Geology topics

Eric M. Thompson

Publications and source records attributed to Eric M. Thompson.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

USGS2024

A journey to the center of the USGS National Strong-motion Project processing and beyond

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Strong Motion Project (NSMP) has the primary U.S. government responsibility to acquire, process, and disseminate significant strong-motion earthquake ground motion records measured at surficial free-field stations, structures (buildings, dams, and bridges, and geotechnical arrays to the earthquake engineering community. As a result of the deployment of modern seismic instrumentation and growth of tools such as web-services, earthquake data from U.S. and international seismic networks are more accessible than ever. Our mission is to provide raw and processed strong-motion waveforms with PGA values greater than 0.1%g for M3.0 earthquakes and larger in California and M4.0 and larger within the conterminous US, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Alaska. Datasets of interest to the engineering and geophysics communities, such as event sequences in areas of induced seismicity and significant global events, are also processed and posted at the Center for Engineering Strong Motion Data (CESMD) at strongmotioncenter.org when available through collaboration with the international strong-motion data community. Here we outline (1) the NSMP’s current workflow to acquire, process, and distribute data at CESMD; (2) our new endeavours and collaborations focusing on comparison and integration of waveform processing software, development of techniques for metadata quality checks before and after earthquakes, and construction of a dynamic site characterization repository; and (3) our topics for possible collaboration topics across the global strong-motion community.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2024

New developments at the Center for Engineering Strong-Motion Data (CESMD)

The Center for Engineering Strong-Motion Data (CESMD), an internationally utilized joint center of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the California Geological Survey (CGS), provides a single access point for earthquake strong-motion records and station metadata from the CGS California Strong-Motion Instrumentation Program (CSMIP), the USGS National Strong-Motion Project (NSMP), the USGS Advanced National Seismic System, and other affiliates. The CESMD has been continuously improving its webtools to facilitate the access of strong-motion data and metadata for use in post-earthquake response and for scientific and engineering research applications. The Center provides raw and processed strong-motion data via the Engineering Data Center (EDC) and the Virtual Data Center (VDC) web portals. This paper focuses on the strong-motion products provided by the EDC where more than 48,000 records with peak ground accelerations greater than 0.1% g from over 2400 earthquakes are currently hosted. and on the ongoing efforts to develop data access tools and applications. The new developments and ongoing efforts in the EDC include: 1) enhancements to the CESMD webservices to facilitate access to station metadata, earthquake information, and strong motion records 2) new features to the interactive map interface, improving the visualization and access to earthquake, station, and record information, 3) efforts to develop a new web application tool for data format conversion from a number of data formats, 4) efforts to unify varying waveform data formats into a consistent format, 5) ongoing efforts to compile seismic station site geology, measured or inferred Vs30 values, shear-wave profiles, NEHRP site class, and available structural instrument deployment schematics, and 6) a special studies pages for research topic-specific ground motion datasets that offer uniform processing of records from a variety of sources.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2024

A partially nonergodic ground-motion model for Fourier amplitude spectra for the San Francisco Bay area, California, USA

We develop a partially nonergodic ground-motion model (GMM) for Fourier amplitude spectra for the San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA, using the Bayless and Abrahamson (2019) GMM as a reference ergodic GMM and developing location-dependent adjustments to the predicted median and variance. We compile regional ground-motion data from moment magnitude (𝑀 w ) >3 earthquakes occurring during 2000–2022 for which magnitude information is available in the U.S. Geological Survey Comprehensive Catalog (Guy et al., 2015). The data set predominantly consists of records from 𝑀 w 3.5–4.5 earthquakes but includes three well-recorded 𝑀 w > 5 events. Ground-motion residuals are evaluated using the time-averaged shear-wave velocity in the top 30 m (𝑉 S30 ) from the California-specific map of Thompson et al. (2018) and basin-depth site parameters from the seismic velocity model of Aagaard and Hirakawa (2021). The 𝑉 S30 dependence and basin-depth scaling of the reference ergodic GMM of Bayless and Abrahamson (2019) are evaluated and modified with the updated data set. We compute maps of site adjustments using a varying-coefficient model that considers the spatial correlation structure and uncertainties at each observation location. The spatial covariance model is developed using ground-motion residuals that are standardized by the uncertainty model, which allows for consideration of the aleatory variability in developing the site adjustments. The covariance model is fit considering the means and standard deviations of the site terms at all locations. The use of partially nonergodic median adjustments results in modified variance components of the within-event variability. Due to the low number of large-magnitude earthquakes that control seismic hazard in the data set, we do not modify between-event variance; however, we present adjustments to site-to-site variability for use in partially nonergodic hazard assessments.

California↗

USGS2023

The 2023 US 50-State National Seismic Hazard Model: Overview and implications

The US National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) was updated in 2023 for all 50 states using new science on seismicity, fault ruptures, ground motions, and probabilistic techniques to produce a standard of practice for public policy and other engineering applications (defined for return periods greater than ∼475 or less than ∼10,000 years). Changes in 2023 time-independent seismic hazard (both increases and decreases compared to previous NSHMs) are substantial because the new model considers more data and updated earthquake rupture forecasts and ground-motion components. In developing the 2023 model, we tried to apply best available or applicable science based on advice of co-authors, more than 50 reviewers, and hundreds of hazard scientists and end-users, who attended public workshops and provided technical inputs. The hazard assessment incorporates new catalogs, declustering algorithms, gridded seismicity models, magnitude-scaling equations, fault-based structural and deformation models, multi-fault earthquake rupture forecast models, semi-empirical and simulation-based ground-motion models, and site amplification models conditioned on shear-wave velocities of the upper 30 m of soil and deeper sedimentary basin structures. Seismic hazard calculations yield hazard curves at hundreds of thousands of sites, ground-motion maps, uniform-hazard response spectra, and disaggregations developed for pseudo-spectral accelerations at 21 oscillator periods and two peak parameters, Modified Mercalli Intensity, and 8 site classes required by building codes and other public policy applications. Tests show the new model is consistent with past ShakeMap intensity observations. Sensitivity and uncertainty assessments ensure resulting ground motions are compatible with known hazard information and highlight the range and causes of variability in ground motions. We produce several impact products including building seismic design criteria, intensity maps, planning scenarios, and engineering risk assessments showing the potential physical and social impacts. These applications provide a basis for assessing, planning, and mitigating the effects of future earthquakes.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2023

Sediment thickness map of United States Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Strata, and their influence on earthquake ground motions

With the recent successful accounting of basin depth ground-motion adjustments in seismic hazard analyses for select areas of the western United States, we move toward implementing similar adjustments in the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains by constructing a sediment thickness model and evaluating multiple relevant site amplification models for central and eastern United States seismic hazard analyses. We digitize and combine existing sediment thickness data sets into a composite surface that delineates the base of Cretaceous sediments under the Atlantic Coastal Plain and the base of Mesozoic sediments under the Gulf Coastal Plain. Amplification models dependent on sediment thickness, site natural period, and source-to-site path length are compared with data sets of observed ground motions to evaluate the ability of the new models to improve ground motion estimates. We find that the amplification models can account for observed trends in sediment-thickness and period-dependent residuals, but some tuning is required. For example, the model of Chapman and Guo requires a reference V S 30 , the time-averaged shear-wave velocity within 30 m of the Earth’s surface, for non-Coastal Plain sites, which we estimate to be between about 1 and 2 km/s. Along with our sediment thickness model, we estimate a velocity profile for application to the Harmon et al. site-natural-period-based model in order to best match the Chapman and Guo period dependence for a broad range of sediment thicknesses. The Next Generation of Attenuation models for the eastern United States Gulf Coast path-based adjustment models can also account for seismic attenuation in the Coastal Plain sediments and reduce the standard deviation of total residuals. If enacted in the U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Model, these amplification models will reduce predicted short-period (<1 s) and increase predicted long-period (>1 s) ground motions in the Coastal Plains appreciably.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2023

ShakeMap Atlas 4.0 and AtlasCat: An archive of the recent and the historical earthquake ShakeMaps, and impacts for global hazard analyses and loss model calibration

Archival earthquake studies often focus on event and source characteristics for use in earthquake catalogs, seismotectonic understanding, and ground‐motion studies—many of these targeting better constraints for probabilistic seismic‐hazard analyses. The ShakeMap Atlas, in contrast, focuses on spatial distribution of shaking for the historical events, providing the best constraints at all locations that experienced significant shaking for each event, facilitating analyses of human experience, damage, and induced hazards (ground failure). The aim of the Atlas is to gain a general understanding and depiction of the shaking distribution for a suite of canonical earthquakes, and, coupled with loss data for each event, to provide a basis for earthquake loss model calibration, among other uses. Although the initial motivation for developing the ShakeMap Atlas was calibrating the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response system, over time, the Atlas has proved to be a useful tool for its users, and, as such, its scope has been vastly expanded in this newest version. The fourth version of the USGS ShakeMap Atlas is an openly available compilation of over 14,000 ShakeMaps of significant global earthquakes between 1900 and 2020. This revision includes: (1) the latest version of the ShakeMap software that provides refined uncertainty estimations and improved methods to combine macroseismic observations with updated ground‐motion models; (2) an updated earthquake source catalog; (3) a refined strategy to select suites of prediction and conversion equations based on a new seismotectonic regionalization scheme; and (4) expanded macroseismic intensity and ground‐motion datasets. We also tabulate reported economic losses and fatalities for Atlas events where such data are openly available. These changes make the new ShakeMap Atlas a self‐consistent, calibrated catalog invaluable for investigating near‐source ground motions, as well as seismic hazard, scenario, risk, and loss‐model development and testing.

California↗

USGS2023

Ground‐motion variability from kinematic rupture models and the implications for nonergodic probabilistic seismic hazard analysis

The variability of earthquake ground motions has a strong control on probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA), particularly for the low frequencies of exceedance used for critical facilities. We use a crossed mixed‐effects model to partition the variance components from simulated ground motions of M w "> M w 7 earthquakes on the Salt Lake City segment of the Wasatch fault zone. Total variability of simulated ground motions is approximately equivalent to empirical models. The high contribution from rupture speed suggests an avenue to reducing variability through research on the causes and predictions of rupture speed on specific faults. Simulations show a strong spatial heterogeneity in the variability that manifests from directivity effects. We illustrate the impact of this spatial heterogeneity on hazard using a partially nonergodic PSHA framework. The results highlight the benefit of accounting for directivity effects in nonergodic PSHA, in which models that account for additional processes controlling ground motions are paired with reductions in the modeled ground‐motion variability.

Salt Lake City segment of the Wasatch fault zone↗

USGS2023

Modern products for a vintage event: An update on the 1933 Long Beach, California, earthquake

When a notable earthquake occurs in the United States, a range of familiar real‐ and near‐real‐time products are produced by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS), and made available via the ANSS Comprehensive Earthquake Catalog. For historical and early instrumental earthquakes, similar results and products are developed depending on data availability and event significance, drawing from published later studies. The year 2023 marked the ninetieth anniversary of the 11 March 1933 Long Beach, California, earthquake. This anniversary provided the impetus to update ANSS products, drawing on archived and published data. Here, we describe the updated ShakeMap, shaking recordings and intensities, and retrospective aftershock forecast for the Long Beach, California, earthquake. In effect we have developed standard, modern ANSS products for an earthquake that occurred 90 yr ago. Our results show that the distributions of both the ground motions, anchored by three strong‐motion recordings, and aftershock magnitudes are consistent with expectations for an M 6.4 mainshock in Southern California. We show that, notwithstanding possible limitations, instrumentally recorded accelerations from the closest station are consistent with predicted shaking and directly estimated macroseismic intensities. Updated data products have been added to the USGS event page, where they are available for download. Public‐facing products were also created for the anniversary and are freely available on the USGS website.

California↗

USGS2023

Rapid characterization of the February 2023 Kahramanmaraş, Turkey, earthquake sequence

The 6 February 2023 M w "> M w 7.8 Pazarcık and subsequent M w "> M w 7.5 Elbistan earthquakes generated strong ground shaking that resulted in catastrophic human and economic loss across south‐central Türkiye and northwest Syria. The rapid characterization of the earthquakes, including their location, size, fault geometries, and slip kinematics, is critical to estimate the impact of significant seismic events. The U.S. Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) provides real‐time monitoring of earthquakes globally, including rapid source characterization and impact estimates. Here, we describe the seismic characterization products generated and made available by the NEIC over the two weeks following the start of the earthquake sequence in southeast Türkiye, their evolution, and how they inform our understanding of regional seismotectonics and hazards. The kinematics of rupture for the two earthquakes was complex, involving multiple fault segments. Therefore, incorporating observations from rupture mapping was critical for characterizing these events. Dense local datasets facilitated robust source characterization and impact assessment once these observations were obtained and converted to NEIC product input formats. We discuss how we may improve the timeliness of NEIC products for rapid assessment of future seismic hazards, particularly in the case of complex ruptures.

The Seismic Record↗

USGS2023

High-pass corner frequency selection for implementation in the USGS automated ground motion processing tool

Earthquake ground motion processing for next-generation attenuation (NGA) projects required human inspection to select high-pass corner frequencies ( f cHP ), which is time-intensive and subjective. With growth in the number of recordings per event and interest in enhancing repeatability, we sought to develop automated procedures for f cHP selection. These procedures consider signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and non-physical features in the displacement time series that indicate high- and/or low-frequency noise effects. The procedures are implemented in a US Geological Survey software package (gmprocess). We extend previous procedures for SNR-based corner frequency selection to also check for low-frequency artifacts in the displacement record using a polynomial fit to improve f cHP selection. We evaluate the performance of the SNR and polynomial fit criteria using recordings from the 2020 M5.1 North Carolina and the 2013 M4.7 Southern Ontario earthquakes. Data processed with the SNR-only criteria can have low f cHP and displacement drift; the displacement check increases f cHP and reduces displacement drift.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2023

Ground motion and seismic hazard in the central and eastern United States

This report describes work carried out under the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Interagency Agreement to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) “Research to Support NRC’s Seismic Hazard Analyses” for Task 3, “Seismic Hazard and Ground Motion Models.” The focus of this work has been on evaluation of the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA)-East groundmotion models (GMMs) with available ground-motion data and evaluation of alternative methods for characterizing epistemic uncertainty for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA). When the Interagency Agreement commenced, the USGS’s National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) was being updated, and a significant part of the update for the 2018 NSHM included the introduction of new GMMs for the central and eastern United States (CEUS) (Petersen et al., 2020). In addition to the implementation of the then-recently developed NGA-East GMMs (Goulet et al., 2018), the ground-motion characterization for the CEUS in the 2018 NSHM also included a logic-tree branch with weights applied to the updated “adjusted seed” models that were developed as part of the NGA-East process and in updates by the GMM developers. The Statement of Work for Task 3 of the NRC Interagency Agreement to the USGS included the following parts: (1) Describe technically acceptable approaches in combining GMMs for use in PSHA calculations; (2) Evaluate the effect of using different sets of GMMs (NGA-East SSHAC versus NGA-East USGS) on PSHA calculations; (3) Describe the results of the GMM testing against recorded data, and provide a recommendation on the GMMs application for use in the PSHA; (4) Evaluate the impacts of recently updated individual GMMs on the published NGAEast models; and (5) Submit a final Technical Letter Report documenting results of this task. We present results from this work in two sections: (Chapter 1) Updated Central and Eastern United States Ground Motions and Ground-Motion Analyses; and (Chapter 2) Approaches to Combining Ground-Motion Models for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis in the Central and Eastern United States.

central and eastern United States↗

USGS2022

Ground failure triggered by the 7 January 2020 M6.4 Puerto Rico earthquake

The 7 January 2020 M 6.4 Puerto Rico earthquake, the mainshock of an extended earthquake sequence, triggered significant ground failure. In this study, we detail the ground failure that occurred based largely on a postearthquake field reconnaissance campaign that we conducted. We documented more than 300 landslides, mainly rock falls that were concentrated in areas where peak ground acceleration (PGA) exceeded 30% g ; sparse smaller landslides occurred in highly susceptible areas more than 50 km from the epicenter and at PGA values <10% g . Though some of the largest mass movements were in natural slopes, rock falls in road cuts had more impact because they caused widespread transportation disruption. Some structures also were damaged by landslides, but no landslide‐related fatalities were reported. Liquefaction and related lateral spreading were severe in some areas, causing damage to residential and commercial structures and a power plant. Most of the liquefaction occurred in coastal areas where shaking exceeded 50% g , though some of the most damaging instances were in Ponce, where shaking estimates were as low as 20% g . In this article, we summarize the most notable ground failures and detail the overall patterns that we observed. The observations and compiled inventory datasets presented here are valuable because no island‐wide hazard maps for earthquake‐triggered landslides or liquefaction have been developed for Puerto Rico, and postevent inventories are vital for such an effort. In general, the datasets presented here contribute to a global understanding of coseismic ground‐failure hazard by presenting detailed observations for a relatively moderate ground‐failure event with well‐constrained shaking estimates; current models and expectations are biased by the tendency to collect detailed datasets mainly for exceptional events.

Puerto Rico↗

USGS2022

Partitioning ground motion uncertainty when conditioned on station data

Rapid estimation of earthquake ground shaking and proper accounting of associated uncertainties in such estimates when conditioned on strong‐motion station data or macroseismic intensity observations are crucial for downstream applications such as ground failure and loss estimation. The U.S. Geological Survey ShakeMap system is called upon to fulfill this objective in light of increased near‐real‐time access to strong‐motion records from around the world. Although the station data provide a direct constraint on shaking estimates at specific locations, these data also heavily influence the uncertainty quantification at other locations. This investigation demonstrates methods to partition the within‐ (phi) and between‐event (tau) uncertainty estimates under the observational constraints, especially when between‐event uncertainties are heteroscedastic. The procedure allows the end users of ShakeMap to create separate between‐ and within‐event realizations of ground‐motion fields for downstream loss modeling applications in a manner that preserves the structure of the underlying random spatial processes.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2022

Spatially continuous models of aleatory variability in seismic site response for southern California

We develop an empirical, spatially continuous model for the single-station within-event ( ϕ SS ) component of earthquake ground motion variability in the Los Angeles area. ϕ SS represents event-to-event variability in site response or remaining variability due to path effects not captured by ground motion models. Site-specific values of ϕ SS at permanent seismic network stations were estimated during our previous work [1]. Here we first fit a model to ϕ SS conditioned on the time-averaged shear wave velocity in the upper 30 m (V S30 ). We observe that stations on soft soil have larger average variability in site response than those on rock, especially at short periods. We use regression kriging to spatially interpolate ϕ SS to an even grid spacing, using the V S30 -scaling as the background model [2]. This improves on previous work that used ordinary kriging for interpolation [1]. We find that ϕ SS ranges from about 0.1 to 0.4 natural log units in our study area, representing variations in site response at single locations of a factor of 1.1 up to a factor of 1.5. There is both greater variability and more coherency in the variability for short-period site response than for long periods. We recommend using these ϕ SS models with the site response models of [1] for applications where quantification of variability is needed, such as probabilistic seismic hazard analyses.

California↗

USGS2022

Improving the Development Pipelines for USGS Earthquake Hazards Program Real-Time and Scenario Products

The real-time and scenario products of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earthquake Hazards Program, such as the ComCat catalog, Did You Feel It?, ShakeMap, ShakeCast, and PAGER, are highly visible and used by a wide variety of stakeholders. We propose two significant enhancements to the development pipelines for the Earthquake Hazards Program real-time and scenario products that have far-reaching benefits. First, we propose incorporating processed and archived ground-motion records into the data streams for real-time products. This increases reproducibility and transparency for ShakeMap and downstream products that serve critical functions in earthquake response and long-term research. It will also provide comprehensive, open access databases of ground-motion metrics (for example, peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and acceleration response spectra) and ground-motion time histories that are fundamental tools in most engineering seismology studies. Second, we propose extending the pipeline for scenario products to provide a full set of complementary products to the real-time pipeline. This would define a comprehensive set of standards for archiving scenarios, including three-dimensional ground-motion simulations, and allow the suite of scenario products to be disseminated in the same way as real-time products. Ultimately, these enhancements would increase the value of some of the most important Earthquake Hazards Program products and transform the way USGS scientists and the engineering seismology community conduct ground-motion research.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2022

Earthquake scenario selection for portfolio holders in CEUS: A case study with Oklahoma DOT

Portfolio managers of spatially distributed assets in the central and eastern United States (CEUS) and other low- to moderate seismic hazard regions require scenario-based seismic risk assessment for the purpose of emergency management and planning. Uncertainties regarding the long-term seismicity of the region, unknown faults, and limited historical records complicate the selection of an earthquake scenario. Through a case study with the Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT) and their portfolio of bridges, we look at one such exercise, which consists of two scenario earthquakes: one scenario earthquake selected from the U.S. Geological Survey Building Seismic Safety Commission (BSSC) scenario catalog, a magnitude (M) 7.2 event on the Meers fault, and a second aftershock selected by the consequence-driven earthquake scenario selection (Co-DESS) method. The latter is driven by ODOT’s desired service actions to be included during the earthquake drill; in this case, we identify an earthquake that is likely to trigger inspections for bridges across multiple districts, thereby testing not only inspection protocols but also coordination efforts between district groups. We find that the Co-DESS selected event is smaller in magnitude and offers different geographical options than selection through conventional selection methods, while still meeting necessary consequences for an effective earthquake exercise.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2022

Sediment thickness and ground motion site amplification along the United States Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains

Past and present research on earthquake ground motions along the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains and Mississippi Embayment show significant period-dependent site response that is not presently accounted for in ground motion models. These deviations are strongly correlated with the thickness of Mesozoic and younger syn- and post-rift sediments. With the recent incorporation of deep basin depth measurements in the U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Model for select regions in the western United States, we move toward a similar analysis in the greater Coastal Plains region by constructing a sediment thickness model and considering three new site response models conditioned on sediment thickness. As of the preparation of this conference paper, we have performed a preliminary evaluation of the Chapman and Guo model and find that the predicted ratio between pseudo-spectral accelerations for the Coastal Plains relative to the continental interior are broadly consistent with our independent dataset.

Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains↗

USGS2022

Applying consequence-driven scenario selection to lifelines

We present a new consequence-driven framework for earthquake scenario selection. For emergency managers, utility operators, policy makers, and other stakeholders, a scenario-based seismic risk assessment is often necessary for the purpose of emergency management and planning. In developing a scientifically defensible scenario, stakeholders can simulate a realistic event in order to pre-identify vulnerabilities in the system and support action to address these vulnerabilities. Selecting scenarios is particularly challenging for important population centers and critical infrastructure in stable tectonic environments, such as in the central and eastern United States, where uncertain long-term seismicity and unknown faults offer inadequate constraints. Notably, significant events in these so-called stable regions do occur (e.g., Nahanni, Canada, 1985, M6.9; Tennant Creek, Australia, 1998, M6.7). In regions of low seismicity, even moderate events can be consequential due to the higher vulnerability of buildings typical of such regions when compared to regions of higher seismicity. Furthermore, communicating seismic risk to stakeholders and the general public in these regions can be especially challenging due to the complexities of characterizing the hazard level. This framework has been developed to address these challenges for scenario selection in low seismic hazard regions. In this new approach, the analysis begins instead with the explicit definition of a consequence of concern to the specific stakeholder. This can range from a definition of loss (in lives, dollars, or another metric of interest), or a performance metric for critical infrastructure. The framework leverages United States Geological Survey software to run the hazard and consequence analysis. Driven by this stakeholder-defined consequence, an inversion analysis generates a complete event set of candidate scenarios that could breach this consequence. The final selection of a scenario, or family of scenarios, is then scientifically informed, but not limited by our lack of constraints in characterizing the hazard.

Conference Paper↗