Geology topics

Nico Luco

Publications and source records attributed to Nico Luco.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

2025 USGS National Seismic Hazard Model for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands: Overview of model and hazard results

The U.S. Geological Survey recently updated the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands (PRVI). The first version of the PRVI NSHM was released in 2003, and therefore this 2025 update includes over 20 years of new geologic, geophysical, and engineering data, methods, and models. Updates follow similar efforts performed in the recent 2023 50-state NSHM. However, this is the first NSHM in which we: (1) apply an inversion methodology to subduction interface fault sources in the earthquake rupture forecast (ERF) model; (2) develop scaled backbone median ground-motion models and independent aleatory variability models that are applied in the ground-motion characterization (GMC) model; and (3) calculate epistemic uncertainty related to alternative scenarios in the ERF and GMC models for all grid points in the study region. Long-term time-independent mean hazard calculations were performed for peak ground acceleration and 5%-damped pseudospectral acceleration at 21 spectral periods from 0.01- to 10.0-s, for eight National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program site conditions ranging from V S30 = 150 to 1500 m/s, and for 2%, 5%, and 10% in 50-year probabilities of exceedance (return periods of 2475, 975, and 475 years, respectively). Epistemic uncertainty, in the form of selected percentiles, is also provided for a suite of test sites and all grid points in the study region for limited periods, site conditions, and probabilities of exceedance. Selected results, including comparisons with the 2003 PRVI NSHM, are shown and discussed for selected periods, site conditions, and probabilities of exceedance. When comparing the 2025 PRVI NSHM with the 2003 PRVI NSHM, hazard is generally higher at shorter periods and lower at longer periods, as a result of updates in both ERF and GMC models. The 2025 PRVI NSHM is applicable for return periods greater than ∼475 or less than ∼10,000 years.

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands↗

USGS2025

A scientific vision and roadmap for earthquake rupture forecast developments, a USGS perspective

We articulate a scientific vision and roadmap for the development of improved Earthquake Rupture Forecast models, which are one of the two main modeling components used in modern seismic hazard and risk analysis. One primary future objective is to provide fully time-dependent models that include both elastic rebound and spatiotemporal clustering nationwide, which is particularly important for shorter-term hazard and risk considerations (e.g., earthquake insurance products). We also discuss the importance and perennial challenges associated with quantifying epistemic uncertainties, including those associated with deformation-model slip rates, un-quantified sampling errors with respect to off-fault seismicity, and any spatial covariances. The need for more physics-based approaches is also emphasized, as is the benefit of adding model valuation (quantifying usefulness) to our verification and validation protocols. Given the multidisciplinary and system-level nature of this activity, modular design is critical. Future updates will also draw from best-available science by both the United States Geological Survey and the external community. The primary goal of this paper is to highlight plans that guide research and facilitate community engagement with model development, especially with respect to lowering the entry barrier for early career scientists and engineers. The paper is written so readers can focus on the sections that interest them most (see table of contents), with the Introduction and Discussion providing a stand-alone overview and summary.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2025

Engineering and risk research—A strategic vision for extending USGS earthquake science to risk assessment and mitigation

As a part of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Natural Hazards Mission Area, the Engineering and Risk Project (ERP) of the Geologic Hazards Science Center conducts civil engineering research to extend natural hazards science to risk assessments. The ERP includes predominantly, but not exclusively, staff funded by the USGS Earthquake Hazards Program. A major focus of the ERP is to deliver actionable information to decisionmakers that helps promote the safety, security, and economic well-being of the Nation. The report discusses briefly the ERP’s evolution and scope, its organization structure, describes key products and deliverables, their efforts to engage with external partners, and its strategy and vision in conducting range of engineering and risk research. The research topics outlined in this report, as developed by the ERP, may be used to facilitate project planning activities during the next 10 years and serve as a longer-term planning resource for the USGS Earthquake Hazards Program and Geologic Hazards Science Center.

Circular↗

USGS2025

Simulating human behavior under earthquake early warning

Earthquakes are a rapid-onset hazard where advance planning and learning plays a key role in mitigating injuries and death to individuals. Recent advances in earthquake detection have resulted in the development of earthquake early warning (EEW) systems. These systems can provide advance warning to predetermined geographic regions that an earthquake is in progress, which may result in individuals receiving warning seconds before significant shaking is felt at their location. This additional time could allow individuals to take more effective protective actions during the immediate disaster. To demonstrate this, we created an agent-based simulation of a basic apartment that allowed us to randomly and repeatedly simulate an individual receiving and responding to an EEW message. The results of our preliminary simulation show that, in our study environment, earthquake early warning alerts have the potential to allow for sufficient time for individuals to take protective actions.

Washington↗

USGS2024

Effective site coefficients for the 2024 International Building Code (IBC)

The U.S. National Seismic Hazard Models (NSHMs), developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), have long been the scientific foundation of seismic design guidelines and have been used to compute design ground motions for construction of new buildings and retrofit of existing buildings in the United States and its territories. The 2018 NSHM is adopted by the 2024 International Building Code (IBC). Prior to the 2018 NSHM update, hazard calculations were required only at one reference site condition defined by V S30 =760 m/s (where V S30 is the time-averaged shear wave velocity from the surface to a depth of 30 m) and three periods (peak ground acceleration, PGA, and pseudo spectral accelerations at periods of 0.2 and 1 s, S s and S 1 ). Site coefficients, F PGA , F a , and F v , were then defined by the Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC) Provisions Update Committee (PUC) in the site-specific procedures of National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) Recommended Seismic Provisions to calculate ground motions for other site classes with different V S30 values at the given periods. The design ground motions at other periods were then estimated using a generic spectral shape that was also defined by the BSSC PUC in NEHRP provisions. In recent years, the engineering community has realized there were deficiencies with the F a and F v site coefficients and the generic spectral shape. To avoid potentially dangerous underestimations of design ground motions for long period structures on soft site conditions in high seismicity regions, the BSSC PUC recommended the use of multi-period response spectra (MPRS) in 2017. As a result, the USGS produced multi-period and multi-V S30 response spectral values in the 2018 NSHM for calculations of design ground motions and the site coefficients F a and F v were eliminated from the 2020 NEHRP Provisions. As these site coefficients were widely used inside and outside of the United States, in this study we back-calculate the “effective” site coefficients F a,eff , and F v,eff by comparing MPRS for various site classes with the MPRS for the reference site condition, and discuss the changes that are observed in the 2024 IBC compared to its previous version in 2021. The effective site coefficients are presented for test site locations and their dependence on various factors including period, ground motion intensity, and regional models are discussed. Ratio maps between the new effective site coefficients and the old ones are then presented for soft site classes and for short and long periods. For soft site classes at short periods, the new effective site coefficients are lower than the old site coefficients for high seismicity regions and higher for low seismicity regions. As it was expected, for soft site classes at long periods and high seismicity regions, the new effective site coefficients are much larger than the old site coefficients without imposing the 50% increase as a penalty that was suggested in the 2021 IBC, whereas they could be much smaller if the 50% increase would have been imposed particularly around New Madrid and Charleston high seismicity regions. For low seismicity regions, the long period effective site coefficients can be smaller or larger by 20% compared to the 2021 IBC coefficients.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2024

U.S. Geological Survey Earthquake Hazards Program decadal science strategy, 2024–33

Executive Summary Earthquakes represent one of our Nation’s most significant and costly natural hazards, with estimated annual loses from earthquakes close to $15 billion in 2023. Over the past two centuries, 37 U.S. States have experienced an earthquake exceeding a magnitude of 5, and 50 percent of States have a significant potential for future damaging shaking; these statistics speak to the need for nationwide interest and investment in earthquake hazard characterization and risk reduction. Authorized under the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Authorization Act, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earthquake Hazards Program (EHP) provides the scientific information, situational awareness, and knowledge necessary to reduce deaths, injuries, and economic losses from earthquakes and earthquake-induced tsunamis, landslides, and soil liquefaction. The EHP supports activities in three focused topical areas: (1) earthquake monitoring, (2) hazard assessment, and (3) applied research, using the results of each—and the coordination among them—to further support risk translation and communication in regions at risk nationwide. For earthquake monitoring, the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS), a cooperative effort of USGS networks, university partner regional seismic networks, and real-time geodetic networks, collects and analyzes data on earthquakes; issues timely, reliable notifications of their occurrence and impacts; and provides data for earthquake research, hazard, and risk assessment as a foundation for building an earthquake-resilient Nation. The USGS-operated ShakeAlert Earthquake Early Warning system is a recent addition to EHP’s ANSS infrastructure. In the realm of earthquake hazard assessment, the EHP contributes to earthquake risk mitigation strategies by developing the National Seismic Hazard Model and maps, and other related products, that describe the likelihood and potential effects of earthquakes nationwide, especially in the urban areas of highest risk. The EHP also conducts research on the causes, characteristics, and effects of earthquakes and prioritizes work that directly increases the accuracy and precision of earthquake hazards assessments, earthquake forecasts, and earthquake monitoring and situational-awareness products and that supports the Nation’s earthquake mitigation practices. Bridging the EHP’s efforts across research, hazard assessments, and earthquake monitoring is a broad and comprehensive collection of earthquake information products, including the National Seismic Hazard Model, ShakeAlert, and other products describing impact, such as ShakeMap and PAGER (Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response), which have been developed and integrated into EHP’s real-time monitoring systems. EHP funds external partners to carry out many important collaborative activities through an active external grants program—one of the largest in the USGS—and through cooperative agreements with other partners such as the university-operated regional seismic networks, funded as part of the ANSS. To continue its support of earthquake hazard characterization and risk reduction, the EHP aims to strengthen its foundational products and practices while positioning itself to respond to the evolving needs of the Nation and follow best practices of the scientific community. This document describes a strategy for the program to ensure it can meet these demands. The foundational priorities outlined in this strategy represent those activities that remain critical to the core functionality of the program and those that can be supported under current fiscal year 2024-level appropriations. Priorities described as aspirational are important for future growth, and to maintain the program’s position as a leading global resource in earthquake science, but would require increases in appropriated funding to be fully realized. Across the program’s portfolio of activities, several major themes have been identified as the most critical activities to advance EHP science over the coming decade. Together, these activities provide the framework necessary to integrate critical hazard characterization and risk reduction activities across the program. They provide the structure for research to advance the understanding of where, when, and why earthquakes occur and how we can use improved knowledge to drive short-term and actionable forecasts of seismic activity. They expand the usefulness of critical earthquake products and advance the sophistication of those products to keep pace with the rapidly evolving needs of an ever-expanding user base while maintaining the position of the USGS as a global leader in earthquake science. Focus on system-level science. Establish an automated earthquake-processing pipeline. Enhance the accuracy and reliability of the ShakeAlert Earthquake Early Warning system and plan for extension to other regions. Implement time-dependent earthquake forecasting. Develop physically realistic models. Expand computational capacity. This science strategy is organized into three primary sections. The first section provides an overview of the EHP and its budget, governance, and program council. Readers familiar with the program may wish to focus on the second section, which describes the core of the science strategy, including priorities across each of the EHP’s major program activities in monitoring, hazard assessment, and targeted research. The third section outlines science priorities that cut across program activities, including those involving collaborations external to the EHP.

American Samoa, Guam, Northern Marianas Islands, U↗