Geology topics

Max Schneider

Publications and source records attributed to Max Schneider.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

Rapid characterization of the 2025 Mw 8.8 Kamchatka, Russia earthquake

The 29 July 2025 M w 8.8 Kamchatka, Russia, earthquake was the sixth largest instrumentally recorded earthquake. This event was seismically well observed at regional and teleseismic distances, but publicly available near‐source data were sparse at the time of the event, presenting unique challenges for rapid source and impact characterization. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Earthquake Information Center provides global real‐time monitoring for earthquakes, including rapid response information products that estimate source characteristics, shaking, and the resulting impacts. We describe the USGS rapid response earthquake information products following the Kamchatka event and discuss their implications for ongoing hazards in the region. We describe potential improvements to our response workflows motivated by this event, including more rapid constraints on source geometries and the automated selection of fault geometries for finite‐fault inversions. The rapid response products together support the interpretation of a unilateral southwestward rupture with significant slip on the southwestern end of the rupture extent. The M w 8.8–9.0 event in 1952, which ruptured a comparable extent of the Kuril–Kamchatka subduction interface, has many similarities to the 2025 rupture. This illustrates that slip deficits may remain following great earthquakes and highlights the usefulness of comparative studies between historic and modern events.

Kuril-Kamchatka subduction zone↗

USGS2025

Meet the people where they are: Assessing user needs for aftershock forecast products in El Salvador, Mexico and the United States

Aftershock forecasts can help communities reduce their seismic risk by conveying how many aftershocks can be expected following a large earthquake, and how the expected number of aftershocks and their corresponding ground shaking evolves over time and space. Prior work finds that graphical forecast products may communicate such information better than only text or numbers. To identify which visual products can serve multiple user groups, we held workshops with members of several professions, including emergency managers, engineers, critical infrastructure operators, public health specialists, science communicators, and more. We conducted these workshops in El Salvador, Mexico and the United States to understand which forecast products may be effective across different countries. In these workshops, users performed small-group activities to elicit the types of aftershock forecast information that would support decisions in their respective roles and how this information would optimally be displayed. Maps of shaking hazards were frequently requested across all professions and countries, even for dissimilar forecast uses. The design of these maps, and other product needs, were differentiated by profession, country and other factors. Other forecast products, including those showing forecasts about the magnitudes and time periods of future aftershocks, also served a variety of users, but for different types of decisions. We found a greater variation in user needs by profession than by country, and that user needs also vary with time, communication channel and other contextual factors. We discuss practical implications for user-centered visual communication of operational aftershock forecasts.

International Journal for Disaster Risk Reduction↗

USGS2025

Bayesian ETAS modeling for the Pacific Northwest: Uncovering effects of tectonic regimes, regional differences, and swarms on aftershock parameters

The Pacific Northwest (PNW) of North America has high seismic hazard due to numerous earthquake sources under populated areas. It hosts several tectonic regimes and subregional seismic zones that are hypothesized to have different patterns of earthquake and aftershock occurrence. It is also predisposed to earthquake swarms, which can complicate the statistical modeling of these patterns. We present the first statistical seismicity model of the PNW catalog using the epidemic‐type aftershock sequence (ETAS) framework. We develop a Bayesian inference procedure that provides a stable estimation of both ETAS parameters and their uncertainties for different sets of PNW earthquakes, even those with very sparse catalogs. The Bayesian approach allows us to investigate how parameter estimates change between the intraslab and crustal tectonic regimes, the northern and southern PNW, and when swarms are included and excluded from the catalog. We also utilize our Bayesian framework to calculate parameter estimates under different prior beliefs about PNW seismicity, as well as to propagate catalog measurement errors into ETAS parameter estimates. We discuss the implications of parameter differences across the region for aftershock forecasting for the PNW.

Pacific Northwest↗

USGS2024

What do we know without the catalog? Eliciting prior beliefs from experts for aftershock models

Fitting parametric seismological models to earthquake catalogs often comes with numerical challenges, especially when catalogs are small. An alternative way to quantify parameter values for a seismic region is by eliciting expert opinions on the seismological characteristics that each parameter corresponds to. For instance, expert beliefs on aftershock patterns can be formulated into prior distributions for aftershock parameters, for example, for the epidemic‐type aftershock sequence (ETAS) model. We illustrate such a method by not only eliciting priors for ETAS parameters for the Pacific Northwest (PNW), a subduction zone with a complex tectonic environment, but also a relatively small catalog. We compare these priors with those suggested by the ETAS literature for global subduction zones, discussing implications for aftershock forecasting for the PNW.

The Seismic Record↗

USGS2024

Developing, testing, and communicating earthquake forecasts: Current practices and future directions

While deterministically predicting the time and location of earthquakes remains impossible, earthquake forecasting models can provide estimates of the probabilities of earthquakes occurring within some region over time. To enable informed decision-making of civil protection, governmental agencies, or the public, Operational Earthquake Forecasting (OEF) systems aim to provide authoritative earthquake forecasts based on current earthquake activity in near-real time. Establishing OEF systems involves several nontrivial choices. This review captures the current state of OEF worldwide and analyzes expert recommendations on the development, testing, and communication of earthquake forecasts. An introductory summary of OEF-related research is followed by a description of OEF systems in Italy, New Zealand, and the United States. Combined, these two parts provide an informative and transparent snapshot of today's OEF landscape. In Section 4, we analyze the results of an expert elicitation that was conducted to seek guidance for the establishment of OEF systems. The elicitation identifies consensus and dissent on OEF issues among a non-representative group of 20 international earthquake forecasting experts. While the experts agree that communication products should be developed in collaboration with the forecast user groups, they disagree on whether forecasting models and testing methods should be user-dependent. No recommendations of strict model requirements could be elicited, but benchmark comparisons, prospective testing, reproducibility, and transparency are encouraged. Section 5 gives an outlook on the future of OEF. Besides covering recent research on earthquake forecasting model development and testing, upcoming OEF initiatives are described in the context of the expert elicitation findings.

Reviews of Geophysics↗

USGS2024

Aftershock forecasting

Aftershocks can compound the impacts of a major earthquake, disrupting recovery efforts and potentially further damaging weakened buildings and infrastructure. Forecasts of the probability of aftershocks can therefore aid decision-making during earthquake response and recovery. Several countries issue authoritative aftershock forecasts. Most aftershock forecasts are based on simple statistical models that were first developed in the 1980s and remain the best available models. We review these statistical models, and the wide-ranging research to advance aftershock forecasting through better statistical, physical, and machine learning methods. Physics-based forecasts based on mainshock stress changes can sometimes match the statistical models in testing, but don’t yet outperform them. Physical models are also hampered by unsolved problems such as the mechanics of dynamic triggering and the influence of background conditions. Initial work on machine learning forecasts shows promise, and new machine learning earthquake catalogs provide an opportunity to advance all types of aftershock forecasts.

Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences↗