Search USGSSearch

USGS · 70275742

Stress states on the eve of past earthquakes inform earthquake rupture through fault complexity along the San Andreas and San Jacinto faults

Abstract

Estimating the evolving state of stress along active fault systems can provide insight into the conditions that generated past ground‐rupturing earthquakes and influenced their ability to propagate through areas of geometric complexity, such as fault branches and stepovers. We use quasi‐static forward numerical models that incorporate the 3D complex configuration of active faults in southern California to estimate shear tractions on the geometrically complex southern San Andreas and San Jacinto faults from 1000 to 1900 C.E. These tractions include interseismic accumulation of traction due to tectonic loading, viscoelastic relaxation of shear stress within the upper crust between earthquakes, and effects of other earthquakes on the fault network. We simulate ground‐rupturing earthquakes based on the along‐strike earthquake extents modeled by Scharer and Yule (2020) , assuming that stress drop is complete in each earthquake. We use Monte Carlo simulations to estimate uncertainty in evolving shear tractions due to uncertainties in earthquake timing and in upper‐crustal viscosity. Pre‐earthquake shear tractions typically do not exceed ∼2 MPa. Although ruptures with length <200 km have pre‐earthquake shear tractions that range from near zero to ∼1.75 MPa, these tractions are not less than ∼0.4 MPa for earthquakes with rupture length >200 km. Earthquakes with long (>200 km) ruptures occur only in the single‐stranded part of the system, whereas those with short (<125 km) rupture length and high pre‐earthquake shear traction occur near fault stepovers and branches. This suggests that high accumulated shear traction encourages longer rupture propagation, but may not be sufficient to overcome geometric complexities. This modeling approach informs our understanding of rupture propagation and provides estimates of fault shear tractions that are unavailable from direct measurements.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 32.9828925° to 36.5042376° latitude; -121.0047357° to -115.2891279° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Emery Anderson-Merritt, Michelle Cooke, Katherine M. Scharer. 2026-03-16. Stress states on the eve of past earthquakes inform earthquake rupture through fault complexity along the San Andreas and San Jacinto faults. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120250173

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Introduction to the special section on improving measurements of earthquake source parameters

Earthquake source parameters such as magnitude, seismic moment, source dimension, stress drop, and radiated energy are fundamental to understanding earthquake physics, and are also key ingredients in earthquake ground‐motion modeling, rupture simulation, and statistical seismology. However, the uncertainties in these parameters estimated from the radiated seismic wavefield are large due to variability in approaches, including site and attenuation characterizations, and so estimates for an individual earthquake made by different studies can vary greatly. Estimating spectral source parameters remains a popular topic, due to a combination of their intrinsic importance and their apparent ease of measurement, but also a controversial one, due to many sources of variability and large uncertainty. The available methods coupled with necessary parameter choices and assumptions in the analysis make it challenging for researchers to apply methods or understand the reliability in results or reported source parameters. This Special Section on Improving Measurements of Earthquake Source Parameters showcasing comparisons between methods and studies seeks to alleviate some of these difficulties to help the community identify the important components and trade‐offs of decomposing recorded seismograms into their source, path, and site components.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

The impact of source time function complexity on stress drop estimates

Earthquake stress drop—a key parameter for describing the energetics of earthquake rupture—can be estimated in several different, but theoretically equivalent, ways. However, independent estimates for the same earthquakes sometimes differ significantly. We find that earthquake source complexity plays a significant role in why theoretically (for simple rupture models) equivalent methods produce different estimates. We apply time‐ and frequency‐domain methods to estimate stress drops for real earthquakes in the SCARDEC (Seismic source ChAracteristics Retrieved from DEConvolving teleseismic body waves, Vallée and Douet, 2016 ) source time function (STF) database and analyze how rupture complexity drives stress‐drop estimate discrepancies. Specifically, we identify two complexity metrics—Brune relative energy (BRE) and spectral decay—that parameterize an earthquake’s complexity relative to the standard Brune model and strongly correlate with the estimate discrepancies. We find that the observed systematic magnitude–stress‐drop trends may reflect underlying changes in STF complexity, not necessarily trends in actual stress drop. Both the decay and BRE parameters vary systematically with magnitude, but whether this magnitude–complexity relationship is real remains unresolved.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

The U.S. Geological Survey 2025 Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands time-independent earthquake rupture forecast

We present the 2025 U.S. Geological Survey Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands (PRVI) time‐independent earthquake rupture forecast (ERF), developed for the 2025 update to the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for PRVI. The updated ERF improves upon a prior model from 2003, including an expanded fault inventory with slip‐rate estimates, updated seismicity catalogs, and refined subduction zone geometries and deformation models. It applies the fault‐system inversion methodology to solve for rates of ruptures on modeled faults, adapted from the 2023 NSHM (NSHM23) for the western United States, including the first application of the inversion to model rates on a U.S. subduction interface. Off‐fault and intraslab seismicity are constrained by observed seismicity and use updated methods developed for NSHM23. Uncertainties in model components are substantial, and the ERF represents epistemic uncertainties through a comprehensive logic tree consisting of 1.7 billion logic‐tree branches combined across all sources.

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands