Magnitude conversion relations create substantial differences in seismic hazard models

Abstract

Earthquake catalogs are essential data inputs for seismic hazard modeling. Because earthquake magnitudes are reported in a variety of types (e.g., local magnitudes and moment magnitudes), magnitude conversion relationships must be used to convert the different magnitude types present in a catalog to a uniform magnitude type to avoid biases in the hazard computation. However, these conversion relationships are often uncertain and have been shown to sometimes perform poorly. Here, we investigate the sensitivity of the gridded seismicity component of the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) to the catalog conversion equations in the Eastern United States. In the 2023 NSHM, magnitudes of various types were converted to moment magnitudes using equations developed by the Central and Eastern United States Seismic Source Characterization for Nuclear Facilities (CEUS‐SSCn), based on least‐squares (LS) regressions made using data from a catalog containing events up through 2008. We recompute these equations using events in the Advanced National Seismic System Comprehensive Earthquake Catalog with multiple magnitudes from 2000 to 2023. Although we prefer the use of orthogonal regressions for our datasets, LS regressions produce broadly similar results, with both approaches exhibiting large deviations from the CEUS‐SSCn conversions, especially at smaller magnitudes. We compare the spatial distribution of annual rates using three different models: (1) the 2023 NSHM conversions, (2) our updated conversions, and (3) no conversions. We find that the choice of conversions leads to substantial differences in the rate forecasts, which can greatly impact the seismic hazard model, particularly in regions with low‐seismicity rates such as the Eastern United States, where the hazard is dominated by gridded seismicity rather than a fault model.