size dependence is
weak, confirming the hypotheses of the model.
The main features of the experimental data for velocity jumps for
acrylic at = 2.5 MPa normal stress (Dieterich and Kilgore, 1994) can
be explained with χ = 460 MPa, c = 0, μ0 = 0.76, and m/pn = 0.10
(Fig. 4A), except for some long-wavelength variations that are not
captured by the model. The increase of the real area of contact with
time for glass at 10 MPa during stationary hold (Dieterich and Kilgore,
1994) can be explained for μ0m/pn = 0.02 (Fig. 4C) (see Methods).
The mathematical equivalence between Eqs. (3)–(4) and (11)–(12)
is only valid upon a truncated power-series expansion, and one may
question the validity of this approximation. To address this concern, I
compare the prediction of the multiplicative form Eq. (3) for steady-
state friction (see Appendix B) with slide-hold-slide experiments on
sandstone (Dieterich, 1972). These results were key to establish the
Fig. 4. Change of the area of contact during the seismic cycle. A) Effect of the
slip velocity for acrylic at 2.5 MPa normal stress from the data of Dieterich and
Kilgore (1994) (black profile) and model Eq. (1) (red profile). B) Evolution of
friction (black profile) during the experiment shown in A). C) Area of contact
during stationary hold for glass at 10 MPa (Dieterich and Kilgore, 1994) (black
profile) and the model Eq. (1). The area is relative to a reference value after 1 s
of hold. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the
reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Exponent Indentation hardness
m/n (MPa)† state-dependence of friction and the logarithmic hardening with time at
static contact under constant normal load. The proposed formulation
0.14 400 explains the experimental data well (Fig. 5). In addition, the numerical
0.007 1800
simulation described in Appendix C indicates that the power-law terms
0.04 5500
0.04 12,000 and their logarithmic equivalent differ by less than 0.17% throughout
the seismic cycle.
The correlation between the characteristic weakening distance and
the gouge thickness found by Marone and Kilgore (1993) is predicted
based on Eq. (14) with λp/2 ≈ 100 to match their experimental data.
The characteristic weakening strain is therefore of the order of 0.5%.
The model of Eqs. (3)–(4) also predicts the independence of the char-
acteristic weakening distance with grain-size and the evolution of grain-
size during sliding, compatible with experiments (Marone and Kilgore,
1993). Small grains do not make more unstable faults. Instead, the
linear scaling (Eq. (14)) between the gouge thickness and the critical
weakening distance, which controls stability (Gu et al., 1984; Rice and
Ruina, 1983; Ruina, 1983), explains the stabilization of fault slip with
gouge accumulation (Beeler et al., 1996; Engelder et al., 1975; Marone
et al., 1990; Scholz et al., 1972). For bare surfaces, the increase in the
weakening distance with large slip over multiple slip cycles is compa-
tible with the removal of small-wavelength striations on the fault sur-
face (Voisin et al., 2007). As gouge is a product of wear and may always
be present, the two length scales emerging from surface roughness and
gouge thickness may coexist and the characteristic weakening distance
may scale with whichever is the largest, compatible with larger slip
weakening distance in fault gouge.
The correlation between the static friction coefficient μ0 and the

134
S. Barbot Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145

0.86 1.2

Data for sandstone from Dieterich (1972) Data Carpenter et al. (2016)
0.84 4.1 MPa 5.4 MPa 9.5 MPa and Ikari et al. (2016)
18.7 MPa 48.0 MPa San Gregorio
1.0 Fault
Constitutive model Multiplicative model with n=70
Alpine Fault
0.82 Calaveras
Fault

Rate-dependence parameter a (x10-2)

Westerly
0.80 0.8
Granite
Zuccale Fault
Coefficient of friction

Kodiak
0.78
Ghost Rocks
Biotite

0
0.6

7
Andesine

n=
0.76
Kaolinite Costa Rica
Decollement

0.74 0.4 Montmorillonite

Rochester Nankai
Shale Decollement

0.72 Talc

0.2
SAFOD
Core
0.70

0
0.68 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
100 101 102 103 104 105 106 Static friction parameter 0
Hold time (seconds)
Fig. 6. Rate-dependence parameter a in rate-and-state friction Eq. (11) for
Fig. 5. Increase of the static coefficient of friction in stationary contact for
natural and synthetic gouges (Carpenter et al., 2016; Ikari et al., 2016). The
quartz sandstone in slide-hold-slide tests (Dieterich, 1972) from a range of
relationship μ0 = n a of Eq. (13) explains the data in the least-squares sense for
normal stress from 2 to 48 MPa (symbols) and predictions from the multi-
n = 70 ± 4 (solid profile with slope 1/n; uncertainty is for one standard de-
plicative form Eq. (10) of rate-and-state friction (solid lines). The hold time
viation).
corresponds to the duration of stick under constant normal stress.

change in slip velocity (Chester and Higgs, 1992). Different effective

rate-dependence parameter a found for a wide range of natural and
synthetic gouges (Ikari et al., 2011; Ikari et al., 2016) indicates a
somewhat uniform n = 70 ± 4 for the velocity exponent for all these
materials (Fig. 6), although these data show some scatter. The high
power exponent in the multiplicative form of Eq. (3) is compatible with
the asperity creep model that requires n ≥ 40 to explain aging at sta-
tionary contact by viscoelastic flow (Mitchell et al., 2013). For re-
ference, typical laboratory value of μ0 and a give rise to n = μ0/a = 60.
Using Arrhenius laws for grain growth (or equivalently, flattening)
and for the flow law, the model correctly predicts the modest change of
frictional resistance with varying sub-solidus temperatures (Chester and
Higgs, 1992; Chester, 1994; Stesky, 1978). The temperature depen-
dence of strain-rate in Eq. (3) and of grain growth at stationary contact
in Eq. (4) implies a temperature control of static friction at fixed hold
times controlled by an effective activation energy (see Appendix B and
the work of Chester and Higgs, 1992)
b
Q= H Q.
a (19)
The available data for sandstone (Nakatani, 2001) and Westerly
granite (Mitchell et al., 2013) require an activation energy of
ΔQ = 36.3 kJ/mol and ΔQ = 16.9 kJ/mol, respectively, to explain the
variation of static friction from room temperature to 900 °C (Fig. 7 and
Supplementary Materials). As the multiplicative form of rate-and-state
friction finds the same form as proposed by Chester and Higgs (1992)
and Chester (1994) upon a Taylor series expansion, the model naturally
explains the experimental results of these studies, including that a
sudden change in temperature gives rise to a sudden change in the
frictional resistance to sliding followed by a transient, similar to, but in
the opposite sense, as the change in friction produced by a sudden
activation energies correspond to several micro-mechanisms of de-
formation, presumably acting at different pressures, shear stress, and
even temperatures.
It is not possible to fully describe the thermally activated sliding
behavior without resolving the shear heating effect (Chen and Rempel,
2015; De Lorenzo and Loddo, 2010; Kitajima et al., 2011; Noda and
Lapusta, 2010; Rempel and Weaver, 2008; Segall and Bradley, 2012;
Segall and Rice, 2006; Sleep, 1995; Sleep, 2019), but the sign of ΔQ
controls the importance of shear heating. For positive ΔQ, sliding is
temperature-hardening and stable (negative feedback). For negative
ΔQ, there is a potential for thermal instabilities, which are conditioned
on the details of heat transport. Chester (1994) found separate values
for Q and H in dry and wet quartz gouge of the order of 89 ± 23 kJ/mol
with effective activation energy ΔQ ranging from −30 kJ/mol to 21 kJ/
mol. Therefore, the temperature dependence may have an important
influence on fault dynamics due to thermal weakening, notwith-
standing the additional strong weakening mechanisms activated at high
slip speed.
The constitutive framework (Eqs. (3)–(4)) also predicts a realistic
dynamic range of grain-size in fault zones. Constraining the evolution of
grain-size in laboratory experiments still remains a challenge, but grain-
size can be estimated in numerical simulations. To explore this prop-
erty, I simulate the evolution of stress, velocity, grain-size, and contact
area in a spring-slider model (see Appendix C) with the parameters
listed in Table 2 using a Runge-Kutta numerical solver (Press et al.,
1992). With p = 3, the numerical simulation indicates a range of about
three orders of magnitude of grain-sizes throughout the nucleation and
propagation of frictional instabilities and relocking (Fig. 8). Grain-sizes
from 1 μm to 1 mm emerge with the characteristic rate of growth of
G = 10 μm3/s, which is theoretically possible around room temperature

135
S. Barbot Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145

A 0.90 with an activation energy of H=160 kJ/mol. These results qualitatively

Data for Westerly granite agree with estimates and measurements of grain-size in fault cores
from Mitchell et al. (2013) (Chester and Logan, 1986; Frost et al., 2009; Sammis and Ben-Zion,
Arrhenius law with Q=16.9 kJ/mol 2008; Sammis and King, 2007; Yund et al., 1990).
0.85 Grain-size evolution offers an alternative interpretation of the sta-
bility of fault slip where the evolution of grain-size within the gouge is
Friction parameter

of primary importance. The stability of a spring-slider system governed

by Eqs. (3–4) is controlled by the stress exponents m and p, i.e., con-
0.80 ditionally stable (Ruina, 1983) for m > p and linearly stable for m < p.
The ratio p/m also seems to control the style and size of nucleation
(Rubin and Ampuero, 2005; Viesca, 2016). This implies that fault sta-
bility and overall dynamics are controlled by the grain-size dependence
0.75 of the real area of contact and of grain-growth. These results are
broadly compatible with the interpretation of Sleep (2006), who found
that steady-state frictional resistance is controlled by the aspect ratio of
the asperities bearing the load.
0.70 The grain-size evolution law proposed in Eq. (4) corresponds to the
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Temperature (ºC)
aging-law of rate-and-state friction, upon the change of variable Eq. (6).
B 0.80 However, the aging law has been shown to only poorly predict the
symmetry of decelerating and accelerating velocity jumps in laboratory
experiments (e.g., Beeler et al., 1994; Nakatani, 2001). The slip law
Data for Na-feldspar gouge
from Nakatani (2001) (hold time=3162 s)
predicts this behavior more accurately but fails to capture the time-
Arrhenius law with Q=36.3 kJ/mol
dependent healing at stationary contact. Some formulations have ad-
0.75

dressed this issue (e.g., Kato and Tullis, 2001; Nagata et al., 2012;
Sleep, 2012). In principle, any evolution law can be directly translated
Friction parameter

0.70 to a revised grain-size evolution law by applying the change of variable

of Eq. (6).

0.65 5. Implications for fault dynamics

Using a power-law for the velocity dependence of friction as in Eq.

0.60 (3) is more realistic for vanishing velocities than the alternative form of
Eq. (11), as the logarithm of velocity predicts negative shear stress for
sufficiently low slip speeds, and even infinite negative stress for truly
0.55 stationary contact. Several regularization forms have been proposed to
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 work around this issue (see the review by Bizzarri, 2011) to model
Temperature (ºC) deformation on weak faults, e.g., sub-horizontal décollements in ac-
Fig. 7. Effect of temperature. A) Friction coefficient μ0 for Westerly granite cretionary prisms or in thrust and fold belts (Hubbard et al., 2015; Ong
from slide-hold-slide experiments (Mitchell et al., 2013) and the prediction et al., 2019), or to incorporate strong weakening mechanisms (e.g.,
from multiplicative model with the effective activation energy ΔQ = 16.9 kJ/ Karato and Barbot, 2018; Noda and Lapusta, 2010; Noda et al., 2009).
mol (solid profile). B) Static friction coefficient μ0 for Na-feldspar gouge from The proposed constitutive framework does not require additional
similar experiments (Nakatani, 2001) and model with ΔQ = 36.3 kJ/mol regularization as the power-law relationship is well-behaved at van-
(Appendix B). ishing velocities. To explore the implications of this form of regular-
ization, I explore the dynamics of faults of decreasing strength in quasi-
dynamic models of the seismic cycle with the radiation-damping ap-
proximation (Barbot, 2018; Goswami and Barbot, 2018; Horowitz and
Table 2 Ruina, 1989; Kato, 2003; Lambert and Barbot, 2016; Li and Liu, 2016;
Physical parameters used to simulate seismic cycles with a spring-slider model Liu and Rice, 2005; Qiu et al., 2016; Rice, 1993; Tse and Rice, 1986; Wu
(Fig. 8). The model predicts effective grain-sizes between 1 μm and 1 mm and a and Chen, 2014). The model consists of a single vertical strike-slip fault
real area of contact in the range of 0.5–0.6% for a dynamic range of velocity embedded in an elastic half-space with the model parameters listed in
between 10−12 and 1 m/s. the caption of Fig. 9. I have checked numerical convergence and proper
Parameter Symbol Value Unit discretization, which requires >20 samples within the critical nuclea-
tion size. Although, the effect of static friction is typically ignored in
Rigidity G 30 GPa
studies of fault stability (e.g., Rice and Ruina, 1983; Rubin and
Velocity power exponent n 60
State variable exponent m 3 Ampuero, 2005; Ruina, 1983; Viesca, 2016), these numerical simula-
Activation energy Q 400 kJ/mol tions indicate that the seismic cycle becomes increasingly complex with
Temperature T 0 °C decreasing static fault strength (i.e., decreasing value of μ0), every other
Reference velocity V0 10−6 m/s
parameters being the same (Fig. 9). Considering frictional parameters
Reference length scale W 10−2 m
Reference friction coefficient μ0 0.6
that produce simple cycles of elasto-dynamic ruptures on strong faults
Effective confining pressure 100 MPa (Fig. 9A, B), partial ruptures of the seismogenic zone and multi-modal
Cohesion c 0 MPa source-time functions emerge spontaneously on weak faults
Activation enthalpy H 160 kJ/mol (Fig. 9C–H). This is reminiscent of the complex dynamics found in the
Grain-size evolution exponent p 3
accretionary prism of subduction zones (Carlos Villegas-Lanza et al.,
Growth parameter G0 10 μm3/s
Reference strain 1/λ 10−2 2016; Dixon et al., 2014; Jiang et al., 2012; Wallace et al., 2016;
Wallace and Beavan, 2006; Wallace et al., 2017), where shortening is
accommodated by a low-dipping, low-strength décollement (Hubbard

136
S. Barbot Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145

A 60 B

55
Stress (MPa)
50

45

40
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65
Contact area (%)
C D
100
Velocity (m/s)

10-3
10-6
loading
10-9
rate
10-12

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65

Contact area (%)
E F
2
1 mm
Grain-size (mm)

100
h
wit
10-1 th /3
1 ow e1

gr
10-2 tim
1 micron
10-3

10-4 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 20 25 30 35 40
G Time (yr)
H
Density of contact area (%)

0.7
logarithmic
0.6 growth

0.5

0.4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 20 25 30 35 40
Time (yr) Time (yr)

Fig. 8. Seismic-cycle simulation in a spring-slider block with dynamic recrystallization assuming μ0 = 0.6, = 100 MPa, a = 10−2, a − b = − 4 × 10−3, L = 1 cm,
G = 10 μm3/s, and λ = 100. A) Shear stress asa function of time. The rapid stress drops are due to frictional instabilities. B) Stress as a function of contact area. The
arrow indicates the direction of time evolution. C) Slip velocity as a function of time. The peaks are due to frictional instabilities. The dashed line indicates the
loading rate of 10−9 m/s. Velocities significantly below this rate correspond to fault locking. D) Phase diagram of slip velocity as a function of contact area. The arrow
indicates the time evolution. E) Grain-size as a function of time (log-linear plot). F) Grain-size as a function of time (linear plot) showing growth with the cubic-root of
time in the inter-seismic period. G) Real area of contact density as a function of time (log-linear plot). H) Real area of contact density (linear plot) indicating
logarithmic increase during the inter-seismic period.

et al., 2015; Ong et al., 2019). Further investigation of fault dynamics 6. Conclusions
on weak faults is warranted.
The regularization that involves replacing the exp (x) terms with Consideration of the relationship between fault strength and the real
sinh (x) terms in the friction law (Rice and Ben-Zion, 1996) assumes an area of contact, and of the weak modulation of the area of contact
exponentially decaying probability of backward slip at contact junc- junctions by grain-size evolution gives rise to the following multi-
tions, giving rise to a linearization of the stress-velocity relationship at plicative, thermally activated form of rate-and-state friction
small velocities. The complex sequence of partial ruptures (Fig. 9C–H) µ0
b
obtained with the multiplicative form Eq. (2) does not appear with the
a
V0 a Q 1 1
V = V0 exp
regularization form of Rice and Ben-Zion (1996), indicating that the c + µ0 L R T T0 (20)
form of regularization may play a more important role in fault dy-
namics than previously thought. Further experimental work is needed with the evolution law
to validate these candidate expressions. Relaxation tests (e.g., Chester H 1 1 V
and Higgs, 1992; Higgs, 1981; Rutter and Mainprice, 1978), although = exp ,
R T T0 L (21)
less popular, seem most adequate for this task because they can achieve
low deformation rates. that captures the temperature dependence of fault strength and reg-
ularizes the constitutive behavior near vanishing slip velocity.

137
S. Barbot Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145

Slip velocity (m/s)

10-12 10-9 10-6 10-1

Moment rate (x1017 Nm/s)

A 0 B 20
0
= 0.6 (strong fault) 0
= 0.6 (strong fault)
5
Depth (km)

nucleation single-peaked
10 10 source-time
propagation function
15
termination
20 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (s) Time (s)

Moment rate (x1017 Nm/s)

C 0 D 10
0
= 0.2 0
= 0.2
5 8 single-peaked
Depth (km)

nucleation source-time
6
10 function
propagation 4 of increasing
15 complexity
termination 2
20 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time (s) Moment rate (x1017 Nm/s) Time (s)
E 0 F 1
0
= 0.1 (weak fault) 0
= 0.1 (weak fault)
5
Depth (km)

secondary
moment multi-modal
10
release source-time
function
15

20 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Time (s) Time (s)
Moment rate (x1017 Nm/s)

G 0 H 2
0
= 0.05 (very weak fault) 0
= 0.05 (very weak fault)
5
Depth (km)

partial
10 rupture 1 long-tailed
source-time
15 function

20 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (s) Time (s)
Fig. 9. Effect of fault strength on the dynamics of fault slip. The strike-slip fault is assumed infinite in the strike direction with a = 10−2, L = 1 cm, = 100 MPa,
V0 = 10−6 m, and Vs = 3 km/s. In the velocity-weakening region, between 5 and 15 km depth, we have b − a = 4 × 10−3; in the velocity-strengthening region
b − a = − 4 × 10−3. The sampling size is 35 m. The fault is loaded at the background rate VL=10−9 m/s. The following snapshots are provided for the fifth event in
the seismic cycle. A) Evolution of slip velocity on a strong fault (μ0 = 0.6) during the nucleation, propagation, and arrest of a seismic rupture. B) Corresponding
source-time function, assuming a length of 10 km. C) Evolution of slip velocity for μ0 = 0.2. D) Corresponding source-time function with increasing complexity. E)
Evolution of slip velocity for μ0 = 0.1. F) Multi-modal source-time function. G) Slip velocity for a partial rupture breaking the top of the seismogenic zone of a very
weak fault with μ0 = 0.05. A previous, slow-slip event ruptures the down-dip section. H) Corresponding long-tailed source-time function.

The physical model proposed here facilitates the upscaling of la-
boratory data by providing an explicit relationship for the frictional
parameters a, b, and L with micro-mechanical properties. The possible
discrepancy in the characteristic weakening distance measured in the
laboratory and inferred seismologically (Cocco et al., 2009; Marone,
1998) could be elucidated by the difference between the gouge thick-
ness and fault roughness in the laboratory versus in nature (Fagereng
and Sibson, 2010; Sibson, 2003). The increasing thickness of fault zones
with depth below the seismogenic zone may enable slow-slip events by
stable weakening near the brittle-ductile transition zone (Goswami and
Barbot, 2018; Sone et al., 2012; Ujiie et al., 2018).
Writing the constitutive behavior of faults as a nonlinear viscoe-
lastic process draws a strong connection between the worlds of
rheology and friction and may simplify the treatment of the brittle-
ductile transition (e.g., Chester, 1989; Noda and Shimamoto, 2010;
Reber et al., 2015; Shimamoto and Noda, 2014).
Grain-size evolution around contact junctions offers new insight
into the mechanics of frictional slip and provides a physical basis to a
constitutive framework with already extensive experimental support.
However, it does not address well-known shortcomings, including the
neglect of off-fault deformation (Bhat et al., 2007; Griffith et al., 2010;
Sammis et al., 2009) and thermally activated processes that take
dominance at high slip-velocity (Ferri et al., 2010; Han et al., 2007;
Toro et al., 2004), and uncertainties regarding the use of one or more
state variables. The constitutive framework should also be refined to
afford a consistent treatment of near-solidus temperatures (Blanpied

138
S. Barbot Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145

et al., 1995; Brown and Fialko, 2012; Mitchell et al., 2013; Stesky et al.,
1974), dilatancy (Marone et al., 1990; van den Ende et al., 2018), and
anisotropy (Power et al., 1987; Sleep, 1998).
With further integration of laboratory, in situ, and remote-sensing
observations into physical models of rock deformation, we may even-
tually elucidate the earthquake phenomenon.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Dr. Kelin Wang and Dr. Eiichi Fukuyama for
their editorial work on the special issue. The manuscript benefitted
from the insightful reviews of Dr. Norman Sleep and an anonymous
reviewer, and from discussions with Dr. Emily Brodsky.

Appendix A. Physical model for rate-and-state friction

In this Appendix, I provide a more detailed derivation of the equivalence between Eqs. (3)–(4) and (11)–(12). We start with
n m
d Q
= 0 exp ,
c + µ0 d0 RT (A1)
and
G0 H
d= exp d,
pd p 1 RT (A2)
or equivalently, using Eq. (5),
G
d= d,
pd p 1
(A3)
where the parameters are described in the main text. At stationary contact, the grain growth follows
d (t ) p = d1 p + G t , (A4)
where t is time and d1 is a starting grain-size. This serves as a motivation to define
dp
=
G (A5)
as a state variable representing the age of the grain, or, in other words, the approximate duration of grain growth. Introducing the change of variable
Eq. (A5) into Eq. (A2), we obtain
1 dp
p d dp 1 =1 p ,
G G (A6)
or, simply,
=1 p . (A7)
Assuming a uniform strain-rate in the fault normal direction leads to
V
= ,
2W (A8)
where V is the slip velocity across the shear zone. Combining Eqs. (A7) and (A8), we obtain
p
=1 V .
2W (A9)
Writing the characteristic weakening distance as
2W
L= ,
p (A10)
we finally obtain
V
=1 ,
L (A11)
i.e., the aging law of Dieterich (1979). Eq. (A11) indicates that the age of the grain in Eq. (A5) and the age of contact defined by Dieterich (1979) are
one and the same. I now consider the rate-and-state formulation of Eq. (A1), recast as
1 m
V n
d n
= (c + µ 0 ) ,
V0 d0 (A12)
where
V Q
= exp .
V0 0 RT (A13)
y
Expanding the powers following x = exp (y ln x), we obtain

1 V m d
= (c + µ 0 ) exp ln + ln .
n V0 n d0 (A14)
The logarithmic dependence on velocity and grain-size combined with the small value of the pre-factors, i.e., n ≫ 1 and n ≫ ∣ m∣, allows us to consider

139
S. Barbot Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145

a power series expansion of Eq. (A14). Using the Taylor series expansion exp (x) = 1 + x + O(x2), ignoring the cohesion for simplicity, we obtain

1 V m d
µ0 1+ ln + ln .
n V0 n d0 (A15)
Using Eqs. (A5), (A15) and
GL 2GW
d0 p = = ,
V0 p V0 (A16)
I obtain a familiar expression of frictional resistance with the static, rate-dependent, and state-dependent terms

1 V m V0
µ0 1+ ln + ln .
n V0 pn L (A17)
−14 3 −6
For reference, with p = 3, G = 10 m /s, V0 = 10 m/s, and L = 0.1 μm, I obtain d0 = 100 μm, which is representative grain-size for fault cores
(Chester and Logan, 1986; Frost et al., 2009). By identification with the rate-and-state friction formulation

V V0
= µ 0 + a ln + b ln ,
V0 L (A18)
an expression for the rate-and-state parameters can be obtained
1
a = µ0 ,
n
m m
b = µ0 = a,
pn p
2W
L= .
p (A19)
Following the same approach, the real area of contact
m
c + µ0 d n
A= ,
d0 (A20)
can be approximated, neglecting cohesion, by
µ0 m d
A= 1+ ln .
n d0 (A21)
The ratio m/n and the material properties χ for acrylic, glass, calcite, and quartz are constrained by the experiments of Dieterich and Kilgore (1996)
(see Table 1). Using Eqs. (A5), (A16), and (A19), we find

µ0 b V0
A= 1+ ln ,
µ0 L (A22)
compatible with the expression proposed by Ronsin and Coeyrehourcq (2001).
To maintain the use of parameters that have been classically used and discussed in multiple studies, we can formulate rate-and-state friction in
multiplicative form as follows
µ0
a
b
V0 a
V = V0 ,
c + µ0 L (A23)
or, equivalently,
a b
V µ0
V0 µ0
= (c + µ 0 ) ,
V0 L (A24)
coupled with the evolution law
V
=1 .
L (A25)
This formulation features a regularization at vanishing slip velocity without further modification.

Appendix B. Temperature dependence of static friction

I look at the effect of temperature on grain-growth to explain the temperature dependence of static friction found in laboratory experiments
(Chester and Higgs, 1992; Chester, 1994; Mitchell et al., 2013; Nakatani, 2001). Let us start with the temperature-dependent constitutive law
n m
d Q
= 0 exp ,
µ0 d0 RT (B1)
and the grain-size evolution law

140
S. Barbot Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145

G0 H
d= exp d.
pd p 1 RT (B2)
The Arrhenius law in the first term on the right-hand side of Eq. (B2) captures the thermal activation of grain-growth. To go from strain-rate to
velocity, I define
V = 2W , (B3)
and

Q
V0 = 2W 0 exp ,
RT0 (B4)
where T0 is the temperature at which the friction is μ0 for the stable velocity of sliding V0. The multiplicative form of the friction law becomes
1 m
V n
d n
Q 1 1
µ = µ0 exp .
V0 d0 nR T T0 (B5)
With the previously defined constants a = μ0/n, b = μ0m/pn, and d 0 = G0 L / V0 , the truncated power-series expansion of Eq. (B5) becomes
p

V Q 1 1 V0
µ = µ 0 + a ln + + b ln ,
V0 R T T0 L (B6)
where I have assumed 0 < Q/nRT ≪ 1.
To make the dependence of temperature explicit in the state evolution law, I consider the change of variable
dp
= .
G0 exp ( ) H
RT0 (B7)
Instead of the aging law for the state variable, I get the modified evolution law

H 1 1 V
= exp ,
R T T0 L (B8)
with the constant L = 2T/pλ. Temperature affects the rate-and-state constitutive relationship Eq. (B6) and the state evolution law Eq. (B8). The pair
Eqs. (B6) and (B8) corresponds to the temperature-dependent constitutive framework of Chester and Higgs (1992) and Chester (1994).
I consider the temperature dependence of friction at steady-state first and then during stationary contact. At steady-state, we have the state
variable

L H 1 1
ss = exp
V R T T0 (B9)
and the steady-state friction reads

Q Hb/a 1 1 V
µss = µ0 + a + (a b) ln .
R T T0 V0 (B10)
If the steady-state friction is evaluated at V = V0, it appears temperature-dependent with the apparent activation energy
b
Q= H Q.
a (B11)
For slide-hold-slide experiments, the weakening terms in Eq. (B2) can be neglected during stationary contact, leading to
G0 H
d= exp .
pd p 1 RT (B12)
Upon integration, we find
H
d (t ) p = d1 p + G0 exp t,
RT (B13)
where d1 is a reference value at t = 0, subsequently ignored. Looking asymptotically at large time t, the friction evolution becomes
1 m
pn
Q m H V n
G0 t
µ (t ) = µ 0 exp .
nRT pn RT V0 d 02 (B14)
Using the truncated power series expansion with b = μ0m/pn, I get
µ µeffective (T ) + b ln(t ), (B15)
showing that the rate of healing does not change with temperature and that the static friction appears temperature dependent, following
Q H b/a
µeffective (T ) = µ0 + a ,
RT (B16)
b
where some constants independent of temperature have been neglected for clarity. The effective activation energy is also Q = a
Q . Assuming
H
a = 0.01, the laboratory data of Mitchell et al. (2013) for the temperature dependence of Westerly granite can be explained for ΔQ = 16.9 kJ/mol;

141
S. Barbot Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145

the laboratory data of Nakatani (2001) of Na-feldspar for ΔQ = 36.3 kJ/mol (Fig. 7).
In simulations of the seismic cycle with the additive form of Eq. (11) of rate-and-state friction where the static friction coefficient is constant, its
value does not affect the dynamics, i.e., the values taken by the state variable and the velocity. The static fiction controls the absolute level of shear
stress, but not its dynamic range. If the temperature is kept constant, it has no effect on the dynamics. However, if the temperature is allowed to vary,
there will be a negative feedback between shear heating and fault hardening by temperature increase if ΔQ is positive, and a positive feedback
between shear heating and fault weakening by increasing temperature if ΔQ is negative.

Appendix C. Block modeling with a spring-slider

Simple models of frictional instabilities in a spring-slider block at constant temperature can be obtained by coupling the multiplicative form of
rate-and-state friction
a b
V µ0
V0 µ0
= µ0 ,
V0 L (C1)
the evolution law
V
=1 ,
L (C2)
and the equation for the elastic interaction between the spring and the slider
= k (V VL ) V (C3)
where k is the spring stiffness, VL is the imposed loading rate, and α is a damping coefficient. The acceleration can be obtained with
µ
V k (V VL) µ0
b /
= µ .
V a + V
µ0 (C4)
Time-series of the state vector y = (τ, θ, V) can then be obtained numerically using the Runge-Kutta method (Press et al., 1992). The grain-size and
b
contact area can be obtained using d = (Gθ)1/p and A = µ 0 ( V0/L) µ0 / , respectively. An example is shown in Fig. 8.
The numerical simulation in Fig. 8 with the parameters listed in Table 2 can be used to investigate the range of values taken by the arguments of
the exponential function in Eq. (A14) to justify the approximation exp (x) = 1 + x + O(x2). The values taken by the arguments of the exponential
function vary in the range of ±6%. As a result, the exponential function and its Taylor expansion differ by less than 0.17%.

References frictional strength. Nature 463 (7277), 76.

Agata, R., Barbot, S.D., Fujita, K., Hyodo, M., Iinuma, T., Nakata, R., Ichimura, T., Hori,
T., 2019. Rapid mantle flow with power-law creep explains deformation after the
2011 Tohoku mega-quake. Nat. Commun. 10 (1), 1385.
Aharonov, E., Scholz, C.H., 2018. A physics-based rock friction constitutive law: steady
state friction. J. Geophys. Res. 123 (2), 1591–1614.
Amontons, G., 1699. De la resistance causée dans les machines, tant par les frottemens des
parties qui les composent, que par roideur des cordes qu'on y employe, & la maniere
de calculer l'un & l'autre. In: Mémoires de l'Académie Royale Des Science, pp.
206–222.
Archard, J.F., 1957. Elastic deformation and the laws of friction. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 243
(1233), 190–205.
Atkinson, H., 1988. Overview no. 65: theories of normal grain growth in pure single phase
systems. Acta Metall. 36 (3), 469–491.
Badt, N., Hatzor, Y.H., Toussaint, R., Sagy, A., 2016. Geometrical evolution of interlocked
rough slip surfaces: the role of normal stress. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 443, 153–161.
Barbot, S., 2018. Asthenosphere flow modulated by megathrust earthquake cycles.
Geophys. Res. Lett. 45, 6018–6031. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL078197.
Barbot, S., Fialko, Y., 2010. A unified continuum representation of postseismic relaxation
mechanisms: semi-analytic models of afterslip, poroelastic rebound and viscoelastic
flow. Geophys. J. Int. 182 (3), 1124–1140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.
2010.04678.x.
Barbot, S., Fialko, Y., Bock, Y., 2009. Postseismic deformation due to the Mw 6.0 2004
Parkfield earthquake: stress-driven creep on a fault with spatially variable rate-and-
state friction parameters. J. Geophys. Res. 114 (B07405). https://doi.org/10.1029/
2008JB005748.
Barbot, S., Lapusta, N., Avouac, J.P., 2012. Under the hood of the earthquake machine:
towards predictive modeling of the seismic cycle. Science 336 (6082), 707–710.
Baumberger, T., Caroli, C., 2006. Solid friction from stick-slip down to pinning and aging.
Adv. Phys. 55 (3–4), 279–348.
Baumberger, T., Berthoud, P., Caroli, C., 1997. Physical analysis of the state- and rate-
dependent friction law. II. Dynamic friction. Phys. Rev. B 60 (6), 3928–3939.
Beeler, N.M., Tullis, T.E., Weeks, J.D., 1994. The roles of time and displacement in the
evolution effect in rock friction. Geophys. Res. Lett. 21, 1987–1990.
Beeler, N.M., Tullis, T.E., Blanpied, M.L., Weeks, J.D., 1996. Frictional behavior of large
displacement experimental faults. J. Geophys. Res. 101 (B4), 8697–8715.
Beeler, N.M., Tullis, T.E., Goldsby, D.L., 2008. Constitutive relationship and physical basis
of fault strength due to flash heating. J. Geophys. Res. 113 (B01401). https://doi.org/
10.1029/2007JB004988.
Ben-David, O., Rubinstein, S.M., Fineberg, J., 2010. Slip-stick and the evolution of
Bennett, A.I., Harris, K.L., Schulze, K.D., Urueña, J.M., McGhee, A.J., Pitenis, A.A., Müser,
M.H., Angelini, T.E., Sawyer, W.G., 2017. Contact measurements of randomly rough
surfaces. Tribol. Lett. 65 (4), 134.
Berthoud, P., Baumberger, T., G'sell, C., Hiver, J.-M., 1999. Physical analysis of the state-
and rate-dependent friction law: static friction. Phys. Rev. B 59 (22), 14,313.
Bhat, H.S., Olives, M., Dmowska, R., Rice, J.R., 2007. Role of fault branches in earthquake
rupture dynamics. J. Geophys. Res. 112 (B11309), 16. https://doi.org/10.1029/
2007JB005027.
Biegel, R.L., Sammis, C.G., 2004. Relating fault mechanics to fault zone structure. Adv.
Geophys. 47, 65–111.
Biegel, R.L., Sammis, C.G., Dieterich, J.H., 1989. The frictional properties of a simulated
gouge having a fractal particle distribution. J. Struct. Geol. 11 (7), 827–846.
Bizzarri, A., 2011. On the deterministic description of earthquakes. Rev. Geophys. 49
(RG3002). https://doi.org/10.1029/2011RG000356.
Blanpied, M.L., Lockner, D.A., Byerlee, J.D., 1991. Fault stability inferred from granite
sliding experiments at hydrothermal conditions. Geophys. Res. Lett. 18 (4), 609–612.
Blanpied, M.L., Lockner, D.A., Byerlee, J.D., 1995. Frictional slip of granite at hydro-
thermal conditions. J. Geophys. Res. 100 (B7), 13,045–13,064.
Bowden, F.P., Tabor, D., 1964. The Friction and Lubrication of Solids, Part II. Clarendon
Press, Oxford.
Brace, W., 1960. Behavior of rock salt, limestone, and anhydrite during indentation. J.
Geophys. Res. 65 (6), 1773–1788.
Brace, W., 1963. Behavior of quartz during indentation. J. Geol. 71 (5), 581–595.
Brace, W., Byerlee, J., 1966. Stick-slip as a mechanism for earthquakes. Science 153
(3739), 990–992.
Brown, K.M., Fialko, Y., 2012. ‘Melt welt’ mechanism of extreme weakening of gabbro at
seismic slip rates. Nature 488 (7413), 638.
Bürgmann, R., Ergintav, S., Segall, P., Hearn, E.H., McClusky, S., Reilinger, R.E., Woith,
H., Zschau, J., 2002. Time-dependent distributed afterslip on and deep below the
Izmit earthquake rupture. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 92 (1), 126–137.
Bush, A., Gibson, R., Thomas, T., 1975. The elastic contact of a rough surface. Wear 35
(1), 87–111.
Byerlee, J., 1978. Friction of rock. Pure Appl. Geophys. 116, 615–626.
Byerlee, J., Savage, J., 1992. Coulomb plasticity within the fault zone. Geophys. Res. Lett.
19 (23), 2341–2344.
Candela, T., Brodsky, E.E., 2016. The minimum scale of grooving on faults. Geology 44
(8), 603–606.
Candela, T., Renard, F., Klinger, Y., Mair, K., Schmittbuhl, J., Brodsky, E.E., 2012.
Roughness of fault surfaces over nine decades of length scales. J. Geophys. Res.
117 (B8).
Carlos Villegas-Lanza, J., Nocquet, J.-M., Rolandone, F., Vallée, M., Tavera, H., Bondoux,

142
S. Barbot
F., Tran, T., Martin, X., Chlieh, M., 2016. A mixed seismic–aseismic stress release
episode in the Andean subduction zone. Nat. Geosci. 9 (2), 150–154.
Carpenter, B., Ikari, M., Marone, C., 2016. Laboratory observations of time-dependent
frictional strengthening and stress relaxation in natural and synthetic fault gouges. J.
Geophys. Res. 121 (2), 1183–1201.
Chen, J., Rempel, A., 2015. Shear zone broadening controlled by thermal pressurization
and poroelastic effects during model earthquakes. J. Geophys. Res. 120 (7),
5215–5237.
Chen, J., Spiers, C.J., 2016. Rate and state frictional and healing behavior of carbonate
fault gouge explained using microphysical model. J. Geophys. Res. 121 (12),
8642–8665.
Chen, J., Verberne, B.A., Spiers, C.J., 2015. Effects of healing on the seismogenic potential
of carbonate fault rocks: experiments on samples from the Longmenshan Fault,
Sichuan, China. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 120 (8), 5479–5506.
Chester, F., Higgs, N., 1992. Multimechanism friction constitutive model for ultrafine
quartz gouge at hypocentral conditions. J. Geophys. Res. 97 (B2), 1859–1870.
Chester, F., Logan, J.M., 1986. Implications for mechanical properties of brittle faults
from observations of the Punchbowl fault zone, California. Pure Appl. Geophys. 124
(1–2), 79–106.
Chester, F.M., 1989. Dynamic recrystallization in semi-brittle faults. J. Struct. Geol. 11
(7), 847–858.
Chester, F.M., 1994. Effects of temperature on friction: constitutive equations and ex-
periments with fault gouge. J. Geophys. Res. 99 (B4), 7247–7261.
Chester, F.M., 1995. A rheologic model for wet crust applied to strike-slip faults. J.
Geophys. Res. 100 (B7), 13,033–13,044.
Ciavarella, M., Joe, J., Papangelo, A., Barber, J., 2019. The role of adhesion in contact
mechanics. J. R. Soc. Interface 16 (151) 20180,738.
Cocco, M., Tinti, E., Marone, C., Piatanesi, A., 2009. Scaling of slip weakening distance
with final slip during dynamic earthquake rupture. Int. Geophys. 94, 163–186.
Coulomb, C., 1785. The theory of simple machines. Mem. Math. Phys. Acad. Sci. 10
(161–331), 4.
Daub, E.G., Carlson, J.M., 2010. Friction, fracture, and earthquakes. Annu. Rev. Condens.
Matter Phys. 1 (1), 397–418.
De Bresser, J., Peach, C., Reijs, J., Spiers, C., 1998. On dynamic recrystallization during
solid state flow: effects of stress and temperature. Geophys. Res. Lett. 25 (18),
3457–3460.
De Bresser, J., Ter Heege, J., Spiers, C., 2001. Grain size reduction by dynamic re-
crystallization: can it result in major rheological weakening? Int. J. Earth Sci. 90 (1),
28–45.
De Lorenzo, S., Loddo, M., 2010. Effect of frictional heating and thermal advection on pre-
seismic sliding: a numerical simulation using a rate-, state- and temperature-depen-
dent friction law. J. Geodyn. 49 (1), 1–13.
den Hartog, S.A., Spiers, C.J., 2014. A microphysical model for fault gouge friction ap-
plied to subduction megathrusts. J. Geophys. Res. 119 (2), 1510–1529.
Dieterich, J.H., 1972. Time-dependent friction in rocks. J. Geophys. Res. 77, 3690–3697.
Dieterich, J.H., 1978. Time-dependent friction and the mechanics of stick-slip. Pure Appl.
Geophys. 116 (4–5), 790–806.
Dieterich, J.H., 1979. Modeling of rock friction 1. Experimental results and constitutive
equations. J. Geophys. Res. 84 (B5), 2161–2168.
Dieterich, J.H., Conrad, G., 1984. Effect of humidity on time-and velocity-dependent
friction in rocks. J. Geophys. Res. 89 (B6), 4196–4202.
Dieterich, J.H., Kilgore, B.D., 1994. Direct observation of frictional contacts: new insights
for sliding memory effects. Pure Appl. Geophys. 143, 283–302.
Dieterich, J.H., Kilgore, B.D., 1996. Imaging surface contacts: power law contact dis-
tributions and contact stresses in quartz, calcite, glass and acrylic plastic.
Tectonophysics 256 (1–4), 219–239.
Dixon, T.H., Jiang, Y., Malservisi, R., McCaffrey, R., Voss, N., Protti, M., Gonzalez, V.,
2014. Earthquake and tsunami forecasts: Relation of slow slip events to subsequent
earthquake rupture. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 111 (48), 17,039–17,044.
Duan, B., Liu, D., Yin, A., 2017. Seismic shaking in the North China basin expected from
ruptures of a possible seismic gap. Geophys. Res. Lett. 44 (10), 4855–4862.
Engelder, J.T., Logan, J.M., Handin, J., 1975. The sliding characteristics of sandstone on
quartz fault-gouge. Pure Appl. Geophys. 113 (1), 69–86.
Fagereng, A., den Hartog, S.M., 2016. Subduction megathrust creep governed by pres-
sure-solution and frictional-viscous flow. Nat. Geosci. 10, 51–57.
̊
Fagereng, Å., Sibson, R.H., 2010. Melange rheology and seismic style. Geology 38 (8),
751–754.
Ferguson, C.C., Lloyd, G.E., Knipe, R.J., 1987. Fracture mechanics and deformation
processes in natural quartz: a combined Vickers indentation, SEM, and TEM study.
Can. J. Earth Sci. 24 (3), 544–555.
Ferri, F., Toro, G.D., Hirose, T., Shimamoto, T., 2010. Evidence of thermal pressurization
in high-velocity friction experiments on smectite-rich gouges. Terra Nova 22 (5),
347–353.
Frost, E., Dolan, J., Sammis, C., Hacker, B., Cole, J., Ratschbacher, L., 2009. Progressive
strain localization in a major strike-slip fault exhumed from midseismogenic depths:
structural observations from the Salzach-Ennstal-Mariazell-Puchberg fault system,
Austria. J. Geophys. Res. 114 (B4).
Fukuyama, E., Yamashita, F., Mizoguchi, K., 2019. Voids and rock friction at subseismic
slip velocity. In: Earthquakes and Multi-Hazards around the Pacific Rim, Vol. II.
Springer, pp. 87–107.
Giger, S.B., Cox, S.F., Tenthorey, E., 2008. Slip localization and fault weakening as a
consequence of fault gouge strengthening? Insights from laboratory experiments.
Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 276 (1–2), 73–84.
Goldsby, D., Tullis, T.E., 2011. Flash heating leads to low frictional strength of crustal
rocks at earthquake slip rates. Science 334 (6053), 216–218.
Goldsby, D.L., Rar, A., Pharr, G.M., Tullis, T.E., 2004. Nanoindentation creep of quartz,
143
Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145
with implications for rate-and state-variable friction laws relevant to earthquake
mechanics. J. Mater. Res. 19 (1), 357–365.
Goswami, A., Barbot, S., 2018. Slow-slip events in semi-brittle serpentinite fault zones.
Sci. Rep. 8 (1), 6181.
Greenwood, J.A., Williamson, J., 1966. Contact of nominally flat surfaces. Proc. R. Soc.
London, Ser. A 295 (1442), 300–319.
Griffith, W.A., Nielsen, S., Di Toro, G., Smith, S.A., 2010. Rough faults, distributed
weakening, and off-fault deformation. J. Geophys. Res. 115 (B8).
Gu, J., Rice, J.R., Ruina, A.L., Tse, S.T., 1984. Slip motion and stability of a single degree
of freedom elastic system rate and state dependent friction. J. Mech. Phys. Sol. 32,
167–196.
Hall, C.E., Parmentier, E., 2003. Influence of grain size evolution on convective in-
stability. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 4 (3).
Han, R., Shimamoto, T., Hirose, T., Ree, J.-H., Ando, J., 2007. Ultralow friction of car-
bonate faults caused by thermal decomposition. Science 316. https://doi.org/10.
1126/science.1139763.
Harbord, C.W., Nielsen, S.B., De Paola, N., Holdsworth, R.E., 2017. Earthquake nuclea-
tion on rough faults. Geology 45 (10), 931–934.
Heslot, F., Baumberger, T., Perrin, B., Caroli, B., Caroli, C., 1994. Creep, stick-slip, and
dry friction dynamics: experiments and a heuristic model. Phys. Rev. E 49 (6),
4973–4988.
Higgs, N.G., 1981. Mechanical Properties of Ultrafine Quartz, Chlorite and Bentonite in
Environments Appropriate to Upper-Crustal Earthquakes. 267 pp. Texas A &M
Univ., College Station, TX.
Hori, T., Kato, N., Hirahara, K., Baba, T., Kaneda, Y., 2004. A numerical simulation of
earthquake cycles along the Nankai trough in southwest Japan: lateral variation in
frictional property due to the slab geometry controls the nucleation position. Earth
Planet. Sci. Lett. 228 (3–4), 215–226.
Horowitz, F.G., Ruina, A., 1989. Slip patterns in a spatially homogeneous fault model. J.
Geophys. Res. 94 (B8), 10,279–10,298.
Hsu, Y.-J., Simons, M., Avouac, J.-P., Galetzka, J., Sieh, K., Chlieh, M., Natawidjaja, D.,
Prawirodirdjo, L., Bock, Y., 2006. Friction afterslip following the 2005 Nias-Simeulue
earthquake, Sumatra. Science 312, 1921–1926.
Hubbard, J., Barbot, S., Hill, E.M., Tapponnier, P., 2015. Coseismic slip on shallow
décollement megathrusts: implications for seismic and tsunami hazard. Earth Sci.
Rev. 141, 45–55.
Hulikal, S., Bhattacharya, K., Lapusta, N., 2015. Collective behavior of viscoelastic as-
perities as a model for static and kinetic friction. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 76, 144–161.
Ikari, M.J., Marone, C., Saffer, D.M., 2011. On the relation between fault strength and
frictional stability. Geology 39 (1), 83–86.
Ikari, M.J., Carpenter, B.M., Marone, C., 2016. A microphysical interpretation of rate-and
state-dependent friction for fault gouge. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 17 (5),
1660–1677.
Jiang, Y., Wdowinski, S., Dixon, T.H., Hackl, M., Protti, M., Gonzalez, V., 2012. Slow slip
events in Costa Rica detected by continuous GPS observations, 2002–2011. Geochem.
Geophys. Geosyst. 13 (4).
Kaneko, Y., Nielsen, S.B., Carpenter, B.M., 2016. The onset of laboratory earthquakes
explained by nucleating rupture on a rate-and-state fault. J. Geophys. Res. 121 (8),
6071–6091.
Karato, S.-I., Barbot, S., 2018. Dynamics of fault motion and the origin of contrasting
tectonic style between Earth and Venus. Sci. Rep. 8 (1), 11 884.
Kato, N., 2003. Repeating slip events at a circular asperity: Numerical simulation with a
rate-and state-dependent friction law. Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst., Univ. Tokyo 78,
151–166.
Kato, N., Tullis, T.E., 2001. A composite rate- and state-dependent law for rock friction.
Geophys. Res. Lett. 28, 1103–1106.
Kilgore, B.D., Blanpied, M.L., Dieterich, J.H., 1993. Velocity dependent friction of granite
over a wide range of conditions. Geophys. Res. Lett. 20 (10), 903–906.
Kitajima, H., Chester, F.M., Chester, J.S., 2011. Dynamic weakening of gouge layers in
high-speed shear experiments: assessment of temperature-dependent friction,
thermal pressurization, and flash heating. J. Geophys. Res. 116 (B8).
Kocharyan, G.G., Ostapchuk, A.A., Pavlov, D.V., 2018. Traces of laboratory earthquake
nucleation in the spectrum of ambient noise. Sci. Rep. 8 (1), 10 764.
Krick, B.A., Vail, J.R., Persson, B.N., Sawyer, W.G., 2012. Optical in situ micro tribometer
for analysis of real contact area for contact mechanics, adhesion, and sliding ex-
periments. Tribol. Lett. 45 (1), 185–194.
Lambert, V., Barbot, S., 2016. Contribution of viscoelastic flow in earthquake cycles
within the lithosphere-asthenosphere system. Geophys. Res. Lett. 43 (19), 142–154.
Lapusta, N., Barbot, S., 2012. Models of earthquakes and aseismic slip based on labora-
tory-derived rate and state friction laws. In: Bizzarri, A., Bhat, H.S. (Eds.), The
Mechanics of Faulting: From Laboratory to Real Earthquakes. Research Signpost,
Trivandrum, Kerala, India, pp. 153–207.
Lapusta, N., Rice, J.R., 2003. Nucleation and early seismic propagation of small and large
events in a crustal earthquake model. J. Geophys. Res. 108 (B4) 2205.
Leeman, J., Saffer, D., Scuderi, M., Marone, C., 2016. Laboratory observations of slow
earthquakes and the spectrum of tectonic fault slip modes. Nat. Commun. 7 (11), 104.
Li, D., Liu, Y., 2016. Spatiotemporal evolution of slow slip events in a nonplanar fault
model for northern Cascadia subduction zone. J. Geophys. Res. 121 (9), 6828–6845.
Li, Q., Tullis, T.E., Goldsby, D., Carpick, R.W., 2011. Frictional ageing from interfacial
bonding and the origins of rate and state friction. Nature 480 (7376), 233.
Lieou, C.K., Elbanna, A.E., Carlson, J.M., 2014. Grain fragmentation in sheared granular
flow: weakening effects, energy dissipation, and strain localization. Phys. Rev. E 89
(2), 022–203.
Lieou, C.K., Daub, E.G., Guyer, R.A., Ecke, R.E., Marone, C., Johnson, P.A., 2017.
Simulating stick-slip failure in a sheared granular layer using a physics-based con-
stitutive model. J. Geophys. Res. 122 (1), 295–307.
S. Barbot
Liu, Y., Rice, J.R., 2005. Aseismic slip transients emerge spontaneously in three-dimen-
sional rate and state modeling of subduction earthquake sequences. J. Geophys. Res.
110 (B08307). https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JB003424.
Liu, Y., Szlufarska, I., 2012. Chemical origins of frictional aging. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (18)
186,102.
Logan, J.M., Teufel, L., 1986. The effect of normal stress on the real area of contact during
frictional sliding in rocks. Pure Appl. Geophys. 124 (3), 471–485.
Lorenz, B., Krick, B., Mulakaluri, N., Smolyakova, M., Dieluweit, S., Sawyer, W., Persson,
B., 2013. Adhesion: role of bulk viscoelasticity and surface roughness. J. Phys.
Condens. Matter 25 (22) 225,004.
Maegawa, S., Itoigawa, F., Nakamura, T., 2015. Effect of normal load on friction coeffi-
cient for sliding contact between rough rubber surface and rigid smooth plane. Tribol.
Int. 92, 335–343.
Marone, C., Kilgore, B., 1993. Scaling of the critical slip distance for seismic faulting with
shear strain in fault zones. Nature 362, 618–620.
Marone, C., Raleigh, B.C., Scholz, C.H., 1990. Frictional behavior and constitutive mod-
eling of simulated fault gouge. J. Geophys. Res. 95 (B5), 7007–7026.
Marone, C., Scholz, C.H., Bilham, R., 1991. On the mechanics of earthquake afterslip. J.
Geophys. Res. 96, 8441–8452.
Marone, C., Cocco, M., Richardson, E., Tinti, E., 2009. The critical slip distance for seismic
and aseismic fault zones of finite width. Int. Geophys. 94, 135–162.
Marone, C.J., 1998. Laboratory-derived friction laws and their application to seismic
faulting. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 26, 643–696.
Marsh, D., 1964. Plastic flow in glass. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A Math. Phys. Sci. 279 (1378),
420–435.
Masuti, S., Barbot, S., Karato, S., Feng, L., Banerjee, P., 2016. Upper mantle water stra-
tification inferred from the 2012 Mw 8.6 Indian Ocean earthquake. Nature 538,
373–377. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature19783.
Mele Veedu, M., Barbot, S., 2016. The Parkfield tremors reveal slow and fast ruptures on
the same asperity. Nature 532 (7599), 361–365. https://doi.org/10.1038/
nature17190.
Mitchell, E., Fialko, Y., Brown, K., 2013. Temperature dependence of frictional healing of
westerly granite: experimental observations and numerical simulations. Geochem.
Geophys. Geosyst. 14 (3), 567–582.
Montési, L.G.J., Hirth, G., 2003. Grain size evolution and the rheology of ductile shear
zones: from laboratory experiments to postseismic creep. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 211,
97–110.
Nagata, K., Nakatani, M., Yoshida, S., 2008. Monitoring frictional strength with acoustic
wave transmission. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35 (6).
Nagata, K., Nakatani, M., Yoshida, S., 2012. A revised rate-and state-dependent friction
law obtained by constraining constitutive and evolution laws separately with la-
boratory data. J. Geophys. Res. 117 (B2).
Nakatani, M., 2001. Conceptual and physical clarification of rate and state friction:
frictional sliding as a thermally activated rheology. J. Geophys. Res. 106 (B7),
13,347–13,380.
Nakatani, M., Scholz, C.H., 2004a. Frictional healing of quartz gouge under hydrothermal
conditions: 1. Experimental evidence for solution transfer healing mechanism. J.
Geophys. Res. 109 (B7).
Nakatani, M., Scholz, C.H., 2004b. Frictional healing of quartz gouge under hydrothermal
conditions: 2. Quantitative interpretation with a physical model. J. Geophys. Res.
109 (B7).
Niemeijer, A., Spiers, C., 2007. A microphysical model for strong velocity weakening in
phyllosilicate-bearing fault gouges. J. Geophys. Res. 112 (B10).
Nishihara, Y., Shinmei, T., Karato, S.-I., 2006. Grain-growth kinetics in wadsleyite: effects
of chemical environment. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 154 (1), 30–43.
Noda, H., 2008. Frictional constitutive law at intermediate slip rates accounting for flash
heating and thermally activated slip process. J. Geophys. Res. 113 (B09302), 12.
Noda, H., Lapusta, N., 2010. Three-dimensional earthquake sequence simulations with
evolving temperature and pore pressure due to shear heating: effect of heterogeneous
hydraulic diffusivity. J. Geophys. Res. 115 (B12314) 24 PP.,.
Noda, H., Shimamoto, T., 2010. A rate- and state-dependent ductile flow law of poly-
crystalline halite under large shear strain and implications for transition to brittle
deformation. Geophys. Res. Lett. 37 (L09310). https://doi.org/10.1029/
2010GL042512.
Noda, H., Dunham, E.M., Rice, J.R., 2009. Earthquake ruptures with thermal weakening
and the operation of major faults at low overall stress levels. J. Geophys. Res. 114
(B07302), 27.
Ong, M., Qing, Su, Barbot, S., Hubbard, J., 2019. Physics-based scenario of earthquake
cycles on the Ventura Thrust system, California: the effect of variable friction and
fault geometry. Pure Appl. Geophys. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-019-02111-9.
Pastewka, L., Robbins, M.O., 2014. Contact between rough surfaces and a criterion for
macroscopic adhesion. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111 (9), 3298–3303.
Paterson, M.S., Wong, T.-f., 2005. Friction and sliding phenomena, Experimental rock
deformation? In: The Brittle Field, pp. 165–209.
Pei, L., Hyun, S., Molinari, J., Robbins, M.O., 2005. Finite element modeling of elasto-
plastic contact between rough surfaces. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 53 (11), 2385–2409.
Perfettini, H., Avouac, J.-P., 2004. Postseismic relaxation driven by brittle creep: a pos-
sible mechanism to reconcile geodetic measurements and the decay rate of after-
shocks, application to the Chi-Chi earthquake, Taiwan. J. Geophys. Res. 109
(B02304).
Perfettini, H., Avouac, J.-P., 2007. Modeling afterslip and aftershocks following the 1992
Landers earthquake. J. Geophys. Res. 112 (B07409).
Perfettini, H., Molinari, A., 2017. A micromechanical model of rate and state friction: 1.
Static and dynamic sliding. J. Geophys. Res. 122 (4), 2590–2637.
Persson, B., 2016. Silicone rubber adhesion and sliding friction. Tribol. Lett. 62 (2), 34.
Persson, B., Albohr, O., Tartaglino, U., Volokitin, A., Tosatti, E., 2004. On the nature of
144
Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145
surface roughness with application to contact mechanics, sealing, rubber friction and
adhesion. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 17 (1), R1.
Persson, B.N., 2001. Theory of rubber friction and contact mechanics. J. Chem. Phys. 115
(8), 3840–3861.
Power, W., Tullis, T., Brown, S., Boitnott, G., Scholz, C., 1987. Roughness of natural fault
surfaces. Geophys. Res. Lett. 14 (1), 29–32.
Press, W.H., Teukolsky, S.A., Vetterling, W.T., Flannery, B.P., 1992. Numerical Recipes in
C: The Art of Scientific Computing, 2nd ed. Cambridge Univ. Press, New York 994 pp.
Putelat, T., Dawes, J.H., Willis, J.R., 2011. On the microphysical foundations of rate-and-
state friction. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 59 (5), 1062–1075.
Qiu, Q., et al., 2016. The mechanism of partial rupture of a locked megathrust: the role of
fault morphology. Geology 44 (10), 875–878.
Reber, J.E., Lavier, L.L., Hayman, N.W., 2015. Experimental demonstration of a semi-
brittle origin for crustal strain transients. Nat. Geosci. 8 (9), 712.
Rempel, A., Weaver, S., 2008. A model for flash weakening by asperity melting during
high-speed earthquake slip. J. Geophys. Res. 113 (B11).
Rice, J.R., 1983. Constitutive relations for fault slip and earthquake instabilities. Pure
Appl. Geophys. 21, 443–475.
Rice, J.R., 1993. Spatio-temporal complexity of slip on a fault. J. Geophys. Res. 98 (B6),
9885–9907.
Rice, J.R., Ben-Zion, Y., 1996. Slip complexity in earthquake fault models. Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. 93 (9), 3811–3818.
Rice, J.R., Ruina, A.L., 1983. Stability of steady frictional slipping. J. Appl. Mech. 50,
343–349.
Ronsin, O., Coeyrehourcq, K.L., 2001. State, rate and temperature–dependent sliding
friction of elastomers. In: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London a:
Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. vol. 457. The Royal Society, pp.
1277–1294.
Rouet-Leduc, B., Hulbert, C., Bolton, D.C., Ren, C.X., Riviere, J., Marone, C., Guyer, R.A.,
Johnson, P.A., 2018. Estimating fault friction from seismic signals in the laboratory.
Geophys. Res. Lett. 45 (3), 1321–1329.
Rousset, B., Barbot, S., Avouac, J.P., Hsu, Y.-J., 2012. Postseismic deformation following
the 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake, Taiwan: implication for lower-crust rheology. J.
Geophys. Res. 117 (B12405), 16.
Rowe, C.D., Lamothe, K., Rempe, M., Andrews, M., Mitchell, T.M., Di Toro, G., White,
J.C., Aretusini, S., 2019. Earthquake lubrication and healing explained by amorphous
nanosilica. Nat. Commun. 10 (1), 320.
Rozel, A., Ricard, Y., Bercovici, D., 2011. A thermodynamically self-consistent damage
equation for grain size evolution during dynamic recrystallization. Geophys. J. Int.
184 (2), 719–728.
Rubin, A.M., Ampuero, J.-P., 2005. Earthquake nucleation on (aging) rate and state
faults. J. Geophys. Res. 110 (B11312) 24 PP.
Rubinstein, S.M., Cohen, G., Fineberg, J., 2004. Detachment fronts and the onset of dy-
namic friction. Nature 430 (7003), 1005.
Ruina, A., 1983. Slip instability and state variable friction laws. J. Geophys. Res. 88 (10),
359–10,370.
Rutter, E., Mainprice, D., 1978. The effect of water on stress relaxation of faulted and
unfaulted sandstone. In: Rock Friction and Earthquake Prediction. Springer, pp.
634–654.
Sahli, R., Pallares, G., Ducottet, C., Ali, I.B., Al Akhrass, S., Guibert, M., Scheibert, J.,
2018. Evolution of real contact area under shear and the value of static friction of soft
materials. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 115 (3), 471–476.
Salman, R., Hill, E.M., Feng, L., Lindsey, E.O., Mele Veedu, D., Barbot, S., Banerjee, P.,
Hermawan, I., Natawidjaja, D.H., 2017. Piecemeal Rupture of the Mentawai Patch,
Sumatra: The 2008 Mw 7.2 North Pagai Earthquake Sequence. J. Geophys. Res. Solid
Earth 122 (11), 9404–9419.
Sammis, C., King, G., Biegel, R., 1987. The kinematics of gouge deformation. Pure Appl.
Geophys. 125 (5), 777–812.
Sammis, C.G., Ben-Zion, Y., 2008. Mechanics of grain-size reduction in fault zones. J.
Geophys. Res. 113 (B2).
Sammis, C.G., Biegel, R.L., 1989. Fractals, fault-gouge, and friction. Pure Appl. Geophys.
131 (1–2), 255–271.
Sammis, C.G., King, G.C., 2007. Mechanical origin of power law scaling in fault zone rock.
Geophys. Res. Lett. 34 (4).
Sammis, C.G., Rosakis, A.J., Bhat, H.S., 2009. Effects of off-fault damage on earthquake
rupture propagation: experimental studies. In: Mechanics, Structure and Evolution of
Fault Zones. Springer, pp. 1629–1648.
Scholz, C.H., 1988. The critical slip distance for seismic faulting. Nature 336, 761–763.
Scholz, C.H., 1998. Earthquakes and friction laws. Nature 391, 37–42.
Scholz, C.H., Molnar, P., Johnson, T., 1972. Detailed studies of frictional sliding of granite
and implications for earthquake mechanism. J. Geophys. Res. 77 (32), 6392–6404.
Scott, D.R., Marone, C.J., Sammis, C.G., 1994. The apparent friction of granular fault
gouge in sheared layers. J. Geophys. Res. 99 (B4), 7231–7246.
Scuderi, M.M., Collettini, C., Viti, C., Tinti, E., Marone, C., 2017. Evolution of shear fabric
in granular fault gouge from stable sliding to stick slip and implications for fault slip
mode. Geology 45 (8), 731–734.
Segall, P., Bradley, A.M., 2012. The role of thermal pressurization and dilatancy in
controlling the rate of fault slip. J. Appl. Mech. 79 (3) 031,013.
Segall, P., Rice, J.R., 1995. Dilatancy, compaction, and slip instability of a fluid infiltrated
fault. J. Geophys. Res. 100 (22), 155–22,171.
Segall, P., Rice, J.R., 2006. Does shear heating of pore fluid contribute to earthquake
nucleation? J. Geophys. Res. 111 (B09316), 17.
Segall, P., Rubin, A.M., Bradley, A.M., Rice, J.R., 2010. Dilatant strengthening as a me-
chanism for slow slip events. J. Geophys. Res. 115 (B12305).
Shimamoto, T., Noda, H., 2014. A friction to flow constitutive law and its application to a
2-d modeling of earthquakes. J. Geophys. Res. 119 (11), 8089–8106.
S. Barbot
Sibson, R.H., 2003. Thickness of the seismic slip zone. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 93 (3),
1169–1178.
Sleep, N.H., 1995. Frictional heating and the stability of rate and state dependent fric-
tional sliding. Geophys. Res. Lett. 22 (20), 2785–2788.
Sleep, N.H., 1997. Application of a unified rate and state dependent theory to the me-
chanics of fault zones with strain localization. J. Geophys. Res. 102, 2875–2895.
Sleep, N.H., 1998. Rake dependent rate and state friction. J. Geophys. Res. 103 (B4),
7111–7119.
Sleep, N.H., 2006. Real contacts and evolution laws for rate and state friction. Geochem.
Geophys. Geosyst. 7 (8).
Sleep, N.H., 2012. Microscopic elasticity and rate and state friction evolution laws.
Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 13 (12).
Sleep, N.H., 2019. Thermal weakening of asperity tips on fault planes at high sliding
velocities. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GC008062.
Sleep, N.H., Blanpied, M.L., 1992. Creep, compaction and the weak rheology of major
faults. Nature 359 (6397), 687.
Sone, H., Shimamoto, T., Moore, D.E., 2012. Frictional properties of saponite-rich gouge
from a serpentinite-bearing fault zone along the Gokasho-Arashima Tectonic Line,
Central Japan. J. Struct. Geol. 38, 172–182.
Stesky, R., 1978. Rock friction-effect of confining pressure, temperature, and pore pres-
sure. In: Rock Friction and Earthquake Prediction. Springer, pp. 690–704.
Stesky, R.M., Brace, W.F., Riley, D.K., Robin, P.Y., 1974. Friction in faulted rock at high
temperature and pressure. Tectonophysics 23 (1-2), 177–203.
Sulem, J., Famin, V., 2009. Thermal decomposition of carbonates in fault zones: slip-
weakening and temperature-limiting effects. J. Geophys. Res. 114 (B03309), 14.
Teufel, L., Logan, J., 1978. Effect of displacement rate on the real area of contact and
temperatures generated during frictional sliding of Tennessee sandstone. Pure Appl.
Geophys. 116 (4–5), 840–865.
Thom, C.A., Carpick, R.W., Goldsby, D.L., 2018. Constraints on the physical mechanism of
frictional aging from nanoindentation. Geophys. Res. Lett. 45 (24), 13–306.
Timoshenko, S., Goodier, J., 1951. Theory of Elasticity, 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Toro, G.D., Goldsby, D.L., Tullis, T.E., 2004. Friction falls towards zero in quartz rock as
slip velocity approaches seismic rates. Nature 427, 436–439.
Toro, G.D., Hirose, T., Nielsen, S., Pennacchioni, G., Shimamoto, T., 2006. Natural and
experimental evidence of melt lubrication of faults during earthquakes. Science 311
(5761), 647–649.
Tse, S.T., Rice, J.R., 1986. Crustal earthquake instability in relation to the depth variation
of frictional slip properties. J. Geophys. Res. 91 (B9), 9452–9472.
145
Tectonophysics 765 (2019) 129–145
Ujiie, K., Saishu, H., Fagereng, Å., Nishiyama, N., Otsubo, M., Masuyama, H., Kagi, H.,
2018. An explanation of episodic tremor and slow slip constrained by crack‐seal veins
and viscous shear in subduction mélange. Geophys. Res. Lett. 45 (11), 5371–5379.
van den Ende, M., Chen, J., Ampuero, J.-P., Niemeijer, A., 2018. A comparison between
rate-and-state friction and microphysical models, based on numerical simulations of
fault slip. Tectonophysics 733, 273–295.
Viesca, R.C., 2016. Self-similar slip instability on interfaces with rate-and state-dependent
friction. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 472 (2192), 20160,254.
Voisin, C., Renard, F., Grasso, J.-R., 2007. Long term friction: from stick-slip to stable
sliding. Geophys. Res. Lett. 34 (13).
Wallace, L., et al., 2016. Near-field observations of an offshore Mw 6.0 earthquake from
an integrated seafloor and subseafloor monitoring network at the Nankai Trough,
southwest Japan. J. Geophys. Res. 121 (11), 8338–8351.
Wallace, L.M., Beavan, J., 2006. A large slow slip event on the central Hikurangi sub-
duction interface beneath the Manawatu region, North Island, New Zealand.
Geophys. Res. Lett. 33 (11).
Wallace, L.M., Kaneko, Y., Hreinsdóttir, S., Hamling, I., Peng, Z., Bartlow, N., D’Anastasio,
E., Fry, B., 2017. Large-scale dynamic triggering of shallow slow slip enhanced by
overlying sedimentary wedge. Nat. Geosci. 10 (10), 765.
Wei, M., Kaneko, Y., Liu, Y., McGuire, J.J., 2013. Episodic fault creep events in California
controlled by shallow frictional heterogeneity. Nat. Geosci. 6 (7), 566.
Wei, S., Barbot, S., Graves, R., Lienkaemper, J.J., Wang, T., Hudnut, K., Fu, Y.,
Helmberger, D., 2015. The 2014 Mw 6.1 South Napa earthquake: a unilateral rupture
with shallow asperity and rapid afterslip. Seismol. Res. Lett. 86 (2A), 344–354.
Wu, Y., Chen, X., 2014. The scale-dependent slip pattern for a uniform fault model
obeying the rate-and state-dependent friction law. J. Geophys. Res. 119 (6),
4890–4906.
Yamashita, F., Fukuyama, E., Mizoguchi, K., 2014. Probing the slip-weakening me-
chanism of earthquakes with electrical conductivity: rapid transition from asperity
contact to gouge comminution. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41 (2), 341–347.
Yastrebov, V.A., Anciaux, G., Molinari, J.-F., 2015. From infinitesimal to full contact
between rough surfaces: evolution of the contact area. Int. J. Solids Struct. 52,
83–102.
Yasuhara, H., Marone, C., Elsworth, D., 2005. Fault zone restrengthening and frictional
healing: the role of pressure solution. J. Geophys. Res. 110 (B6).
Yund, R., Blanpied, M., Tullis, T., Weeks, J., 1990. Amorphous material in high strain
experimental fault gouges. J. Geophys. Res. 95 (B10), 15,589–15,602.