Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Journal of Seismology”

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.

1,663 records · Page 5Linked to original sources
USGS2024

On algorithmically determined versus traditional macroseismic intensity assignments

The utility of macroseismic data, defined as the effects of earthquakes on humans and the built environment, has been increasingly recognized following the advent of online systems that now produce unprecedented volumes of macroseismic intensity information. Contributed reports from the U.S. Geological Survey “Did You Feel It?” (DYFI) system ( Wald et al ., 1999 ) are used to generate intensity values with an algorithm based on seminal work by Dengler and Dewey (1998) . The algorithm was developed initially to reproduce intensity values assigned by expert opinion using questionnaire results collected by telephone survey. In this article, I discuss reasons why intensity values from (self‐selected) DYFI responses can differ from values that would be assigned by expert opinion given more complete data from randomly selected participants. For example, with the data used by Dengler and Dewey (1998) , intensities near 4 could be determined from the percentage of people who felt shaking in each town. With less spatially rich data from self‐selected participants, this percentage often cannot be determined reliably. Audible noises are key additional diagnostic criteria for modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) 4, but, although the DYFI system includes a question about noise, following Dengler and Dewey (1998) , the DYFI algorithm does not include a noise indicator. At the upper end of the scale, as defined the DYFI algorithm yields a maximum intensity value of 9.05, nominally corresponding to peak ground acceleration of 75% g . These and other factors can result in DYFI values that are low compared to traditional MMI values assigned using expert opinion, even absent factors that can bias traditional MMI assignments. Modern ground‐motion intensity conversion equations determined using DYFI intensities are expected to be appropriate for DYFI intensities, but the results of this study suggest that biases may be introduced if DYFI and traditional intensities are assumed to be interchangeable.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2024

Static and dynamic strain in the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

During the 1886 Mw 7.3 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, three railroads emanating from the city were exposed to severe shaking. Expansion joints in segmented railroad tracks are designed to allow railroad infrastructure to withstand a few parts in 10,000 of thermoelastic strain. We show that, in 1886, transient contractions exceeding this limiting value buckled rails, and transient extensions pulled rails apart. Calculated values for dynamic strain in the meizoseismal region are in reasonable agreement with those anticipated from the relation between strain and moment magnitude proposed by Barbour et al. (2021) and exceed estimated tectonic strain released by the earthquake by an order of magnitude. Almost all of the documented disturbances of railroad lines, including evidence for shortening of the rails, can thus be ascribed to the effects of dynamic strain changes, not static strain. Little or no damage to railroads was reported outside the estimated 10 −4 dynamic strain contour. The correspondence between 10 −3 and 2×10 −4 contours of dynamic strain and Mercalli intensity 9 and 8, anticipated from the dependence of each quantity on peak ground velocity, suggests it may be possible to use railroad damage to quantitatively estimate shaking intensity. At one location, near Rantowles, ≈20 km west of Charleston, a photograph of buckled track taken one day after the earthquake has been cited as evidence for shallow dextral slip and has long focused a search for a causal fault in this region. Photogrammetric analysis reveals that the buckle was caused by transient contraction of <10 cm with no dextral offset. Our results further weaken the evidence for faulting in the swamps and forests south of the Ashley River in 1886, hitherto motivated by the photograph and limited macroseismic evidence for high‐intensity shaking.

South Carolina↗
USGS2025

A scientific vision and roadmap for earthquake rupture forecast developments, a USGS perspective

We articulate a scientific vision and roadmap for the development of improved Earthquake Rupture Forecast models, which are one of the two main modeling components used in modern seismic hazard and risk analysis. One primary future objective is to provide fully time-dependent models that include both elastic rebound and spatiotemporal clustering nationwide, which is particularly important for shorter-term hazard and risk considerations (e.g., earthquake insurance products). We also discuss the importance and perennial challenges associated with quantifying epistemic uncertainties, including those associated with deformation-model slip rates, un-quantified sampling errors with respect to off-fault seismicity, and any spatial covariances. The need for more physics-based approaches is also emphasized, as is the benefit of adding model valuation (quantifying usefulness) to our verification and validation protocols. Given the multidisciplinary and system-level nature of this activity, modular design is critical. Future updates will also draw from best-available science by both the United States Geological Survey and the external community. The primary goal of this paper is to highlight plans that guide research and facilitate community engagement with model development, especially with respect to lowering the entry barrier for early career scientists and engineers. The paper is written so readers can focus on the sections that interest them most (see table of contents), with the Introduction and Discussion providing a stand-alone overview and summary.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
USGS2025

Seismic moment and local magnitude scales in Ridgecrest, CA from the SCEC/USGS Community Stress Drop Validation Study

We illustrate the systematic difference between moment magnitude and local magnitude caused by underlying earthquake source physics, using seismic moments submitted to the Statewide California Earthquake Center/United States Geological Survey Community Stress Drop Validation Study 2019 Ridgecrest data set. While the relationship between seismic moment and moment magnitude ( M or M w ) of log 10 ( M 0 ) ~ 1.5* M is uniformly valid for all earthquake sizes by definition (Hanks and Kanamori, 1979), the relationship between local magnitude M L and moment is itself magnitude dependent. For moderate events, ~3< M < ~6, M and M L are coincident; for earthquakes smaller than ~3, M L ~ 1.0 log 10 M 0 (Hanks and Boore, 1984). This is a physical consequence of the corner frequency fc becoming larger than the upper frequency of observation and implies that M L and M differ systematically by a factor of 1.5 for these small events. While this idea is not new, we propose a new, continuous relationship between local magnitude and moment, for magnitudes 2 to 6 which extrapolates to smaller and larger magnitudes, applicable to southern California specific to the Ridgecrest region. We make use of the plethora of seismic moments as submitted by many participants of the Community Stress Drop study, compared to the Southern California Seismic Network (SCSN) catalog magnitudes. Overall, the seismic moments in the Community Study recover moment magnitude well, so we use our new M L - M 0 to convert M L to M , refining the SCSN operational M Lr scale. This systematic difference of 50% in slope between local and moment magnitude at small magnitudes has implications for spectral stress drop estimates, earthquake ground motion modeling, as well as other magnitude scales and earthquake occurrence statistics.

California↗
USGS2025

Estimating earthquake source depth using teleseismic broadband waveform modeling at the USGS National Earthquake Information Center

The U.S. Geologic Survey National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) monitors global seismicity, producing a catalog of earthquake source parameters in near-real-time to provide information that can help mitigate the societal impact of earthquakes. The NEIC commonly relies on teleseismic observations to constrain earthquake source parameters (e.g., location, depth, magnitude, and mechanism) due to a lack of local and regional observations. For these ‘teleseismic’ events, depth phase (i.e., pP , sP ) arrival time observations provide the best estimate on source depth. However, depth phases are often difficult to accurately identify and/or pick. Therefore, NEIC relies on waveform modeling, such as those determined from W-phase ( M ww ), body wave ( M wb ), and regional ( M wr ) moment tensor estimations, to provide constraints on source depth. While depth estimates from these approaches are informative, higher frequency observations provide more precise estimates because depth phases are more prominently observed at higher frequencies. Here, we present NEIC’s relatively high-frequency (~0.04 to 1 Hz) teleseismic waveform modeling approach, termed Synthetic Depth Phase Modeling (SynDepth), for determining source depth. SynDepth was developed to provide NEIC with a tool that enables rapid, accurate, and quantifiable estimates of earthquake source depth in cases where locator depths are not reliable. This relatively simple and fast procedure searches over 1 km-incremented source depths and an expanding triangular source-time function to find the best-fitting solution. We compare automatic SynDepth solutions for a dataset of 1,216 earthquakes (M5.5-M7.6) between 2017 and 2021 to NEIC-derived depth estimates from other methods. Our approach provides a robust depth estimate for earthquakes lacking local arrival time data, and it minimizes the need for analyst review of depth-phase picks ( pP , sP ) or using predefined ‘fixed’ depths.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2026

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

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.

Callifornia↗
USGS2024

Debris avalanches in the northern California Coast Range triggered by plate boundary earthquakes

Determining the timing and cause for ancient hillslope failures proves difficult in the western United States, yet critical as it ties directly into groundmotion estimates for hazardous events. This knowledge gap is important to confront as hillslope failures are candidates to be triggered by earthquakes along active plate boundaries. We identify two prehistoric, i.e., preinstrumental history, debris avalanches (3 10^6 and 6 10^6 m^3) in the Coast Ranges of northern California. These debris avalanches are well suited for studying the timing (to the exact year) and trigger as the densely forested landscape enables effective use of dendrochronology and high-resolution radiocarbon to pinpoint time of failure, and the legacy of landslide studies in the region provides context for evaluating a seismic trigger as the most likely triggering mechanism. Neither debris avalanche was triggered by the largest precipitation event of the instrumental record in 1964 CE, and the two debris avalanche sites are physiographically suited to accommodate topographic amplification of seismic shaking. Through a suite of geologic and dendrochronologic evidence, we establish the likely time of failure of the two debris avalanches as 1906 CE and 933 CE. The failure of the younger landslide coincides with the 1906 CE San Francisco earthquake on the Pacific/North American plate boundary, while the older landslide dates to 933 CE falling within the broad age range (850-966 CE) of a likely megathrust earthquake on the Cascadia subduction zone as recorded in coastal marshes in Humboldt Bay, California. The precise age on the 933 CE debris avalanche could trim the uncertainty on a Cascadia subduction zone event from 116 years to one year. Utilizing debris avalanche records from sites suitable to record seismic shaking improves understanding of plate-boundary earthquake timing and extent of shaking.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
USGS2024

A seismic nodal deployment to understand magmatic structure in the vicinity of the Pahala earthquake swarm

In summer-fall 2022, 80 three-component SmartSolo IGU-BD3C-5 nodal seismometers were deployed surrounding the Pāhala seismic swarm on the Island of Hawaiʻi, with the goal of improving seismicity catalogs, and seismic velocity images of the crust and upper mantle in this region. The Pāhala swarm, located south of Mauna Loa and Kīlauea, has been the site of a multiyear sustained swarm of seismicity at depths of ~ 25 – 40 km, with order of magnitude increases in rate in 2015, and then again in 2019. This seismicity is possibly related to the input of magma from the mantle plume below, which may then be subsequently transported to volcanic edifices. However, these processes remain enigmatic, in part due to a lack of precise earthquake locations and seismic velocity models in this region. Here we provide an overview of the deployment, an assessment of the quality of the collected data, and discuss the viability of the dataset for local earthquake relocation, tomography, and teleseismic receiver functions. Through comparisons with proximal permanent broadband and short period instruments, we find that the nodes produce high quality data, particularly at periods shorter than 5 s, although we find, document, and correct discrepancies with the gain and polarities of the instruments. We successfully record signals from teleseismic earthquakes, even at periods longer than 5 s (the corner of the flat response of the nodes). We also record local earthquakes, including details related to source characteristics. This indicates that the data is likely to prove useful for investigations using both local and teleseismic earthquake signals to better understand the connections between the deep and shallow magmatic systems of Hawaiʻi. While this deployment provides a snapshot in time, its success may provide a useful benchmark for future studies as the volcanic systems of Hawaiʻi continue to evolve in the future.

Hawaii↗
USGS2025

Using gridded seismicity to forecast the long-term spatial distribution of earthquakes for the 2025 Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands National Seismic Hazard Model

Gridded (or background) seismicity models are a critical component of probabilistic seismic hazard assessments, accounting for off‐fault and smaller‐magnitude earthquakes. They are typically developed by declustering and spatially smoothing an earthquake catalog to estimate a long‐term seismicity rate that can be used to forecast future earthquakes. Here, we present new gridded seismicity models for use in the 2025 National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands (PRVI). The previous PRVI NSHM was released in 2003, and our new models incorporate updates to both data and methodology. We utilize an updated earthquake catalog based on improved Puerto Rico Seismic Network data with newly characterized completeness epochs. The catalog is divided into crustal, subduction interface, and intraslab seismicity using new methods and Slab2 subduction zone geometries. To forecast the long‐term spatial distribution of earthquakes, we use an updated methodology developed for the 2023 U.S. 50‐state NSHM, considering three declustering methods and two spatial smoothing methods based on 2D Gaussian kernels. To adapt it for the complex seismotectonics of the region, we also adopt probabilistic methods to account for events with unknown depths and uncertainties in tectonic classification, and develop a new method for spatial scaling to counteract the effects of spatial variability in network coverage while maintaining the use of smaller events. Finally, we test the performance of these spatial models in forecasting the location of M w ≥ 5earthquakes in the region. Our updated methodology improves the representation of epistemic uncertainty relative to the 2003 model, and our results demonstrate the effectiveness of the new measures we have introduced to address heterogeneities in network detection and systematically evaluate forecast performance.

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands↗
USGS2024

Extending the Boore and Abrahamson (2023) modified square-root-impedance method for the development of site amplifications consistent with the full-resonance approach to a range of VS30 values

The square-root-impedance (SRI) method is commonly used to approximate the seismic site amplifications computed using the full-resonance (FR) method for gradient shear-wave velocity ( V S ) profiles that are smoothly varying with depth. The SRI site amplifications have been observed to systematically underpredict the FR site amplifications by a ratio of FR/SRI amplifications around 1.05 to 1.3 across a wide frequency range (Boore, 2013). Recently, Boore and Abrahamson (2023; hereafter, BA23) related this difference in the SRI and FR methods to differences in the exponent η of the ratio of seismic impedances between the two methods. They proposed the implementation of a modified frequency-dependent η in the SRI method to improve its match to the FR site amplifications. This modified η was derived using only five V S profiles. We investigate the performance of the BA23 η for a wide range of realistic gradient V S profiles with V S30 ranging from 180 to 1500 m/s. These gradient V S profiles are constructed using two power-law functions of depth and are constrained by the assigned VS30 value, the depth and velocity of the half-space, and depths to shear-wave velocity horizons of 1.0 and 2.5 km/s ( Z 1.0 and Z 2.5 ) based on western United States sites. Despite observing a V S30 dependence of η, we find that the BA23 η generally works reasonably well for the range of V S profiles analyzed. Using the VS30 -dependent η derived in this study results in improvements in matching the FR site amplification compared to using the BA23 η. These improvements are more pronounced for the soft-site conditions and become modest to negligible for the stiff site conditions

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
USGS2024

How does the onset of offset influence geologic slip rates?

Geologic slip rates are typically based on the displacement accrued by a geomorphic or stratigraphic feature and the age of the offset feature. Because slip rates are commonly calculated by dividing the displacement of a faulted marker by its age, they contain two open time intervals: the elapsed time between the age of an offset feature and the age of the earthquake that displaced the feature, and the time between the present‐day and the most recent earthquake. Here, we explore the influence of including unconstrained open intervals in geologic slip rate calculations. We test the degree to which these open intervals affect geologic slip rates and their uncertainties, and we find that their influence depends primarily on mean earthquake recurrence intervals (RIs). Slip rates on faults with longer RIs, such as the Wasatch fault, can be greatly influenced by an increase of up to 20% when accounting for open intervals. In contrast, slip rates on faults with shorter RIs, such as the San Andreas fault, are only slightly influenced by the assumption that slip rates calculated over open intervals approximate those calculated over closed intervals. Our analyses indicate that faults with moderate slip rates (∼0.2–5 mm/yr) are sensitive to both open interval effects themselves, as well as methods to quantify and account for these effects. We re‐evaluate how slip rates are calculated and defined in displacement–time space using published deformation records. We explore the utility of assigning a probability distribution to the initiation of offset of the oldest faulted feature and the timing of the most recent earthquake (MRE). We find that calculating geologic slip rates without using probability distributions that capture the timing of the MRE and the onset of offset of the oldest faulted feature, especially on slow‐to‐moderate slip rate faults, can lead to systematic underestimation of average geologic slip rates.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2024

Slip rate for the Rose Canyon fault through San Diego, California, based on analysis of GPS data: Evidence for a potential Rose Canyon–San Miguel-Vallecitos fault connection?

The Rose Canyon fault is the southern extension of the larger Newport–Inglewood–Rose Canyon fault system, which represents a major structural boundary in the Inner Continental Borderland (ICB) offshore of southern California. Ten to fifteen percent of total plate boundary motion in southern California is thought to be accommodated by the faults of the ICB, but the exact distribution of slip is uncertain. With an onshore segment, the Rose Canyon fault offers an opportunity to measure the slip rate using traditional geodetic methods. In this study, we use Global Positioning System (GPS) surface velocities from a combined campaign and continuous GPS network to constrain elastic models of the Rose Canyon fault. We then compare the observed surface velocities with proposed conceptual models of regional fault connections that facilitate the transfer of slip into the Rose Canyon fault to assess how well the observations are explained by the models. The results of elastic half‐space models suggest that the Rose Canyon fault may be slipping toward the higher end of geologic estimates, with the preferred model indicating a slip rate of 2.4 ± 0.5 mm/yr. Although limited in terms of near‐fault benchmarks, we find an improved model fit using an asymmetrical elastic half‐space model and a higher slip rate, suggesting a potential rheological contrast across the Rose Canyon fault, similar to observations from the northern Newport–Inglewood fault segments. Observed GPS surface velocities, background seismicity, and gravity anomalies south of San Diego Bay point toward a more easterly trace for the Rose Canyon fault, suggesting a possible connection with the San Miguel–Vallecitos fault system. Such a connection could increase the potential rupture lengths of future earthquakes and have important consequences for regional seismic hazards.

California↗
USGS2025

Site response and wave propagation effects in the eastern United States

Fourier amplitude spectra from regional earthquakes in the eastern United States are used in a parametric inversion for source, path, and site effects. Five earthquakes are selected for analysis during the installation of the United States National Seismic Network (US), Earthscope’s USArray Transportable Array (TA), and other temporary arrays to maximize station coverage. A global search algorithm is used to solve for site response from 0.1 to 15 Hz, corner frequency, geometrical spreading ( r - γ ), and frequency dependent anelastic attenuation in the form Q(f) = Q o f α . Tradeoff between moment and geometric spreading is handled by fixing the moment. The tradeoff between corner frequency and Q(f) is solved by selecting the value of corner frequency that minimizes an objective function defined over all stations. Values of site response and attenuation parameters show a strong spatial correlation with the physiographic provinces of the eastern United States. Site response for the Atlantic Coastal Plain is consistent with previous work using spectral ratios relative to a reference site, defined by strong resonance peaks correlated with the thickness of sediments. Site response for the other physiographic provinces is markedly different from the coastal plain, with a lack of distinct resonance peaks and a broad moderate high at frequences from 0.1 to 0.5 Hz consistent with the hard-rock geology of the regions. Like site response, Q(f) has a strong correlation with physiographic province, showing lower values on the coastal plain and higher values inland. Geometric spreading exponent, γ, decreases with increasing hypocenter distance from just above 1 at a few tens of kilometers to 0.9 at 500 km. The limited range in geometric spreading values is attributed to starting the Fourier transform window at the S ‐wave arrival for all distances and averaging over multiple wave types.

eastern United States↗
USGS2024

Are the horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratios of earthquakes and microtremors the same?

We consider the similarities and differences between earthquake and microtremor horizontal‐to‐vertical spectral ratios (eHVSR and mHVSR, respectively) using a dataset of 161 sites in southern California. Quantitative comparisons are made in terms of the eHVSR and mHVSR lognormal median curves, as well as the frequencies and amplitudes associated with the fundamental‐ and higher‐mode resonances where present. The results show only 58% of the eHVSR–mHVSR pairs agree in terms of their median curve and only 25% of the eHVSR–mHVSR pairs agree in terms of shared resonances, which increases to 68% if flat HVSRs are considered equivalent. Furthermore, while the shared resonances match very well in terms of frequency (root mean square error, RMSE, <0.11 Hz), the amplitudes of those resonances do not agree (RMSE >1.6). These findings demonstrate that while eHVSR and mHVSR agree at some sites, they are not equivalent at all sites. To investigate if the agreement between eHVSR and mHVSR could be related to features of the microtremor data, earthquake recordings, and/or the site conditions, three machine learning (ML) models at varying levels of interpretability are presented. The ML models—which include multivariate logistic regression, gradient‐boosted trees, and support vector machines—show only partial success at using site‐specific data to predict whether eHVSR and mHVSR will likely agree in terms of their median curve (accuracy of 78%) and number of resonances (accuracy of 84%). Therefore, we conclude that while eHVSR and mHVSR can be quite similar in terms of resonant frequencies at some sites, they are not identical at all sites. Furthermore, preliminary evidence shows that the agreement of eHVSR and mHVSR can be predicted a priori given features of the microtremor measurements, earthquake recordings, and site conditions, although a larger dataset will be necessary for developing a robust predictive model.

California↗
USGS2025

A newly identified creeping strand of the Concord fault, San Francisco Bay Area

The Concord fault constitutes a major branch of the Pacific–North America transform plate boundary in Northern California, bridging the strike‐slip Bartlett Springs ‐ Green Valley Fault system to the north with the Greenville and Calaveras Faults to the south. Like many faults in the San Francisco Bay Area its long‐term slip is partially accommodated by aseismic slip (creep). Although creep has been recognized and monitored on the northern half of the fault for decades, the precise location of the southern half of the fault and its slip rate—whether accommodated seismically or aseismically—has remained enigmatic. How slip transfers between the Concord and Greenville or Calaveras faults to the south remains an outstanding question. New field observations presented here indicate that the active trace of the fault south of downtown Concord is not where previously interpreted and is indeed actively creeping. We report observations of shallow creep continuing >7 km farther south along the Concord fault than previously reported, along a fault strand not previously recognized for most of its length. This is evident as right‐laterally deflected concrete curbs and sidewalk slabs on both sides of every street that crosses the fault at a high angle in southeast Concord and northeast Walnut Creek. We document the magnitude and location of these deflections to estimate accumulated right‐lateral aseismic slip expressed in engineered structures. Offsets of these piercing lines range from 8 to 18 cm, over widths varying from narrow breaks along centimeter‐scale concrete joints to 10‐m‐wide zones of deflection. Significantly, this active trace is ∼400 m west of where the Quaternary active trace has previously been inferred, placing it within—rather than bounding—the built area of suburban Concord. Slip along the fault has already caused infrastructure damage. These results revise our understanding of the southern Concord fault and help constrain its seismic potential.

California↗
USGS2026

Characterizing precariously balanced rocks (PBRs) in the eastern United States for estimating maximum past earthquake ground motions

Fragile geologic features (FGFs) can be used to estimate an upper bound to the strength of earthquake ground shaking in the past thousands to tens of thousands of years. FGFs could be especially useful in the eastern United States, where few active faults are available for paleoseismic studies and where low seismic attenuation means that an earthquake could damage FGFs at large distances. This article describes a pilot study of one form of FGF, precariously balanced rocks (PBRs), in the Blue Ridge of Virginia, ∼160 km from the central Virginia seismic zone (CVSZ) and ∼100 km from Virginia’s Giles County seismic zone (GCSZ). The main goal is to develop and refine methods for studying PBRs in the eastern United States. Photogrammetric 3D models of the rocks were used to locate their centers of mass and delineate their basal contacts, with the latter corroborated by wrapping a wire around the bases to verify the circumferences. Relations between hill geometry and amplification were used to estimate topographic amplification. Seismometers on the PBRs provided the frequencies, amplitudes, and directions of rocking after giving the rocks gentle pushes. The levels of ground shaking likely to topple the rocks were compared with the median hazard curves from the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Seismic Hazard Model and were used to map magnitudes of earthquakes in the nearby region likely to topple the rocks. Results indicate that an M w ≥ 7.5 earthquake is needed in the CVSZ or near the 2020 Sparta, North Carolina, earthquake to topple the two most fragile PBRs and that an earthquake of ~ M w 7–7.5 in the GCSZ is needed. The fragilities and estimated ages of the PBRs (20–40 ka) are thus consistent with the absence of such events in the historical record in the nearby region.

eastern United States↗
USGS2026

Simulation-based scenario ShakeMaps for large magnitude (MW6.5+) crustal earthquakes on the Seattle, Tacoma, and southern Whidbey Island faults, Washington, USA

Scenario ground‐motion maps based on empirical ground‐motion models (GMMs) provide a rapid and generally reliable means of estimating the amplitude and distribution of earthquake shaking. However, because GMMs are designed for broad applicability, they often rely on simplified representations of Earth structure, which can limit their accuracy in regions with complex source, path, and site effects. This can substantially impact the accuracy of predicted shaking in areas like western Washington State, where deep, interconnected basin structure exerts a strong influence on seismic‐wave propagation. In this study, we present a new suite of simulation‐based scenario ShakeMaps that characterize ground shaking from large‐magnitude ( ⁠ M W 6.5–7.5) earthquakes on the Seattle, Tacoma, and southern Whidbey Island faults. These maps are developed using results from recent 3D wave propagation simulations ( Stone et al. , 2022 , 2023 , 2025 ) that incorporate realistic rupture geometries, variable slip distributions, and a regional 3D seismic velocity model with shallow soils. Broadband ground motions are estimated by combining the low‐frequency (<1 Hz) deterministic seismograms from these studies with high‐frequency (1–10 Hz) stochastic seismograms. Simulated ground motions are corrected to account for the enforced minimum shear‐wave velocity and nonlinear site response. The resulting ShakeMaps represent median ground‐shaking estimates derived from multiple rupture scenarios with varying slip distributions and hypocenter locations for each fault. To extend ShakeMap coverage beyond the simulation domain (i.e., into eastern Washington, northern Oregon, and southwestern British Columbia), we scale GMM‐based ground‐motion estimates using amplification patterns observed in the simulations. These new ShakeMaps reveal the substantial influence of deep basin structure on shaking intensity, underscoring the importance of considering crustal structure complexity in regional hazard assessments for the Pacific Northwest.

Washington↗
USGS2025

SURF: An automated method for building nonplanar 3D fault models from earthquake hypocenters

Accurately characterizing 3D fault geometry is vital for improving our understanding of earthquake behavior and informing the development of seismic hazard models. Despite their importance, subsurface fault structures tend to be poorly constrained because of limitations in observational data. Improvements to the seismic networks and earthquake detection algorithms have increased the precision and volume of earthquake catalogs, which help illuminate detailed subsurface fault structure and provide the most direct information available about fault geometries at depth. We present a Python package to automate generating 3D fault geometries directly from hypocentral seismicity patterns. This method begins with clustering events based on their spatial density, identifying coherent patterns. Nearby clusters are then merged based on the similarity of their orientations. We fit nonplanar surfaces using support vector regression to balance surface accuracy with minimal deviations from planarity. The fault models are output as quadrilateral meshes at user‐defined resolution. In the process of generating the 3D fault surfaces, we compute the spatial density of seismicity around the surface and the planarity as quantitative metrics of the model outputs. As a proof of concept, we apply this approach to the San Andreas–Calaveras fault junction region and the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence, both in California, which contain complex subparallel faults well defined at the Earth’s surface and abundant microseismicity. These case studies demonstrate the method’s ability to model complex fault structures, including long continuous fault surfaces, crossing faults, variably dipping segments, and subparallel faults. We test the method on both standard network catalogs and double‐difference relocated catalogs. We find that our seismicity‐based fault model results align with published 3D models that incorporate additional constraints and interpretations ( Plesch et al. , 2020 ; Aagaard and Hirakawa, 2021 ). This workflow provides a low‐user‐input solution for estimating fault geometries at depth from earthquake catalogs.

California↗