1992 - Thomson - Geometrical Theory of Shear-Wave Splitting-Corrections To Ray Theory

Geophys. J . Int.
(1992) 108, 339-363
Geometrical theory of shear-wave splitting: corrections to ray theory

for interference in isotropic/anisotropic transitions
C. J. Thomson, J-M. Kendall and W. S. Guest
Department of Geological Sciences, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6
Accepted 1991 June 12. Received 1991 June 11; in original form 1990 December 10
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

SUMMARY
An S-wavefront from an isotropic region is expected to separate into two fronts
when it passes into a gradually more anisotropic region. Standard ray expansions
may be used t o continue the waves in the anisotropic region when these two
S-wavefronts have separated sufficiently. However, just inside the anisotropic region
the two S-waves interfere with an effect that is stronger than the usual o-’
corrections of the ray method. A waveform distortion can occur and this should be
considered when modelling S-waves in, e.g., subduction zones with regions of
isotropy grading into regions of anisotropy.
The interference is studied here by local analysis of an integral equation
obtained by the Green’s function method. It is found that if the elasticity and its first
two derivatives are continuous at the isotropy/anisotropy border, then zeroth-order
ray theory may still be used to continue the incident wave into the anisotropic
region. The incident displacement is simply resolved into two definite directions at
the point where the anisotropy begins. These two directions are the limits of the
unique eigenvectors on the anisotropic rays as the point of isotropy (onset of
splitting) is approached. If the nth derivative of the elasticity is discontinuous at the
isotropy/anisotropy border, then the scattering integral which describes the inter-
ference makes a correction to ray theory which is O ( W - ” ~ +in ’ ) magnitude. Hence,
the interference effect is stronger when the emergence of anisotropy is more
gradual.
Although the corrections are given by simple expressions, it is not reasonable to
specify numerical velocity models up to such high-order derivatives. For a smooth
interpolation scheme, such as cubic splines, it is more practical to monitor the
splitting rays obtained by ray tracing and to use the best-fitting ‘equivalent’
high-order discontinuity. This will lead t o an estimate of the importance of the
correction terms. An example is given for a subduction zone model involving olivine
alignment in the mantle-wedge above the slab.
Key words: body-wave seismology, interference, shear-wave splitting, waveform
modelling.
1 INTRODUCTION
The ray method of seismic modelling in inhomogeneous anisotropic media (Cerveny 1972) is based on the assumption that
there are three distinct wave types with speeds sufficientlydifferent that they propagate independently. An analogous theory
exists for isotropic media (Cervenq & Ravindra 1971), where the two S-wavespeeds are identically equal. However, in a
transition between isotropy and anisotropy neither of these asymptotic methods is applicable, because of local interference
between the two shear waves as their speeds coalesce or diverge. The interference modifies the waveforms in a way which
depends in its details on how the transition to anisotropy occurs. In this paper, the splitting problem is analysed for idealized
models having a discontinuity in some high derivative of the elasticity, say the third derivative. In this way we are able to
derive simple ‘connection’ formulae which can be used in less ideal models and which provide initial waveforms for the ray
method in the anisotropic region.
339
340 C. J . Thomson, J - M . Kendall and W . S . Guest
The problem is first studied in a laterally homogeneous model by local analysis of familiar separable solutions of the wave
equation. Then, with these results in mind, the laterally varying case is examined by isolating the main contributions to the
scattering integral of Coates & Chapman (1990) when it is applied with boundary conditions appropriate to the transition zone
problem. The laterally varying case requires local analysis of the rays and phase functions as they split and corresponding
asymptotic limits of surface and volume integrals obtained by the Green’s function method. In order to d o this several ancillary
topics have had to be investigated. These are the reciprocity of the ray limit of the anisotropic Green’s function, ray-centred
coordinates and their properties in anisotropic media, and degenerate perturbation theory for displacement vectors near a
point of isotropy (ray splitting). These topics are discussed in two research notes which accompany this paper: Kendall, Guest
& Thornson (1992, this issue and referred t o as “1’) and Guest, Thomson & Kendall (1992, this issue, “ 2 ’ ) . Although these
topics have been taken only as far as needed for the present problem, the methods used t o study them should be of more
general use and so they are presented separately. Future applications will include, for example, scattering by acoustic axes
(Fedorov 1968, p. 94) in inhomogeneous anisotropic media.
The interference connection formulae are convenient for inclusion in ray tracing programs. In numerical ray tracing it is

common to require only the first two derivatives of the model parameters to be continuous, as, for example, in a cubic spline
interpolation. It might be expected, then, that the case of a third-order transition t o anisotropy is convenient for modelling the
interference studied here. In practice, though, it is not reasonable t o specify the elasticity of the Earth so precisely and another
approach is suggested for smooth models. Provided there are several ray tracing time steps within the frequency-dependent
transition zone, the rate at which the anisotropic rays separate may be used to find a best-fitting ‘equivalent’ discontinuity. This
can be done by using the local properties of the rays for the equivalent discontinuity model, which are found in the course of
this study. This approach will yield a useful estimate of the strength of the interference for finite-frequency, smoothed signals
and it is demonstrated by a numerical example in Section 4. Apart from the frequency, the main variables on which the
interference signals depend are the incidence angle, incident polarization and anisotropic symmetry.
The effects of changes in anisotropy o n waveforms are potentially rich sources of information, as has recently been shown
by the SKS data of Silver & Chan (1988). T h e particular problem of a continuous transition from isotropy to anisotropy has
arisen in modelling subduction zones (Kendall & Thomson 1990) and the numerical example of Section 4 is drawn from that
work. Although a transition is in many ways more complicate’d than a discontinuity in the elastic parameters themselves [a
‘first-order’ discontinuity in the sense of cerveny & Ravindra (1971, p. 39)], the correction formulae obtained here are simple
enough to be used directly in general 3-D modelling and interpretation. T h e derivation is quite intricate, however, and so
readers who are not interested in the intermediate steps may wish to turn straight t o Section 4, which uses only the final
formulae.
2 A LATERALLY HOMOGENEOUS E X A M P L E
2.1 Basic equations
Here the medium varies only with depth I (Fig. 1). Region I (I < 0) is isotropic and Region I11 ( z > zl) is strongly anisotropic
in the sense that two shear waves travel independently. Region I1 is the transition zone for the material. A t high frequencies,
interference between the two shear waves occurs only in the part of region I1 closest to z = 0 and in this vicinity the elasticity is
taken to be in the form
Figure 1. A ray of type S in region I (isotropic) splits into two (S,, S,) o n reaching the anisotropic region 11. By the time region 111 is reached,
the pulses carried by S, and S2 have separated in time and space so that they may then be continued by anisotropic ray theory. The waveforms
of S, and S, will generally differ from that of the incident S, because of interference near z = 0.
Splitting S-wave interference 341
where c:,, is an isotropic background and cGk, defines the anisotropic perturbation. It is assumed that acoustic axes do not exist
in the propagation directions of interest and the dependence of the results on h is to be examined.
The equations of motion may be Fourier transformed with respect to time and the lateral coordinates x and y in order to
obtain a system of ordinary differential equations in z. In the notation of Fryer & Frazer (1984) this system is written
where the displacement-stress vector y is given by yT = [uT,tT/(-iw)], u is the displacement, t is the traction on surfaces of
constant z, w is the frequency and p x , p,, are the horizontal slowness components. The 6 x 6 matrix A has the block structure

where the 3 X 3 blocks T, X and S can be found from Woodhouse (1974). See also Garmany (1988) for more details on the
derivation of the reduced wave equation (2).
When the eigenvalues qi of A are all distinct, a fundamental matrix solution (Gilbert & Backus 1966) of (2) may be sought
in the form
F = N[1 + O(o-')]E, (4)
where
E = exp ( i o r ) , r= A(z) dz,
A is the diagonal matrix of eigenvalues q i and N is the corresponding matrix of eigenvectors. Solution (4) may be continued to
higher terms (Wasow 1965; Garmany 1988), giving the WKBJ expansion.
In an isotropic region, the six eigenvalues of A are not all distinct and the sixth-order WKBJ expansion breaks down
(Wasow 1965, section 28; Chapman & Shearer 1989). However, it is well known that in isotropic materials the system (2)
separates into the 4 X 4 P-SV system and the 2 X 2 SH system (see, for example, Woodhouse 1974). A WKBJ expansion may
be found for each of these subsystems separately (Richards 1971; Chapman 1973; Kennett 1983) and these expansions may be
combined to form a 6 X 6 fundamental matrix if desired.
The eigenvalues qi corresponding to shear waves tend to equality at z = 0 and neither the sixth order WKBJ nor the
isotropic WKBJ expansions apply in region I1 close to that point (Wasow 1965; Chapman & Shearer 1989). The way in which
the eigenvalues coalesce determines the local form of the wave equation (2) and the form of the solution.
2.2 The eigenvectors near z = 0

For given px, p,,, each eigenvalue q of A is an allowed vertical component of the slowness vector p for a local plane-wave
solution of the wave equation. Therefore, instead of dealing with the 6 X 6 matrix, it is convenient to follow Fryer & Frazer
(1987) and Garmany (1988), who study the related displacement vector problem
(a,k,ptpl - b,k)U, = (5)

where a,,k, = c,,k//p and p is density. Equation (5) arises when one seeks local plane-wave solutions of the wave equation in its
original form rather than the reduced form (2) (Cervenf 1972). A non-trivial solution of (5) requires the determinant of the
3 x 3 matrix at left to be zero and this determines allowed values of the slowness vector p = ( p , , p,,, 4). Typically there are six
allowed values of q, corresponding to 'up' and 'downgoing' waves of type P, S, and S,. In this paper we do not consider the
possibility of true turning or evanescent waves in the transition zone.
The local forms of the eigenvalues and eigenvectors for the S-waves near z = 0 are needed in order to ascertain the local
form of the wave equation there. Since the medium is isotropic at z = 0 we must use the degenerate perturbation results of
Jech & PSentik (1989), or rather a modified form of them given In Appendix A. From the results of Appendix A (equation
A12) we may write the two vertical slownesses for downgoing S-waves that coalesce at z = 0 in the form
Note that unlike the 'Airy' turning point problem studied by Garmany [1988, equation (35)], the correction (2") terms in (6)
are not necessarily equal and opposite. The corresponding displacement eigenvectors are written
ul(z) = U,,)(Z) + U,,(Z)Zh +0(ZZh), u,(z) = UZ(,(Z) + U,l(Z)Zh + O(zZh). (7)

These also follow from the results of Appendix A, where two orthogonal vectors ul0and u2(,are found for the isotropic limit
which blend smoothly into the unique eigenvectors of the 'nearby' anisotropic medium.
342 C. J . Thomson, J - M . Kendall and W . S. Guest
The relationship of these displacement results to the eigenvalue problem for the 6 X 6 matrix A in (2) may be found by
writing the stress-displacement 6-vectors in the form gT = (uT, aT) and then forming by elimination two separate 3 x 3
problems for u and recall the block structure (3)]. The displacement problem is found to be identical to (5) and once allowed
displacements urnare found the corresponding stresses are obtained from
a = X-'(q,l-
, T)u,, (8)
where I is the 3 X 3 identity matrix. As a result of these steps the stress-displacement eigenvectors of A corresponding to two
downgoing shear waves near z = 0 are found in the form [recall (7))
g&) = g,,(z) + gll(z)zh + O(Z2h), g2(z) = g,,(z) + g,,(z)z, + O(zZh). (9)

Analogous forms exist for the two upgoing shear waves that coalesce and there are also two distinct eigenvectors of A for the
up- and downgoing P-waves (which we do not need to study analytically).
As it is possible to find six linearly independent eigenvectors in the limit of isotropy, the matrix A is still similar to a

diagonal matrix at z = 0. This is in contrast to the usual turning point problem (Chapman 1974; Garmany 1988), where the
degeneracy of two eigenvalues is accompanied by a degeneracy of the eigenvectors. In the latter case the 2 x 2 Jordan block
corresponding to the degenerate eigenvalues has a one above the diagonal and the wave equation is similar to Airy's equation
(Wasow 1965, section 29). The theory of formal asymptotic expansions is less complete when the Jordan block for the two
eigenvalues in question is strictly diagonal (Wasow 1985, section 5.4). In this case another approach is needed.
2.3 The iterative solution

As the six eigenvectors are linearly independent it seems reasonable to expect that the zeroth-order WKBJ solution will still be
useful as a first approximation. Therefore the solution is sought in the form
y = NEr, (10)
where r ( z ) is a vector of amplitudes to be found. Substituting (10) into (2) leads to the following equation for r:
where
C = -N-'a,N = -NTJd,N (1lb)
is called the coupling matrix. The last step in ( l l b ) is accomplished using the symmetry property (Garmany 1983; Thomson,
Clarke & Garmany 1986)
N-'=NTJ, J=(p A).

This particular form of the symmetry property holds when the eigenvectors of A are normalized wrt vertical energy flux. If u is
a unit eigenvector of (5) and u the corresponding stress from (8), then the energy-normalized column vector g of N is defined
by
gT = n-'(uT, uT), where n2 = 2aTu. (12)
It turns out that nz in (12) is negative for downgoing waves (Appendix E). It can also be shown that with this normalization the
coupling matrix has the property
To a first approximation r(z) = do),a constant determined by the initial/boundary conditions. The second approximation
is obtained by the method of Picard iterations (Coddington & Levinson 1955, pp. 11-12). See Richards & Frasier (1976),
Chapman (1981) and Chapman & Orcutt (1985) for details of the isotropic elastic problem and Chapman & Shearer (1989) for
the application to problems in anisotropy. The method is closely related to iteratively solving an integral equation equivalent to
(11) by the Neumann-Born procedure (Mathews & Walker 1964, p. 304). The latter approach will be taken in Section 3
(laterally varying media).
For definiteness, let the columns of N be arranged in the order (S,, S,, P)down, (Sl, S,, P)up. Then a downgoing S-wave in
the isotropic region having a displacement U' at z = 0 will excite waves in the anisotropic region that are given to leading order
by
I(,)= = (nlou;,n2&, o,o, 0,O), (144
where, for example, n,, is the normalization factor (12) and U;= u, U' is the component of the incident displacement along
the unit vector u1 for the wave S, at z = 0. After the first iteration
r(z) = do)+ f e x p [ -iwa( <,O)]C(6) exp [ i w r ( 6, O)]dO) dc. (14b)

0
As the diagonal elements of C are zero (13) there is no self coupling to downgoing S, in (14b). Of the two other downgoing
waves, coupling to S, is strongest for the reasons to be described next.
The main contributions to integrals such as (14b) come from near the endpoints or from stationary points of the phase.
Stationarity of the phase in the ijth interaction term implies
-[a,t,(z, 0 ) - d,ti(Z, O)] = - [ q , ( z ) - q j ( z ) ]= 0. (15)

This does not occur for the P-S interactions because the wavespeeds are so different. In this case the integral is asymptotically
given by its Laplace endpoint contributions (Thomson & Chapman 1986) and is O ( w - ' ) in magnitude. These contributions are

part of the higher terms of the WKBJ asymptotic expansion (Young 1984).
There is a stationary point (15) for the S, - S, interaction at z = 0, because of the isotropy there. From (6) one finds that in
this vicinity
-[& 0 ) - tl(Z,O)] = --
'421 Zh+l + ... ? Aq21=921-qll,
h+l
and the stationary point is of higher order than usual as well as being at the endpoint of integration. In the vicinity of this point
the approximation
+
C(z) = C(0) O ( z ) (17)
is used. The elements of C(0) require the first derivatives of the eigenvectors just inside region I1 and, like the eigenvectors
themselves, these derivatives depend on how the anisotropy tends to isotropy. They must be found by perturbation methods
such as those of Appendix A and note N2. The details can be quite complicated and a discussion of this issue is given in Section
2.4 of N2. In practice a numerical differentiation is often satisfactory (see Section 4 of this paper).
For the downgoing wave of type S, at z = 0, the coupling to S, which has occurred by depth z is therefore approximately
1
c21(o)r( E) e-i[n12(h +l ) ] s g n ( w A q ~ ~ )
C2,(0) exp [-iw AqZlgh+'/(h+ l ) ] d c =
(h + IAq,,ll'h+l I w I ,Ih+
where we have used the standard integral
(Gradshteyn & Ryzhik 1980, p. 399, Section 3.712). The approximation (18) relies on the frequency being high enough that the
S-waves interfere only in a narrow region near z = 0. In particular, the use of (16) requires an inequality of the form
jw x constant1 ch'*/(h + 2) << 1, so that by Taylor expansion the next term in the phase can be removed from the exponential
in (14b) to give the integrand of (18). Also, in order to use the standard integral (19) it is necessary that IwAqZ115;h+1/(h+
1) >> at the upper limit 5 = z. These two types of constraint can be summarized by
O(W-l'h+l)<<Z << O(W-'lh+2). (20)

Provided the frequency is high enough, there is a range of z values (20) where the coupling has effectively ceased and after
which there are no more significant contributions to the depth integral (14b).
This is the basis on which we develop our formulae, here and in Section 3 below. However, more should be said about
validating the local arguments for a given model, as the frequency w is usually fixed or bounded. If (20) were to be used for
this purpose, the missing coefficients on the left and rhs would be needed and these coefficients depend on higher terms in
expansions (16) [and (17)]. We prefer to avoid directly estimating such higher expansions for a numerically specified model and
in the sample calculation of Section 4.3 we adopt another (though equivalent) approach. The argument is most transparent for
transient or localized time-domain signals (pulses). The main, physical, requirement is that the leading (frequency-
independent) approximations for the rays, phases and coupling parameters be reasonably accurate over sufficient distances for
the interfering pulses to separate in time and space. Broader, lower frequency pulses take longer (or further) to separate and
so the ray approximations must then be accurate over larger distances (which they may not be). Ray tracing tells us the 'exact'
ray paths and we need only compare them with the leading approximations. Thus we may in effect estimate the 'tayls' of Taylor
series such as (16) and (17) for ray properties by comparing the approximations with the exact solutions. There is always a
frequency low enough that the condition (20) is violated and so for time-domain signals containing a range of frequencies this is
the most practical approach and it is easily implemented. See Section 4.3 for further discussion.
Returning to the derivation, the net frequency-domain solution for the displacement of the wave S, at any depth may now
be written
The agreement between this solution and that for laterally varying media (Section 3.3) is examined in Appendix E.
The time domain form of the corrections can be obtained by applying the Chapman method to the integral on the rhs of
(18) (Chapman 1978). Performing the inverse frequency transform first leads to the time domain expression

where the properties/definition of the delta function have been used and H ( t ) is the unit step function. Alternatively, the
Fourier transform results of Lighthill (1980, p. 43, table 1) can be used to deduce the inverse w transform of the rhs of (18).
Adapted to our notation the required Fourier transform pair given by Lighthill (1980) is
Using these results the time-domain analogue of the net solution (21) is found to be
3 LATERALLY V A R Y I N G M E D I A
3.1 Basic equations
Coates & Chapman [1990, equation (15)] have obtained coupling integrals for laterally varying media which are analogous to
the extra terms of the first iteration for laterally homogeneous media [i.e. (14) above]. As the physical problem considered
here is somewhat different to that of Coates & Chapman (1990), we shall need to explain how the coupling equations are
obtained. The notation here is somewhat different from that of the last section in order t o be more compatible with Coates &
Chapman (1990) and other papers o n ray theory. For example, g (not u) is used for the displacement or polarization
eigenvector and the two shear waves are denoted S, and S,.
The situation is shown in Fig. 2. Region I is isotropic and region 111 strongly anisotropic in the sense that two shear waves
travel independently. Region I1 is the transition region. Ray theory is used t o continue waves in region I u p to the 1-11
boundary. In region 111, the anisotropic ray method may be used t o continue the waves. Although the anisotropic ray series
breaks down in region I1 as the 1-11 boundary is approached, one may still find two orthogonal polarization vectors for the
coalescing S-waves (see note N2). Therefore we work under the hypothesis that the zeroth-order ray solution is still useful as a
I I1 111
Figure 2. The laterally varying analogue of Fig. 1. The boundary between regions I and 11 is now denoted 3'and the splitting waves by S, and
S, (as in other works). The elasticity is continuous across a',but some of its derivatives are not. Neighbouring ray S' splits into S: and Sh and
serves to emphasize how the two wavefronts separate. The dashed path R' is the continuation of a ray from region I obtained by using the
isotropic elasticity and ray equations a short distance into region 11. R' is used in the discussion of Section 4.2.
first approximation throughout region 11. (As before, the possibility of acoustic axes in the direction of propagation is not
considered. )
The homogeneous wave equation in region I1 is written
-Se/[Ui(X, o ) ] = d i [ C i j k / ( X ) d / U k ( X , w)] + W'P(X>Uj(X, w ) = 0. (23)

In order to construct an integral equation for u j ( x , w ) we must also consider the Green's function for a hypothetical source in
region I1 (Hudson 1980, chapter 5):
-Se/.[Gip(x,
x,, w)] = -6(x - xr)ajP, x, in region 11. (24)
As the exact Green's function G , is not known we shall assume that the zeroth-order ray solution u,,(x, x,, w ) is a useful first
approximation. The equation satisfied by uip is
qU,(x, x r , (311 = - 6 ( x - X#j, + ~ j b , , ( X , xr, O)l, (25)

where Ri(vip)is the remainder due to the fact that uip is only an approximate solution of the wave equation.
Taking the product of (23) with ujp and (25) with uj, then integrating the difference over a volume enclosing x, leads to
where the divergence theorem has been used (Hudson 1980, p. 101), B is the boundary of the domain 9 and n, is the inward
normal. *
Coates & Chapman (1990) consider the physical problem of a point source at xs, so that equation (23) appears with
6 ( x - x , ) on the rhs. In this case, equation (26) has another term giving the ray theory result at x,: namely ujp(&,xr, w ) =
upi(x,, x,, w ) , where reciprocity of the point source ray solution is used in this last step (see note Nl). The surface integral in
(26) is then taken to be effectively at infinity and it is neglected, leaving zeroth-order ray theory plus a correction (volume)
integral on the rhs. In the present work, however, (23) is homogeneous and the surface of integration comprises the 1-11
boundary plus a closing surface at infinity around regions I1 and 111. The incident wavefield is specified on the 1-11 boundary
and this portion of 93 will be denoted 3'.As 93' is also a material discontinuity, we should specify the secondary reflected wave
that it generates. It is a high-order discontinuity, though, and so the reflected wave will be weak. To an adequate
approximation we take the total field on 93' to be that due to the incident wave alone. It is not difficult to see later that the
correct leading-order results are obtained in this way.
3.2 Contribution of the surface integral

The ray theory form of the incident wave is written
u:(x, w ) = U:(x)ezwr'(x) (27)

and the ray theory Green's function has the form
v,(x, x,, w ) = v;(x, x,)e'WTY(X.Xr) (28)
[see N1, equation (IS)]. Superscript v in (28) indicates that there are three waves associated with the Green's function and
allowance for all three should be made. The incident wave (27) will be taken to be an S-wave. On substituting (27) and (28)
into the integral over a',
an integrand with the phase
@(x, x,) = t ' ( X ) + t'(X, XJ, xE %I,

(29)
is obtained. This phase will be stationary with respect to variations in 93' at some point xs when
d E @= g V @ = 0 and a,,@ = q V @ = 0, (30)
where lj and r] are in orthogonal directions in the surface at xs and 6 and q are the corresponding unit vectors. In other words,
the two wavefronts have equal and opposite slownesses parallel to 93' at the stationary point. Since the wavespeeds themselves
are continuous across 3' (Fig. 2), this means that a stationary point occurs when the slowness vectors satisfy
PYXS) + P Y ( X s , x,) = 0. (31)

In words, a stationary phase contribution is derived from a point x s where the incident ray and the ray from x , to x s ,
* This step IS not as simple as it seems. The ray approximation urP has a singularity at x, and this introduces a singularity into the 4 term of
(26). This singularity cancels that of the delta function of the point source. However, the remainder R, given in the ray-theory form (33) below
contains exactly the same singularity, which must be superfluous. We are assuming that the point source theory of Babif & Kirpifnikova (1979,
chapter 7) can be extended to the anisotropic case and that in the vicinity of the source a smoother remainder term R, can be found.
346 C . J . Thomson, J - M . Kendall and W. S. Guest
considered in reverse, are continuous in slowness. The incident ray corresponds to a shear wave and so there are in general two
points in region 11, x: and x:, which will satisfy condition (31). The corresponding shear waves are denoted S,, and S, [to be
consistent with the notation of Coates & Chapman (1990)] and we shall speak of the incident ray at xs as having split into a ray
of type S,, going to x: and one of type S, going to x,". The P-wave from a hypothetical source in region I1 does not give rise to a
stationary phase contribution as its slowness is always distinct from that of S-waves. The details of the stationary phase
evaluation of the surface integral are given in Appendix B, where results from notes N1 and N2 are used. The outcome of
Appendix B is that to leading order the fields at x: and xf are those predicted by resolving the incident displacement at xs into
the unique S,,and S,, eigenvectors there and then continuing by zeroth-order anisotropic ray theory. The volume integral in
(26) will now be shown to describe the interference between these two waves in the vicinity of the 1-11 boundary.
3.3 Contribution of the volume integral

In order to evaluate the volume integral in (26) exactly, the total field u, must be known. If zeroth-order ray theory is a valid

first approximation for u,, then the interference described by the integral should be a weaker effect (in some power of w ) . This
suggests that the scattering can be approximated by substituting zeroth-ray theory for u, and then reducing the integral to its
leading-order form for high frequencies. There are two contributions t o the zeroth-order ray value of u,, namely the S,,- and
S,,-waves excited by the incident wave. There are also two contributions to the ray Green's function u,,,, one for each type of
S-wave. Hence there are really four volume integrals to consider. W e shall deal with the case of scattering from S,, to S,,,
observed at the receiver x:.
The zeroth-order ray contribution S, is written
u: = U~A@(x)g~(x)e'wT", (32)
where UL is the fraction of the incident displacement which is imparted to S, at the surface 53' [see equation (B2) of Appendix
B or equation (14a) of Section 2.31 and A'*(x) is the spreading function. The remainder corresponding to the ray theory
Green's function (28) is written
qv;) = P(X)[L,(v;J - ~ ~~,(V~p)letWTV' (33)

where the operators L and M are given by cerveny [1972, equations (6)] and Coates & Chapman [1990, equations (4)]. It is
expected that the region closest to 53' contributes most to the volume integral. T h e ray theory amplitude functions are assumed
to be smooth in this region and the contribution of M in (33) is of higher order in w than that of L, so the latter will be ignored.
Substituting (32) and (33) into (26) leads to a volume integral with the phase
I#+, x:) = t'(X) + t y x , x:), x E 9. (34)

As a result of the isotropy on %I, this phase will have a 3-D stationary point, i.e. V@ = 0, at the point x y on the initial surface
where the S,, ray through x: begins. It is convenient t o consider the phase functions in the ray-centred coordinates (r, y,, y2)
defined on this S, ray (see note N1) and to approach the stationary point approximation in two stages.
For definiteness let the jump in the elasticity a t B* be in the third derivative. In Appendix D it is shown that the phase
function t wof zeroth-order ray theory then has the local form
t p =t + at4 + ~ ( t ' ) y+, o(t3)y2+ t,,,(t)y: + t,,,(t)y: + t~,,(t)y,y, + . . .
= t + at4 + 0 ( t 3 ) ~ , + + t y ~ D y t )+y . . . , (35)
where t = 0 at x)., coefficient a is given by equation (D8), yT = ( y , , y2) and the initial values
1 ap, 1 ap, ap, ap,
tZI1(0)= -- , t222(0) = -- , T21*(0) = -= -
2 aY, 2 aY2 aY, aY2
hold. The latter are the initial curvature factors due t o the incident wavefront and we have
D V ( 0 ) = DP(0) = 6. (36b)
The tilde is present on D, etc., to signify that ray-centred coordinates are used and that they are 2 X 2 matrices (see note N1,
Section 3.1). For the S,,-wavefront from x: we have the simpler expansion
tY=T -t + 4yTD'(t)y + . . . , (37)
where T > 0 is the time at x: measured from xv. The overbar on the curvature matrix in (37) signifies that the geometrical
spreading solutions of which it is composed are those obtained by integrating the spreading equations "1, equation (28)] in the
reverse sense from x: towards t = 0 on the reference ray. In terms of the blocks of the propagator "1, equation (30)], we have
D y t ) = -Pyt)[Ryt)]-l =Ofl(t)[Rfl(t)]-'. (38)
This follows from the chain rule and the symplectic property. See Appendix B, equations (B8 and B9), for a similar situation
and discussion about signs and the sense of integration of the geometrical spreading equations.
After these considerations we may write the wave scattered from S,, arriving at x: as S, in the form
where T is the transformation matrix to ray-centred coordinates (Nl). First we perform the integration wrt (yl, y,). From the
magnitudes of the linear terms in y, and y, in ( 3 9 , it follows that at a given t the stationary values of Y , , ~are O(t").Hence their
contribution to the phase after a 2-D stationary phase approximation will be O(t").This is negligible in comparison with the t 4
term in (35) and so the stationary values may be taken to be y, = y, = 0. The integration over (y,, y2) is then straightforward
and leads to the approximation

where the integration is along the ray S, from xv to x:. As the region near t = 0 contributes most to this integral, the next
approximation is to take the amplitude part of the integrand in (40) to be equal to its value at t = 0. This leaves the standard
integral (19) and we have the result
where A"(xv) = 1 and (38) have been used and all the amplitude terms are evaluated at xv.
In order to simplify further we must consider the term ~ ~ ( X , , ) M ~ [ which
V ~ ~ :controls
,], the strength of the coupling. From
note N1, equations (18) and (39) we have
where
The first two terms in (43) vanish on account of the isotropy at x,, and the orthogonality of gy and g: there. The quantity
C,,,(O) is a coupling parameter which in effect generalizes the coupling parameter C,,(O) of Section 2.3 to the laterally
inhomogeneous case. The simpler alternative forms indicated in (44) are not obvious and require some explanation. This is
given in Appendix F (which in turn refers to Section 2.4 of note N2). Taking (42) and (43) into account we can now write (41)
as
where
and we have also used the symmetry properties (B8) of Appendix B (or, rather, the equivalent ones in ray-centred
coordinates) and (36b). The term A'(x:, x V ) is recognized as the spreading factor of zeroth-order ray theory appropriate to the
wave S, [Appendix C, equation (CS)]. It may be considered effectively constant (at unity) in the small region under
consideration. However, at the edge of the region of strong coupling, (45) is to be matched with ray theory for continuation to
large distances. The form of (46) and the phase in (45) make this matching straightforward. Therefore collecting (45) together
with zeroth-order ray theory for S, [see (32)] we have the net result
Result (47) is the generalization of (21) and in Appendix E it is verified that (47) reduces to (21) in the laterally homogeneous
case.
The time-domain solution is obtained by using the Fourier transform pair given just prior to equation (22). When this is done
the final result can be written
where we have allowed for the possibility of anisotropy arising at orders other than the third. This more general form of the
solution can be obtained quite easily given a familiarity with the various expansions made up to this point. The parameter 'u' in
(48) depends on the jump in ray velocity derivatives at 93' and it is given by equation (D8) of Appendix D for the case of
anisotropy emerging at third order. A more general form than (D8) is

where ptw,is the ray slowness at the splitting point, v{$) = dhv/dth there and [ 1; represents the difference in the values of this
derivative for the two S rays at the splitting point. Equations (48) and (49) are used for the examples of Section 4.
For self coupling from S,, to S,, the arguments up to equation (40) are similar. In that equation, the t4 phase term is absent,
however, and so for S" it appears at first that the coupling integral is O(1). However, the amplitude of the integrand is
identically zero in t, since
This result follows by noting that the term in square brackets is a compact form of the operator in the transport equation of
zeroth-order ray theory and that \Vippl satisfies that transport equation.
4 A NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
4.1 Introduction
This example is based on a 3-D model of a subduction zone used in the work of Kendall & Thomson (1990). Cartesian
coordinates are used within a box that encloses the subducting slab and which has typical dimensions of 1000 km along the
strike of the slab, 650 km perpendicular to strike and 750 km in depth. In the work of Kendall & Thomson (1990), Cartesian
ray tracing within this box is matched with spherical coordinate ray tracing in a global Earth model (PREM), in order to
continue to teleseismic distances. The present example, though, is rather preliminary and only the ray tracing within the box is
of concern. The aim is to estimate how significant the interference effects might be and to relay some of the practical
considerations which are needed to implement the theory presented in the last section.
A modified cubic-spline due to M. L. Smith and described by Thomson & Gubbins (1982) is used to interpolate the elastic
parameters specified on a grid of knot points within the subduction zone box. Fig. 3 shows a 2-D section of the model
perpendicular to the slab strike. In this particular model, an isotropic 5 per cent velocity anomaly represents the lithosphere
subducting at an angle of 63". The anisotropy is located in the mantle 'wedge' above the slab. This anisotropy corresponds to
that predicted by McKenzie (1979) and Ribe (1989) on the basis of olivine alignment due to deformation during mantle flow.
We refer to the latter paper for details of the nature and strength of the anisotropy and mention only that the fast axis of the
olivine is parallel (downdip) to the slab. A point source is placed in the isotropic slab and rays are traced by using the
Runge-Kutta method to solve the ray equations. The ray tracing timestep is 0.2 s.
4.2 Some ray tracing details

This section can be omitted by readers not concerned with the numerical implementation of ray tracing.
The Cardinal spline interpolation functions have side-lobes (Thomson & Gubbins 1982, Fig. 4). This means that a medium
which is smoothly changing from isotropy to anisotropy will, once sampled on a grid and interpolated, be represented in the
calculations by a model with weak anisotropy in the region which is supposedly isotropic. For the present example, it was
found that the spline 'leaked' anisotropy so that the two S-wave normal velocities (or phase speeds) were different by at most
OFFSET (km)
0 200 400 600
I
I
63' 0 OLIVINE
Knot Spacing
50
00000
610 km OOOOOD
700

Figure 3. A 2-D cross-section through the subduction zone model, indicating the relative positions of the slab and the anisotropic region in the
mantle above. The splitting rays are schematically indicated.
0.7 per cent in the region which should be isotropic. On the other hand, in the region where the main lobe of the spline
dominates the anisotropy grew from 0.5 to about 2 per cent in less than a fifth of a knot spacing (in about four time steps, in
fact). The leakage was dealt with by using only the isotropic part of the elasticity tensor in the region where anisotropy was less
than 0.7 per cent. The isotropic ray equations were used in this region, although the anisotropic contribution to the elasticity
was monitored. As soon as the anisotropy, as determined by the two shear-wave phase speeds, grew above a certain tolerance
(2 per cent, say), a decision was made that the medium should be considered truly anisotropic.
Once this decision is made it is necessary to estimate where the point of vanishing anisotropy occurred and to invoke a
matching scheme for the ray tracing. This matching scheme is necessary partly because the elasticity obtained by ignoring the
spline side-lobe has a discontinuity in gradient, albeit small. More importantly, to begin the anisotropic ray tracing in a fashion
which is consistent with zeroth-order ray theory, we must effectively perform a local reinterpolation of the elasticity, estimate
the limiting forms of the anisotropic polarizations and ensure that the two splitting S rays have appropriate initial conditions.
The matching scheme will be explained with the aid of Fig. 2. The dashed line denoted by R' in Fig. 2 is the ray path
obtained using the isotropic ray equations. It enters a short distance into region 11. The positions and slownesses at several
previous points on R' are stored during ray tracing. Once the region of anisotropy is entered, the two, slightly different,
anisotropic phase velocities are calculated at two reference points on R' which are judged to be far enough into region I1 that
reliable numerical results are obtained. These two reference velocities are used to estimate the time to on R' at which the
anisotropy started by assuming that the difference in phase speeds grows like (t - tJ3. Given to, the elasticity and its first two
derivatives at the first of the two reference points can be used to create an interpolation scheme for the anisotropic part of the
elasticity, u$. This interpolation is of the form atkkl= Aykl(t- t,)', SO that the anisotropy enters at the third derivative. This
local reinterpolation is strictly defined only for elasticity as a function of time along the isotropic ray R'. Although the true
Figure 4. A perspective plot of the ray tracing results in the vicinity of the point of splitting.The 3-D axes are indicated: z is vertically upwards
at the source, x is perpendicular to the slab strike and y along strike. The ray leaves the source horizontally at an angle of 30" to the x-axis. The
polarizations on the splitting rays are indicated by the 3-D arrows. Also shown are three (vertical) sections through the S phase-velocity sheets
at 7, 17 and 27 km along the rays from the point of splitting. The 'x'-axis of these velocity sections is parallel to the ray slowness.
splitting S rays are not the same as the ray R ' , the differences are small in the small region under consideration and so the
elasticity given by this scheme is locally acceptable.
The Runge-Kutta method is also used to solve the ray equations in this local region, although it is applied in a fashion
appropriate to the problem. In general, one timestep At of the Runge-Kutta method uses the ray equations at a number of
time values between zero and At. For example, at zero, one half and one times At in the Runge-Kutta method of order four.
In the present problem, it is appropriate t o use the isotropic ray equations at the first point (to) and the anisotropic ray
equations at the remaining points. In this way, the values of p and d p / d t at the point t,, are explicitly made the same for both
S-wave types. The second derivative d 2 p / d t 2 does not explicitly appear in the ray equations and so it is not explicitly
constrained to be the same for the splitting S rays. However, the way in which the elasticity is locally interpolated should
implicitly impose this condition. It is conceivable that in this region of very weak anisotropy the polarization cannot be found
accurately by the usual exact method. The polarizations are slowly varying in this small neighbourhood and so the values at the
reference points on R' may be used. Alternatively, the perturbation theory approach can be used.
The modified interpolation and ray tracing scheme just outlined is only applied for one timestep. A t the end of this step,

the values of position and slowness on the two S rays are different and the usual anisotropic ray tracing scheme is used to
continue them.
4.3 Results for the slab model

Figure 4 shows a pair of splitting S rays in an exaggerated form, together with the polarizations. This is a 2-D projection of rays
computed in 3-D and the direction of viewing is chosen t o maximize the separation.
Figure 4 indicates that the rays separate by about 5 km laterally after travelling approximately 37 km. However, in order to
apply simple formulae such as (48), the rate at which the rays separate must be known in a more detailed way. Fig. 5 shows a
plot of the logarithm of the separation versus the logarithm of ray length o r , rather, ray tracing step number. We deduce from
this figure that, to a reasonable approximation, the splitting grows like t'. Thus the separation of the wavefronts in the
direction parallel to the rays also grows like t" [cf. the t4 growth in equation (35)]. This would correspond to saying that the rise
in anisotropy is effectively equivalent to that caused by a second-order jump in the elastic constants. Some explanation is
therefore required, as, by the idealized theory of Section 3, such an assumption appears t o be inconsistent with the use of
zeroth-order ray theory. In this model, the elastic constants are continuous u p to second derivatives, to a good approximation,
so ray theory is reasonably applied. The volume scattering integral which describes the coupling should be evaluated
numerically, as the phase functions d o not quite behave as the idealized theory of Section 3 assumes. However, the local
arguments and formulae of that section d o still indicate how we can proceed to an approximate solution. Here we find the
phase functions differ in I', approximately, and so instead of evaluating the scattering integral numerically we will replace it
with a simpler integral, as suggested by Section 3. The way the rays split is controlled by properties of the model over distances
of 20-30 km. By comparison, the local reinterpolation scheme of Section 4.2 was used only in a zone about 7 km wide. Thus
larger scale properties of the model are controlling the behaviour of the rays over most of the region of importance and, hence,
1 BEST-FITTING S E P A R A T I O N C U R V E
lo,
Sj=Sep'n of pts. n,on S , a n d S,
I , ,
,
, , I : , , ,
1 -0.2
?--.
m- -0.4
-0.8 -
0.00 om 0.39 0.59 0.79 o 98 i is I 37 I 57 1.77 I 96
Figure 5. Determination of the best-fitting separation function for the rays in the present model. The ray points n,. j = 1, 2, . . . are counted
from the first point after the modified (matching) ray-tracing step of Section 4.2. The stepsize for this modified step was (arbitrarily) set at 7
times the usual ray tracing stepsize to ensure sufficient differences between the results for S, and S,,. Hence, it is appropriate to consider n , = 7
for the purposes of Fig. 5 . The dash line indicates when the rays have travelled approximately 37 km from the point of isotropy (as defined in
Section 4.2). The rays appear to diverge at a rate proportional to f3, to a reasonable approximation. See text (Section 4.3) for further
discussion.
COUPLING PARAMETERS
0.08 7 ’ ’ ’ ,
I 4 8 I? 15 19 2.3 26 JO
Point along r a y

Figure 6. The coupling parameter(s) (44). These were estimated by using a simple finite difference approximation for the time-derivatives of
the polarization vectors along the two rays shown in Fig. 4. The ray points are spaced approximately 1 km apart and point # 1 here is the first
+
point after the modified ray tracing step of Section 4.2. The middle curve is the value of C,, C,,, which is zero in the isotropic limit and
serves as a numerical check. See text (Section 4.3) for discussion.
the effective value of the scattering integral. In view of these observations it is appropriate to apply formula (48) with h = 2.
The parameter ‘a’ given by (49) can be estimated from the positions along the splitting rays: the separation Ax between points
at equal times along the two rays is related to ‘a’ by poo * Ax = ath+’, to leading order. Great accuracy is not required in
estimating ‘u’as it is raised to a fractional power in (48).
The coupling parameter (44) has been estimated by a simple finite difference scheme and is shown in Fig. 6. The
polarizations were obtained both by the exact method and the degenerate perturbation theory, with effectively identical results.
The smooth, though rapid, decrease as the point of isotropy is approached appears to be another feature of this specific
numerical model. However, it is interesting to note that for the idealized theory of Section 3 the coupling parameter is zero in
the isotropic region and jumps suddenly to a finite value at the boundary 53’ (see note N2, Sections 2.4-2.5, for a discussion).
It appears in Fig. 6 that the smoothly interpolated model is displaying a similar behaviour. The coupling parameter (44) is
precisely defined only at the initial point, where the two splitting rays are coincident. On the other hand, for Fig. 6 the
polarizations were evaluated on rays that are diverging slightly. This presumably accounts for the reduction of the coupling
parameter at the larger times.
Figure 6 implies a constraint on the frequencies for which the local coupling formulae are useful. The coupling must take
place mainly in the first 27 km after the point of isotropy and be complete by 37 km. That is, the two shear-wave pulses must
separate in time and space by that position along the rays. The coupling parameter used in the calculations was that value at
point 12 in Fig. 6. Evidently the values between points 3 and 20, say, control the size of the integral and point 12 was chosen as
representative of these.
The separation criterion for transient pulses needs some explanation. The asymptotic theory clearly fails for the lowest
frequencies present in the pulses shown below, but we assume that the higher frequencies dominate so that reasonable results
are obtained. We use a Rayleigh-type criterion for deciding when the separation has occurred. The separation is deemed to
WAVEFORMS I
I . . . . . . . . .
SECONDS
Figure 7. The (smoothed) individual waveforms associated with the coupling/interference. See text (Section 4.3)for discussion
352 C. J . Thomson, J-M. Kendall and W . S. Guest
WAVEFORMS I1
.............
~
ZEROTH-ORDER RAY
THEORY

CORRECTED
Figure 8. The net waveforms, after pulse separation, when the incident wave is polarized at various angles to one of the anisotropic
polarizations. These angles range from 0" to 90".as indicated by the rotating bar. The waveforms for the two quasi-shear waves have been
offset by approximately the pulse width at half the peak height.
have occurred when the two S-wave pulses have separated by the pulse width at half the maximum pulse height, so that two
distinct pulses can just be resolved. In the present model (i.e. for Fig. 4), the wavefronts have separated by approximately
2.75 km in the direction of propagation after travelling approximately 37 km into region 11. As the wavespeed is approximately
5.5 km s-', this means that pulses of half-peak width 0.5 s will effectively separate in time and space. Fig. 7 shows a smoothed
delta function of unit amplitude and width 0.5 s at half the peak height. The two correction time series obtained using (48) are
also shown. Fig. 7 shows the relative importance of the corrections for the special case where the incident polarization is
directed at 45" to the two limiting anisotropic polarizations [so that U!,= U: in (48)].
More generally, Fig. 8 shows the resulting waveforms of S,, and S, given by ray theory and the corrected ray theory for
incident polarizations ranging from 0" to 90" from the direction of the S,, polarization. Naturally, the relative importance of the
corrections is greatest for the wave type which is excited the least (in the zeroth order) by the incident wave. The significant
waveform effects shown in Fig. 8 lead us to the conclusion that the interference cannot reasonably be ignored when modelling
or interpretating waves in structures such as that shown in Fig. 3. For example, ray theory predicts that there are incident
polarizations for which only one type of S-wave pulse will exist in the strongly anisotropic region. The first and last sets of
waveforms in Fig. 8 correspond to this case. The coupling in the weakly anisotropic transition generates a significant pulse of
the other type, however, and this effect must be considered when designing an experiment to determine the anisotropy using
the 'absence' of a second S-wave pulse as a diagnostic tool.
5 CONCLUDING REMARKS
The expressions derived here are the most reduced or simplified forms for the physical problem of shear-wave splitting. In
practice they may be oversimplified and a solution based on the numerical evaluation of the scattering integral at some
intermediate step may prove more accurate. The decision as to which approach to take depends upon a comparison of the
exact ray paths, phases and coupling parameters, for the model at hand, with the leading-order approximations for these
quantities given in this paper and notes N1 and N2. If the local approximations for these frequency-independent quantities are
not sufficiently accurate over the separation distances required by pulses containing the frequencies of interest, then it may be
necessary to perform a line or volume integral (not all the possible intermediate solutions have been investigated). It should be
noted, though, that the starting point for all these solutions is that zeroth-order ray theory is a reasonable first approximation.
For the sake of argument, let us say that the interference should not modify the ray theory pulses by more than 40 per cent at
the peak. If the simplest approximations for the corrections yield 30 per cent and the full first-iteration volume integral 40 per
cent, then it is conceivable a user would be content to accept the most local formulae (in view of the work required to evaluate
the volume integral numerically). We advocate approaching the problem in stages, with strong emphasis on understanding the
ray geometry fully before computing any waveforms. To this end, good computer graphics can be cited as a very important
tool.
The splitting of a shear wavefront has been considered here, but of course the converse problem of a wavefront passing
from an anisotropic region to an isotropic region is closely related. Although the incident wavefront may be just S, or S, alone,
the interaction between both types of wavefunction near the point of isotropy will mean that the S-wave in the isotropic region
depends on both polarizations. In general the isotropic S will have different waveforms on its two 'components'. The general
formulation of Coates & Chapman (1990) is a novel approach which permits both the local and numerical analysis of many new
wave problems such as this.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported by a n NSERC Operating G r a n t , a n Energy, Mines & Resources Research Agreement a n d a
University Research G r a n t from Imperial Oil/Esso Resources C a n a d a . J M K is supported by a n A m o c o Canada Graduate
Scholarship and WSG is supported by a n NSERC G r a d u a t e Studentship. R. T. Coates & C. H. C h a p m a n are thanked for a
preprint of their paper. T h e authors have benefitted from several helpful discussions with Chris Chapman and express their
appreciation. Richard Coates is thanked for three careful and constructive reviews.
REFERENCES
BabiE, V. M. & KirpiEnikova. N. Y., 1979. The Boundary-Layer Method in Diffraction Problem, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Bleistein, N. & Handelsmann, R. A , , 1975. Asymprotic Expansions of Integrals, Holt, Rhinehart & Winston, New York.
cerveng, V., 1972. Seismic rays and ray intensities in inhomogenous anisotropic media, Geophys. J . R. asfr. SOC., 29, 1-13.
cervenq, V. & Ravindra, R., 1971. Theory of Seismic Head Waves, University of Toronto Press.

Chapman, C. H., 1973. The Earth-flattening transformation in body-wave theory, Geophys. J. R. astr. SOC., 35, 55-70.
Chapman, C. H., 1974. The turning point of elastodynamic waves, Geophys. J. R. astr. SOC.,39, 613-621.
Chapman, C. H., 1978. A method of computing synthetic seismograms, Geophys. J. R. astr. SOC., 54, 481-518.
Chapman, C. H., 1981. Long-period corrections to body-waves: theory, Geophys. J. R. astr. SOC., 64,321-372.
Chapman, C. H. & Orcutt, J. A,, 1985. The computation of body wave synthetic seismograms in laterally homogeneous media, Rev.
Geophys., 23, 105-163.
Chapman, C. H. & Shearer, P. M., 1989. Ray tracing in azimuthally anisotropic media-11. Quasi-shear wave coupling, Geophys. J . , 96,
65-83.
Coates, R. T. & Chapman, C. H., 1990. Quasi-shear wave coupling in weakly anisotropic 3-D media, Geophys. J . lnt., 103, 301-320.
Coddington, E. A. & Levinson, N., 1955. Theory of Ordinary Differential Equations, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Fedorov, F. I., 1968. Theory of Elastic waves in Crystals, Plenum Press, New York.
Fryer, G . F. & Frazer, L. N., 1984. Seismic waves in stratified anisotropic media, Geophys. J . R. astr. Soc., 78, 691-710.
Fryer, G. F. & Frazer, L. N., 1987. Seismic waves in stratified anisotropic media-11. Elastodynamic eigensolutions for some anisotropic
systems, Geophys. J . R. astr. SOC., 91, 73-101.
Garmany, J., 1983. Some properties of elastodynamic eigensolutions in stratified media, Geophys. J . R . a r r . Soc., 75, 565-569.
Garmany, J., 1988. Seismograms in stratified anisotropic media-I. WKBJ theory, Geophys. J . , 92, 365-377.
Gilbert, F. & Backus, G. E., 1966. Propagator matrices in elastic wave and vibration problems, Geophysics, 31, 326-333.
Gradshteyn, I. S. & Ryzhik, I. M., 1980. Table of Integrals, Series and Produce, Academic Press, New York.
Guest, W. S., Thomson, C. J. & Kendall, J-M., 1992. Displacements and rays for splitting S-waves: perturbation theory and the failure of the
ray method, Geophys. J. Inr., this issue.
Hudson, J. A., 1980. The Excitation and Propagalion of Elastic Waves, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Jech, J. & PSenEik, I . , 1989. First-order perturbation method for anisotropic media, Geophys. 1. Int., 99, 369-376.
Kendall, J-M. & Thomson, C. J., 1990. Teleseismic P wavefronts from 3D subduction zone models: predictions for heterogeneity and
anisotropy, EOS, Trans. A m . geophys. Un., 71, 1462.
Kendall, J-M., Guest, W. S. & Thomson, C. J., 1992. Ray-theory Green’s function reciprocity and ray-centred coordinates in anisotropic
media, Geophys. J . lnt., this issue.
Kennett, B. L. N., 1983. Seismic Wave Propagation in Stratified Media, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Lewis, R. M., 1964. Asymptotic methods for the solution of dispersive hyperbolic equations, in Asymptotic Solutions of Diferential Equations
and rheir Applications, ed. Wasow, W., Wiley, New York.
Lighthill, M. J., 1980. Introduction ro Fourier Analysis and Generalised Functions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Mathews, J. & Walker, R. L., 1964. Mathematical Metho& of Physics, Benjamin, Menlo Park.
McKenzie, D. P., 1979. Finite deformation during fluid flow, Geophys. J . R. astr. Soc., 58, 689-715.
Ribe, N. M., 1989. Seismic anisotropy and mantle flow, J . geophys. Res., 94, 4213-4223.
Richards, P. G., 1971. Elastic wave solutions in stratified media, Geophysics, 36, 798-809.
Richards, P. G. & Frasier, C. W., 1976. Scattering of elastic waves from depth-dependent inhomogeneities, Geophysics, 41, 441-458.
Silver, P. G. & Chan, W. W., 1988. Implications for continental structure and evolution from seismic anisotropy, Nature, 335, 34-39.
Thornson, C. J. & Gubbins, D., 1982. Three-dimensional lithospheric modelling at NORSAR: linearity of the method and amplitude
variations from the anomalies, Geophys. J. R. astr. SOC., 71, 1-36.
Thomson, C. J. & Chapman, C. H., 1985. An introduction to Maslov’s asymptotic method, Geophys. 1. R. astr. SOC., 83, 143-168.
Thomson, C. J. & Chapman, C. H., 1986. End-point contributions to synthetic seismograms, Geophys. J. R. astr. Soc., 87, 285-294.
Thomson, C., Clarke, T. & Garmany, J., 1986. Observations on seismic wave equation and reflection coefficient symmetries in stratified
media, Geophys. J. R. astr. Soc., 86, 675-686.
Wasow, W., 1965. Asymptotic Expansions for Ordinary Differenrial Equations, Wiley Interscience, New York.
Wasow, W., 1985. Linear Turning Point Theory, Springer-Verlag, New York.
Woodhouse, J. H., 1974. Surface waves in a laterally varying layered structure, Geophys. J. R. astr. SOC., 37, 461-490.
Young, R. M., 1984. Formal power series and iterative methods for wave vectors, Geophys. J. R. astr. SOC., 77, 531-547.
APPENDIX A
Perturbation theory for displacement eigenvalues and eigenvectors (laterally homogeneous media)
Jech & PSenEik (1989, denoted JP below) describe a perturbation theory for S-waves which is valid whether the unperturbed
medium or reference position is isotropic or anisotropic. JP focus o n variations i n phase velocity and eigenvectors d u e to small
354 C . J . Thomson, J-M. Kendall and W . S . Guest
changes in the elastic parameters while the unit vector n, parallel to the slowness vector is held constant. In the present
problem, the perturbations to be considered are at constant horizontal slowness ( p x ,p,) and some modifications of the JP
formulae are required.
At any depth z we have that
(aijk/p,pl - ' j k k j = o! (Al)

where the symbol gl is now used for the eigenvector to be consistent with JP. For a given n,, there are three allowed phase
velocities, denoted V, by JP, three slownesses p!"' = nJV, and three orthogonal unit eigenvectors gj"). It will be convenient
to use these orthogonal vectors, even though in the present problem two components of slowness are held constant. Let rn = 1,
2 represent S, and S, and M = 3 the P-wave. It is worth noting at this point that for the same n,

where (Al) has been used.
The perturbations considered are written in the form
arjkl 3 aijkl + Aaijklr Pz = * 4 +'q? gj * g j + A g j .

The magnitude of Aa,lkl depends on the quantity h defined in Section 1. We note that changes in elasticity may occur in the
isotropic background or the anisotropic perturbation [see (l)] and in principle both depend on depth. The effect of adding the
anisotropic perturbation is of interest here and so the unperturbed or reference eigenvectors and eigenvalues have an implicit
dependence on the background and hence z [see equation (6) of Section 2.21. Then, as ( A l ) also applies after perturbation we
have
The terms involving one, two, etc. A's are referred to as linear, second-order, etc. Additionally, since gj is a unit vector
gjAgi = 0. (A41
It is helpful in understanding the method if we first consider expansion about a reference medium which is anisotropic and
in which all three waves are distinct. Taking equation (A3) for the case rn = 1, multiplying (dot product) by gp) and setting the
linear terms to zero yields
since the linear term in Agk vanishes by (Al). The analogous equation in JP is their equation (8). Like that equation, (A5) is
not singular if the reference medium or 'point' is isotropic: it can be verified by substituting an isotropic aykl that the
denominator in (A5)is then 2pqJp.
Explicit formulae for the Agk at constant n, are given by equations (5), (9) and (10) of JP. In view of (A4) it is convenient
to proceed in the same way as JP and to set
Agj') = agy) + fig?), ('46)
are the orthogonal vectors defined at the same value of n, as g:'). Substituting (A6) into (A3) (for the wave
where g1(2)p(3)
m = l), taking the product with g f ) and setting the linear terms to zero leads to
(Aa,k/p~')p~'' + Ly(U,IkIpI(l)p~')
+ D$)Aq('))g~l)g~) - 6]k)g,'2)gy' = 0, (A7)
which may be simplified using (A2) to give
Similarly substituting (A6) into (A3) and multiplying by g i 3 ) yields

It should be remembered that the basis g;”) used here is that corresponding to normal n, of wavefront S, and that different
basis vectors are used for each wave type.
It is clear from (A8) that when the reference point is isotropic (V, = V,) the above formula for (Y fails. Indeed, if the
reference point is isotropic the vectors g;’) and gj” used up to now are not uniquely defined. It is intuitively reasonable that the
unique eigenvectors for an anisotropic material tend to a unique limit as the strength of the anistropy decreases to zero and we
should expect to determine this limit as a part of the perturbation theory. For any arbitrary choice of gL1).(’)the second term
on the Ihs of (A7) is zero in the isotropic limit, but the first term is not necessarily so. Choosing the gp’s(2)to make the first
term on the Ihs of (A7) equal to zero not only leads to solutions for Aq(’),(’), but also clears the way to proceed to the
second-order terms in (A3) and these in turn yield the undetermined coefficient a in the Agj (A6).
Following JP, the polarizations of S type in the isotropic limit are written
g,(1)=a,,ei(1)+al,ei(2), g y ) = -a,,ei(1)+a,,ei(2), (‘410)

where ej’),(’) are pre-selected unit vectors spanning the plane orthogonal to gy). Substituting these into (A3) (for m = 1) and

taking the dot product first with e g ) and then ep’ and then setting the linear terms to zero leads to the two equations
a,,(B,l + Dl1 A q ) + ai2Biz = 0, a i i B i z + aiz(B2z + 0 2 2 A q ) = 0, (A ll)

where
and the last form uses the isotropy property. The determinant condition for a non-trivial solution of ( A l l ) is an equation for
Aq with solution [see JP (17)]
where
D = [(B,, +
- BZ2)’ 4B~,]’/’.
The choice of sign in (A12) gives the two solutions for the vertical slowness perturbation about the isotropic value at the depth
in question. The values of the coefficients are then found to be
This defines the unique eigenvectors in the limit of isotropy. If by chance E12= 0 then a more simple solution appears since in
that case the vectors e(’),(’) are the required eigenvectors [see JP (19)].
Given the eigenvectors gj1).(’) found by this route, we again seek the perturbations Ag, in the form (A6). Substituting
(A6) into (A3) and taking the dot product with gL3) again leads to (A9) for /3. Substituting (A6) into (A3) and taking the dot
product with gp’ annihilates all the linear terms in (A3) on account of the construction above [i.e. because of equations
(All)]. The second-order terms in (A3) then yield
&(I?$:) + 0;:’A q ( ’ ) )+ /3(B$\) + D$\’A q “ ) ) + C,kgjl)gp)Aq”” + E,kg;l)gi’)Aq“’ = 0. (A141
As fi is known this gives a and hence Ag:’). To find Ag;” use (A6) with superscripts 1 and 2 interchanged, take (A3) for m = 2
and find (A9) for /3 once more (but with superscripts 1 and 2 reversed). (A14) is also basically the same with only a change in
the indices m = 1 and 2.
We note that if the perturbation Aa,,,, is isotropic, then B , , = BZ2, A q has only one solution and a , , and a,’ are
non-unique. It is also of interest to note that A4 given by ( A l l ) is the same as the earlier form (A5), provided g;’.’) in the
latter are given the appropriate forms according to (A10) and (A13). This fact is used in Appendix E.
APPENDIX B
Surface integral ray-theory contribution
The ray theory Green’s function for the source at x , is given explicitly by equation (18) of note N1. On substituting this into the
surface integral in (26) and retaining only terms of leading order in w one obtains the integral
with $J given by (29)

356 C. J . Thomson, J - M . Kendall and W . S. Guest
At a stationary point xS, p: = -pr by (31) and because of the isotropy at the boundary the incident displacement there
may be resolved into the two orthogonal directions g:"' as follows
u; = Uk; + ub; 032)

(see note N2 for the unique limiting forms of the eigenvectors gJ." on 93'). The amplitude term of the integral above may then
be simplified to
where use has been made of the isotropy at xs and the ray equation for total/group velocity vs of the ray from xs to x, [e.g. N2,
equation (3)]. The 2-D stationary phase evaluation of the integral then yields (Lewis 1964; Bleistein & Handelsmann 1975;
Thomson & Chapman 1985; Coates & Chapman 1990)

where &,, is the 2 x 2 matrix of second derivatives of the phase in the surface and we have assumed it has positive eigenvalues
only. (Throughout this discussion the possibility of caustics is not explicitly accounted for.)
We now wish to show that (B4) agrees with zeroth-order ray theory continuation from xs to x,. The phase clearly agrees
and it is the amplitude which requires inspection. Comparing with equations (3) and (5) of Appendix C shows that the density
terms are correctly placed and that the problem reduces to showing that
-
(vs n)-2W det I&, 1 = det (0+ RD'( (B5a)
= det 0 + RD'I,
IT1 det ITol-' det 1 (B5b)
where the curvature of the incident wavefront at xs is defined by D:, = dp,/ax,in Cartesian coordinates and fiLb = dPa/dyb
( a , b = 1, 2) in ray-centred coordinates. The Green's function spreading factor 92 is given by equation (17) or (19) of note N1 in
Cartesian coordinates and equation (39) of that note in ray-centrea coordinates.
It is of interest to attempt to verify (B5) by working entirely in Cartesian coordinates. By application of the chain rule
6$+ = (aX,+)(&x,) = (ax,+)& one finds the second derivative relation
where + j j is the 3 X 3 matrix of Cartesian second derivatives and the stationarity condition (31) has been used in the last step.
Then the determinant is found to be
where the summations on pjl are cyclic over 123 [see, for example, N1, equations (7) to (10) for a similar procedure] and the
symmetry of +c, has been used. The matrix Db = dp,/3xl has been introduced for the wavefront from x, at xs and the adjugate
form has been noted in (B7) [see note N1, equation (19)].
In (BS), the blocks of the geometrical spreading matrices are those obtained by integrating the spreading equations [i.e.
equations (14) and (30) of N l ] from xs to x,. An overbar will be used to signify the solutions obtained by integrating in the
opposite sense from x, to xs and by the symplectic property of the geometrical spreading propagator matrix "1, equation (13)]
we have
O(t, 0) = PT(O, t ) = PT, P(t, 0) = OT(O, t ) = OT, R(t, 0 ) = -RT(O, t ) = -RT, Q(t, 0) = -QT(O, t ) = -aT, 038)
with similar results for the 2 x 2 blocks 0 , etc., in ray-centred coordinates. In applying these results, it is important to
recognize that the sense of time integration is reversed when going from x, to xs. That is, the phase at xs is then negative
relative to that at x, and, if the value at X, is taken to be zero, then it is also the negative of the phase function t Vin equation
(6) of Section 3.2. Bearing this in mind and exploiting the chain rule (dp,/dx,)(ax,/dp,) = apz/3pok,one finds that the
wavefront function z"(x, x,) satisfies -D"R = P at xs and hence by (B8)
D'= -pR-1= OT(RT)-'
039)
(R is invertible if 3 is finite, as assumed). Proving (B5a) in Cartesian coordinates now reduces to showing that
det 1 +
0 RD'( = (vs n)-'(v: adj R v,) nT adj[D' + OT(RT)-']n,
where R has been written in the form (19) of N1 and (B8) has been used again (for R, with an appropriate sign compensation).
Although (B10) involves only spreading functions in the sense from xs to xr,we have been unable to prove this identity as it
stands. The difficulty stems from the product of quadratic forms on the rhs. Apparently such an identity cannot hold for
arbitrary matrices and vectors and it holds here only because of the special form of the geometrical spreading solutions. If
ray-centred coordinates are used the 3 x 3 matrices used so far can be obtained from 2 x 2 matrices and the result sought is
then easier to find. There are a number of ways to show this and two approaches will be described, in part because some of the
intermediate steps are of interest in themselves and prove useful elsewhere.
Method I
Here (B10) [or (B7)] is taken as the starting point and the next step is to show that

nT adj (D' + DV)n= (vs - n)' det ID' + D'I det ITI-', (B11)
where 0" is the 2 X 2 'curvature' matrix with elements dPa/dyb (a, b = I, 2) for the wavefront from x, and T is the
transformation matrix to ray-centred coordinates at xs.
From equation (22b) of N1 we have
where t , 1, 2 are the ray-centred coordinate indices (N1, Section 3). The latter term in (B12) will cancel in the net phase
function 4 on account of the stationarity condition (31) and we have
The first three follow by definition (see N1, Section 3.1) and the last follows from, for example,
where 13 is the Hamiltonian in ray-centred coordinates and the corresponding ray equations have been used in the last step [see
N1, equations (25) to (27)]. However, on the reference ray, P,, y , and y , are constant and so (B14) follows. Substituting (B14)
into (B13) and substituting the result into the Ihs of (B11) leads to
nTadj (D'+ Dv)n = det (T(-'(n,T,,)[adj (P' + Pv)]ab(niTb,), a, b = 1, 2,
where the relationship between the adjugate and inverse of a matrix has been used. In view of (B14), only the (11) element
(perhaps better referred to as the {tt} element) of adj (Pi+ P') is non-zero and it is equal to the 2 x 2 determinant
det 16'+ 6'1. Furthermore, the first row of the transformation matrix T is just v on the reference ray. Hence result (B11)
follows and then from (B7) we have
det I@eql = (v,. n)'det ID' + 1
'
6 det IT[-'. (BW
Substituting this into the Ihs of (B5), using the ray-centred coordinate solution for 92 "1, equation (39)], the symplectic
property (B8) and result (B9) in ray-centred coordinates, leads to the rhs of (B5b). Hence zeroth-order ray theory is verified.
Method I1
This method is more direct in the sense that det is evaluated using ray-centred coordinates ( y , , y2) on the reference ray
though xs and the Cartesian form (i.e. (B7)] is not addressed.
For each value of ( y l , y2) in the wavefront at xs (i.e. at some fixed t = t , on the reference ray) there is a ray which crossed
$3' at (c,
q ) at a different time f(E, q) and which defines the values Y , , =~ y , , , ( & q). For any phase function f(t, y,, y 2 ) we have
at constant q
358 C. J. Thomson, J-M. Kendall and W . S. Guest
and hence for the second derivatives on the reference ray
where we have used the properties (B14). The first term on the rhs of (B17) vanishes when the combined phase function c$ is
considered because of the stationarity condition (31). By steps analogous to those that led to (B7) (but now for vectors of
length two), one finds from (B17) that
It remains to find the Jacobian of the mapping between ( y l , y 2 ) and ( E , q). One approach is to write a position in 633' in the
form x[&yl, y2), q ( y , , y2)] = x [ t ( y l ,y2), y , , y2] and then to obtain by the chain rule

where the first term on the rhs depends on the definition of the ray-centred coordinates (Nl, Section 3). Taking the product of
(B19) with 6 and then q yields the system of equations
(B20)
where the Y;, are defined in N1 (equation 20). By the usual steps the determinant on the rhs is found to be Ef,knrY/1Yk2. It
follows from the definition of the Y;, that ~ , , ~ Y / , Y k ~and
a p ,by taking the product with v we find that the constant of
proportionality is det IT(. As a result, on taking the determinant of equation (B20) one finds
where the last step follows from recognizing that n, 5 and 1form an orthogonal coordinate system at xs. Substituting (B21)
into equation (B18) then yields (B16) once more and the steps from (B16) to the zeroth-order ray theory conclusion are
unchanged.
It is of interest to note that equation (B21) may also be obtained by considering (t, t, q ) as coordinates in three
dimensions. From x = x(t, E, q ) = x(t, y , , y2) we have for a derivative in the surface
($Iq ($Lq (3a,11(2q

= +
and on rearranging this the derivative in three-space is
This formula is also used later in Appendix D (equation D15). From (B22) and the corresponding equation for (&/aq), we
obtain
APPENDIX C
'Plane-wave' initial conditions
If the initial amplitude and phase are specified on a smooth surface rather than very near a point source, then another form of
the geometrical spreading solution is used.
From the phase function t specified in the surface and the derivatives of the original eikonal equation in that
neighbourhood, we may construct the three spatial derivatives
where we have used a subscript zero to indicate evaluation at the initial point of a ray %. These derivatives describe the
curvature of the wavefront at x,.The solution of the geometrical spreading problem then depends on the volume (not area)
mapping defined by the ray field:
where the blocks of the geometrical spreading propagator are defined by equation (14a) of note N1. The scalar amplitude at a
general point on the ray is then related to its inital value at x,by

(e.g. Thomson & Chapman 1985).
If ray-centred coordinates (I, y , , y2) (Nl, Section 3) are used, then the derivatives
are needed. In terms of the blocks of the geometrical spreading propagator matrix in ray-centred coordinates we have the
analogue of equation (C3):
(see N1, Section 3). If the determinant of the transformation matrix to ray-centred coordinates, T, is equal to the magnitude of
ray velocity, then det 10 + RDol can be related to the usual ‘ray-tube cross-section’ or ‘wavefront-area’ mapping.
APPENDIX D
Leadingorder forms of the separating phase functions
Expansions are needed for the phase functions t Vand t p near the boundary 9’. It is convenient to obtain these expansions in
ray-centred coordinates defined on one of the splitting rays, say g(t).As usual, to explain the method we take the case of
anisotropy emerging at third order, but the generalization of the results will be clear. Although the forms of the expansions
may at first look intimidating, the results we require are obtained without too much effort.
For the position on a ray of S, leaving 93’ at xg we have the expansion
X(F, x;) = x; + v;[tp - t(xo”)]+ ; V g ” t p - t(xo”)]’+ fv;’“.” - t(x[)]3 + $V[’”[t” - t(X6)I4 + O{[t. - t(x;)]S), (D1)
where vg is the ray or group velocity at and a prime denotes the derivative along the ray wrt time. We denote by x& the
point at which the reference ray leaves 3’and use a double subscript 00 for functions evaluated at this point. We take E and q
as coordinates about x;6 in the surface 9‘and t and q are the corresponding unit vectors. Then we also have an expansion of
the form
for the initial point of the ray S,. The initial phase, which is the same for both wave types, has an expansion
where the time at the initial point on the reference ray is taken to be zero for convenience. The slownesses are initially the
same for both wave types and at first we shall not need to distinguish them. Also, there is an expansion for the ray or group
velocity of S, at the initial point $:
The spatial derivatives of v,",, may be obtained in principle by using the ray equations, but we shall not need their explicit
forms. Formulas analogous to (D3b) also exist for the velocity time derivatives along the ray. Having noted all these
expansions, substituting them into ( D l ) yields an expansion for x in terms of t pand the initial point given by the 'ray
cordinates' or 'ray parameters' 5" and q .,
The ray-centred coordinates defined on the ray < ( t ) are introduced by setting
x(t, Y, Y2) = X X t )
9 + YlYl(t) + Y2Y,(C). (D4)
See note N1 (Section 3) for a discussion of these coordinates. There is an expansion for $ ( t ) in powers of t which is analogous
to (Dl) and which in principle can be found from the ray equations. Also, because of the isotropy to second order, the initial
group velocity, its first and second derivative along any ray are the same for both wave types [i.e. v v = v v , v v ' = v p ' and
vv" = v"" on 93': see the ray equations, (3), of NZ]. The anisotropy enters via the third derivative of ray velocity wrt time along
the ray.
In terms of (t, y , , y,), the expansions we seek are written

It is important to recognize that these expansions are to apply for the phase and rays of type p when the coordinates (c, y,, y,)
+
are centred on a ray of type v. Hence, for example, t p= t A r ( t ) at y, = y, = 0 (i.e. not t alone), the coordinates (yl, y2) are
,
not in the S,, wavefront (i.e. t, and t,, are in general non-zero) and the S,-ray through y, = y, = 0 at some time t does not pass
through xj;o [i.e. &(t) and r],(t) are non-zero].
Substituting (D2), (D3) and (D5) into ( D l ) and equating the result to (D4) gives a vector equation which may be used to
find the coefficients in expansions (DSa) to (DSc). Although this vector equation is in general rather unwieldy, the results we
require in the main part of the paper are quite easily obtained. Naturally we have A z ( 0 ) = Eo(0)= rlo(0) = 0 and it is reasonable
to assume simple leading forms such as A t ( t ) = at", &,(t) = bts and qtr(t) = ctY, where the exponents are initially assumed to be
just unity. Consider now the vector equation ( D l ) = (D4) at y, = y2 = 0. From the coefficient of t one finds
The Ihs and last term on the rhs cancel on account of the isotropy at first order. Then, on taking the product of (D6) with pm,
only the a-term remains and we conclude that a = 0 or, more correctly, that AT = at" where (Y 2 2. Taking the product of (D6)
with 5 and q then leads to two homogeneous linear equations for b and c and so they too must be zero or, rather,
&(t) = O[qn(t)] = O(tz)at least. One may continue in this way until terms of order t4 are reached, at which one finds
1
BV,
v"'
- b5 + cq + av& - [(pm - g)b + (pm * q)c]v& + A v g .
-
(D7)
As the ray-velocity third derivatives are not equal, taking the product of (D7) with poo leads to an equation for a and the result
Explicit forms for the jump in velocity third derivatives depend on the unique eigenvectors in the isotropic limit on 9' and are
given in section 2.3 of note N2. Taking products of (D7) with 5 and 11 now yields two inhomogeneous linear equations and
from these we conclude that
Eo(t) = O[qn(t)I = O(t4). (D9)

Next we consider the coefficients of (yl, y2) in the equation for (Dl) = (D4). As the rays of both types initially have the
same slownesses, the coefficients t l l and tI2are initially zero and may be assumed proportional to some power of 1. The
coefficients of type ylt" then yield
Taking the product of this with pm shows that the rhs is a vector in the wavefront, as required. Hence, (D10) may be solved for
the leading-order values in t of the four unknown components Ell, EI2, q , , and q12 in the ray-centred system. The explicit
forms are not required here.
Now consider the quadratic terms, such as y:t". Equation (D4) is linear in y, and y, and from ( D l ) we obtain the
(LIa)
...
aaeq os ~ ea~ pue
components of slowness in ray-centred coordinates (see D5a), it can be inferred from (D17) that
t l l ( t ) = O [ t , , ( t ) ]= O(t”. (DW
It turns out in Section 3.3 that this is small enough for these contributions to zw to be neglected for the final results of this
paper.
APPENDIX E
Agreement of the laterally homogeneous and inhomogeneous solutions
As elsewhere, the case of a third-order jump in elasticity will be used as an example. We shall assume the displacement
eigenvectors have been found by the perturbation theory of Appendix A and note N2. It is pointed out in N2 that the more
general results there are consistent with the laterally homogeneous results. The slight differences in notation between Sections

2 and 3 must be noted and here we necessarily use a combination of both.
By comparing the integral in (18) with that in (40), it is seen that a logical first step is to verify that -Aq21<4/4 in the
former corresponds with ar4 in the latter. To do so we obtain Aq2, from equation (A5) of Appendix A [see also the note
regarding (A5) at the very end of Appendix A]. For a depth-dependent medium the factor AqIkI in (A5) is the jump in
$33ailklldz3at z = 0 and so
for a depth-dependent medium. Using ( E l ) with 5“ = v:t4 yields
where it has been noted that p q l p = vz. Equation (E2a) agrees with at4 given by (D8) when the jump in velocity third
derivatives appearing in the latter is obtained from equation (26) of note N2. Hence the phases agree. Alternatively, equation
(E2a) may be used to relate a and Aq,, directly, giving
For a depth-dependent medium and for constant lateral slowness, the coupling coefficient (44) becomes
where there is summation on i but not on z and p L = q, the vertical slowness. In order to relate (E3) to C,, given by ( l l b ) in
the laterally homogeneous case, it is convenient to cast the latter into the form of the former. For each unit displacement
eigenvector gl,2 (with a subscript notation as in Section 2) of (9,the corresponding stress vector u , ,may
~ be constructed from
(8). For simplicity let p y = 0 (arranged by an appropriate choice of x-axis). Then, by adapting equations (2.8) to (2.11) of
Woodhouse (1974) to our notation of Section 2.1, we find that the matrices in (8) take the form
With these it can be shown from (8) and the orthogonality of the ray and polarizations at z = 0, that
n2 = 2g‘a = -2qp, z = 0,
for both wavetypes. Hence the normalization factor in (12) is indeed imaginary. We also note that the property
T
gTa, = g2 a1 = 0 , (E6)
which follows from (llc), may be shown explicitly using (8) and (E4). From ( l l b ) we have the defining equation
C,l(O) = - ( g 3 ~ 2 ) 3 z ( ~ l -
/ ~(uT/n2)az(sl/nl).
d (E7)
It follows from (E6) that derivatives of the normalizations do not contribute. Using the derivative of (8) [with (E4)], the
orthogonality of g, and g, and their orthogonality to the ray at z = 0, one finds after a few short steps that
where (E5)has been used in the last step.

It is now straightforward to use (E2b) and (E8) to verify that the corrections in equation (21) for the laterally
homogeneous case are consistent with those in equation (47) for the laterally varying case. In doing so the Snell wavefront of
constant p x is considered to be the wavefront tracked using ray theory. Then, by using simple trigonometry, the ratio of
normalizations nzo/n2 in (18) may be shown to correspond to the usual geometrical spreading factor for the zeroth-order term
and, as noted above, n , , = nzo so the same factor occurs in the correction terms.
APPENDIX F

The polarization derivatives and alternative forms of the coupling parameter
The simpler forms of the coupling parameter given in equation (44)are derived here. Similar steps can be found in Coates &
Chapman (1990), the circumstances here being different because of the splitting-ray geometry.
From the results of note N2 it is known that the splitting rays have the same slowness (and so wavefront normal) up to
terms in t3 (for a third-order jump in elasticity). Hence we infer that the two polarizations g;"' are orthogonal up to this order.
Note this does not mean that, for example, g f ( d g y / d t ) is zero, only that
g Ydgv1 +gv-dgv = 0.
I dt I dt
The individual polarization rates of change are discussed in Section 2.4 of N2. Explicit formulae for these rates of change can
only be found by considering higher order perturbations than those used to obtain the polarizations themselves.
In view of the isotropy to first order and the mutual orthogonality of the polarisations and ray(s) to that order we have
a
a i j k l p l g ~ g=~ and P-' -
axi (pai,klplgTk!a = O. (F2)
Subtracting the second of (F2) from the first (long) form of the coupling parameter in (44) yields
Since the polarizations are unit vectors we have relationship such as
Substituting (F4) into (F3), using the first of the ray equations (ray velocity) and the original eigenvalue equation [e.g. (S)],
leads to the simplification
The property p m g ; , = 0, to higher than first order, now permits us to replace derivatives of g ; , in the last two terms of (FS)
with derivatives of p m . The symmetry dp,/dxi = d p , / a x , = a 2 t / d x , ax, can then be used to show the last two terms of (FS)
cancel each other. Hence the result
where (Fl) has been used to derive the alternatives indicated.

1992 - Thomson - Geometrical Theory of Shear-Wave Splitting-Corrections To Ray Theory

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1992 - Thomson - Geometrical Theory of Shear-Wave Splitting-Corrections To Ray Theory

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geophys. J . Int.

(1992) 108, 339-363

Geometrical theory of shear-wave splitting: corrections to ray theory

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

E = exp ( i o r ) , r= A(z) dz,

2.2 The eigenvectors near z = 0

(a,k,ptpl - b,k)U, = (5)

ul(z) = U,,)(Z) + U,,(Z)Zh +0(ZZh), u,(z) = UZ(,(Z) + U,l(Z)Zh + O(zZh). (7)

g&) = g,,(z) + gll(z)zh + O(Z2h), g2(z) = g,,(z) + g,,(z)z, + O(zZh). (9)

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

2.3 The iterative solution

N-'=NTJ, J=(p A).

r(z) = do)+ f e x p [ -iwa( <,O)]C(6) exp [ i w r ( 6, O)]dO) dc. (14b)

-[a,t,(z, 0 ) - d,ti(Z, O)] = - [ q , ( z ) - q j ( z ) ]= 0. (15)

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

O(W-l'h+l)<<Z << O(W-'lh+2). (20)

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

-Se/[Ui(X, o ) ] = d i [ C i j k / ( X ) d / U k ( X , w)] + W'P(X>Uj(X, w ) = 0. (23)

qU,(x, x r , (311 = - 6 ( x - X#j, + ~ j b , , ( X , xr, O)l, (25)

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

3.2 Contribution of the surface integral

u:(x, w ) = U:(x)ezwr'(x) (27)

@(x, x,) = t ' ( X ) + t'(X, XJ, xE %I,

PYXS) + P Y ( X s , x,) = 0. (31)

3.3 Contribution of the volume integral

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

qv;) = P(X)[L,(v;J - ~ ~~,(V~p)letWTV' (33)

I#+, x:) = t'(X) + t y x , x:), x E 9. (34)

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

4.2 Some ray tracing details

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

4.3 Results for the slab model

0.00 om 0.39 0.59 0.79 o 98 i is I 37 I 57 1.77 I 96

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

(aijk/p,pl - ' j k k j = o! (Al)

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

arjkl 3 aijkl + Aaijklr Pz = * 4 +'q? gj * g j + A g j .

Similarly substituting (A6) into (A3) and multiplying by g i 3 ) yields

g,(1)=a,,ei(1)+al,ei(2), g y ) = -a,,ei(1)+a,,ei(2), (‘410)

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

a,,(B,l + Dl1 A q ) + ai2Biz = 0, a i i B i z + aiz(B2z + 0 2 2 A q ) = 0, (A ll)

with $J given by (29)

u; = Uk; + ub; 032)

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

($Iq ($Lq (3a,11(2q

and on rearranging this the derivative in three-space is

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

Eo(t) = O[qn(t)I = O(t4). (D9)

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

for a depth-dependent medium. Using ( E l ) with 5“ = v:t4 yields

where (E5)has been used in the last step.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/108/1/339/663298 by guest on 12 September 2022

Since the polarizations are unit vectors we have relationship such as

where (Fl) has been used to derive the alternatives indicated.