SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Bulletin Seismological Society America”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 685 records · Page 38Linked to original sources

USGS2022

Quantifying the sensitivity of microearthquake slip inversions to station distribution using a dense nodal array

To investigate the sensitivity of slip inversions to station distribution and choice of empirical Green’s function (EGF), we examine three microearthquakes that occurred within the high‐density LArge‐n Seismic Survey in Oklahoma (LASSO) nodal seismic array. The LASSO array’s dense distribution of 1825 geophones provides an exceptional level of spatial and azimuthal coverage, allowing for more accurate inversions of slip than are possible with typical station distributions. The highly accurate slip inversions, in turn, allow for the exploration of the sensitivity of slip inversions to station distribution and parameter choices. We examine the effects of these choices using three well‐recorded strike‐slip microearthquakes ( M L 1.7, 2.3, and 2.7) using an EGF method. From this analysis and the systematic testing of varied network arrangements, we find that station distributions that have uniform coverage of azimuth and distance can retrieve the overall pattern of slip, but the estimated amplitude of slip can vary by 30% for high‐slip regions due to small variations in station location. In addition, we find that the distance range that accurately resolves the overall pattern of slip is the one that contains the takeoff angles of 45°–65°. Concerning azimuthal coverage, a network with >270° performs similarly to having complete coverage. The choice of EGF can shift the location of resolved areas of slip and their amplitude, depending on its similarity in location and radiation pattern to the target earthquake.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2022

Enumerating plausible multifault ruptures in complex fault systems with physical constraints

We propose a new model for determining the set of plausible multifault ruptures in an interconnected fault system. We improve upon the rules used in the Third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3) to increase connectivity and the physical consistency of ruptures. We replace UCERF3’s simple azimuth change rules with new Coulomb favorability metrics and increase the maximum jump distance to 15 km. Although the UCERF3 rules were appropriate for faults with similar rakes, the Coulomb calculations used here inherently encode preferred orientations between faults with different rakes. Our new rules are designed to be insensitive to discretization details and are generally more permissive than their UCERF3 counterparts; they allow more than twice the connectivity compared to UCERF3, yet heavily penalize long ruptures that take multiple improbable jumps. The set of all possible multifault ruptures in the California fault system is near-infinite, but our model produces a tractable set of 326,707 ruptures (a modest 29% increase over UCERF3, despite the greatly increased connectivity). Inclusion in the rupture set does not dictate that a rupture receives a significant rate in the final model; rupture rates are subsequently determined by data constraints used in an inversion. We describe the rupture building algorithm and its components in detail and provide comparisons with ruptures generated by a physics-based multicycle earthquake simulator. We find that greater than twice as many ruptures generated by the simulator violate the UCERF3 rules than violate our proposed model.

California↗

USGS2022

Shallow faulting and folding in the epicentral area of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

The moment magnitude ( ⁠ M w "> M w �w ⁠ ) ∼7 earthquake that struck Charleston, South Carolina, on 31 August 1886 is the largest historical earthquake in the United States east of the Appalachian Mountains. The fault(s) that ruptured during this earthquake has never been conclusively identified, and conflicting fault models have been proposed. Here we interpret reprocessed seismic reflection profiles, reprocessed legacy aeromagnetic data, and newly collected ground penetrating radar (GPR) profiles to delineate faults deforming the Cretaceous and younger Atlantic Coastal Plain (ACP) strata in the epicentral area of the 1886 earthquake. The data show evidence for faults folding or vertically displacing ACP strata, including apparent displacements of near‐surface strata (upper ∼20 m). Aeromagnetic data show several northeast (NE)‐trending lineaments, two of which correlate with faults and folds with vertical displacements as great as 55 m on the seismic reflection and radar profiles. ACP strata show only minor thickness changes across these structures, indicating that much of the displacement postdates the shallowest well‐imaged ACP strata of Eocene age. Faults imaged on the seismic reflection profiles appear on GPR profiles to displace the erosional surface at the top of the upper Eocene to Oligocene Cooper Group, including where railroad tracks were bent during the 1886 earthquake. Some faults coincide with changes in river trends, bifurcations of river channels, and unusual river meanders that could be related to recent fault motion. In contrast to our interpreted NE fault trends, earthquake locations and some focal mechanisms in the modern seismic zone have been interpreted as defining a nearly north‐striking, west‐dipping zone of aftershocks from the 1886 earthquake. The relationship between the modern seismicity and the faults we image is therefore enigmatic. However, multiple faults in the area clearly have been active since the Eocene and deform strata in the upper 20 m, providing potential targets for field‐based geologic investigations.

South Carolina↗

USGS2022

High‐frequency rupture processes of the 2014 Mw 8.2 Iquique and 2015 Mw 8.3 Illapel, Chile, earthquakes determined from strong‐motion recordings

Strong‐motion recordings of the 2014 M w "> M w Mw 8.2 Iquique and 2015 M w "> M w Mw 8.3 Illapel, Chile, earthquakes were analyzed to determine rupture propagation and the location, timing, and strength of subevents that produce most of the high‐frequency (≥1 Hz) ground motions. A moving window,cross‐correlation analysis of recordings from a local dense array, band‐pass filtered at 1 Hz, directly shows that the Iquique earthquake ruptured to the southeast over a distance of about 60 km. Array analysis of lower frequency energy (0.03–0.1 Hz) indicates that it occurred updip of the high‐frequency rupture. A methodology was developed for inverting the envelopes of acceleration records (1–5 Hz) to map high‐frequency source factors on the rupture zone and was applied to the two earthquakes. Waveforms of M w "> M w Mw 6 earthquakes were used as empirical Green’s functions in the inversions. High‐frequency subevents within the two M w "> M w Mw 8 earthquakes were located at depths ranging from 25 to 55 km and mostly occurred downdip of the peak slip of these earthquakes. Fourier spectral ratios of the Iquique mainshock with respect to M w "> M w Mw 5–6 aftershocks were fit to determine their stress drops. The stress drops were roughly constant from M w "> M w Mw 5 to 8 at 10–20 MPa. A compound rupture model is described in which subevents occur in areas of spatially heterogeneous strength and stress on the rupture, and produce the high‐frequency radiated energy of the overall earthquake, but are not located in the areas of peak slip. The stress drop of the overall earthquake is shown to equal the root mean square stress drop of subevents averaged over the rupture area.

Iquique, Illapel↗

USGS2022

High-resolution marine seismic imaging of the Seattle fault zone: Near surface insights into fault zone geometry, Quaternary deformation, and long-term evolution

The Seattle fault zone (SFZ) is a north‐directed thrust fault system that underlies the greater Seattle metropolitan area. Evidence of past land level changes, landslides, liquefaction, and a local tsunami indicate that this 70‐km‐long fault system can host up to M 7–7.5 earthquakes. Both the geometry and earthquake recurrence of the SFZ are debated and surveys of the shallow subsurface have not yet been incorporated into deeper crustal‐scale structural interpretations, especially where the SFZ cuts across marine portions of the Puget Lowland. Here we use a new high‐resolution marine seismic reflection dataset to image fault‐related deformation in Quaternary sediments and Tertiary bedrock throughout Puget Sound and Lake Washington. We use this perspective of shallow geology as a link between existing crustal‐scale geophysical insights into fault geometry at depth and paleoseismological observations of faulting at the surface and propose a refined structural model for the SFZ. We interpret that our new seismic reflection data in the Rich Passage area of Puget Sound images evidence of an inactive, south‐dipping strand of the SFZ, which is overprinted by Quaternary folding and slip along north‐dipping backthrusts within the hanging wall of a blind, south‐dipping fault located 6 km farther north. To explain these results, we propose that the SFZ is a normal sequence fault propagation fold that has stepped northward through time, and we show the plausibility of this model through trishear forward modeling. Growth strata and faulting imaged in Quaternary sediments in Lake Washington and Rich Passage are consistent with the spatial distribution of folding and backthrusting that occurred during an M 7–7.5 earthquake in A.D. 900–930, corroborating existing evidence that the SFZ has been active throughout the Quaternary.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2022

The 8 April 1860 Jour de Pâques earthquake sequence in southern Haiti

The grave threat posed by the Enriquillo‐Plantain Garden fault zone (EPGFZ) and other fault systems on the Tiburon Peninsula in southern Haiti was highlighted by the catastrophic M 7.0 Léogâne earthquake on 12 January 2010 and again by the deadly M 7.2 Nippes earthquakes on 14 August 2021. Early Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar observations suggest the 2021 earthquake broke structures associated with this fault system farther west of the 2010 event, but the rupture zones of both events are separated by a ∼50 km gap. This sequence provided the impetus to reconsider a nineteenth century earthquake that may have occurred within this gap. Though previous studies identified a single moderately large event on 8 April 1860, original sources describe a complex and distributed seismic sequence to the west of Port‐au‐Prince. These provide evidence for an initial event to the west of Les Cayes, on the southern coast of the Tiburon Peninsula. This was followed on the morning of 8 April 1860 by a damaging earthquake near l’Anse‐à‐Veau along the northern coast of the peninsula, which was succeeded 14 hr later by a larger mainshock to the east. Although locations cannot be determined precisely from extant macroseismic data, our preferred scenario includes an intensity magnitude ( M I ) ∼ 6.2 "> ( M I ) ∼ 6.2 (MI)∼6.2 foreshock, followed by an M I ∼ 6.8 "> M I ∼ 6.8 MI∼6.8 mainshock wholly or partially on the EPGFZ to the east of the foreshock. Our results suggest that, although earthquakes tend to trigger subsequent earthquakes on immediately neighboring fault segments, sequences can include gaps due to strain release by poorly characterized earthquakes in the historic past. We also document 83 aftershocks to the 1860 earthquake sequence, including a previously unknown damaging shock, estimated M I ∼ 6.6 "> M I ∼ 6.6 MI∼6.6 ⁠ , on 10 April 1860 near Jérémie, farther west of l’Anse‐à‐Veau.

Tiburon Peninsula↗

USGS2022

Real-time earthquake detection and alerting behavior of PLUM ground-motion-based early warning in the United States

We examine the real‐time earthquake detection and alerting behavior of the Propagation of Local Undamped Motion (PLUM) earthquake early warning (EEW) algorithm and compare PLUM’s performance with the real‐time performance of the current source‐characterization‐based ShakeAlert System. In the United States (U.S.), PLUM uses a two‐station approach to detect earthquakes. Once a detection is confirmed, observed modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) distributions are forecast onto a regular grid, in which the preferred alert regions are grid cells with MMI 4.0+ forecasts. Although locations of dense station coverage allow PLUM to detect small ( M < 4.5) earthquakes typically not considered for EEW in the U.S., a PLUM detection on a small earthquake does not always generate an alert. This is because PLUM alerts are determined by current shaking distributions. If the MMI 4.0+ shaking subsides prior to detection confirmation by shaking at a second neighboring station, the prior MMI 4.0+ information will not be in the alert forecasts. Of the 432 M 3.0+ U.S. West Coast earthquakes in 2021, 33 produced ground motions large enough to be detected by PLUM. Twenty‐four generated MMI 4.0+ PLUM alerts, whereas ShakeAlert issued public EEW alerts for 13 of these earthquakes. We compare PLUM and ShakeAlert alert regions with ShakeMap and “Did You Feel It?” intensity distributions. Because PLUM alert regions surround stations observed to have strong ground motions (regardless of earthquake magnitude), PLUM alerts reliably include locations that experience significant shaking. This is not necessarily the case for ShakeAlert alert regions when there are large errors in magnitude or epicenter estimates. For two of the largest earthquakes in our real‐time dataset, the M 6.0 Antelope Valley and M 5.1 Petrolia earthquakes, the inclusion of PLUM would have improved real‐time ShakeAlert performance. Our results indicate that incorporation of PLUM into ShakeAlert will improve the robustness of the EEW system.

California, Oregon, Washington↗

USGS2022

Estimation of site terms in ground-motion models for California using horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratios from microtremor

The horizontal‐to‐vertical spectral ratios from microtremor (mHVSR) data obtained at 196 seismic stations in California are used to evaluate three alternative microtremor‐based proxies for site amplification for use in ground‐motion models (GMMs): the site fundamental period ( ⁠ f 0 "> f 0 ⁠ ), the period‐dependent amplitude of the mHVSR( T ), and the normalized amplitude of the mHVSR( T ). The alternative parameters are evaluated for the sites with and without measurements of V S 30 "> V S 30 ⁠ . If a V S 30 "> V S 30 measurement is not available for a site, then f 0 "> f 0 has the highest correlation with the site amplification for short periods ( T <1 s) and the normalized amplitude of the mHVSR( T ) has the highest correlation for long periods ( T ≥1 s). If a measurement of the V S 30 "> V S 30 is available for a site, then the normalized amplitude of the mHVSR( T ) has the highest correlation for the site amplification not explained by V S 30 "> V S 30 for all periods. For both cases, the correlations are strongest at the longer periods as mHVSR( T ) measurements excel at providing valuable information for sites with long‐period amplification due to the deeper velocity structure. In particular, for sites with a V S 30 "> V S 30 measurement, the normalized mHVSR( T ) amplitude provides more information about the long‐period site terms than the basin depth currently used in GMMs. Empirical models of the median and standard deviation of the site terms based on the normalized mHVSR( T ) curves are developed for the two cases. These models can be used directly in the ASK14 GMM to modify the median and aleatory standard deviation or they can be used to estimate the site‐specific site term in the context of a partially nonergodic GMM. Including the mHVSR( T ) measurement can have a significant effect on estimates of the ground motion at a site: the range 5%–95% on the observed HVSR( T ) values corresponds to factors of 0.6–1.6 for the median spectral acceleration for periods between 0.5 and 4 s.

California↗

USGS2022

Estimates of k0 and effects on ground motions in the San Francisco Bay area

Ground‐motion studies are a key component of seismic hazard analyses and often rely on information of the source, path, and site. Extensive research has been done on each of these parameters; however, site‐specific studies are of particular interest to seismic hazard studies, especially in the field of earthquake engineering, as near‐site conditions can have a significant impact on the resulting ground motion at a site. There has been much focus on the constraint of site parameters and their application to seismic hazard studies, especially in the development of ground‐motion models (GMMs). Kappa is an observational parameter describing the high‐frequency attenuation of spectra, and its site contribution ( ⁠ κ 0 "> κ 0 ) has shown to be a good predictor of high‐frequency ground motions; however, measurements are often limited. In this study, we develop a κ 0 "> κ 0 dataset for the San Francisco Bay area (SFBA) by estimating κ 0 "> κ 0 for 228 stations, and we produce a continuous regional map of κ 0 "> κ 0 ⁠ . We find κ 0 "> κ 0 to range between 0.003 and 0.072 s, with larger values concentrating on the east, north, and south sides of the bay, and lower values concentrating on the west side. We also evaluate the robustness of κ 0 "> κ 0 as a site parameter and find it to correlate with peak ground acceleration. These estimates of κ 0 "> κ 0 can add predictive power to GMMs, thus increasing the accuracy of predicted ground motion and improving the robustness of ground‐motion studies in the SFBA.

California↗

USGS2023

Comparison of nonergodic ground-motion components from CyberShake and NGA-West2 datasets in California

In this study, we compare the Southern California Earthquake Center CyberShake platform against the Next Generation Attenuation‐West2 empirical datasets. Because the CyberShake and empirical datasets cover very different magnitude ranges and site conditions, we develop ground‐motion models (GMMs) for CyberShake datasets to compare trends with empirical GMMs and decompose the residuals for further analysis. We apply mixed effects regression to four CyberShake datasets in southern, central, and northern California at 2, 3, 5, and 10 s periods, and compare the results with the empirical datasets using the same approach. CyberShake captures the total variability of ground motions in the empirical datasets but tends to predict larger median ground motions relative to the empirical GMMs. We then calculate and compare the repeatable source‐specific location, site, and path effects between CyberShake and empirical datasets. We find that the correlations of site effects between the CyberShake and empirical datasets are generally satisfactory, but the variability of site effects is slightly smaller for CyberShake datasets. There is no apparent correlation of source‐specific location effects between the CyberShake and empirical datasets. Comparison of path effects shows a wide range of correlation coefficients. Finally, we investigate the source of observed differences between the CyberShake and empirical datasets. We attribute the larger median ground‐motion levels in CyberShake to a combination of the homogeneous slip patterns of the earthquake ruptures, the low resolution of near‐surface materials in the velocity models, and strong reflections at high‐contrast boundaries in the velocity models. These factors also impact the correlations of site and path effects between the CyberShake and empirical datasets. Moreover, the leakage from location effects into site and path terms further weakens the correlations. In summary, we find that CyberShake could be improved, but it is still very useful to supplement empirical datasets for ground‐motion studies, especially to inform their nonergodic components.

California↗

USGS2022

The Geodetic Centroid (gCent) Catalog: Global earthquake monitoring with satellite imaging geodesy

Remote sensing geodetic observations (Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar [InSAR] and optical correlation [“pixel tracking”]) serve an increasingly diverse and important role in earthquake monitoring and response. This study introduces the Geodetic Centroid (gCent) catalog—an earthquake catalog derived solely from space‐based geodetic observations—and analysis of 74 earthquakes ( ⁠ M W 4.3–7.4) imaged from 1 August 2019 to 01 February 2022. For gCent, we use InSAR and optical correlation observations derived from the Sentinel‐1 satellites and various publicly available optical satellites to systematically image all global earthquakes M W 5.5 or larger and shallower than 25 km, M W 7.0 or larger at any depth, and other high‐impact earthquakes or seismic events of special interest. We invert surface displacements from successfully imaged earthquakes for the location, orientation, and dimensions of a single slipping fault patch that describes the centroid characteristics of the earthquake. These centroid models, in turn, are compiled into a catalog and used in U.S. Geological Survey/Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) operational earthquake response products such as ShakeMaps and finite‐fault models. We provide a comparison of the gCent catalog to the ANSS Comprehensive Catalog and Global Centroid Moment Tensor (Global CMT) catalog to compare reported locations, depths, and magnitudes. We find that global earthquake catalogs not only generally provide reasonably comparable locations (within 10 km on average), but also they systematically overestimate depth that may have implications for earthquake shaking predictions based solely on earthquake origin information. Geodetic magnitudes are comparable to seismically inferred magnitudes, indicating that gCent models are unlikely to be systematically biased by the presence of postseismic deformation. We additionally highlight limitations of the gCent catalog induced by both the limitations of remote sensing imaging of earthquakes and our imposition of a simplified earthquake source description that does not include spatially distributed slip.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2022

Rupture scenarios for the 3 June 1770 Haiti earthquake

The 2010 M 7.0 Haiti earthquake provided the impetus to reconsider historical earthquakes in Hispaniola ( Bakun et al. , 2012 ). That earthquake also shed new light on complex fault systems along Haiti’s southern peninsula ( Douilly et al. , 2013 ; Saint Fleur et al. , 2015 ). Recently, the 2021 M 7.2 Nippes earthquake ( Calais et al. , 2022 ; Douilly et al. , 2022 ), and a recent study reconsidering the 1860 sequence ( Martin et al. , 2022 ) further underscored the complexity of fault systems and large earthquake ruptures along the peninsula. Motivated by these studies and recent geological investigations ( Prentice et al. , 2010 ; Saint Fleur et al. , 2020 ), we reconsider the 3 June 1770 Haiti earthquake to explore the conventional assumption that it was the last major ( M ≥7.5) earthquake along the Enriquillo–Plantain Garden fault (EPGF). Accounts provide compelling evidence for substantial liquefaction in the Cul‐de‐Sac plain, one or more likely landslide‐driven tsunami in Gonaïves Bay, and extensive landsliding that created at least three documented landslide dams. We consider three end‐member rupture scenarios that are consistent with available constraints: two scenarios with M 7.7 and rupture lengths of 150–170 km, and one scenario with a ∼90 km rupture and M 7.5. Absent future work to identify and date paleoevents along the southern peninsula, none of these scenarios can be ruled out. Our preferred rupture model extends from the Miragoâne pull‐apart to near la Selle mountain, with a rupture length of 127 km, M 7.6, and a high stress drop. Rupture could have been on the EPGF or on an oblique thrust fault associated with overthrusting of the Massif de la Selle. The results do support the conclusion that the 1770 earthquake was the last major earthquake in southern Haiti, with a magnitude upward of M 7.5 and significantly more severe shaking in southern Haiti than during the 2010 earthquake.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2023

A methodology to combine shaking and ground failure models for forecasting seismic damage to buried pipeline networks

How does an earthquake affect buried pipeline networks? It is well known that the seismic performance of buried pipelines depends on ground failures (GFs) as well as strong ground shaking (SGS), but it is unclear how the various types of earthquake hazards should be collectively combined, as existing methodologies tend to examine each of the earthquake hazards separately. In this article, we develop a probability‐based methodology to consistently combine SGS with three types of GF (surface faulting, liquefaction, and landslide) for forecasting seismic damage in buried pipeline networks from a given earthquake rupture scenario. Using a gas transmission pipeline example, we illustrate how the proposed methodology enables others (e.g., researchers, pipeline operators who manage distribution lines, and consultants) to modularly combine various models such as those for estimating probability of GF, permanent ground displacements, and pipeline fragility. Finally, we compare the proposed methodology against the Hazus methodology to explore implications from considering each hazard one at a time.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2023

Applications of nonergodic site response models to ShakeAlert case studies in the Los Angeles area

In this study, we explore whether the Parker and Baltay (2022) site response models for the Los Angeles (LA) basin region can improve ground‐motion forecasts in the U.S. Geological Survey ShakeAlert earthquake early warning system (hereafter ShakeAlert). We implement the peak ground acceleration and peak ground velocity site response models of Parker and Baltay (2022) in ShakeAlert via the earthquake information to ground‐motion (hereafter eqinfo2GM) module, which predicts ground motions from the estimated earthquake parameters of magnitude, rupture length, and location. The nonergodic site response models for the greater LA area were developed using ground motions from 414 M 3–7.3 earthquakes in southern California. We test nonergodic ground‐motion forecasts for five earthquakes in the LA area: the 1994 M 6.7 Northridge earthquake, the 2008 M 5.4 Chino Hills earthquake, the 2019 M 7.1 Ridgecrest earthquake, the 2020 M 4.5 South El Monte earthquake, and a synthetic M 7.8 earthquake on the southern San Andreas fault from the ShakeOut scenario, which was the basis of a statewide emergency response exercise. From the test results, we find that with the nonergodic site response applied, ShakeAlert not only alerts larger areas but can also result in longer warning times in LA region. In addition, the modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) ground‐motion predictions generated by the ShakeAlert eqinfo2GM module are improved in accuracy when compared with the corresponding ShakeMap ground‐truth MMI when the nonergodic site response model is applied.

California↗

USGS2023

Seafloor observations eliminate a landslide as the source of the 1918 Puerto Rico Tsunami

The 11 October 1918 devastating tsunami in northwest Puerto Rico had been used as an example for earthquake‐induced landslide tsunami hazard. Three pieces of evidence pointed to a landslide as the origin of the tsunami: the discovery of a large submarine landslide scar from bathymetry data collected by shipboard high‐resolution multibeam sonar, reported breaks of submarine cable within the scar, and the fit of tsunami models to flooding observations. Newly processed seafloor imagery collected by remotely operated vehicle (ROV) show, however, pervasive Fe–Mn crust (patina) on the landslide walls and floor, indicating that the landslide scar is at least several hundred years old. C 14 "> 14 C dates of sediment covering the landslide floor verify this interpretation. Although we have not searched the region systematically for an alternative tsunami source, we propose a possible source—a two‐segment normal‐fault rupture along the eastern wall of Mona rift. The proposed fault location matches the published normal faults with steep bathymetry and is close to the International Seismological Center–Global Earthquake Model catalog locations of the 1918 mainshock and aftershocks. The ROV observations further show fresh vertical slickensides and rock exposure along the proposed fault trace. Hydrodynamic models from an M w "> M w 7.2 earthquake rupture along the eastern wall of the rift faithfully reproduce the reported tsunami amplitudes, polarities, and arrival times. Our analysis emphasizes the value of close‐up observations and physical samples to augment remote sensing data in natural hazard studies.

Puerto Rico↗

USGS2023

Combinatorial optimization of earthquake spatial distributions under minimum cumulative stress constraints

We determine optimal on‐fault earthquake spatial distributions using a combinatorial method that minimizes the long‐term cumulative stress resolved on the fault. An integer‐programming framework was previously developed to determine the optimal arrangement of a millennia‐scale earthquake sample that minimizes the misfit to a target slip rate determined from geodetic data. The resulting cumulative stress from just slip‐rate optimization, however, can greatly exceed fault strength estimates. Therefore, we add an objective function that minimizes cumulative stress and broad stress constraints to limit the solution space. We find that there is a trade‐off in the two objectives: minimizing the cumulative stress on a fault within fault strength limits concentrates earthquakes in specific areas of the fault and results in excursions from the target slip rate. Both slip‐rate and stress objectives can be combined in either a weighted or lexicographic (hierarchical) method. Using a combination of objectives, we demonstrate that a Gutenberg–Richter sample of earthquakes can be arranged on a constant slip‐rate finite fault with minimal stress and slip‐rate residuals. We apply this method to determine the optimal arrangement of earthquakes on the variable slip‐rate Nankai megathrust over 5000 yr. The sharp decrease in slip rate at the Tokai section of the fault results in surplus cumulative stress under all scenarios. Using stress optimization alone restricts this stress surplus to the northeast end of the fault at the expense of decreasing the slip rate away from the target slip rate at the southwest end of the fault. A combination of both slip‐rate and stress objectives provides an adequate fit to the data, although alternate model formulations for the fault are needed at the Tokai section to explain persistent excess cumulative stress. In general, incorporating stress objectives and constraints into the integer‐programming framework adds an important aspect of fault physics to the resulting earthquake rupture forecasts.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2023

Incorporation of real-time earthquake magnitudes estimated via peak ground displacement scaling in the ShakeAlert Earthquake Early Warning system

The United States earthquake early warning (EEW) system, ShakeAlert®, currently employs two algorithms based on seismic data alone to characterize the earthquake source, reporting the weighted average of their magnitude estimates. Nonsaturating magnitude estimates derived in real time from Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) data using peak ground displacement (PGD) scaling relationships offer complementary information with the potential to improve EEW reliability for large earthquakes. We have adapted a method that estimates magnitude from PGD ( Crowell et al. , 2016 ) for possible production use by ShakeAlert. To evaluate the potential contribution of the modified algorithm, we installed it on the ShakeAlert development system for real‐time operation and for retrospective analyses using a suite of GNSS data that we compiled. Because of the colored noise structure of typical real‐time GNSS positions, observed PGD values drift over time periods relevant to EEW. To mitigate this effect, we implemented logic within the modified algorithm to control when it issues initial and updated PGD‐derived magnitude estimates ( ⁠ M PGD "> M PGD "> M PGD PGD ⁠ ), and to quantify M PGD "> M PGD PGD uncertainty for use in combining it with estimates from other ShakeAlert algorithms running in parallel. Our analysis suggests that, with these strategies, spuriously large M PGD "> M PGD PGD will seldom be incorporated in ShakeAlert’s magnitude estimate. Retrospective analysis of data from moderate‐to‐great earthquakes demonstrates that the modified algorithm can contribute to better magnitude estimates for M w > 7.0 "> M w > 7.0 w>7.0 events. GNSS station distribution throughout the ShakeAlert region limits how soon the modified algorithm can begin estimating magnitude in some locations. Furthermore, both the station density and the GNSS noise levels limit the minimum magnitude for which the modified algorithm is likely to contribute to the weighted average. This might be addressed by alternative GNSS processing strategies that reduce noise.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2023

On the ratio of full‐resonance to square‐root‐impedance amplifications for shear‐wave velocity profiles that are a continuous function of depth

Amplifications of seismic waves traveling upward through a continuous, interface‐free velocity profile are consistently smaller when computed using the square‐root‐impedance (SRI) method than when computed using full‐resonance (FR) calculations. This was found for a wide range of velocity profiles. For realistic profiles, for which the gradient of velocity decreases with depth, the differences are not large, with the ratio of FR/SRI amplifications ranging from about 1.05 to 1.3. Comparisons of the amplifications from a continuous velocity profile with those from approximations to that profile using a stack of constant‐velocity layers give some support to the hypothesis that the difference between FR and SRI amplifications for gradient profiles is because the former is controlled by the ratio of seismic impedances, whereas the latter is based on the square root of the seismic impedance ratios. This implies that gradient profiles will always have FR amplifications greater than SRI amplifications. A model‐independent, easy‐to‐implement modification of the SRI amplifications is proposed that shows promise in bringing the SRI amplifications closer to the FR amplifications.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗