Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. Vol. 60, No. 5, pp. 1491-1520.

October, 1970

SURFA CE-WAYE DISPERSION COMPUTATIONS: KNOPOFF'S METHOD

BY I~RED SCHWAB

ABSTRACT
The optimization of Knopoff's method for computer computation of surface-
wave dispersion, and the comparison of this method with the Thomson-Haskell
technic and its extensions are studied. Of the various versions of the Thomson-
Haskell formulation for Rayleigh-wave dispersion computations, the reduced-f-
matrix extension is the most powerful, i.e., the fastest which contains the feature
controlling the loss-of-precision problem occasionally encountered by the original
formulation. It is shown that the results of the f-matrix extensions are actually con-
tained in Knopoff's work, which appeared earlier than these extensions, and that these
results are obtainable directly from his formulation without recourse to f-matrix
theory. The flexibility of Knopoff's method is used to devise a new representation
of the Rayleigh-wave dispersion function which is more powerful than the most
powerful of the Thomson-Haskell versions, i.e., it contains the loss-of-precision con-
trol feature and is about 38 per cent faster than the reduced-~-matrix extension; in
fact, it is about 12 per cent faster than the fastest of the Thomson-Haskell versions.
Explicit forms of the new representation are given for the layered-half-space
analogs of continental and oceanic models of the Earth, which can be terminated
by a homogeneous half-space beginning in the mantle, a liquid outer core, or a
solid inner core. The representations for symmetric and antisymmetric modes of the
symmetric-plate analog of the Earth are also given. The Rayleigh-wave dispersion
functions for the product form of the original Thomson-Haskell formulation, the ~-
matrix and reduced-c~-matrix extensions of this formulation, and the representations
developed from Knopoff's method, are identical when written out fully. The various
technics differ only in their matrix representations of the dispersion function, which,
of course, govern the speeds of computation of the various methods.
The Knopoff and Thomson-Haskell technics for computing Love-wave dispersion
are compared. Although the matrix representations of the dispersion function dif-
fer for the two technics, the functions are identical, except for a possible sign re-
versal, when written out fully. The speeds of computation are also identical. The
representations derived from Knopoff's method are given for the two possible flat-
layer analogs of the Earth, which are applicable to Love-wave propagation.

INTRODUCTION
The optimization of surface-wave dispersion computations for computer application
has recently been studied by Schwab and I(nopoff (1970). Only the Thomson-Haskell
technic and its extensions were considered. The optimization of Knopoff's (1964)
method, and its comparison with the Thomson-Haskell formulations were too lengthy
for inclusion. The present paper completes the previous study by treating Knopoff's
method.
The first technic for treating surface-wave dispersion on perfectly-elastic, multi-
layered media was devised by Thomson (1950) and Haskell (1953). In certain cases,
which are discussed below, the original Thomson-Haskell formulation encounters a
loss-of-precision problem when computing Rayleigh-wave dispersion. The ~-matrix
and redueed-~-matrix extensions (Pestel and Leckie, 1.963) of the original formulation
1491
1492 BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

(Thrower, 1965; Dunkin, 1965; Watson, 1970) were developed to deal with this prob-
lem. Watson's reduced-~-matrix extension is the fastest of the Thomson-Haskell ver-
sions which contains the loss-of-precision control feature, and is thus the most powerful
of the Thomson-Haskell formulations.
Preceding the development of these extensions, Knopoff proposed his alternate
method for constructing the matrix representation of the dispersion function for both
Love and Rayleigh waves. For Rayleigh-wave dispersion computations, the specific
purposes of the present paper are: (1) to show that the results of the ~-matrix extensions
are actually contained in Knopoff's earlier work, and are obtainable directly from his
formulation without recourse to ~-matrix theory; (2) to use the flexibility of Knopoff's
method to devise a new representation of the dispersion function which is more power-
ful than the most powerful of the Thomson-Haskell versions, i.e., it contains the loss-of-
precision control feature and is about 38 per cent faster in computation speed; and (3)
to extend Knopoff's technic to allow the inclusion of the flat-layer analogs of the outer
and inner sections of the core in dispersion computations. For Love-wave dispersion
computations, a complete comparison of Knopoff's method and the Thomson-Haskell
technic is presented.
The Thomson-Haskell technic synthesizes, or builds up the surface-wave dispersion
functions by constructing layer matrices which relate the components of motion at one
interface in a layered structure to those at the next. The product of these layer matrices
then relates the components of motion at the deepest interface to those at the free
surface, and this layer-matrix product is used to construct the dispersion function.
Knopoff's technic begins with the immediate construction of the dispersion function in
its full determinantal form, and then analyzes or decomposes the determinant into a
product of interface matrices, which are derived from submatrices of the determinant.
Each of these interface submatrices relates the components of motion in the layer on
one side of the interface to those in the layer on the other side.
Randall (1967) performed the initial programming of Knopoff's technic for Rayleigh
waves and demonstrated the validity of the method. During the recent work on the
optimization of the computational aspects of the Thomson-Haskell formulation
(Schwab and Knopoff, 1970), it became evident that much of the same optimizing pro-
cesses could be applied to Knopoff's technic, and that they would lead to considerable
simplification in the computation of the Rayleigh-wave dispersion function, as well as
improving the speed of computation. Two modifications of the original form of Kno-
poff's technic bring about these improvements.
In its initial form the method employed interface-matrix elements which were com-
plex. A simple change in notation allows all elements to be expressed as either pure real
or pure imaginary quantities. Using the technic given by Schwab and Knopoff, this
allows all computations to be carried out with pure real numbers. This eliminates the
extra time required to compute matrix products when complex elements are involved.
It also removes the problems inherent in bracketing and refining roots of a dispersion
function having both real and imaginary parts, since this function now becomes a pure
real quantity.
The second change merely requires that the elements of the interface matrices, which
are defined as fourth-order determinants for Rayleigh-wave computations and second-
order determinants for Love-wave computations, be evaluated analytically before
numerical computations begin. In the final representation of the Rayleigh-wave dis-
persion function derived from Knopoff's method, numerical evMuation of the matrix
elements directly from the determinantal definitions leads to significant loss in speed of
 SURFACE-WAVE DISPERSION COMPUTATIONS 1493

computation, since four of the elements in each interface matrix are seen to vanish
when evaluated analytically. The expressions for the other elements are quite simple,
thus considerable computation time is saved by elimination of these determinantal
definitions from the actual program.

I:~AYLEIGIt WAVES
In order to facilitate the comparison of Knopoff's method with the various versions
of the Thomson-Haskell technic, Haskell's notation is used throughout this section
Since this was also done by Schwab and Knopoff in treating the extensions of the Thom

CONTINENTAL OCEANIC
MODEL MODEL

x
Free surface
• z (-~ (-I)
0
.z(O) Free Surface (0)
I I
-z (n (I)
2 2

rn-J m-l
-z (m'n (m-I)
m m
-z (m~ (m)
m+l m+ I

n-I n-I
-z (n-l) (n-l)
n n

z
FIG. 1. Coordinate s y s t e m and g e o m e t r y of the problem.

son-Haskell technic, direct comparison with these extensions will be possible. This
simple change of notation is the basis for eliminating complex matrix elements and thus
a complex dispersion function from the Rayleigh-wave computations. Before the dis-
persion function can be written in its full determinantal form, the interface submatrices,
applicable to continental and oceanic models, must be written in this notation.
Initial formulation of the interface submatrices. The coordinate system and geometry
of the problem are given in Figure 1. The continental model consists of a solid, perfectly-
elastic half-space with n -- 1 layers over a homogeneous half-space. The oceanic model
includes a single liquid layer over the solid, n-layered half-space. Subscripts refer to
layer numbers and parenthesized superscripts refer to interface numbers. Using Has-
1494 BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

kell's notation, the c o m p o n e n t s of motion in the mth layer are given b y

cRz~ = cos p.~Am - - i sin pmBm + r ~ cos qmC.~ - - ir~m sin qmD.~

C~tbm = --5'.,,~ sin p~A,,~ + r.~ cos pmBm + i sin qmCm -- cos qmD~

(rm = p,. (%. -- 1 ) COS pmAm - io,. (~',~ -- 1 ) sin pmB,~ + Om'ymro.~ COS qmCm

-- io,.~,,.r,.~ sin q,..Dm

"r,. = ip,.~,.~r.., sin pmAm -- p.:Ymr~.~ cos pmBm -- iota (~'~ -- 1) sin %C,..

+ p,. ( ~ -- 1) cos q,.D,.,

where

Am = -- am 2 ( &~' + A , Z )

2 t P
B,.= --am(Am - - A m )

C,. = - ~,.~ (~o,.' - ~o~")

H
Dm = - 213,~2 (corn' --}-~o,~ ),
and
p,~ = kr.m (z -- z (m-l))

q,. = kr~m (z -- z (m-l)).

For a continental model, the vanishing of the two components of stress at the free
surface yields

--m('n - 1)A1 - pl'~lrfllC1 = 0

pl"~lr.lB1 -- Pl (~1 -- 1)D1 = O.

T h u s Knopoff's submatrix h (°) has the form

A~c~ --m(~l - 1) 0 -m~r~ 0

.ti,~.t~l = . (1)
0 pl"ylral 0 --Pl(T1 -- 1) ]

F o r an oceanic model, the vanishing of stress at the free surface yields

Ao = O.

This result, combined with the continuity of the n o r m a l c o m p o n e n t s of displacement

and stress and the vanishing of the tangential c o m p o n e n t of stress at z (°), yields

r~0 cos PoBo -- r~lB1 -I- D1 = 0 (2)

 SURFACE-WAVE DISPERSION COMPUTATIONS 1495

ipo sin PoBo - p~('n -- 1)A~ - p~'nr~C~ = 0 (3)

pl7lr.lB1 -- pl (a/l -- 1)D1 = 0, (4)

where

Po = kr.o do.

If equation (2) is multiplied b y - i p o tan Po/r,o and added to equation (3), and the re-
sulting equation, together with (2) ~nd (4) are used to form the first three rows of the
determinantal form of the dispersion function [see Knopoff, 1964, equation (7)], then
the determinant can be expanded b y the first column. If it is agreed to neglect roots
given b y
r.0 cos Po = 0,

the determinant for the oceanic model will have the same form as that for the conti-
nental model, with

F--pl(~,l -- 1) ipor.1 t a n Po/r,o --pl~lr~l --ipo t a n Po/r,o 1

A(0)
o .... io = (5)
L 0 pl~/lr.l 0 --pl('Yl -- 1) _]"

At the m th interface, the continuity of displacement and stress yields

cos P ~ A ~ -- i sin P ~ B ~ -~ r ~ cos Q~C~ - i r ~ sin QmD~ - A~+I -- r~m+lCm+l = 0

- - i r , ~ sin P ~ A ~ ~- r,m cos P ~ B ~ ~- i sin Q~C~ - cos Q ~ - r,~+~B~+~ ~- D.,+I = 0

pm (~m -- 1) COS P ~ A ~ -- ipm (~'m -- 1) sin PmB,~ ~- pm'ymr~,~ cos QmCm

-- ipmvmr~ sin Q . ~ - p~+l(~+~ - 1)A~+~ - pm+~'ym+~r~.~+lC,~+~ = 0

ip~r.~ sin P ~ A ~ - p ~ r . ~ cos P ~ B m - ip~ (7~ - 1 ) sin Q~C~

~- p~ (-y~ -- 1) cos Q ~ ~- p~+~/m+~r,~+~B~+~ - p~+l (~'~+1 - 1)D~+I = 0,

where
Pm = k r . ~ d~

Qm = kr~m d ....

These expressions can be used to construct Knopoff's 4 X 8 interface submatrices, and

b y noting t h a t Am = B~ and C~ = D~, the 4 X 6 submatrix representing the (n - 1 )th
interface can also be constructed. If these submatrices, together with (1) and (5),
are used to construct the determinantal form of the dispersion function; if the elements
in columns 4i - 2 are divided b y r , i ( i = 1, 2, . . . , n - 1); and if the elements in
the columns immediately following these are divided by r~i ; then the determinant
will be composed of elements Y~i, which, when not equal to zero, will be pure real
quantities if i ~- j is even, and pure imaginary quantities if i ~- j is odd. The sub-
1496 BULLETIN OF T H E SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

matrices now have the forms

A c o n t i n e n t M ----
o ] (6)
m~'~ 0 -m(~'~ - 1)

A(O)
Oceanic
I--Pi(;
i-1) ipo tan Po/r,o --pi 3'i --ipo tan Po/r,o-
(7)
pl~', 0 --pl(~', -- 1)

cos P,~ - i sin P,~/r~m cos Qm

--ir.,~ sin Pm cos Pm i sin Q,~/~,~
A (m) =_
pm('Y,. -- 1) cos P., --ipm(~,~ -- 1) sin P,~/r~,~ p~ ~ cos Q~
iota ~,mr.,~ sin P~ --PmTm COS P m -ip~(.y,~ - 1) sin Qm/rom

--ire., sin Q~ - 1 0 - 1 0 ]
- c o s Q~ 0 -1 0 1
-iota "y~ r¢m sin Q.,
o~('Ym -- 1) cos Q~
- p~+~(~,~+~ - 1)
0
0
pm+~%,,+~
- o ~ + t ~/~+~
0
0
-p~+i(~'~+i - 1) J (8)

A(n_l) ----
[! --O~(~',,
1
--ra~
- - 1)
:1
--o~%ron [ (9)
p~.r.~ -pn(~,~- 1)J

where the first four columns of (9) are the same as those of (8), with m = n - 1.
This initial formulation of the interface submatrices provides the starting point for
the next two sections. The purpose of the first of these is to demonstrate that the re-
sults of the &matrix extensions of the Thomson-Haskell technic are actually contained
in Knopoff's earlier work and are obtainable from his formulation without recourse to
&matrix theory.
Comparison of Knopoff's method with the &matrix extensions of the Thomson-Haskell
technic. I f the determinantal form of the Rayleigh-wave dispersion function [Knopoff,
1964, equation (7)] is constructed using submatrices (6) through (9), and the first set
of manipulations listed in Table 1 is applied to the determinant, the submatrices can
be expressed in terms of the transposed Thomson-Haskell layer matrices amT, and the
dispersion function takes the form

ai I2
a2T 12
a8 T I2
i R (10)

T
a n --2 I2
aT
n--1
 SURFACE-WAVE DISPERSION COMPUTATIONS 1497

TABLE 1
MANIPULATION OF THE DETERMINANTAL FORM OF THE RAYLEIGH-WAvE DISPERSION
FUNCTION FORMED FROM SURMATRICES (6) THROUGH (9)

F i r s t Set
M u l t i p l y r o w s 4i - 1 a n d 4i b y p~ (i = 1, 2, - . . , n -- 1).
Add c o l u m n s 4i - 2 to 4i a n d r e p l a c e t h e l a t t e r w i t h t h e r e s u l t s .
S u b t r a c t c o l u m n s 4i - 1 f r o m 4i - 3 a n d r e p l a c e t h e l a t t e r w i t h the r e s u l t s .
M u l t i p l y c o l u m n s 4i -- 3 b y 7i , add to 4/ - 1, a n d r e p l a c e t h e l a t t e r w i t h t h e r e s u l t s .
M u l t i p l y c o l u m n s 4i b y ~'i, s u b t r a c t f r o m 4i - 2, a n d r e p l a c e t h e l a t t e r w i t h t h e r e s u l t s .
D i v i d e c o l u m n s 4i - 3 a n d 4i b y pi •
I n t e r c h a n g e r o w s 1 a n d 2, r o w s 4i - 1 a n d 4i ~- 2, a n d r o w s 4i a n d 4i ~- 1.
I n t e r c h a n g e c o l u n m s 4i a n d 4i -- 3.
I n t e r c h a n g e c o l u m n s 4i a n d 4i -- 2.
I n t e r c h a n g e c o l u m n s 4i a n d 4i -- 1.
M u l t i p l y c o l u n l n s 4i - 3 a n d 4i - 2 b y - 1 , c o l u m n s 4i - 1 a n d 4 i b y ca ~, a n d r o w s 4i -/- 1 and
4i + 2 b y (O~cR~)-1.
M u l t i p l y t h e l a s t two c o l u m n s (4n -- 3 a n d 4n - 2) b y c~ 2.
M u l t i p l y c o l u m n 4n - 3 b y - r ~ , add to 4n - 2, a n d r e p l a c e t h e l a t t e r w i t h t h e r e s u l t .
M u l t i p l y c o l u m n 4n - 2 b y - (-/. - 1 ) / r ¢ , , a d d to 4n - 3, a n d r e p l a c e t h e l a t t e r w i t h t h e r e s u l t .
D i v i d e c o l u m n 4n -- 2 b y --Tnr,nr~nCR~pn~an 2 a n d r e p l a c e it w i t h t h e r e s u l t .
Second Set
D i v i d e r o w s 1 a n d 2 b y - - p l , a n d r o w s 4i ~- 1 a n d 4i -1- 2 b y pl (i = 1, 2, . . . , n - 1).
M u l t i p l y r o w s 4i - 1 b y -- (-/i - 1), add to 4i -}- 1, a n d r e p l a c e t h e l a t t e r w i t h the r e s u l t s .
M u l t i p l y r o w s 4i b y ~i , a d d to 4i -~ 2, a n d r e p l a c e t h e l a t t e r w i t h t h e r e s u l t s .
M u l t i p l y r o w s 4i + 1 b y - 1 , a d d to 4i - 1, a n d r e p l a c e t h e l a t t e r w i t h t h e r e s u l t s .
M u l t i p l y r o w s 4i + 2 b y --1, add to 4i, a n d r e p l a c e t h e l a t t e r w i t h t h e r e s u l t s .
M u l t i p l y t h e l a s t c o l u m n b y (-1)~-~p12ca2/~r,~r~o,2a~ 2.

where zeros appear in the element positions left blank,

[o I 0 0 0j
r i 0 1 0 0
,o -1 q
':L 0
0
0
0
-1
0
o 1

and
- - ell/e51 e31

i 3

J 0

e31/e51

--1

The quantity q vanishes for a continental model, and is given by ipocR2 tan Po/r,o
--

e61
e51

for an oceanic model. The quantities eli are identical to the quantities e~ defined in the
last section of the paper by Schwab and Knopoff. When decomposed from the de-
terminantal form to a product of matrices, the dispersion function becomes

if n - - liseven
AR = T(°)Fa)F(~)fi(3) . . . IPI~-IIFI~-II (11)
IF - F - if n - - lisodd,
1498 B U L L E T I N OF T H E SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

which has the symbolic matrix form

A~ = [1 X 6][6 X 6 ] . . . [6 X 6][6 X 1].

The elements of T (°) are obtained from A(°), using

T(O) 11 =
A(O)A(O)
11
~(o)~(o)
22 - - ~ 2 1 ~k12

T(O)
12
= A(O)~(o) ~(o)~(o)
~k23 - - ~k21 xk13
11

T(O) ---- A(o)A(o) a(o).(o)

13 11 24 -- 2k21 2k14

T(O) ~(o)~(o) ~(o)~(o)

14 ~ ~12 21-23 - - ~22 ~13

T(O)
15 ~
A(O)A(0) ~(0)~(0)
12 24 - - zx22 lk14

T 16 (~-" ~(o)~(o)
O ~k24) - -
11-13
~(o>~(o)
-~-23 -tkl4 •
(12)

Thus

T (°) = [1, - q , 0, 0, 0, 0]. (13)

The elements of the interface matrices F (~) and F(~) are obtained from the submatrix
A(~) =[a~r, I~], by defining the quantities F ~(~)t as the fourth-order determinants com-
posed of the i th, jth, (k -4- 4) th, and (1 -t- 4) th columns of A(~), in that order. The posi-
tions and signs of these quantities in the interface matrices are as follows

-~.(~)
1'1212 F (1213
m ) F (1214
m ) F(:)
1228 ~.(.~)
L'1224 F(:)
1234

Flal~ F131a Flm F13~3 F1324 F1334

F1412 F1413 Flm F142a Fm4 F14~4
F (m) = (14)
F2312 F2313 F2314 F2323 F2~24 F2334
F2412 F2413 F2414 F2423 F2424 F2434

'~F3~12 Fa41a F3414 F3423 F3424 F3434

F(m)
3434 --
F(m)
3424
r~(m)
1' 3423
~,(,,,)
1' 3414 --
F(m)
3413
r,(m)
F3412

--F2434 F24:4 --F2423 --F2414 F2a13 --F2412

F2334 -F2324 F2a23 F2314 --F2al~ F2312

~(m) ----
(15)
F1434 --F1424 Fm3 Flm --F1413 F1412

--F1~34 F1324 --F1323 --Flm Fla13 --F131~

F1234 --F1224 F1228 F1214 --Fm3 Fm2 J

for 1 __< m =< n -- 2. F (~-1) is the 6 X 1 matrix given by the first column of (14), and
/~(~-1) is given by the last column of (15). With h (m) = [an T, I2] (1 _-< m =< n -- 2), and
 S U R F A C E - W A V E DISPERSIOI~ COMPUTATIONS 1499
~ T
A ("-1) [a~_~, I3], the interface submatrices take the forms
$(m)
~f~') --J12 f(m)•
11

-f..5 f,, f2, --f22 f21

--f24 (fs~-- 1) f3, --fa2
F (m} = (16)
--f2'3 f3~ ( f ~ 3 - 1) --f2 f4~1
--f22 f,, f4~ --fs: f51
--fl21 f31 f41 --f51 f61
f(m)
61 f(u)
51 ~ (m)
J41 ~ (m)
J31 f~7 ) f(m)7
11 I
--fst -A2 -f~2 -f~2 --f12
f23 f13
~(m) =
H H (17)
f32 f33 (f3~- 1 f14
--f21 -f~2 -f2~ -f2~ --f25 --f16
/11 f12 fla f14 £5 f16 J

-}1
}5
}
F(~-I) = 'l (18)
}

~(n--1) =
(19)

_
]
--}5
h

where

}1 ---- ellg16 't- e~lg15 -~- e~lg14 q- e41913 -t- eslg12 -t- e61911

}5 = ellg15 't- e21g25 -t- es1924 ~ e41g23 -~- e51922 - ~ e61g21

}3 = eug14 + eelg24 -I- e31 (g33 -- 1) + e4193a + e51g32 -t- e61931

}4 ---- }3 = ellgl3 ~- e21923 -1- ealg33 't- e41 (g33 - - 1 ) -~- e51942 + e61g41

}5 = el,g12 --H e21922 -H e31932 -t- e41942 ~ e51g~2 -t- e61(J51

}6 = engu -t- e21921 + e31981 + e41~/41-~- e51951 -t- e61961

1500 BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

f!'~) a = (a~-l)ij', and the independent elements of the ~ matrices, am ~,

are given by Schwab and Knopoff. The sixth-order representation of the dispersion
function is then defined by (11), (13), (16), (17), (18), and (19). Making use of the
indicated symmetry, inspection shows that the identical dispersion function can be
obtained from (11) with the fifth-order matrix representation

T (°) = [1, - q , 0, 0, 0] (20)

I ~(m)
J16
f15 -f~ f,_,~ -f~ f~1
F (m) 2f~ -2~ (2f3~- 1) -2f~2 2f3~ (21)
-f~ f~.~ -f~ f~l
--f21 f31 --f~1 f61

- f~r) 51 f2(m
1 f~T) -
--f51 -f~2 -f~2 --f22 --f12
~(m) = 2f~1 2f~ ( 2 f ~ - 1) 2f13 (22)
--f21 -f~ -f~3 --f25 --f15
£1 f~2 f~3 f~5 f~6

(23)

f(~-l) = 2~, . (24)

The basic interface-matrix multiplication has the form

R I R
In I R r R] I R I ,
R I R
I R I

where pure real quantities appear in the R positions and pure imaginary quantities
occupy the I positions. Thus the technic presented by Schwab and Knopoff for avoiding
the use and manipulation of complex numbers can be applied directly to this fifth-
order formulation.
The sixth-order matrix representation of the Rayleigh-wave dispersion function
 SURFACE-WAVE DISPERSION COMPUTATIONS 1501

given by (11), (13), (16), (17), (18), and (19) is equivalent to the full, sixth-order
6-matrix extension of the original Thomson-Haskell formulation. The fifth-order repre-
sentation given by (11), (20), (21), (22), (23), and (24) is the analog of the fifth=
order, reduced-6-matrix extension. Although 5-matrix theory is not required in the
derivations of the matrix representations from Knopoff's method, these representations
contain the results of the ~-matrix extensions. In fact, the sixth-order representation
derived from Knopoff's method is exactly the 6-matrix extension written in what is
essentially a transposed form. This is easily demonstrated by applying the following
series of operations.
Beginning with the sixth-order representation derived from Knopoff's method, the
product T(°)/7(~) should be formed, giving

[h61 + qh61, h51 + qh52 , h41 + qh42 , h31 + qh32 , h21 + qh22 , hn + qh12],

where h~j = (ala)ij ; all negative signs, except for those in (f3(~) -- 1 ), may be removed
from the matrix definitions (16) and (17), and if applicable, (19), since in this par-
ticular matrix representation, products of the form F('~)f (re+l) are unchanged by the
removal; whichever of F (n-l) and P(n-~) is applicable should be written as the product
of a 6 × 6 matrix and

ell~

I e2~/
e31/
e4t / ;

L e61d

the matrices [T(°)/~(1)], •(3), p(5), ... , may be replaced by their reflections in the line
between the third and fourth columns, and F (~), F (4), . . . , may be replaced by their
reflections in the line between the third and fourth rows, since these operations do not
affect the product [T(°)P(1)]F(2) or those of the form P(m)F(m+~), 3 6 m < n - 2. If it is
now noted that AR, being a scalar, is its own transpose, the result of this series of oper-
ations can be transposed according to

(AB... C D ) r = DrC r . . . B r A ~,

and AR will take the exact form of the ~-matrix extension of the Thomson-Haskell
formulation. Thus both sixth-order, and therefore both fifth-order forms are merely
different matrix representations of exactly the same dispersion function. All these
representations contain the loss-of-precision control feature. The speeds of computa-
tion of the two sixth-order matrix representations are the same. The fifth-order repre-
sentations also have identical speeds of computation, which are about 7 per cent faster
than the corresponding sixth-order representations of the dispersion function. Both
speed of computation and the loss-of-precision problem will be discussed more fully
below.
The preceding has only the purpose of demonstrating that Knopoff's method con-
tains the results of the later 8-matrix extensions. The fifth-order representation of the
Rayleigh-wave dispersion function, which was derived from Knopoff's method, and
which has the same power as the reduced-8-matrix extension of the original ThomsoIt-
1502 BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

Haskell formulation, is far from the optimum representation, for computer applica-
tion, which it is possible to construct from Knopoff's method. This method is quite
flexible--any amount of row and column manipulation of the determinantal form of
the dispersion function can precede the decomposition into a product of matrices--
and this allows considerable simplification of the final representation of the dispersion
function. The purpose of the following section is to use this flexibility to construct a
new representation of the Rayleigh-wave dispersion function which is more powerful
than the preceding fifth-order representations, i.e., a representation which contains the
loss-of-precision control feature and has a speed of computation significantly faster
than these fifth-order representations.
"Fast" form of Knopoff's method. Starting with submatrices (6) through (9), and
again forming the dispersion function in its determinantal form, the second set of
manipulations listed in Table 1 is applied to the determinant. This yields the submatrices

Continental ~- 0 --~1 0 (yl -- 1)

A(°)o
.... i¢ = [ ( - y ~1- ) 0 --ipotanPo/pxr,oy~ipotanPo/~r.o]_.y~
0 (3'~ (26)

I cos Pm --i sin Pm/r.r~ 0 0

--ir.,~ sin Pm cos Pm 0 0
A (m) =
[ o o cos Q.~ -ir~m sin Qm
0 0 i sin Qm/r~,~ - cos Q~
-- ~3 0 -- ~i 0
(m) (m) 1
(m) (m)
0 e2 0 - - ~4
(m) (m) / (27)
~4 0 ~2 0
0 -- ~1
(m)
0 E3
(m)
J
. . . . . E3(n--l) - - ~, (n--l) r~n E1
(n--l) E4(n--1)
.... ~2 ?'an --
A (n-l) (28)
(n--l) (n--l) | '
.... E4 E2 r~n E

. . . . . ~.l(n--1)ran E3(n--1)~
J
where the first four columns of (28) are the same as those of (27), and

/ 1 \n--I 2 2/ 2 2
E = k-- I ) P l Cl~ / ' y n r a n r l 3 n p n O~n •

The quantities e~('~), e2(m), e3(m), and e4(m) are given with Table 2. Decomposing the de-
terminantal form of the dispersion function into the product of matrices (11), the ele-
ments of the matrix T (°) arc obtained from (25) and (26) using relations (12)

T (°) = [-"Y1('~1- 1), 0, ( 3 ' , - 1) 2, ,.y,2, q/cR2p~,y~(~l- 1)].

 SURFACE-WAVE DISPERSION COMPUTATIONS 1503

TABLE 2
EXPRESSIONS FOR THE QUANTITIES ~'~,(m)
iikl ~ 1 <
~ m <
= n -- 2
kl
12 13 14 23 34
~\
(m) (m)
12 -- es(m) 0 e13 e6(m) 0 el0
13 - i ( e l l ~ 9 -~ eT~'lO) ~15~14 i(eid'9 + ~12~'1o) i(~9t9 + e~i'io) --*ld'v I i(¢n~'o + e7~-lo)
14 ~Ii~'7- e7~'12 i (~15r10) --~14~'7 + ~12~"12 --$9~'7 -4- ~5~'12 i (~15~'8) ] --~11~"7 -4- E7t12
ei4~'i5- ~i2~-7 e9~'i5- e5~'7 i(e15~'11)] eli~-15- ¢7~'7
24 --/(eliCit -~ e7~8) -- else"7
34 elo 0
~0 (m) ~ Pm÷l/Pm e8(m) el(re)e4 (m) ~h(m) = COS P m ~'9(m) = ~'i(m)~'6(m)
~9 ~ ~'2 = cos Qm ~'lo = ~'~i-~
~i0
~3 ~ ~i -~- ¢!0 ~e~ ~'4 = sin P . ~ / r ~ ~l~ = ~
~4 ~ ~2 -~- ~0 ~12 ~ ~ = r~.~ sin Q,~ i-i~ = i'd'~
~5 ~ {!l2 ¢!13 ~4 i'~ = sin Q,~/r~m ~,~ = ~
~6 ~ el~2 ~14 ~4 2 ~'7 = ~'1~'2 ~'15 = ~'4~'6
e7 ~ ~1~3 ~15 - ~o ~'s = ~i~
~16 (i8 "-~ ~10

The interface matrices F (~) a n d F(m) a r e d e f i n e d by (14) and (15), where F i~kl
(m) are
obtained from (27) in the manner previously outlined. Table 2 gives the results of the
anMytical evaluation of the determinantal definitions o f F (o'k~
~) for 1 = m =< n - 2.
F (~-1) i s g i v e n b y t h e f i r s t c o l u m n o f ( 1 4 ) , a n d f i ( ~ - l ) b y t h e l a s t c o l u m n o f ( 1 5 ) , w h e r e

F(n-1)/
1212 / ~ = el3
(n--i)
~-
el(n--l)
ran r~n

/ r~(n--1) J
F(n-1)
3412 / e ~ --1'1212 /~!

- - ~ (n--l) / -
l' 1312 / ~ 1313 1' 1314 1323 1824 / 7' n
F ( 1412
n-i)~ /~ F(n-i) ~(n--1) ~(~--1) ~(~--1)|
1418 I' 1414 I' 1423 I' 1424 |
F (2312
n-l)/ /e [ F(n-1)
2313 ~(n-1)
I' 2314 F(n-D
2323 ~L'<2324
~-1) ]] ] ran r~n I'
~(n--1) / /[..I'~(~-1) F(n-1) F(n-D ~(~-D
324i2 /e 2413 2414 2423 I' 2424 _]I L r.. 3

and the quantities in the 4 X 4 matrix are obtained from Table 2.

The basic interface-matrix multiplication has the symbolic matrix form [1 X 6]
[6 X 6], where the sixth element of the 1 X 6 matrix is always the negative of the first
element. The symmetry of the 6 X 6 interface matrices, as indicated below,
[U(m+1), iV (re+l), W(,~+I), R(m+l), iS(m+l), _ U ('~+i)]
-~ 0 ~, v 0

iK - - iK

6 --0
= [U ('~), iV (m), W (m), R (m), iS (m), _ U ('~)]

i~ --i~
_~ 0 --v --v 0
1504 BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA.

is the reason that the 1 X 6 matrix retains this property throughout the formation of
the interface-matrix product. The first and last elements of columns 2 and 5 of the
6 × 6 matrix vanish, which means that fourth-, not sixth-order matrix multiplication
is involved in forming the corresponding elements of the 1 X 6 product matrix. The
remaining four elements of the product matrix involve only fifth-order multiplication
due to the properties of the first and last elements of the 1 × 6 matrices. Since the first
and last elements of the product matrix are the same e x c e p t for sign, only one of
these two elements needs to be computed. Two fourth-order, and three fifth-order
multiplications per matrix product is a significant improvement over the original six
sixth-order multiplications. If these five product-matrix elements are written out
analytically, it is seen that there is still considerable simplification possible by means
of simple algebraic factorization. The results of this factorizatiou allow the elements of
the product matrix to be written in very simple form. For m 4- 1 even

U (re+l) = _e~n-[-1)U (m) + e~7+l)K (re+l) + e7(m+l)L(re+l) (29)

V (re+l) = el5(m+l)(,Sl4/~(m+l)Tr(m)t
/ 4- ~'10(m-[-1)l]-l(m),, --}- ~'9(m+l)R (m) - - ~7(m+1)S (m)) (30)

W (m+l) = - ell(re+l)T'Y(m+I)L~.- - el2(m+l)(m+l)L~

y 4-4- --(~139
(re+l) u(m) (31)

R (re+l) = --e9 (m+l)K(m+l) es(m+l)L ('~+1) 4- 2e6(m+l)u (m) (32)

k~(m+l) (m+l)[ ~ (m+l)v(m) ~ (m+l)lly(m) ~(m+l)R(m) ~(m+l)~(m)~
~--- e15 \ - - 3 7 4- $8 " "l- $11 -'1- 313 o j, (33)

where

K (~+:) -- 39"(m+l)TT(m)v -[- S7~(mW1)TXT(m)rv- - SlS~(mW1)l:)(m)tb"-~ ~ + l ) s ( m ) (34)

L (re+l) = Sio~(m+l)lT(m)r - - ~12(mTl)w(m) -~- ~7~(re+l)/)(m)lb 4- $8~(m+l)~(m)to, (35)

and for m 4- 1 odd

U (m-{-l) ~--- --616(m+1)U(m) 4- 6 ~ a + l ) x (m-~-l) 4- e~(m+:)Z(m+:) (36)

w(m+l) (m+l) [~.(m+l)TT(m)

615 t,~13 ~ -- ~.~+l)w(m) -- $~.8 (.~+1).(,~)
~v
_ ~_7(m+I)S(~)) (37)

W (m'{-1) ~ e9(m+l) v-(m+l)~ 4-4- es(m+l)z(m+l) - - 266 (re+l) V (m) (38)

R (re+l) (m+l)~(m+l) (re+l) ry(m-bl) ¢~ (re+l) Tr(m)
= et: ~- 4 - e12 ~ -- ~e13 ~ (39)

= (re+l) (__~7(m.4-1)g(m) ~. (m+l)lly(m) ~(m+l)D(m) ~.(m+l)~(m)

S (~+" e~ - $~ ,, - s:o ,~ + s:~ - ), (40)

where

X (re+l) = Sll~'(mT1)v(m) 4- ~lS~'(ra-i-1)lff?'(m),,- - ~7(m+l)R(m) "~- ~'9(m+l)S(m) (41)

Z (m+:) = ~s(~+~)V(m) -- s7 ,, 4- s:2 4- (42)

All quantities in expressions (29) through (42) are real.

 SURFACE-WAVE DISPERSION COMPUTATIONS 1505

The dispersion function is formed by starting with the pure real quantities

U (°) ---- - - 7 1 ( 7 1 - 1)
V (°) = 0

W (°) = (~'i - 1)2 (43)

R (0) = ,~12

for a continental model

S (°) _ f 0 for an oceanic model,
p0 tan Po/plr,~o

and by repeated application of equations (29) through (33), or (36) through (40),
until the dispersion function has been carried down to the (n -- 2) th interface

[U(,~-~), iV(,-2), W(n-2), R(n-2), iS(~-2>, _ U(n-2)]

fF(~-2) if n -- 2 is even
= V(°)F(1)F (2) . " \ p ( ~ + 2 )
if n -- 2 is odd.
The complete dispersion function is given by
"v (n--1)
L' 1212 --
F 3412
(~-1) -

--
i m kL'
l ~,(1312
n-t) "~
)

F (1412
rl) if n - - l i s e v e n
F(n-l)
2312
( n --i)
-Ira(F2412 )
~R = [U <~-2), V (n-2), W (~-2), R <~-2), S <n-2)] (44)
- L~(n--l) ~-~ ( n - - 1 ) -
L' 3412 -- i ' 1212

i / 7~(n--1)
m ~ P 2412 )

F(,-1)
2312 if n - - l i s o d d .
F(.-1)
1412

I m ( f ~ 1))
Since expressions (29) through (44) involve only pure real quantities, the use and
manipulation of complex numbers is completely avoided in forming the Rayleigh-wave
dispersion function.
The above representation for the Rayleigh-wave dispersion function is the most
powerful constructed to date. It contains the feature controlling the loss-of-precision
problem, and its speed of computation is about 38 per cent faster than the fifth-order
representations discussed in the previous section. In fact, it is about 12 per cent faster
than the fastest of the Thomson-Haskell versions. These last--the "fast" representa-
tions of the product and ratio forms of the original Thomson-Haskell formulation,
which are discussed in the next section--do not contain the loss-of-precision control
feature.
Speed of computation. It should first be noted that the speed of computation of a
1506 BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

given technic is determined by the representation of the dispersion function, i.e., by

the particular algorithm the technic uses for the numerical evaluation of the dispersion
function. Although two technics may have identical dispersion functions when written
out fully, the speeds of computation of the two technics need not be the same. This is
illustrated clearly by the sixth-order representation, (11), (13), (16), (17), (18), and
(19), and the fifth-order representation, (11), (20), (21), (22), (23), and (24). The
dispersion functions, when written out fully, are identical for the two methods, but
the latter is about 7 per cent faster in computation speed due to its more efficient al-
gorithm for computing the numerical value of the dispersion function.
The characteristic time of a technic--the average time required to treat one inter-
face (layer) during the computation of the dispersion function--is perhaps the best

TABLE 3
T I M E ESTIMATES FOR R A Y L E I G H - W A v E D I S P E R S I O N COMPUTATIONS*

Computation Time per Dispersion

t~elative 3 Point for 10-Layer Structure Using
Root-Bracketing
Contains
Iterations to obtain Loss-of-
r Computa-
Technic Version (10-6 sec tion the following accuracies (sec) Precision
Times Control
Feature
st I 7-9 11 12

Thomson-
Haskell
Original "fast" repre-
sentation
Original representation
computing layer-ma-
845

1059
1.12

1.40
=:Oo:::: 0.0676 0.0845

0.0847 0.1059
No

No

trix product
Reduced-g-matrix repre- 1042 1.38 0.0625 0.0729 0.0834 0.1042 Yes
sentation
g-matrix representation 1113 1.47 0.0668 0.0779 0.0890 0. 1113 Yes

Knopoff "Fast" representation 757 1.00 0.0455 0.053C 0.0606 0.0757 Yes
Analog of reduced-g-ma- 1042 1.38 0.0625 0.0729 0.0834 0.1042 Yes
trix representation
Analog of g-matrix repre- 1113 1.47 0.0668 0.0779 0.0890 0.1113 Yes
sentation
* All times are for double-precision conIputations on an IBM 360/75 computer. Normalization
is not included in the time estimates, since for all estimates, H/k = (o- + 1)/4 (see Schwab and
Knopoff, 1970).
t The number of significant figures in the computed phase velocity.

way of specifying the speed of a given technic. The characteristic times, ~, for the
various versions of the Thomson-Haskell technic have been given by Schwab and
Knopoff. These values, and the times describing the representations derived from
Knopoff's method are collected in Table 3. The characteristic times apply to double-
precision computations carried out on an I B M 360,/75 computer with programs written
in F O R T R A N IV. The use of an I B M 360/91 computer improves these times by a
factor of about 4. The details concerning the characteristic times of the ~-matrix and
reduced-~-matrix analogs constructed from Knopoff's method are the same as those of
the ~-matrix and reduced-~-matrix extensions, respectively. The information concern-
ing these latter representations is given by Schwab and Knopoff. Each application of
(29) through (33), or (36) through (40), is equivalent to treating one interface during
the computation of the dispersion function. Thus the time per application is just the
ehaxacteristic time of this "fast" version of Knopoff's method. Reference to Table 3
 SURFACE-WAVE DISPERSION COMPUTATIONS 1507

shows the characteristic time of this version to be 1.12 times faster than the fastes~ of
the Thomson-Haskell versions, and 1.38 times faster than the reduced-~-matrix ex-
tension.
In actual computations, the frequency is fixed at one of a set of specified values, and
the phase velocity is varied until it is within a specified interval of a root of the disper-
sion function. Thus the actual program speed depends not only upon r, but also upon
the speed with which the program converges to within a specified accuracy of a root,
i.e., upon the number of times the dispersion function must be computed to achieve a
specified accuracy. Obviously, if two different representations have the same disper-
sion function, they will require the same number of evaluations of the dispersion func-
tion to achieve a given accuracy. In this case, the relative computation speeds of the
two technics will be determined by the ratio of their characteristic times. The ~-matrix
and reduced-~-matrix extensions, as given by Schwab and Knopoff, and the analogs
of these representations derived from I(nopoff's method, all have the same dispersion
function. Only their representations of this function differ. Thus, if this dispersion
function can be shown equal to that from the "fast" form of Knopoff's method, the
relative computation times of all these representations will be determined by their
characteristic times.
The first set of manipulations listed in Table 1, operating on the determinantal form
of the Rayleigh-wave dispersion function constructed from submatrices (6) through
(9), produces a new dispersion function which has been shown equal to those of the
~-matrix extensions of the original Thomson-Haskcll formulation. The second set of
manipulations, operating on the same original determinantal form, produces thenew
dispersion function for.the "fast" form of Knopoff's method. Comparison of thetwo
sets of manipulations will show that they have exactly the same effect on the original
determinantal form of the dispersion function. Thus the dispersion function from the
"fast" form of Knopoff's method, when written out fully, is the same as those from the
other four representations. This means that the relative computation speeds of all
these representations can be obtained from the characteristic times. Reference to
Table 3 shows that the "fast" representation from Knopoff's method has a relative
computation speed about 47 per cent faster than the two sixth-order representations,
and about 38 per cent faster than the two fifth-order representations.
The preceding remarks deal only with relative speeds of computation. In order to
estimate absolute speeds of computation some knowledge is required concerning the
number of times the dispersion function must be evaluated once the root has been
bracketed. Schwab and Knopoff have determined the number of iterations required,
after bracketing a root with a phase velocity increment of 0.1 km/sec, in order to ob-
tain a given accuracy with the original Thomson-Haskell formulation: These results
are reproduced in Table 4, and refer to root refining by linear interpolation. With this
information it is possible to give absolute program speeds as a function of z, the num-
ber of significant figures desired in the phase velocities, and n, when the number of
wavelengths above the homogeneous half-space, H / ~ , is a bit greater than (~ -~ 1)/4
(see Schwab and Knopoff, 1970). Accurate estimates of the program speeds can be
obtained for all representations of the dispersion function which have been mentioned,
if one assumption is made. The results given in Table 4 were obtained using the ratio
form of the dispersion function from the original Thomson-Haskell formulation

FR(~, Ca) -- J32 -- J42 Jl~ - J~2

J 3 1 - J41 J l l - J21'
1508 BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

which is constructed from Haskell's equation (2.21). If it is assumed that the product
form of this dispersion function

FR (w, c~) = (Jli -- J21) (Js2 -- J~2) -- (.1~2 -- J ~ ) (J~l - J41)

converges to a specified accuracy in much the same manner as the ratio form, then
the program speeds are easily estimated. This is possible because the dispersion func-
tion from this product form, when fully written out, is identical to the fifth- and sixth-
order representations discussed previously and the "fast" representation from Knop-
off's method. (See the definition of the reduced-~-matrix extension, in terms of the
J-matrix elements, given by Schwab and Knopoff. )
Estimates of the program computation time per phase velocity value are obtained
from
~'n (M + N),

where r is the characteristic time obtained from Table 3, M is the number of root-

TABLE 4
N, NUMBER OF COMPUTATIONS OF THE DISPERSION FUNCTION
REQUIRED, ONCE A ROOT HAS BEEN BRACKETED, TO
OBTAIN A SPECIFIED ACCURACY*
Rayleigh-WaveComputations

at N

5 3
7-9 4
11 5
12 7
* All computations performed with H/h = (~, + 1)/4.
t The number of significant figures in the phase velocities.

bracketing iterations, and N is the number of root-refining iterations required to ob-

tain the specified accuracy in the phase velocity. The value of this last parameter can
be estimated from Table 4. Sample computation times are given in Table 3 for all the
representations of the dispersion function, and for several values of the required ac-
curacy of the phase velocity. These estimates are based on a structure having ten layers,
and on the use of three root-bracketing iterations. All time estimates assume the use
of double-precision computation on an I B M 360/75 computer, that roots are sought by
varying the phase velocity at fixed values of the frequency, that linear interpolation is
used in the root-refining process when the ratio form of the original Thomson-Haskell
formulation is used, and that quadratic interpolation is used with the other formula-
tions (see section on program testing).
Under the assumption that the ratio and product forms of the dispersion function
derived from the original Thomson-ttaskell formulation converge to a specified ac-
curacy in the phase velocity with the same number of iterations, the actual program
speed of the "fast" form of Knopoff's method is 1.12 times faster than the fastest of
the Thomson-Haskell versions. Independent of this assumption is the fact that this
form of Knopoff's method has a program speed 1.38 times faster than the reduced-
~-matrix representation.
 SURFACE-WAVE DISPERSION COMPUTATIONS 1509

Loss-of-precision problem. The representation for the product form of the original
Thomson-Haskell formulation can be obtained from Haskell's result

j -1
.En an-1 " ' " a l .

i,,~= E~ - - 1 0 01 0 ] = and/5
1 1 ,

the representation is given by

F~ (~, c~) = [ I4JI51 = (I4E~ -1 )an_l " ' " a2(a115) I"

The expression to the right of the first equality sign yields the definition of the product
form given above, and the operation to the right of the second equality sign thus yields
the expression to be used in evaluating the dispersion function

- . @9 ~ / ~ ) , 2 - c , ~ 2 ('r~ - 1)/~ 2ro,~, (,,~ ~ 2)- 1 -,( p ~ a , ~ r . ~ )2 -~ "]

F,~(oo, cR) = !
L (~,, - 1)/.y~r~, --1, -- (p~ eR2"y~ r~) -1 , -- (p,~ cR2%~)-1 J

(al)l, (a,) 121

•a,~_l...a= (al)21 (al)22/ (45)
(al)31 (al)32/
(al)41 (al)31J

The dispersion function from the reduced-&matrix extension of the Thomson-Hasell

formulation is

hn q- qh~
h21 q- qh~
F ~ (co, c~) = [el e2 e3 e~ e6] 2fal 2fa2 (2faa -- 1) 2f2a 2f, a • "" 2[hal q- qhad , (46)

h51 -Jr- qhs~

_ h61 q- qhs1

where the notation of Schwab and Knopoff is used.

The extensions of the original Thomson-Haskell formulation were developed to deal
with Rayleigh-wave computations when many wavelengths of layered structure were
retained above the homogeneous half-space. The original formulation encounters a
loss-of-precision problem in this case (Thrower, 1965; Dunkin, 1965; Schwab and
Knopoff, 1970). The cause of this problem is clearly demonstrated by writing out the
dispersion functions from (45) and (46) for a continental model with n = 2. From the
1510 BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

product form of the original formulation

Fa(w, c~) = el(a~)n ~- e~(a~)~ -~ 2e~(ala)~, ~- e~(a~A)~ ~- e~(al~)~t

2
+ 2~. (% -- 1) [(a~)n(a~)~.~ -- (a~)n(a~)~]
O~n2Tnr~n

2
_1_ Ca ('Yn - - 1) [(al)21(al)22 -- (al)~t(a~)~.~]
O!n2ran

+ [(al)~l(al)32- (al)31(al)32]
pn2OLn2Ca2~[nr~n

+ [(al)41(al)31 -- (al)41(al)31],
pn2Oln2Ca2"ynran

and from the reduced-8-matrix extension of the original formulation

Fa (co,ca ) = el (al A)11 ~- e2 (al A )21 -~ 2e3 (al A)31 ~- e5 (al A)51 ~- e6 (ala )6,.

Thus the two forms of the dispersion function are identical analytically, but when the
product form is evaluated numerically, four terms involving the difference of two
identical products must be evaluated. As the number of wavelengths of layering in-
creases, these products: (al)n (al) 12, (al)~n(at)~2, (al)31(a,)32, and (a,)41 (al):n become
dominant; the differences, which do not vanish because of the finite number of digits
carried in numerical computation, begin to affect the precision of the computations.
When the number of wavelengths of layering becomes sufficient, these differences which
should vanish actually become larger than the true value of the dispersion function,
and the computations lose significance.
The reason that these products become dominant is that they contain products of
the form cos P~ sin P~, whereas the terms in the significant portion of the expression
contain products of the form cos P1 sin QI. When the surface layer is several wave-
lengths thick, both P~ and Q~ are pure imaginary quantities, and the significant terms
are smaller than the spurious ones by a factor of

exp --2~r~-(%//1 -- ca2/a~2 -- %/1 -- c ~ / ~ 2) •

Thus the significant terms become less important as H/X increases. (Since the quan-
tities (al~)~j are evaluated numerically from the determinantM definitions when the
product form of the original Thomson-Haskell technic is used, further complications
of this same type arise when these &matrix elements are evaluated.) The reduced-
a-matrix extension solves the loss-of-precision problem by eliminating terms containing
products of the form cos Pm sin Pm before beginning numerical computations, while
retaining terms containing products of the form cos Pm sin Q~. Reference to Table 2
will show that the "fast" form of Knopoff's method does exactly the same thing. Thus
this latter method is not only the fastest constructed to date, but it also contains the
loss-of-precision control feature.
Layered-half-space and symmetric-plate analogs of the Earth. Biswas and Knopoff
(1970) have devised a simple relation which transforms a layered sphere into a layered
half-space and vice versa for Love waves. In the period range generally investigated by
 SURFACE-WAVE DISPERSION COMPUTATIONS 1511

propagating surface waves, this transformation allows all computations to be performed

on a layered half-space. The solutions can then be converted to those on a layered
sphere.
Unlike the Love-wave ease, Rayleigh-wave propagation is dependent upon the
parameters of the outer and inner sections of the core, as well as upon gravity. The
sphere-to-flat-layering transformation for Rayleigh waves, which is currently being
developed, requires dispersion functions for flat-layer analogs of the Earth, which take
the core into account. Schwab and Knopoff have given a method for approximating the
introduction of gravity into the computations.
The submatrix representing the mantle-core boundary is obtained from the boundary
conditions at this solid-liquid interface: the continuity of the normal components of
displacement and stress, and the vanishing of the tangential component of stress. After
dividing the second, third, and sixth columns by r,~, r~,,, and r,,,+l, respectively, the
submatrix takes the form

0 0 - sin Qm/%~r~.~
h (m) = (~m -- 1) cos P~ --i(~,~ -- 1) sin Pm/r,.. ~ cos P~
1 i'ymr.~ sin Pm - - w cos Pm 0

-i cos Q,~/v,~ 0
(m)
- - i w r ~ sin Q~ ~0 0

0 0 w(W -- 1) .

The corresponding 6 X 2 interface matrices G (m) and G(~) are given by

-/*(m) f,(m)n • "r~(~) "-~ (m) 7
~121 t%122 -- '~(J342 't~341
G(m) ,~(m)
181 ~x132 iG(m)
242 - - ~ (.,-,(m)
J241

G(m) [~,(m)
141 ~142
~(m)
-- iG(.O
232 iG(,O
231
G (m) ~_
231 232 -- ...(m)
"/,(/142 iG~m)
41

G(m) ,~(m)
241 %r242 .~(m)
't(J132 -- iG(m)
131

f~(m) f~(m)
t_Lr341 '0342 _ -- iG 122
(,~) iG 121
(,~)

where the quantities a iik

(m)
are defined as the third-order determinants formed with the
ith, jth, and (k q- 4) th columns of A (m), in that order. The analytical expressions derived
from the determinantal definitions are
a (m) (~(m)
121 = 0 .1,2 = iv.,(vm - 1)
G~(~n)
132 = 2~.(m)
G(m)
131 ~ -- • (,,)~(m)
~E0 ~14 -- (Vm -- 1)2~'9 (m) - - ")'m ~10

G(m) (m) ~.(m) G(m) 1)2~.7('-0

141 ~ e0 ~10 142 = --i[(v.~ -- -- "Ym2~(m)l
~12 t
G(m) (,,~)~. (m) \2~.(m) 2,. (m) l
231 ~ ~0 $9 G (m)232 = i[(vm- 1;~15 -- Vms7 j

G(m)
241 ~
. (m)~.
~E0 ~7
(m) G(m)
242 = -- ('~ -- 1)2~':T) _ "/~2"~8 (')

G(~)
341 ~ 0 G342
(m) = --iVm(Vm - - 1).
1512 BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

At the liquid-liquid interfaces in the outer section of the core, the boundary condi-
tions of continuity of the normal components of displacement and stress are used to
form the 2 X 4 submatrices characterizing these interfaces. After dividing the second
and fourth columns by r.~ and r.~+l, respectively, these submatrices take the form

A(m) = [ r ~ s i r t P m icosPm 0 Oi]

k - c o s P~ i sin Pm/r.,~ ~o(m)

The corresponding 2 X 2 interface matrices H (m) a n d / 7 (m) are given by

H (m) =[Hz(~) .(m)'l [C - 11- 22

.(,~) H(m) j"1
/1121 ~x22 _J [_ 11 12

where the quantities H - - .!.~) are defined as the second-order determinants formed with
the i th and (j -}- 2) th columns of h C~), in that order. Evaluation of the determinantal
definitions yields
H(~) (~)~ (~) r_r(~) .~ (m)

H(m) : (m)~ (m) ~T(m) . (m)

21 = '~0 ~1 1-[22 = --~'4 •

The submatrix representing the liquid-solid interface separating the outer and inner
sections of the core is obtained from the continuity of the normal components of
displacement and stress, and the vanishing of the tangential component of stress at
this boundary. After dividing the second, fourth, and fifth columns by r . ~ , r.~+l,
and rag+l, respectively, the submatrix takes the form

r.m sin P~ i cos Pm 0 --i 0 i

2L(m) --

I --cos Pm i sin P,./r.m

o 0
- - ~0 ('~)~

The corresponding 2 X 6 interface matrices I (m) and 2T(') are given by

k'Ym+l - -

0
1) 0
~+1
--e0(m)~/~+l
0
0
- (~'m+~ - 1) J
i(m) r'I(m)
[ 112=
T(m)
"113
T(m)
1114
T(m) T(rr~)
~t123"124
T(m)'-I
"134 [

IT(m)
L1212
i 213
(m) r(m)
-(214
r(m)
~t223
i(~)
224
/(m)/
234 ..[

~(m) / ~ 234 ~ ; I 224

(m) ~ t 214 - - ~1213 ~;1(m)212 ['7
~" i ;T(m)
L - - ~ * 134
;T(m)
~'124
_iI~'~)3 --iI~'~)4 :T(m)
~113 --
iI(m) l '
112 _]

when the quantities r(m)

zijk are defined as the third-order determinants formed with the
i th, (j + 2) th, and (k + 2 ) th columns of A(~), in that order
(m)
i(m)
112 = -E0 ~ + 1 ( ~ + 1 - 1)i'3 (m) i(~)
212 = _ i~0(m)?m+l(Vm+l 1 ) h (m)

i(,~)
113 ----" 0
I(m)
213 ~-- 0

I(~)
114 ~ ~o(~) (?m+l 1 ) 2i'3(m) I(m)
214 = ie0 (m) ( ~ m + l - 1)2~1 (m)
 SURFACE-WAVE DISPERSION COMPUTATIONS 1513

Tl(m) (m) (m) . (m) ~ ~ (m)

123 ~ ~0
2
'Ym+l ~3
~
i(m)
228 ~ $~0 ~m+l ~1

i(m) .~ (m) i(m) .- ( . 0

124 ~ --~1 224 ~ --~-4

I(~)
134 ~ e0(m)7~+l(7~+1 1)f~ (~) i ( ~m4) = i~0(~)~/~+1(7~+1 - - 1 ) ~ 1 (~).

If the structure is terminated with a liquid homogeneous half-space, beginning at

some point in the fiat-layered region which is the analog of the outer section of the core,
the dispersion function has the form

f ~(m-1) G(m)ITt(m+l)H(,,+2) ~
An = T(°)F (1) " " ~F(,,-l)~(m)H(,~+i)I-i(m+2)f . . . ififmmiSiseVenodd

. . . f/7(~-2)H(n-1) if n -- 1 is even
~H(~-2)/7 (n-l) if n -- 1 is odd. (47)

The boundary conditions at the deepest interface yield the submatrix A(~-~). After
dividing the second column by r,n-1, it takes the form

A(n_~)=Vr,~_lsinP~_l i cos P~_I r*~ 1

L -- cos P~-I i s i n Pn-1/r,~-I ~o(n-l) '

where r .*. is the pure real quantity r,~/i. The corresponding interface matrices are

H ( ~ _ I ) VH ~ -1) 7 /7(~_1)=1r ~-,(,-1)n

~,~21 ] '

and the quantities H ~ -1) are defined as the second-order determinants formed with the
•~h and (j -~ 2 )~ columns of A(~-~), in that order. They are

H ~ -1) = e0(n--l)}.~3(n--l) + r,~

¢ ~. (n--l)
~1 TAr(n--l)
,~21 .r
= zLe0(n--1)~ (n--l)
tl •
-- r,~ ~.4(n--1)
].

if the structure is terminated with a solid homogeneous half-space, beginning at

some point in the fiat-layered region which is the analog of the inner section of the core,
the dispersion function has the form

A~ = T(°)F (1) /F('~-l)G(m)It(m+l)~ if m is even

"'" ~ F('~-I)G('~)H(m+I)/ "'" if m is odd

//7(~-')I(P)P(P+I)F(P+2)~ if p is even
" " \ H (p 1)i(P)F(p+i)r(P+2)f "'" if p is odd

//~(~-2)F('-l) if n -- 1 is even
"'" \ F ( n - 2 ) ~ (aLl) i f n - - 1 i s odd, (48)

where F (~-~) and P(~-~) have been defined previously.

In the symmetric-plate analog of the Earth, interface n -- i is a plane of symmetry.
The dispersion function is the same as (48), with F (~-~) and F(~-~) redefined. For s y m -
1514 BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

metric modes, the normal component of displacement must vanish at the plane of
symmetry. From Haskell's equation (2.4), it is seen that sufficient conditions for this
type of motion are: the vanishing of the partial derivative of the dilatation, with respect
to z, at the plane of symmetry, and the vanishing of the partial derivative of the
rotation, with respect to x, at this plane. These conditions yield the submatrix

A(n-z):[--ir:n_~oinPn_~cosPn_~
0
0
- sin Qn_l/r~,,_l
0
- i cos Q,-1
]
after the second and third columns have been divided by r,~_~ and ran_x , respectively.
For antisymmetric modes, the tangential component of displacement must vanish at
the plane of symmetry. From Haskell's relation (2.3), it is seen that sufficient condi-
tions for this type of motion are: the vanishing of the partial derivative of the dilata-
tion, with respect to x, at the plane of symmetry, and the vanishing of the partial
derivative of the rotation, with respect to z, at this plane. After dividing the second and
third columns by r .... ~ and r3n_l , respectively, the submatrix takes the form

A(n-l) I--i cos Pn_l -- Sin Pn_l/ran_l 0 0 1

-- 0 0 cos Qn-z -ir~,,_l sin Qn-z "

For both symmetric and antisymmetric modes, the 6 X 1 matrices F ("-z) and P(~-~)
are given by
['-~(n--l)
] ~' 12
~(n--1)
- - , x ' 24

__I F~;'-l)
F (n--l)
- l~(n-1)1'23
~(n--1)

(n--l)
J['24 _F~-z>
F~; -1)

where the quantities -+3P!"~-z)are defined as the second-order determinants formed with
the i th and jth columns of A <n-z), in that order. For symmetric modes

F(n-l)
12 ~ 0
p(n-z)
l.' 23 ~ ~9
~ (n-z)

F(n-i) i~.~-1) L-'~( n - - l ) .._ (n--l)

13 ~ ~' 24 ~ --7+g-7

= -s~o F i ~ -~) = 0 (49)

and for antisymmetrie modes

F(n-1) ~ (n--l) ~=(n--l)

12 = 0 ~[' 23 ~ --Sll

F<~-I)
13 =
. : (n--l)
--~g-7
15~(n--])
z' ~4 ~ i
~--1)

F~2-1> ~ (n-l) F~: -1> 0 (50)

 SURFACE-WAVE DISPERSION COMPUTATIONS 1515

In using (47) to compute the dispersion function, the m *h matrix multiplication

has the form

V°iv
[T(m), i~(m)] = [U<m-1), ig(m-~), W(m-~), R(m-1), iS(m-l), _ U(m-1)] ~ i~

L;o
Thus the product can be formed using only pure real quantities

T(~) = _ ~ V (m-~) + vW (m-~) + KR (m-~) _ 0S(.~-~)

(I)(m) = 2(~U (m-l) + &V(m-l) _~ ~ W (m-l) ._~ ~R (m-l) .Jr_ ~S (m-l).

When [T(~), i~(~)] has been formed, the dispersion function has the symbolic matrix
form

. .

and the technic given by Schwab and Knopoff can be applied to complete the computa-
tion of AR without the use of complex numbers. If (48) is used to compute the dis-
persion function, the same technics can be employed to carry the computation down to
IT(p-~), i(I)(p-~)] without the use of complex numbers. The pth matrix multiplication has
the form

[U(P)' iV(P)' W(P)' R(~)' iS(P)' - U(P)] = [T(P-~)' i~(p-1)] Iv'iv, " " "' - ,ivv 1

Since the last element of the 1 X 6 matrix product is the negative of the first, equations
(29) through (33), or (36) through (40), can be applied to carry the matrix product
down to [U (~-2), . . . , - - U (~-2)] without using complex numbers. Equation (44) can
then be used to complete the computation of the half-space dispersion function. The
dispersion function for the symmetric-plate analog of the Earth is obtained from

IF-Im(F~-~))]
I[
I F~2_1)
F ~ -1) if n - 1 is even

A, = [V (~-~), W (~-~), R (~-2), S (~'-~)]

[ L --Im(F(2'~ -') )

--
Ira(F24(n--l)) 1
]
]~(n--1)
•'23 if n - - l i s o d d
F1(~-1)
(n-i)
Ira(F13 )
]516 BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

where the quantities F ~ -1) are given by (49) for symmetric modes, and by (50) for
antisymmetric modes.
P r o g r a m testing. The "fast" representation of Knopoff's method was checked with
a test program. ContinentM and oceanic models containing up to 50 layers in the crust-
mantle system were used to check equation (11). The numerical value of the disper-
sion fun ction from Knopoff's method was found to be the same as that from the product
form of the Thomson-Haskell technic. The latter values were obtained from a modified
version of the ratio-form program described by Schwab and Knopoff. Using normaliza-
tion (Schwab and Knopoff, 1970) to control overflow, layer-reduction experiments
were used to test the loss-of-precision control feature. Carrying 16 decimal digits during
computations, and requiring 15.4 significant figures in the computed phase velocities,
the number of wavelengths of layered structure above the homogeneous half-space was
increased to 196 without encountering any loss-of-precision problems. Thus this con-
trol feature is undoubtedly present in the "fast" representation of Knopoff's method.
Although linear interpolation is an excellent root-refining process when used with
the ratio form of the dispersion function from the Thomson-Haskell formulation, it
was found to be a poor process to use with the dispersion function from Knopoff's
method. In order for the latter dispersion function to converge to within a specified
accuracy of a root with the rapidity of the former (see Table 4), and to validate the
comparative time estimates given in Table 3, it was necessary to switch to quadratic
interpolation. Since all the representations mentioned, except for the ratio form of
the Thomson-Haskell formulation, have the same dispersion function as the representa-
tion derived from Knopoff's method, all these technics are employed most efficiently
with quadratic interpolation applied to the root-refining process.
Equations (47) and (48), for obtaining the dispersion from layered half-space and
symmetric-plate analogs of the Earth when the inner and/or outer sections of the core
are taken into consideration, were tested by comparing the resulting phase velocities
with those obtained from the comparable Thomson-Haskell dispersion functions given
by Schwab and Knopoff. Full agreement, to the specified accuracy, was obtained.

LOVE WAVES
In order to facilitate the comparison of Knopoff's method with the Thomson-
Haskell technic, Knopoff's method is used to derive the dispersion function while using
Haskell's notation. The Love-wave components of displacement and stress in the mth
layer are

(b/el.),~ = A , ~ i k cos qm + Bmk sin qm

( Y ~ ) m = --A,nkt~mr~m sin q,, - B,~iktL,~r~m cos q~ ,

where

A m ~ Vm r -4- Vmp

B m -~- Vm ! - - y m fp.

At the free surface (Y~)I(°) vanishes. Thus

-B:ik~:r~: = O,
 SURFACE-WAVE DISPERSION COMPUTATIONS 1517

and Knopoff's first submatrix takes the form

F (°) = [0, --ikthr~l]. (51)

The continuity of displacement and stress at the mth interface, 1 =< m _-< n - 2, gives
rise to the relations

Amik cos Q,~ --~ Bmk sin Qm -- Am+~ik = 0

-A~kumr~m sin Q~ - B,~iktLmr~,~ cos Q,~ -~- B,~+~ik~m+ir~m+~ = 0

from which the intermediate interface submatrices can be constructed

F(m) = I ikcosQ~ ksinQ~ -ik 0 1" (52)

--k~ r ~ sin Q,~ - i / c t ~ r ~ cos Q~ 0 ik~+~ r~+~

Since the Biswas-Knopoff transformation allows Love-wave dispersion on a layered

sphere to be determined from layered half-space computations, there are two flat-
layered structural cases of geophysical interest: n - 1 solid layers over a solid homo-
geneous half-space, and n - 1 solid layers terminated b y a solid-liquid interface, i.e.,
the mantle-core boundary.
In the first case, the continuity of displacement and stress at the deepest interface
yields the relations

A~_lik cos Q._~ + B,_lk sin Qn-1 - v,/ik = 0

-A._llcttn_lr~._l sin Q._~ - B,~_~iktL~_~r~,,_l cos Q~_~ - - v~ ' l ~ t ~ r ~* = O,

where r~* is the pure real quantity r~/i. These relations produce the final interface
submatrix for this case

F(n-1) F ik COS Qn-1 k sin Q~-I -ik

(53)
/L_ kt~-i r~n-1 sin Q~_~ - ik~_~ r~_~ cos Qn-~ - k ~ r~*~~_j"

For the case in which the deepest interface corresponds to the mantle-core bound-
ary, the vanishing of the tangential component of stress at this interface yields

--A,~_lk~-lr~-i sin Q~-! -- Bn-lik~.-lr&~-i c o s Qn--1 -- 0,

and thus the final interface submatrix is

I ~(n-1) ---- [--k#n-lr~n--1 s i n Qn-1, --ikttn--lr~n--1 COS Qn-I]. (54)

If the full determinantal form of the dispersion function AL is now constructed from
(51), (52), and either (53) or (54), according to Knopoff's equation (2), and if:
columns 2i are divided b y tt~B~, i = 1, 2, • • • , n - 1; all rows are divided b y k; even
numbered rows are multiplied b y i; the last column is multiplied by i if the deepest
interface is a solid-solid boundary and n - 1 is odd; and the last row is divided by i if
the deepest interface is a solid-liquid boundary and n - 1 is even; then the interface
1518 BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

matrices can be constructed according to Knopoff's specifications• These are

T (°) = [0,--i]

T(~) = F~.~ r ~ sin Q~ - i cos Q~ (55)

L i cos Q~ - sin Q,~/~mr~mJ

~(m) = [sin Qm/~., r~ i cos Q~ l (56)

L - i cos Qm -~ rs~ sin Q~J '

where 1 =< m =< n -- 2. If the deepest interface is a solid-solid boundary,

~n rBn cos Qn-1"~ I~n--1r~n--1Sln Qn-1

T(n_l) =
F* 1
b ( - , ~ r.~ sm Q~-1/,~-1 r~.~_l + cos Q.~-I)J

2p(,~_1) = F~,~r~*sinQ,~_l/~n_lr~,~_l- cos Q~_I 1

L - i ( . ~ r~* cos Q~_~ + .~_~ro~_~ sin Q~-I)J "

If the deepest interface is a solid-liquid boundary,

T(n-1) F--~n--1 r¢~-1 sin Q,~-I-]

= m - i cos Q~_I J

~(n--1) =V cOSQn--lQn_l
j
Li~_~ r~n-~ sin
The matrix representation of the dispersion function is

T(O)~(1)Tm)~(3) _fT(~-mT(~-l) if n -- 1 is even

AL m ~ O

\T(~-2)T (~-~) if n - 1 is odd,

which has the symbolic matrix form

[7 [7 [;3.
Thus the scheme given by Schwab and Knopoff for avoiding the use and manipulation
of complex numbers can be applied directly to the computation of AL.
From Haskell's equation (9.9), the "fast" representation of the Thomson-Haskell
Love-wave dispersion function c~n be constructed

FL(O~ , C L ) : [ ~ , --i] r (art-1)ll (a~t-1)12] [ (a2)11 (a2)12l m(ai)111

m(~n-1)21 (an-l) 11 ''" (a2)21 (aD.Jk(a,).,J'
where s vanishes when the deepest interface corresponds to the mantle-core boundary,
and has the value tL.r~,
* when it is a solid-solid interface. The Thomson-Haskell layer
matrices have the form

a~ = F. cos Q~ i sin Qm/t~mr~,(]

U,~.,r ~ sin Q~ cos Q~ J"
 SURFACE-WAVE DISPERSION COMPUTATIONS 1519

Comparing the elements of this layer matrix with those of the interface matrices (55)
and (56), it is seen that the two technics require the same amount of time to compute
the independent elements of the individuM interface, or layer matrices. Since the two
technics also use the same form of matrix multiplication, [1 X 2][2 X 2], the two
methods have the same characteristic times for Love-wave dispersion computations.
AL can be shown equal to F~ (¢0, cL) or --FL (~, eL), depending upon the value of n, in
much the same manner as the Rayleigh-wave dispersion function derived from the re-
duced ~-matrix extension of the Thomson-Haskell formulation was shown equal to the
analogous function derived from Knopoff's method. Since the characteristic times are
the same, and since the dispersion functions are the same, except for a possible sign re-
versal for some values of n, the matrix representations derived from Knopoff's method
and from the Thomson-Haskell technic have the same program speeds. The charac-
teristic times are given in the paper by Schwab and Knopoff.
In the work reported in that paper, only halving and linear interpolation were tested
in the root-refining process for Love-wave dispersion computations. Linear interpola-
tion was found to be about twice as fast as halving when structure reduction was in ef-
fect. However, further testing of the root-refining process has shown that quadratic
interpolation is still more efficient and should be used in Love-wave dispersion compu-
tations.
CONCLUSIONS

There are two basic technics for deriving representations of surface-wave dispersion
functions. The method proposed by Knopoff proceeds by setting up the problem as a
system of m linear, homogeneous equations in m unknowns and defines the dispersion
function as the determinant of the coefficient matrix. After decomposing the determi-
nant into a product of matrices, the frequency dependence of the phase velocity is ob-
tained from roots of the dispersion function. The appeal of the Thomson-Haskell
technic is its strongly physical basis. The dispersion functions are constructed from
layer matrices and layer-matrix products, which have very definite physical significance:
the former relating the components of motion at the bottom of a layer to those at the
top, and the latter relating the components of motion at the deepest interface to those
at the free surface.
Rayleigh-wave dispersion computations. For the fastest computation of fundamental-
mode Rayleigh-wave dispersion, structure reduction (Schwab and Knopoff, 1970)
should be employed with either the "fast" form of Knopoff's method, or the "fast"
version of the ratio form of the original Thomson-Haskcll technic (Schwab and Knop-
off, 1970). With quadratic interpolation used in the root-refining process, Knopoff's
method is about 12 per cent faster than the Thomson-Haskell technic. For computa-
tions in which structure reduction is not employed, or for higher-mode computations
which encounter loss-of-precision problems in the original Thomson-Haskell formula-
tion, Knopoff's method should be used. This technic is always about 38 per cent faster
than the reduced-~-matrix extension of the Thomson Haskell technic. This extension
is the fastest version of the Thomson-Haskell formulation containing the loss-of-
precision control feature.
Knopoff's method is particularly suitable for dispersion computations involving the
use of both solid and liquid layers. The technic for the construction of solid-solid inter-
face matrices can be generalized, in an obvious manner, to the construction of solid-
liquid, liquid-liquid, and liquid-solid interface matrices.
Love-wave dispersion computations. The only difference between Knopoff's method
1520 BULLETIN OF THE SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA

and the Thomson-Haskell technic for the computation of Love-wave dispersion is in

the matrix representations of the dispersion function. The dispersion functions them-
selves, except for a possible sign reversal, the characteristic times, and the actual pro-
gram speeds are all identical. Quadratic interpolation should be used in the root-refining
process of these computations.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research was supported by US Air Force Grant 69-1808.

REFERENCES
Biswas, N. N. and L. Knopoff (1970). Exact earth-flattening calculation for Love waves, Bull.
Seism. Soc. Am. 50, 1123-1137.
Dunkin, J.W. (1965). Computation of modal solutions in layered, elastic media at high frequencies,
Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 55, 335-358.
Haskell, N. A. (1953). The dispersion of surface waves on multilayered media, Bull. Seism. Soc.
Am. 43, 17-34.
Knopoff, L. (1964). A matrix method for elastic wave problems, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 54, 431-438.
Pestel, E. C., and F. A. Leckie (1963). Matrix Methods in Elastomechanics, McGraw-Hill, New
York.
Randall, M. J. (1967). Fast programs for layered half-space problems, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 57,
1299-1316.
Schwab, F. and L. Knopoff (1970). Surface-wave dispersion computations, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am.
60, 321-344.
Thomson, W. T. (1950). Transmission of elastic waves through a stratified solid medium, J. Appl.
Phys. 21, 89-93.
Thrower, E. N. (1965). The computation of dispersion of elastic waves in layered media, J. Sound
Vib. 2, 210-226.
Watson, T. H. (1970). A note on fast computation of Rayleigh wave dispersion in the multilayered
half-space, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 60, 161-166.

INSTITUTE OF GEOPHYSICS AND PLANETARY PHYSICS

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
PUBLICATION NUMBER 800

Manuscript received February 24 1970