SILVA_final:Layout 6 A simple statistical procedure for the analysis of radon anomalies associated with seismic activity Hugo Gonçalves Silva1,*, Mourad Bezzeghoud1, Maria Manuela Oliveira2, António Heitor Reis1, Rui Namorado Rosa1 1 University of Évora, School of Sciences and Technology (ECT), Geophysics Centre of Évora and Physics Department, Évora, Portugal 2 University of Évora, School of Sciences and Technology (ECT), Mathematics Department, Évora, Portugal ANNALS OF GEOPHYSICS, 56, 1, 2013, R0106; doi:10.4401/ag-5570 ABSTRACT This study presents an analysis of data from various radon anomalies that were compiled by Toutain and Baubron [1999], to investigate their relationships with the earthquake parameters of magnitude and distance from epicenter. The simple methodology applied here reveals significant and positive correlation between the duration of the radon anomalies and the ratio between the earthquake preparation radius and the distance between the sensor and the event epicenter. This shows an important relationship between seismic activity and duration of radon anomalies at a local scale. The consequences and implications of this relationship are discussed. 1. Introduction The study of earthquake precursors has a long history that goes back to the late 19th century [e.g., Kagan and Knopoff 1987, Geller 1991, Wyss 1991; and references therein]. In the last few years, the study of these phenomena has been gaining new widespread interest. The reason for this is clearly due to the valuable tools that are being devel- oped in this field to complement existing hazard assessment facilities. In the literature, it is possible to find a number of different effects with many occurrences [e.g., Biagi et al. 2006, Ouzounov et al. 2007, Chauhan et al. 2009, Silva et al. 2011]. The interested reader is referred to a recent review by Cicerone et al. [2009]. Many studies have attributed these effects to radon em- anations that can be caused by variations in the bedrock strain and the soil permeability during the preparatory phase of earthquakes, and particularly by severe changes near to the end of this phase [see, e.g., Pulinets and Ouzounov 2011]. For example, according to Harrison et al. [2010], the radon released in this process can ionize the lower atmosphere, to produce a considerable reduction in the atmospheric electrical field. Due to its relevance, comprehensive analyses of radon emanations are crucial, and many studies have dealt with this issue. In particular, Toutain and Baubron [1999] carried out a very extensive review of various degassing processes in re- lation to seismic activity for different gases (especially radon), with specific attention to the multiple factors that can influ- ence these processes (mainly weather conditions). As a dis- cussion of these aspects is not within the scope of the present study, the reader is referred to Toutain and Baubron [1999], where many further details can be found. In the present study, we applied a simple statistical pro- cedure that was recently developed by Silva et al. [2012] to the radon anomalies associated with seismic activity that were compiled by Toutain and Baubron [1999]. We focused, in particular, on a study of the relationship between the du- ration of the anomalies and the magnitude of the earthquake and distance from its epicenter. These anomalies are defined based on deviations in the radon levels from the soil or groundwater. Here, after presenting the database used and describing our methodology in Section 2, we apply this to the occurrences reported by Toutain and Baubron [1999], in- cluding together both the soil and groundwater radon anom- alies, as they are linked by the same physical processes discussed in Section 3. Our analysis indicates that the dura- tion of the radon anomalies is linearly related to the earth- quake preparation radius (which is exponentially dependent on its magnitude), and is inversely related to the distance from the earthquake epicenter to the radon-measuring site. 2. Data In this study, we have analyzed the various radon anom- alies that were compiled by Toutain and Baubron [1999]. Their review includes nearly 150 anomalies of different geo- chemical indicators, including: Rn, H2, N2, Ar, He, CH4, H2S and Hg (gas). Nearly 72% of these anomalies are related to radon, which provided a significant number of cases to which we can apply our methodology. These are defined as size- Article history Received February 8, 2012; accepted November 8, 2012. Subject classification: Atmosphere: Composition and Structure, Geochemical exploration, Radon emissions, Seismic precursors, Seismic activity, Seismic risk. R0106 RESEARCH ARTICLES able deviations from the mean background levels of radon, , which is a typically criterion used in various studies that considers a given measurement as an anomaly when the radon levels rise above + 2v, with v as the standard devia- tion. This is a well-established criterion in the literature that provides good support for our analysis, although, unfortu- nately, the values of and v are not presented in the review by Toutain and Baubron [1999], because normally they are not mentioned in the original papers. Most of the anomalies (83%) correspond to groundwa- ter measurements, with 10% from soil measurements, and 7% measured using both groundwater and soil observations. These values should imply a dominance of the groundwater processes in our results; however, interestingly, Virk and Baljin- der [1994] showed that groundwater and soil radon measure- ments show similar behaviors as earthquake precursors. Thus our dataset should be representative of the general radon em- anation dynamics in connection with earthquake occurrences. The measurements were made for intermediate to long- term periods (more than 1 year of observations), and differ- ent techniques were used. The soil radon anomalies were measured using the track-etch method [Virk and Baljinder 1994], which is usually a low-frequency technique (integrated over one or two weeks) that does not allow the correct esti- mation of the anomaly duration and its starting time. On the other hand, groundwater measurements typically consider daily sampling from natural springs, and a subsequent closed- circuit system enables the collected gases from these samples to pass through a detector; e.g., a ZnS(Ag) cell. This detector measures the number of decays recorded for a given period after radon and its progeny reach equilibrium [Virk and Baljinder 1994]. This technique was used for 90% of our dataset, and it allows better control of the anomaly duration and starting time. It is important to note that 63% of the anomalies con- sidered in the present study corresponded to M ≥5 earth- quakes. Indeed, different precursor behaviors would be expected for small and large earthquakes, and a careful analy- sis regarding this will be carried out in the future. For each radon anomaly, Toutain and Baubron [1999] presented (for the information that is available): the magni- tude, M, and depth of the earthquake, z (km); the distance from the earthquake epicenter to the measurement site, D (km); the relative amplitude of the radon measurement, da (%); the duration of the anomaly, d (days); and the time in- terval between the beginning of the anomaly and the occur- rence of the earthquake, dt (days). We selected 109 anomalies where that the earthquake parameters M and D are available (we did not considered z in the analysis, and thus this param- eter was ignored), along with at least one of the three pa- rameters of the radon anomalies, da, d, and dt. The ranges of theses parameters are: M = [1.9, 8.1]; D = [1, 1000] (km); da = [−80, 1200] (%); d = [1, 1370] (days); dt = [1, 180] (days). 3. Methodology We will now focus on a description of the methodology applied. First, we should note that when analyzing the possi- ble effects of an earthquake on anomalous radon emanations, two parameters must be considered together: the event mag- nitude, M, and the distance from the epicenter to the meas- uring site, D. This can be clarified when two earthquakes of the same magnitude are considered, where they occur at dif- ferent distances from a measuring site: it is expected that the nearer event will influence the radon emanations more sig- nificantly than the farther event, such that we cannot com- pare them directly. This is because, in principle, both of the earthquakes would be expected to generate similar deforma- tion fields, while the deformation caused by the nearer one to the measurement site is expected to be stronger, thereby caus- ing a substantial increase in the local soil permeability, and enabling greater radon emanation, as compared to the far- ther event. Thus, it is important to develop a parameter that is suitable to simultaneously account for both the effects of M and D, as these two parameters by themselves are insufficient to describe the significance of an earthquake with respect to the radon levels at a measuring site. On this basis, we considered the concept of the earth- quake preparation radius, R, that depends on M [see Dobro- volsky et al. 1979]. It is assumed that there should be an approximately circular region around the epicenter of an earthquake that undergoes elastic crustal deformation prior to seismic events, with this radius estimated as R ≈ 100.43M (km). Bearing in mind these observations, we can assume that for relevant events, the radon measurement site will fall within a circle of radius R that is centered at the seismic epi- center, such that R ≥ D. Indeed, we have represented the 109 occurrences of radon anomalies that are relevant to the pres- ent study in the R-D plane in Figure 1. From Figure 1, it is clear that more than 84% of the events obey the R ≥ D con- SILVA ET AL. 2 Figure 1. Representation of all radon data points from Toutain and Baubron [1999] in the R-D plane, where R is the earthquake preparation radius, and D the distance (km) from the epicenter to the measuring site. x x x 3 dition. In the remaining 16%, 10 anomalies almost coincide as R = D (black line), while seven of the anomalies corre- spond to microseismicity data from the same study, Virk [1995], as cited by Toutain and Baubron [1999]. In line with the above arguments, Silva et al. [2012] in- troduced a dimensionless parameter, S, that was defined as follows: (1) where S should be positive, or very small if negative, for oc- currences considered to be relevant to the present study; i.e., those that obey the R ≥ D condition. In the present analysis, we used the restrictive criterion of S ≥0 for the relevant cases. Figure 2 shows the parameters that characterized the observed radon anomalies; namely, da (Figure 2a), d (Figure 2b), and dt (Figure 2c), as a function of S for these cases. In the S-d plot (Figure 2b), it is possible to identify a clear out- lier point for S ≅ 16.38 and d = 1370 days, which corresponds to an earthquake with M = 7.8 at 130 km from the sensor, and a radon anomaly with da = −40% and no information about dt, as reported by Hauksson [1981]. Indeed, Toutain and Baubron [1999] noted that in areas with frequent high- magnitude earthquakes, more than one event might cause an apparently single anomaly. In the particular case of this outlier, where dt was not identified, it might have been re- lated to either the Haicheng (February 4, 1975, M 7.3) or the Tangshan ( July 28, 1976, M 7.8) earthquake [Toutain and Baubron 1999], and for that reason this point was not in- cluded in the analysis. Finally, we performed a Pearson correlation analysis of S with da, d and dt using the statistical computing program "R". 4. Results and discussion The Pearson correlations of da (%), d (days) and dt (days) with S are shown in Figure 3. A p <0.01 level of sig- nificance was considered (Figure 3, blue line). Even though no correlation was found between da or dt with S, stimulat- ingly, there was a significant positive correlation between d and S, with a coefficient of 0.503 with a p of approximately zero. In addition, we carried out linear regression, which fit the data reasonably and showed a reasonable coefficient of R2 ~0.25, as can be seen in Figure 4. Although both of these parameters are not high, they are statistically significant. Thus we consider this as an important result, as it shows a possible relationship between the radon anomaly duration, d, and both the magnitude of the impending earthquake and the distance from the earthquake epicenter to the measure- ment site. In other words, this reveals that for two seismic events with the same magnitude, the nearer one to the meas- urement site will show a longer anomaly than the farther one. This tends to confirm the physical hypotheses presented at the beginning, as it is expected that an event that occurs near to a measurement site should result in a stronger local deformation field, together with a larger increase in the soil permeability (while also implying a slower recovery to the equilibrium state), and this should induce a longer radon em- anation episode, as compared with the farther event. Like- wise, a stronger earthquake that has a larger preparation radius will tend to generate a radon source of larger superfi- RADON ANOMALIES RELATED WITH EARTHQUAKES Figure 2. The three parameters of interest presented as functions of S (de- fined in Equation 1). (a) The time interval between the beginning of the radon measurement anomalies and the occurrences of the earthquakes, dt (days). (b) The duration of the anomalies, d (days). (c) The relative ampli- tudes of the anomalies, da (%). The data shown were extracted from Toutain and Baubron [1999]. Figure 3. Results obtained for Pearson correlation tests for da, d and dt with S correlations. ,S D R 1= - cial area, together with anomalous radon levels (in both the soil and the groundwater) that last longer. It therefore ap- pears that parameter d is related more directly to the overall process of deformation and the permeability state than the other parameters. Indeed, the amplitude of the anomalies, da, depends on the amount of radon released, which is un- avoidably related to the specific lithology at the measuring site, such that comparisons of data from different sites has relatively little meaning. Likewise, the interval between the beginning of the anomaly and the occurrence of the earth- quake, dt (days), is strictly reliant on the intricate process of the radon source, the emanation and flow of the radon through the fissure network of the rocks, and its diffusion through the overlying soil at the observation site, such that, once again, the results from different sites are blurred by sev- eral uncontrolled site-related factors. At this point, it is important to note that recorded radon anomalies are very much dependent on the local weather conditions; namely, the precipitation and water run-off, and also the temperature. In contrast, there is no relevant influ- ence from the wind [Chen and Thomas 1994]. Actually, pre- cipitation affects the soil permeability, therefore reducing the radon release rate, and this might be responsible for the short duration of radon anomalies like the points on the S axis (d ~0) in Figure 2b. Thus special care must be taken with meteorological conditions. Indeed, a possibility to min- imize any meteorological influences on these radon anom- alies is to consider only the anomalies with S > Sc (a critical value to study only the events with the earthquake epicen- ter close enough to the measuring site; e.g., Sc = 20). How- ever, due to the restricted size of the database considered in the present study, this would significantly reduce the num- ber of selected occurrences and thereby preclude the real- ization of any statistical analyses. Unfortunately, as mentioned by Toutain and Baubron [1999], there is almost no information in the literature of very important parameters like the focal mechanics of these earthquakes, and the meteorological conditions during the anomalies, among others. Thus, the results shown here are preliminary and deeper investigations will be required to pro- vide more robust results. In particular, the effect of the focal mechanism on the radon anomalies is definitely important, and although it requires a significant monitoring effort, it could complement the present analysis in the future. Never- theless, stimulating perspectives for earthquake hazard as- sessment are found here, and they are presented at the end of this report (Section 4). On the other hand, from a comparison between the re- sults from an analysis performed by Cicerone et al. [2009] and the present study, it is interesting to note that a clear re- lationship between the radon anomalies and the earthquake parameters is found here, while no particular relationships were found by Cicerone et al. [2009]. From our point of view, this is because they did not take into account the balance be- tween the distance of the earthquake epicenter to the meas- uring site and its magnitude; thus, it is not physically appropriate to compare anomalies from different magni- tudes at different distances (see discussion in Section 2). For this reason, we plan to apply our methodology to the very relevant data that was compiled by Cicerone et al. [2009], and to compare their data with the present data. Indeed, new studies using larger databases with careful attention to me- teorological conditions, and particularly using more ad- vanced statically methods (like the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test), need to be carried out in the near future. 5. Final remarks The present study constitutes a first step to a more pro- found analysis that must include a larger and more complete database of radon anomalies, with particular attention being paid to the meteorological conditions, and especially to pre- cipitation (this is a crucial aspect for future studies). Never- theless, by using a simple approach, this supports significant, although not decisive, evidence of a correlation between the seismic activity and the duration of the radon anomalies re- ported by Toutain and Baubron [1999]. However, the pres- ent viewpoint of many studies, e.g., Pulinets and Ouzounov [2011], tends to emphasize the analysis of satellite data, e.g., Sarkar et al. [2011], as a crucial approach to the study of earthquake precursory phenomena. We believe that similar to the case of meteorology, local stations are determining in the better constraining of models, and for that reason, much effort is still needed in multiple-parameter-based re- search of earthquake precursory phenomena at the local level. To this end, we suggest the combination of satellite InSAR analysis, which provides an accurate calculation of the deformation area (especially if compared to the rough estimation by the formula of Dobrovolsky et al. [1979]), with local radon measurements in seismically active regions. In this way, it will be possible for future studies to fully ex- SILVA ET AL. 4 Figure 4. Linear regression of d as a function of S. 5 plore the effects of deformation area on radon emissions, to provide more assertive results. Acknowledgements. HGS acknowledges the support of two Portuguese institutions: the Science and Technology Foundation for the grant SFRH/BPD/63880/2009, and the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation for the grant Estímulo à Criatividade e à Qualidade na Actividade de Investigação in the science program of 2010. Important discussions with Prof R. Giles Harrison, Dr Cláudia Serrano, and Marta Melgão are strongly acknowledged. We are also thankful for the support of the Annals in Geophysics Editor, Prof Salvatore Barba, and the reviewers of our manuscript, Dr Valerio Curcio and Dr Anna Riggio; the final form of our manuscript was greatly enriched by their suggestions. References Biagi, P. F., L. Castellana, T. Maggipinto, R. Piccolo, A. Mi- nafra, A. Ermini, S. Martellucci, C. Bellecci, G. Perna, V. Capozzi, O.A. Molchanov and M. Hayakawa (2006). LF radio anomalies revealed in Italy by the wavelet analysis: possible preseismic effects during 1997-1998, Phys. Chem. Earth, 31, 403-408. Chauhan, V., O.P. Singh, V. Kushwah, V. Singh and B. Singh (2009). Ultra-low-frequency (ULF) and total electron con- tent (TEC) anomalies observed at Agra and their associ- ation with regional earthquakes, J. Geodyn., 48, 68-74. Chen, C., and D.M. Thomas (1994). Soil processes and chem- ical transport, J. Environ. Qual., 23, 173-179. Cicerone, R.D., J. E. Ebel and J. Britton (2009). A systematic compilation of earthquake precursors, Tectonophysics, 476, 371-396. Dobrovolsky, I.P., S.I. Zubkov and V.I. Miachkin, (1979). Es- timation of the size of earthquake preparation zones, Pure Appl. Geophys., 117, 1025-1044. Geller, R.J. (1991). Shake-up for earthquake prediction, Na- ture, 352, 275-276 (also 353, 612). Harrison, R.G., K.L. Aplin and M.J. Rycroft (2010). Atmos- pheric electricity coupling between earthquake regions and the ionosphere, J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys., 72, 376-381. Hauksson, E. (1981). Radon content of groundwater as an earthquake precursor: evaluation of worldwide data and physical basis, J. Geophys. Res., 86, 9397-9410. Kagan, Y.Y., and L. Knopoff, (1987). Statistical short-term earthquake prediction, Science, 236, 1563-1567. Ouzounov, D., D. Liu, K. Chunli, G. Cervone, M. Kafatos and P. Taylor (2007). Outgoing long-wave radiation vari- ability from IR satellite data prior to major earthquakes, Tectonophysics, 431, 211-220. Pulinets, S., and D. Ouzounov (2011). Lithosphere–atmos- phere–ionosphere coupling (LAIC) model – a unified con- cept for earthquake precursor validation, J. Asian Earth Sci., 41, 371-382. Sarkar, S., S. Tiwari and A.K. Gwal (2011). Electron density anomalies associated with M 5.9 earthquakes in Indone- sia during 2005 observed by DEMETER, J. Atmos. Solar Terr. Phys., 73, 2289-2299. Silva, H.G., M. Bezzeghoud, A.H. Reis, R.N. Rosa, M. Tlemçani, A.A. Araújo, C. Serrano, J.F. Borges, B. Caldeira and P.F. Biagi (2011). Atmospheric electrical field decrease during the M =4.1 Sousel earthquake (Portugal), Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 987-991. Silva, H.G., M.M. Oliveira, C. Serrano, M. Bezzeghoud, A.H. Reis, R. N. Rosa, P.F. Biagi (2012). Influence of seis- mic activity on the atmospheric electric field in Lisbon (Portugal) from 1955 to 1991, Annals of Geophysics, 55 (1), 193-197. Toutain, J.P., and J.C. Baubron (1999). Gas geochemistry and seismotectonics: a review, Tectonophysics, 304, 1-27. Virk, H.S., and S. Baljinder (1994). Radon recording of Ut- tarkashi earthquake, Geophys. Res. Lett. 21, 737-740. Virk, H.S. (1995). Radon monitoring of microseismicity in the Kangra and Chamba Valleys of Himachal Pradesh, India, Nucl. Geophys., 9, 141-146. Wyss, M., ed. (1991). Evaluation of Proposed Earthquake Precursors, 94 pp., AGU, Washington, D.C.; doi:10.1029/ SP032. * Corresponding author: Hugo Manuel Gonçalves da Silva, University of Évora, School of Sciences and Technology (ECT), Geophysical Centre of Évora and Physics Department, Évora, Portugal; email: hgsilva@uevora.pt. © 2013 by the Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia. All rights reserved. RADON ANOMALIES RELATED WITH EARTHQUAKES << /ASCII85EncodePages false /AllowTransparency false /AutoPositionEPSFiles false /AutoRotatePages /None /Binding /Left /CalGrayProfile (Dot Gain 20%) /CalRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Warning /CompatibilityLevel 1.3 /CompressObjects /Tags /CompressPages true /ConvertImagesToIndexed true /PassThroughJPEGImages true /CreateJobTicket false /DefaultRenderingIntent /Default /DetectBlends true /DetectCurves 0.1000 /ColorConversionStrategy /LeaveColorUnchanged /DoThumbnails false /EmbedAllFonts true /EmbedOpenType false /ParseICCProfilesInComments true /EmbedJobOptions true /DSCReportingLevel 0 /EmitDSCWarnings false /EndPage -1 /ImageMemory 1048576 /LockDistillerParams true /MaxSubsetPct 100 /Optimize false /OPM 1 /ParseDSCComments true /ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true /PreserveCopyPage true /PreserveDICMYKValues true /PreserveEPSInfo true /PreserveFlatness true /PreserveHalftoneInfo false /PreserveOPIComments false /PreserveOverprintSettings true /StartPage 1 /SubsetFonts true /TransferFunctionInfo /Apply /UCRandBGInfo /Preserve /UsePrologue false /ColorSettingsFile (None) /AlwaysEmbed [ true /AndaleMono /Apple-Chancery /Arial-Black /Arial-BoldItalicMT /Arial-BoldMT /Arial-ItalicMT /ArialMT /CapitalsRegular /Charcoal /Chicago /ComicSansMS /ComicSansMS-Bold /Courier /Courier-Bold /CourierNewPS-BoldItalicMT /CourierNewPS-BoldMT /CourierNewPS-ItalicMT /CourierNewPSMT /GadgetRegular /Geneva /Georgia /Georgia-Bold /Georgia-BoldItalic /Georgia-Italic /Helvetica /Helvetica-Bold /HelveticaInserat-Roman /HoeflerText-Black /HoeflerText-BlackItalic /HoeflerText-Italic /HoeflerText-Ornaments /HoeflerText-Regular /Impact /Monaco /NewYork /Palatino-Bold /Palatino-BoldItalic /Palatino-Italic /Palatino-Roman /SandRegular /Skia-Regular /Symbol /TechnoRegular /TextileRegular /Times-Bold /Times-BoldItalic /Times-Italic /Times-Roman /TimesNewRomanPS-BoldItalicMT /TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT /TimesNewRomanPS-ItalicMT /TimesNewRomanPSMT /Trebuchet-BoldItalic /TrebuchetMS /TrebuchetMS-Bold /TrebuchetMS-Italic /Verdana /Verdana-Bold /Verdana-BoldItalic /Verdana-Italic /Webdings ] /NeverEmbed [ true ] /AntiAliasColorImages false /CropColorImages true /ColorImageMinResolution 150 /ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleColorImages true /ColorImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /ColorImageResolution 300 /ColorImageDepth -1 /ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1 /ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.10000 /EncodeColorImages true /ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterColorImages true /ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /ColorACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /ColorImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000ColorImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasGrayImages false /CropGrayImages true /GrayImageMinResolution 150 /GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 300 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.10000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /GrayImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000GrayImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasMonoImages false /CropMonoImages true /MonoImageMinResolution 1200 /MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 1200 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.08250 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict << /K -1 >> /AllowPSXObjects false /CheckCompliance [ /None ] /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile (None) /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier () /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName (http://www.color.org) /PDFXTrapped /Unknown /CreateJDFFile false /SyntheticBoldness 1.000000 /Description << /ENU (Use these settings to create PDF documents with higher image resolution for high quality pre-press printing. The PDF documents can be opened with Acrobat and Reader 5.0 and later. These settings require font embedding.) /JPN /FRA /DEU /PTB /DAN /NLD /ESP /SUO /NOR /SVE /KOR /CHS /CHT /ITA >> >> setdistillerparams << /HWResolution [2400 2400] /PageSize [595.000 842.000] >> setpagedevice