Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Zheng-Kang Shen

Publications and source records attributed to Zheng-Kang Shen.

7 recordsLinked to original sources
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

The USGS 2023 Conterminous U.S. time‐independent earthquake rupture forecast

We present the 2023 U.S. Geological Survey time‐independent earthquake rupture forecast for the conterminous United States, which gives authoritative estimates of the magnitude, location, and time‐averaged frequency of potentially damaging earthquakes throughout the region. In addition to updating virtually all model components, a major focus has been to provide a better representation of epistemic uncertainties. For example, we have improved the representation of multifault ruptures, both in terms of allowing more and less fault connectivity than in the previous models, and in sweeping over a broader range of viable models. An unprecedented level of diagnostic information has been provided for assessing the model, and the development was overseen by a 19‐member participatory review panel. Although we believe the new model embodies significant improvements and represents the best available science, we also discuss potential model limitations, including the applicability of logic tree branch weights with respect different types of hazard and risk metrics. Future improvements are also discussed, with deformation model enhancements being particularly worthy of pursuit, as well as better representation of sampling errors in the gridded seismicity components. We also plan to add time‐dependent components, and assess implications with a wider range of hazard and risk metrics.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
USGS2022

Western U.S. deformation models for the 2023 update to the U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model

This report describes geodetic and geologic information used to constrain deformation models of the 2023 update to the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM), a set of deformation models to interpret these data, and their implications for earthquake rates in the western United States. Recent updates provide a much larger data set of Global Positioning System crustal velocities than used in the 2014 NSHM, as well as hundreds of new faults considered as active sources for the 2023 NSHM. These data are interpreted by four geodetic models of deformation that estimate fault slip rates and their uncertainties together with off‐fault moment release rates. Key innovations in the 2023 NSHM relative to past practice include (1) the addition of two new (in addition to two existing) deformation models, (2) the revision and expansion of the geologic slip rate database, (3) accounting for fault creep through development of a creep‐rate model that is employed by the four deformation models, and (4) accounting for time‐dependent earthquake‐cycle effects through development of viscoelastic models of the earthquake cycle along the San Andreas fault and the Cascadia subduction zone. The effort includes development of a geologic deformation model that complements the four geodetic models. The current deformation models provide a new assessment of outstanding discrepancies between geologic and geodetic slip rates, at the same time highlighting the need for both geologic and geodetic slip rates to robustly inform the earthquake rate model.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

Earthquake potential in California-Nevada implied by correlation of strain rate and seismicity

Rock mechanics studies and dynamic earthquake simulations show that patterns of seismicity evolve with time through (1) accumulation phase, (2) localization phase, and (3) rupture phase. We observe a similar pattern of changes in seismicity during the past century across California and Nevada. To quantify these changes, we correlate GPS strain rates with seismicity. Earthquakes of M > 6.5 are collocated with regions of highest strain rates. By contrast, smaller magnitude earthquakes of M ≥ 4 show clear spatiotemporal changes. From 1933 to the late 1980s, earthquakes of M ≥ 4 were more diffused and broadly distributed in both high and low strain rate regions (accumulation phase). From the late 1980s to 2016, earthquakes were more concentrated within the high strain rate areas focused on the major fault strands (localization phase). In the same time period, the rate of M > 6.5 events also increased significantly in the high strain rate areas. The strong correlation between current strain rate and the later period of seismicity indicates that seismicity is closely related to the strain rate. The spatial patterns suggest that before the late 1980s, the strain rate field was also broadly distributed because of the stress shadows from previous large earthquakes. As the deformation field evolved out of the shadow in the late 1980s, strain has refocused on the major fault systems and we are entering a period of increased risk for large earthquakes in California.

Geophysical Research Letters↗
USGS2017

A fault‐based model for crustal deformation in the western United States based on a combined inversion of GPS and geologic inputs

We develop a crustal deformation model to determine fault‐slip rates for the western United States (WUS) using the Zeng and Shen (2014) method that is based on a combined inversion of Global Positioning System (GPS) velocities and geological slip‐rate constraints. The model consists of six blocks with boundaries aligned along major faults in California and the Cascadia subduction zone, which are represented as buried dislocations in the Earth. Faults distributed within blocks have their geometrical structure and locking depths specified by the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, version 3 (UCERF3) and the 2008 U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Map Project model. Faults slip beneath a predefined locking depth, except for a few segments where shallow creep is allowed. The slip rates are estimated using a least‐squares inversion. The model resolution analysis shows that the resulting model is influenced heavily by geologic input, which fits the UCERF3 geologic bounds on California B faults and ±one‐half of the geologic slip rates for most other WUS faults. The modeled slip rates for the WUS faults are consistent with the observed GPS velocity field. Our fit to these velocities is measured in terms of a normalized chi‐square, which is 6.5. This updated model fits the data better than most other geodetic‐based inversion models. Major discrepancies between well‐resolved GPS inversion rates and geologic‐consensus rates occur along some of the northern California A faults, the Mojave to San Bernardino segments of the San Andreas fault, the western Garlock fault, the southern segment of the Wasatch fault, and other faults. Off‐fault strain‐rate distributions are consistent with regional tectonics, with a total off‐fault moment rate of 7.2 × 10 18 "> 7.2 × 10 18 and 8.5 × 10 18    N · m / year "> 8.5 × 10 18 N ⋅ m / year for California and the WUS outside California, respectively.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
USGS2016

A fault-based model for crustal deformation, fault slip-rates and off-fault strain rate in California

We invert Global Positioning System (GPS) velocity data to estimate fault slip rates in California using a fault‐based crustal deformation model with geologic constraints. The model assumes buried elastic dislocations across the region using Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast Version 3 (UCERF3) fault geometries. New GPS velocity and geologic slip‐rate data were compiled by the UCERF3 deformation working group. The result of least‐squares inversion shows that the San Andreas fault slips at 19–22  mm/yr along Santa Cruz to the North Coast, 25–28  mm/yr along the central California creeping segment to the Carrizo Plain, 20–22  mm/yr along the Mojave, and 20–24  mm/yr along the Coachella to the Imperial Valley. Modeled slip rates are 7–16  mm/yr lower than the preferred geologic rates from the central California creeping section to the San Bernardino North section. For the Bartlett Springs section, fault slip rates of 7–9  mm/yr fall within the geologic bounds but are twice the preferred geologic rates. For the central and eastern Garlock, inverted slip rates of 7.5 and 4.9  mm/yr, respectively, match closely with the geologic rates. For the western Garlock, however, our result suggests a low slip rate of 1.7  mm/yr. Along the eastern California shear zone and southern Walker Lane, our model shows a cumulative slip rate of 6.2–6.9  mm/yr across its east–west transects, which is ∼1  mm/yr increase of the geologic estimates. For the off‐coast faults of central California, from Hosgri to San Gregorio, fault slips are modeled at 1–5  mm/yr, similar to the lower geologic bounds. For the off‐fault deformation, the total moment rate amounts to 0.88×10 19   N·m/yr, with fast straining regions found around the Mendocino triple junction, Transverse Ranges and Garlock fault zones, Landers and Brawley seismic zones, and farther south. The overall California moment rate is 2.76×10 19   N·m/yr, which is a 16% increase compared with the UCERF2 model.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗