\documentclass[10pt]{article}

\usepackage{fullpage}
\usepackage{setspace}
\usepackage{parskip}
\usepackage{titlesec}
\usepackage[section]{placeins}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage{breakcites}
\usepackage{lineno}
\usepackage{hyphenat}





\PassOptionsToPackage{hyphens}{url}
\usepackage[colorlinks = true,
            linkcolor = blue,
            urlcolor  = blue,
            citecolor = blue,
            anchorcolor = blue]{hyperref}
\usepackage{etoolbox}
\makeatletter
\patchcmd\@combinedblfloats{\box\@outputbox}{\unvbox\@outputbox}{}{%
  \errmessage{\noexpand\@combinedblfloats could not be patched}%
}%
\makeatother


\usepackage{natbib}




\renewenvironment{abstract}
  {{\bfseries\noindent{\abstractname}\par\nobreak}\footnotesize}
  {\bigskip}

\titlespacing{\section}{0pt}{*3}{*1}
\titlespacing{\subsection}{0pt}{*2}{*0.5}
\titlespacing{\subsubsection}{0pt}{*1.5}{0pt}


\usepackage{authblk}


\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[space]{grffile}
\usepackage{latexsym}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage{tabulary}
\usepackage{booktabs,array,multirow}
\usepackage{amsfonts,amsmath,amssymb}
\providecommand\citet{\cite}
\providecommand\citep{\cite}
\providecommand\citealt{\cite}
% You can conditionalize code for latexml or normal latex using this.
\newif\iflatexml\latexmlfalse
\providecommand{\tightlist}{\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}}%

\AtBeginDocument{\DeclareGraphicsExtensions{.pdf,.PDF,.eps,.EPS,.png,.PNG,.tif,.TIF,.jpg,.JPG,.jpeg,.JPEG}}

\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[ngerman,english]{babel}



\usepackage{float}








\begin{document}

\title{Community-Driven Code Comparisons for Three-Dimensional Dynamic Modeling
of Sequences of Earthquakes and Aseismic Slip (SEAS)}



\author[1,1]{Junle Jiang}%
\author[2,2]{Brittany Erickson}%
\author[3,3]{Valere Lambert}%
\author[4,4]{Jean-Paul Ampuero}%
\author[5,5]{Ryosuke Ando}%
\author[6,6]{Sylvain Barbot}%
\author[7,7]{Camilla Cattania}%
\author[8,8]{Luca Dal Zilio}%
\author[9,9]{Benchun Duan}%
\author[10,10]{Eric M Dunham}%
\author[11,11]{Alice-Agnes Gabriel}%
\author[3,3]{Nadia Lapusta}%
\author[11,11]{Duo Li}%
\author[12,12]{Meng Li}%
\author[13,13]{Dunyu Liu}%
\author[14,14]{Yajing Liu}%
\author[5,5]{So Ozawa}%
\author[11,11]{Casper Pranger}%
\author[12,12]{Ylona van Dinther}%
\affil[1]{University of Oklahoma}%
\affil[2]{University of Oregon}%
\affil[3]{California Institute of Technology}%
\affil[4]{Institut de Recherche pour le Développement}%
\affil[5]{University of Tokyo}%
\affil[6]{University of Southern California}%
\affil[7]{Massachusetts Institute of Technology}%
\affil[8]{ETH Zurich}%
\affil[9]{Texas A\&M University}%
\affil[10]{Stanford University}%
\affil[11]{LMU Munich}%
\affil[12]{Utrecht University}%
\affil[13]{The University of Texas at Austin}%
\affil[14]{McGill University}%


\vspace{-1em}



  
  \date{May 26, 2024}


\begingroup
\let\center\flushleft
\let\endcenter\endflushleft
\maketitle
\endgroup





\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{abstract}
Dynamic modeling of sequences of earthquakes and aseismic slip (SEAS)
provides a self-consistent, physics-based framework to connect,
interpret, and predict diverse geophysical observations across spatial
and temporal scales. Amid growing applications of SEAS models, numerical
code verification is essential to ensure reliable simulation results but
is often infeasible due to the lack of analytical solutions. Here, we
develop two benchmarks for three-dimensional (3D) SEAS problems to
compare and verify numerical codes based on boundary-element,
finite-element, and finite-difference methods, in a community
initiative. Our benchmarks consider a planar vertical strike-slip fault
obeying a rate- and state-dependent friction law, in a 3D homogeneous,
linear elastic whole-space or half-space, where spontaneous earthquakes
and slow slip arise due to tectonic-like loading. We use a suite of
quasi-dynamic simulations from 10 modeling groups to assess the
agreement during all phases of multiple seismic cycles. We find
excellent quantitative agreement among simulated outputs for
sufficiently large model domains and small grid spacings. However,
discrepancies in rupture fronts of the initial event are influenced by
the free surface and various computational factors. The recurrence
intervals and nucleation phase of later earthquakes are particularly
sensitive to numerical resolution and domain-size-dependent loading.
Despite such variability, key properties of individual earthquakes,
including rupture style, duration, total slip, peak slip rate, and
stress drop, are comparable among even marginally resolved simulations.
Our benchmark efforts offer a community-based example to improve
numerical simulations and reveal sensitivities of model observables,
which are important for advancing SEAS models to better understand
earthquake system dynamics.%
\end{abstract}%



\sloppy




\selectlanguage{english}
\FloatBarrier
\end{document}

