Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Seismological Research Letteres”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 307 records · Page 17Linked to original sources
USGS2026

Ground-motion simulations for the 2024 Mw 4.8 Tewksbury, New Jersey, earthquake

Ground-motion simulations of notable earthquakes in the central and eastern United States are limited and typically assume one-dimensional (1D) Earth structure. In this study, we use a three-dimensional (3D) seismic velocity model to better constrain the depth and focal mechanism of the April 5th, 2024, moment magnitude 4.8 Tewksbury earthquake and investigate the spatial variability of earthquake ground motions and the effects of nearby sedimentary basins. We perform earthquake ground-motion simulations up to 0.5 Hz using the 3D spectral-element wave-propagation solver SPECFEM3D over a region 280-km wide by 260-km long by 77-km deep. Topography and subsurface geophysical structure are assigned using the U.S. Geological Survey National Crustal Model with a minimum shear-wave velocity of 200 m/s. We use earthquake time series from 13 broadband seismic stations in the region that have a uniform azimuthal distribution and epicentral distances ranging from 76 to 131 km to compare with synthetics and explore the effects of 1D versus 3D seismic structure on focal mechanism and depth solutions. Ground-motion intensity metrics are also presented relative to the NGA-East ground-motion models (GMMs) currently used in seismic hazard assessments for the region. We find that the 3D model, which reveals a wide spatial variability of period-dependent ground motions, yields better predictions of earthquake ground motions relative to the 1D model and the NGA-East ergodic ground-motion model, with 76 percent reduction of residual variance in observed ground motions averaged over 3-, 5-, 7-, and 10-second periods. Use of the 3D model to solve for a focal mechanism yields a shallower focal depth at 4 km and a shallower east-dipping focal plane relative to the U.S. Geological Survey regional moment tensor and Global Centroid Moment Tensor. Our study demonstrates that use of 3D seismic velocity models can improve estimates of earthquake focal mechanisms, ground motions, and seismic hazard.

New Jersey↗
USGS2026

Earthquake catalog for the Fairbanks region of central Alaska, 2014–2024, based on waveform cross-correlation

The Fairbanks region of central Alaska is part of a broad zone of intraplate crustal deformation, situated north of the Denali fault and north of the ongoing collision and flat‐slab subduction of the Yakutat oceanic plateau. Seismicity in the Fairbanks region occurs both in diffuse areas as well as in well‐defined lineaments, such as the left‐lateral Salcha fault, which hosted the 1937 M 8 7.3 earthquake. Starting with the regional seismicity catalog, we perform waveform cross‐correlation, network‐matched filtering, and relative relocation to obtain an enhanced seismicity catalog over the time period 2014–2024. Based on the relocated catalog, we interpret a set of 15 fault segments, including two conjugate faults and two new faults east of the previously documented fault system. Considering the combined seismicity in the Minto and Fairbanks regions, the median depth of seismicity decreases from east (6 km) to west (20 km). Our interpreted faults provide guidance for future tectonic modeling and assessment of seismic hazards in this region.

Alaska↗
USGS2026

The digital archivist: Automating legacy macroseismic data processing using large language models

Macroseismic data are a key resource to investigate shaking and damage from preinstrumental and early instrumental eras. However, data are often stored as inconsistently formatted reports describing observed shaking and damage, making manually parsing and interpreting accounts labor‐intensive. We introduce a novel workflow using Google’s Gemini 2.5 Pro large language model (LLM) to automate the extraction and structuring of macroseismic observations from summary reports. We apply this workflow to the 22 March 1957 M 5.3 Daly City, California, earthquake as a case study. We used Gemini to extract addresses, originally assigned modified Mercalli intensity values, and descriptions from each report. To address coordinate precision limits, addresses were geocoded via Google’s Geocoding application programming interface. This workflow yielded over 2300 geocoded intensity reports for the Daly City earthquake. We use the geocoded accounts, with the original report intensity assignments, to develop a shaking intensity map that in some respects rivals modern Did You Feel It? Maps. We also extract and present data for the 9 February 1971 M L 6.7 Sylmar, California, earthquake. Our results demonstrate the potential of LLMs for reliably extracting and analyzing large, unstructured macroseismic datasets. LLMs offer a scalable solution for rapidly digitizing macroseismic archives, enabling their broader use to constrain ground‐motion models in modern seismic hazard analysis and to improve our understanding of site effects in urban areas. The concepts explored here may also be applied to the handling of other legacy seismological and earth science data.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2026

Cascadia Subduction Zone science: Call for the next generation community seismic velocity model

The Cascadia subduction zone (CSZ) hosts major seismic and tsunami hazards, yet key questions persist about the relationship between margin structure, fluid distribution, episodic tremor and slip, shallow megathrust behavior, shaking and tsunamigenesis, and the resulting hazard estimates. Addressing these problems requires an empirically grounded, three‐dimensional seismic velocity model to illuminate subsurface structure and properties and to provide a basis for geophysical studies such as earthquake simulations and ground‐motion estimation. In May 2024, the National Science Foundation‐funded Cascadia Region Earthquake Science Center (CRESCENT) community velocity model (CVM) working group, with U.S. Geological Survey and regional partners, convened a workshop to identify priorities for such a model. Participants emphasized the features necessary for addressing key science questions, including implementing findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability (FAIR) access, capturing along‐strike and along‐dip structural heterogeneity, resolving shallow offshore–onshore structure, constraining elastic properties and quantifying their uncertainties for numerical wave propagation simulations, their validation benchmarks, and supporting associated accurate earthquake ground‐motion simulations and hazard assessments. This article describes the priorities defined in the workshop, and a description of how, guided by these needs, CRESCENT plans to develop multiple generations of a CVM to advance CSZ science and improve seismic and tsunami hazard modeling across the Pacific Northwest. The CVM will span the CSZ from the surface to ∼100 km depth, offshore and east of the Cascades into Idaho (∼132°–110° W) and the southern and northern tectonic regime transitions (∼36°–52° N) to capture the entire tectonic system as well as its surroundings.

Cascadia Subduction Zone↗
USGS2026

Preface to the focus section on intraplate earthquakes

More than a half century after plate tectonics provided an overarching framework to explain earthquakes along active plate boundaries, numerous theories have been proposed to explain where, why, and how often earthquakes occur well away from active plate boundaries, but a paradigm remains elusive. Even the classification of earthquakes away from active plate boundaries as "intraplate" raises issues, with potentially important distinctions between Stable Continental Regions and more actively deforming regions including passive margins and failed rifts. Some of the largest known intraplate earthquakes themselves remain enigmatic, having occurred before the modern instrumental era. Hazard assessments are often data-limited: low fault-slip rates relative to landscape modification rates result in poor discoverability of fault sources, challenging the characterization of source zones and earthquake recurrence; the completeness and homogenization of instrumental earthquake catalogs using uncertain magnitude conversions can lead to uncertainties in earthquake recurrence; and, limited strong-motion observations for large-magnitude events at near-source distances leads to uncertainties in the selection and development of ground-motion models for seismic hazard studies. Data from recent intraplate earthquakes around the world—from the moment magnitude M 7.7 2001 Bhuj, India, earthquake 25 years ago to the 2024 M 4.8 Tewksbury, New Jersey earthquake—have yielded both new insights and new questions. The papers in this special focus discuss many of the long-standing challenges involved with intraplate earthquake investigations and provide a snapshot of the state of the art with current research to advance our understanding.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2026

Landslide volume estimation from seismic waveform features using a global catalog of seismogenic events

Seismic waves generated by large, rapid landslides encode information about the source and can be analyzed rapidly following an event. Even remote landslides can pose hazards to downstream communities, so rapid detection and characterization using existing seismic monitoring networks could be beneficial. In this study, we expand on past regionally limited work by presenting a globally applicable method for estimating landslide volume from seismic features that could be integrated into future landslide seismic monitoring frameworks. We train the model using multivariable linear regression and five seismic features derived from recordings of 129 landslide events of a range of styles and locations with independently estimated volumes. We present two preferred models, one that combines long‐period (LP) and high‐frequency (HF) features and one for use on smaller landslides without observed long‐period signals. We find that our best‐performing model, applicable to landslides larger than 100,000 m 3 with signals containing observable long‐period energy, requires only two features: LP (20–100 s) absolute maximum amplitude and HF (1–5 Hz) rise time (time between the signal start and the maximum envelope amplitude) and has an R 2 score of 0.79. This model predicted volumes within one order of magnitude for 55 out of 58 events. We find that this combination mitigates the trade‐off between mass and acceleration and other variations of landslide style that limit methods based on amplitude alone.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2026

Digitizer Suite: The Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory Digitizer Testing Suite

Laboratory testing of digitizers and seismometers helps ensure that prior to deployment the instrumentation can produce high quality data and is operating within specifications. In this work we detail the software package called: the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory (ASL) Digitizer Test Suite. This Java software package provides several algorithms to verify various performance parameters of digitizers commonly used for recording analog seismic instruments. The goal of these tests is not to be exhaustive, but to identify common failures that could compromise the integrity of seismic data being recorded on the digitizer. For example, Sandia National Laboratories (e.g., Slad and Merchant, 2018) routinely do comprehensive testing of digitizers for various monitoring missions. While these tests reports are valuable for comprehensively characterizing a recording system, it would be resource intensive to conduct such tests on every seismic recorder used in a network. We focus on tests that include ways to estimate the sensitivity, timing, self-noise, and clip-level of the digitizer, as well as the fidelity of the signal being recorded. The software is publicly available and provides a way for the community to verify the integrity of a digitizer using a minimum amount of outside equipment.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS1976

A revised “earthquake report” questionnaire

The revised “Earthquake Report” questionnaire introduced here is designed to restrict the replies on the effects of earthquakes as closely as possible to a set of effects that can be evaluated by use of a computer program. Differences in intensity resulting from evaluation by different individuals using their own qualitative procedures can then be eliminated and static rules for evaluating the questionnaire for the assigning of intensity values can be established.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS1988

Structure of the Blytheville arch in the New Madrid seismic zone

Seismic-reflection profiles across part of the New Madrid seismic zone in northeastern Arkansas and southeastern Missouri show a faulted and structurally complex zone, originally known as Charlie’s ridge but herein renamed Blytheville arch, which is about 10 to 15 km wide and about 110 km long. Several exploratory drill holes in the arch penetrate Upper and possibly Middle Cambrian formations directly below Cretaceous rocks, whereas drill holes off the arch penetrate the Cambrian and Ordovician Knox and Arbuckle Groups equivalents and possibly younger Paleozoic rocks below the Cretaceous; therefore, the pre-Cretaceous rocks in the arch are structurally high. Most earthquakes in the northeast-trending segment of the New Madrid seismic zone along the axis of the Reelfoot rift occur along the arch. Focal mechanisms of earthquakes in the trend show right-lateral, strike-slip movement. Epicenters in the northeastern part of the seismic trend between Caruthersville, MO, and Blytheville, AR, are spatially less dispersed than those to the southwest between Blytheville and Marked Tree, AR. Most of the hypocenters to the northeast cluster between 6 to 12 km deep, whereas those to the southwest range from near the surface to about 15 km deep. Earthquakes in the northeast part of the seismic trend are concentrated along a fault zone under the arch, whereas those to the southwest are more dispersed under the arch. A seismic trend that extends south-southwest from near Charleston, MO, projects to the northwest side of the ridge near Blytheville, where the seismicity changes character and the southeast boundary of the arch trends more easterly. The relationship between the structural boundaries of the arch and the seismicity may establish the extent of part of New Madrid seismicity and improve the basis for seismic hazard assessment.

Arkansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Tennessee↗
USGS1988

Seismicity in South Carolina

The largest historical earthquake in South Carolina, and in the southeastern US, occurred in the Coastal Plain province, probably northwest of Charleston, in 1886. Locations for aftershocks associated with this earthquake, estimated using intensities based on newspaper accounts, defined a northwest trending zone about 250 km long that was at least 100 km wide in the Coastal Plain but widened to a northeast trending zone in the Piedmont. The subsequent historical and instrumentally recorded seismicity in South Carolina images the 1886 aftershock zone. Except for a few scattered earthquakes and a swarm of shallow (≤ 4 km deep), small ( M L ≤ 2.5), primarily reverse faulting earthquakes that occurred along the flanks of a granite pluton about 60 km northwest of Columbia, the seismicity in the Piedmont province has been associated with water level changes in reservoirs. Reservoir induced seismicity (RIS) is shallow (≤ 6 km deep), primarily strike-slip or thrust faulting corresponding to an inferred maximum horizontal compressive stress oriented approximately N 60° E. Instrumentally recorded seismicity in the Coastal Plain province occurs in 3 seismic zones or clusters: Middleton Place-Summerville (MPSSZ), Adams Run (ARC), and Bowman (BSZ). Approximately 68% of the Coastal Plain earthquakes occur in the MPSSZ, a north trending zone about 22 km long and 12 km wide, lying about 20 km northwest of Charleston. The hypocenters of MPSSZ earthquakes range in depth from near the surface to almost 12 km. Thrust, strike-slip, and some normal faulting are indicated by the fault plane solutions for Coastal Plain earthquakes. The maximum horizontal compressive stress, inferred from the P-axes of the fault plane solutions, is oriented NE-SW in the shallow crust (< 9 km deep) but appears to be diffusely E-W between 9 to 12 km deep. Although there is localized variability, the current seismicity and associated faulting in South Carolina probably represent a regional response to the NE-SW maximum horizontal compressive stress prevalent throughout eastern North America.

South Carolina↗
USGS1988

Midplate seismicity exterior to former rift-basins

Midplate seismicity associated with some former rift-zones is distributed diffusely near, but exterior to, the rift basins. This “basin-exterior” seismicity cannot be attributed to reactivation of major basin-border faults on which upper-crustal extension was concentrated at the time of rifting, because the border faults dip beneath the basins. The seismicity may nonetheless represent reactivation of minor faults that were active at the time of rifting but that were located outside of the principal zones of upper-crustal extension; the occurrence of basin-exterior seismicity in some present-day rift-zones supports the existence of such minor basin-exterior faults. Other hypotheses for seismicity exterior to former rift-basins are that the seismicity reflects lobes of high stress due to lithospheric-bending that is centered on the axis of the rift, that the seismicity is localized on the exteriors of rift-basins by basin-interiors that are less deformable in the current epoch than the basin exteriors, and that seismicity is localized on the basin-exteriors by the concentration of tectonic stress in the highly elastic basin-exterior upper-crust. All of the hypotheses considered here appeal to the presence of a rift zone to explain the characteristics of the basin-exterior seismicity, but the hypotheses differ in their implications for the seismic risk of former rift-zones and in their implications for the causes of midplate earthquakes in general.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS1989

Peak accelerations from the 17 October 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake

Peak accelerations of the Loma Prieta main shock have been tabulated from instruments maintained by a number of organizations. We have analyzed a subset of 86 records from nominally free-field sites, which have been subdivided into rock, alluvium, and bay-mud categories according to data available in various reports. After correction for attenuation, the peak accelerations on rock, alluvium, and bay-mud sites are factors of 1.6, 1.8, and 4.5 larger, on the average, than Joyner and Boore’s (1988) predicted values for a M= 6.9 earthquake. The mean motions for the rock and alluvium sites are somewhat greater than one standard deviation away from the predicted value, but the mean acceleration from the bay-mud sites is well outside the range expected from analyses of data from previous earthquakes from rock and alluvium sites. Large amplitudes of motions on bay-mud sites relative to rock sites (a factor of 2.8 for the average of the recordings of the Loma Prieta main shock) has been found previously from recordings of distant earthquakes and explosions, but the Loma Prieta earthquake provided the first opportunity to study the relative amplitudes from strong-motion recordings.

California↗
USGS1992

Structure of the Reelfoot rift as interpreted from 2-D magnetotelluric models

The results of magnetotelluric (MT) surveys reveal structures associated with the Reelfoot rift, including an axial high-resistivity structure that may be related to intrusions in the central part of the rift or to a previously unrecognized horst. The axis of this resistivity high generally follows the central part of the Reelfoot rift, but its orientation is offset several degrees from the enigmatic Blytheville arch. The MT structural high follows the main part of a northeast-trending seismicity belt, but in the New Madrid, Missouri area electrical structures are more complicated. In this northern part of the study area, the strike of resistivity structures determined from the MT data indicate a nearly north-south direction, rather than the N45°E direction indicated for most of the data. If the axial high-resistivity structure represents a horst, then it may form an interior divide between thick shale basins. Faults bounding the proposed horst may be a controlling factor for the northeast trending seismic zone.

Arkansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Tennessee↗
USGS1992

Geologic implications of earthquake source parameters in central and eastern North America

The relations between geology and earthquakes remain mostly enigmatic in North America east of the Rocky Mountains. Hypocentral depths and the dips of rupture zones (preferred nodal planes) are among the seismological variables most likely associated with geologic structure in the stable continental region (SCR) of central and eastern North America (CENA). We compiled well-constrained depths and dips for 20 SCR shocks in CENA with magnitudes (M) between 4.9 and 6.8. The appendix lists the values we chose, our reasons for selecting specific values, and the uncertainties associated with each value. The median depth is 10 km, but an aseismic interval from about 15 to 25 km depth separates three midcrustal hypocenters from the others. The median dip of preferred nodal planes is 54°, and the larger earthquakes tend to rupture along shallower dips. These results combined with geologic evidence lead to four inferences about SCR earthquakes with M ≥ 4.9 in CENA. (1) If rupture generally progresses updip, then the tendency for large earthquakes to rupture more shallowly-dipping surfaces than small earthquakes can explain the scarcity of surface ruptures in CENA. (2) The few midcrustal earthquakes might be evidence that mafic or granulite facies rocks are present. (3) CENA seismicity is concentrated in Late Proterozoic and Phanerozoic orogens and extended terranes that rim an older, stable, central craton. Unusually shallow large CENA earthquakes have been observed only in the central craton, where they might cause severe but localized shaking. (4) Earthquakes in the Appalachian orogen tend to be shallower than those of comparable size in the Late Proterozoic rifted continental margin that underlies and borders the northwest side of the orogen. As a result, some Appalachian earthquakes could cause more localized shaking than comparable shocks in the rifted margin.

eastern North America↗
USGS1995

Source parameters and crustal Q for four earthquakes in South Carolina

Two three-component seismometers (one surface and one borehole) were re-installed on the Savannah River Site (SRS), South Carolina in July 1992 to determine attenuation in the Coastal Plain sediment wedge and source parameters of local earthquakes. Four earthquakes M ∼ 1.8 to 3.6 were recorded during the next 6 months. The largest event was located near Summerville within the meizoseismal area for the 1886 Charleston earthquake. Two shocks were located 50 km to the east near Neeses, and one was located 20 km north of the SRS near Aiken. Although source parameters have been determined from strong motion data and short-period regional networks for east coast earthquakes, such as the Saguenay, Nahanni, and Mt. Laurier earthquakes (e.g., Atkinson, 1993 ), these are some of the first source parameters determined from broad-band digital recorders. Seismograms for the Summerville event are also available from Chapel Hill, North Carolina and Blacksburg, Virginia, providing estimates of t * beyond 200 km. Here we determine source parameters such as moment, stress drop, and the attenuation parameter t * using a non-linear least-squares algorithm. We do not correct for site response because the deepest borehole is not below the Coastal Plain sediments (about 300m thick at this site) and because only one station is available for most of the data. Values of t* are marginally higher from seismograms recorded at the surface when compared to records from the 91m depth borehole seismograph. A value of 170-200 bars was determined for the Brune stress drop of the Summerville event using the borehole data, which is high compared to a value of 50 bars usually specified for modeling strong motion in western North America, but similar to other estimates for eastern North America. A higher stress drop leads to a higher seismic risk because peak acceleration is approximately proportional to stress drop. Moreover, mid- to upper-crustal Qs are in the range of 2,000 to 3,000, which would permit the propagation of high frequency seismic waves. A comparison of the surface records from the SRS with a record from the USGS dense array at Parkfield, CA for an event at about the same distance range and moment as the Summerville event-SRS case shows that the peak acceleration of the Summerville event is 16 times higher than that for the event from California (stress drop of 21 bars).

South Carolina↗