Geology topics

Kirstie Lafon Haynie

Publications and source records attributed to Kirstie Lafon Haynie.

11 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

2025 USGS National Seismic Hazard Model for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands: Overview of model and hazard results

The U.S. Geological Survey recently updated the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands (PRVI). The first version of the PRVI NSHM was released in 2003, and therefore this 2025 update includes over 20 years of new geologic, geophysical, and engineering data, methods, and models. Updates follow similar efforts performed in the recent 2023 50-state NSHM. However, this is the first NSHM in which we: (1) apply an inversion methodology to subduction interface fault sources in the earthquake rupture forecast (ERF) model; (2) develop scaled backbone median ground-motion models and independent aleatory variability models that are applied in the ground-motion characterization (GMC) model; and (3) calculate epistemic uncertainty related to alternative scenarios in the ERF and GMC models for all grid points in the study region. Long-term time-independent mean hazard calculations were performed for peak ground acceleration and 5%-damped pseudospectral acceleration at 21 spectral periods from 0.01- to 10.0-s, for eight National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program site conditions ranging from V S30 = 150 to 1500 m/s, and for 2%, 5%, and 10% in 50-year probabilities of exceedance (return periods of 2475, 975, and 475 years, respectively). Epistemic uncertainty, in the form of selected percentiles, is also provided for a suite of test sites and all grid points in the study region for limited periods, site conditions, and probabilities of exceedance. Selected results, including comparisons with the 2003 PRVI NSHM, are shown and discussed for selected periods, site conditions, and probabilities of exceedance. When comparing the 2025 PRVI NSHM with the 2003 PRVI NSHM, hazard is generally higher at shorter periods and lower at longer periods, as a result of updates in both ERF and GMC models. The 2025 PRVI NSHM is applicable for return periods greater than ∼475 or less than ∼10,000 years.

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands↗

USGS2026

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

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

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands↗

USGS2026

Wavelet Inversion for SliP (WISP): Open-source earthquake slip modeling software

Models of the spatiotemporal evolution of earthquake slip, termed finite-fault models, are a critical component of rapid earthquake and tsunami response, earthquake forecasting, seismic ground-motion estimates, and studies of earthquake kinematics. Here, we detail a newly released finite-fault modeling software, Wavelet Inversion for SliP (WISP), in use at the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) and available to the public. WISP version 1.1.0 allows inversion of teleseismic body and surface waves, as well as local strong-motion, static and dynamic Global Navigation Satellite System, and satellite imagery (e.g., Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar) observations on single or multiple planar fault segments. The software is used in NEIC rapid response of earthquakes M w ≥ 7, generally resulting in a published model within the first few hours after the event origin time. The rupture location and dimensions are then used as inputs to downstream products to estimate earthquake shaking, predict loss, and model the likelihood of secondary hazards, namely landslides and liquefaction. WISP is also used in research studies to evaluate the characteristics of complex ruptures including multifault ruptures and earthquake doublets, among others. The WISP version 1.1.0 software release is composed of Python-wrapped FORTRAN code to accomplish the inversion procedure. A simple command line interface facilitates ease of use even for those with only a cursory knowledge of Python scripting. WISP version 1.1.0 includes a Jupyter Notebook tutorial demonstrating use of the software for modeling the 2015 M w 8.3 Illapel, Chile, earthquake. In parallel with the tutorial, we demonstrate the typical usage of the WISP software using the M w 8.3 Illapel earthquake example here.

Seismological Research Letters↗

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↗

USGS2025

Subduction zone earthquake catalog separation tool: Implementation in the USGS 2025 Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands National Seismic Hazard Model

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) periodically releases updates to National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the United States and its territories leveraging current scientific knowledge and methodologies to guide public policy, building codes, and risk assessments regarding potential ground shaking due to earthquakes that may result in infrastructure damage. In subduction zones, there is a need to separate the earthquake catalog into tectonic regimes to create specific seismicity models for which the most appropriate ground‐motion models are then applied. Here, we describe newly developed methods and software, called CatSep, that classifies subduction zone events into three primary tectonic regimes: crustal, interface, and intraslab. This method incorporates information about the location of the earthquake relative to the subducting slab, the depth of the Mohorovičić discontinuity, and the earthquake’s moment tensor. Applying this method is a first step in the NSHM workflow for regions covering U.S. subduction zones. Results using this subduction zone earthquake catalog separation tool for the 2025 Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands NSHM earthquake catalog are presented and analyzed.

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands↗

USGS2024

The 2023 Alaska National Seismic Hazard Model

US Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Models (NSHMs) are used extensively for seismic design regulations in the United States and earthquake scenario development, as well as risk assessment and mitigation for both buildings and infrastructure. This 2023 update of the long-term, time-independent Alaska NSHM includes substantial changes to both the earthquake rupture forecast (ERF) and ground motion models (GMMs). The ERF includes numerous additions to the finite-fault model, considers two deformation models, and introduces updated declustering and smoothing algorithms in the gridded background seismicity model. For the Alaska–Aleutian subduction zone, megathrust earthquakes occur on an updated structural and segmentation model, and the moment magnitude (M) 8+ rupture and rate model include a logic tree branch that considers slip rates derived from geodetic models of interface coupling. The megathrust model considers multiple models of down-dip width, and magnitudes are computed using newly developed scaling relations. For subduction intraslab events and subduction interface events with M < 7, the 2023 update uses a smoothed seismicity model with rupture depths derived from Slab2. The 2023 model updates GMMs in all tectonic settings using the recently published Next Generation Attenuation Subduction (NGA-Sub) GMMs for subduction interface and intraslab events, and the NGA-West2 GMMs for active crustal settings. Collectively, additions and updates to the Alaska NSHM result in hazard increases across most of south-central Alaska relative to the previous model, published in 2007. These changes are primarily due to the adoption of updated rate models for the large-magnitude interface events and the NGA-Sub GMMs that have much higher aleatory variability (sigma), consistent with global observations, and that include models of epistemic uncertainty.

Alaska↗

USGS2024

Effects of stochastically-simulated near-fault ground motions on soil liquefaction

The scarcity of historically recorded near-fault ground motions poses a challenge to systematically understanding the influence of near-fault effects on various types of seismic demands for engineering purposes. In particular, the current state of knowledge of the influence of ground-shaking intensity on soil liquefaction and its consequences does not specifically account for the effects of near-fault ground motion characteristics. In this study, the influence of near-fault ground motions on liquefaction triggering and lateral spreading are investigated using non-linear modeling of a hypothetical liquefiable soil column in the finite-element computational platform OpenSees subjected to simulated ground motion time series that represent strong earthquake shaking in the near field. The simulated ground motion time series and resulting datasets are based on a parametric stochastic model and are developed for a range of source and path parameters to represent a realistic variability of ground motion characteristics. Dependencies between ground motion intensity measures (IMs) and liquefaction demand parameters are investigated for near-fault pulse and nonpulse-like ground motion sets. Evolutionary IMs, such as cumulative absolute velocity (CAV) and the time-varying magnitude-adjusted peak ground acceleration (PGAM), are considered in developing liquefaction triggering probability density functions. Post-liquefaction triggering responses such as lateral spreading displacements are examined in relation to PGA M and CAV. The ground motion simulations are validated by comparing their liquefaction-capacity PGA M fragilities and post-triggering CAV vulnerability relationships to historical records from the 1994 Northridge earthquake in California, USA. Finally, a path forward for future studies that includes finding systematic differences in the IM-liquefaction demand relationships between near-fault and far-field stochastic ground motion sets is outlined.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2024

Forecasting the long-term spatial distribution of earthquakes for the 2023 US National Seismic Hazard Model using gridded seismicity

Probabilistic seismic hazard analyses such as the U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) typically rely on declustering and spatially smoothing an earthquake catalog to estimate a long‐term time‐independent (background) seismicity rate to forecast future seismicity. In support of the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) 2023 update to the NSHM, we update the methods used to develop this background or gridded seismicity model component of the NSHM. As in 2018, we use a combination of fixed and adaptive kernel Gaussian smoothing. However, we implement two additional declustering methods to account for the fact that declustering is a nonunique process. These new declustering methods result in different forecasts for the locations of future seismicity, as represented by spatial probability density functions that are later combined with a rate model to produce a full gridded earthquake rate forecast. The method updates, particularly in the separation of the spatial and rate models as well as revised regional boundaries, in some places cause substantive changes to the seismic hazard forecast compared to the previous 2018 NSHM. Additional updates to catalog processing and induced seismicity zones also contribute to changes in the gridded seismicity hazard since 2018. However, these changes are well understood and reflect improvements in our modeling of gridded seismicity hazard.

Continental United States↗

USGS2023

The 2023 US 50-State National Seismic Hazard Model: Overview and implications

The US National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) was updated in 2023 for all 50 states using new science on seismicity, fault ruptures, ground motions, and probabilistic techniques to produce a standard of practice for public policy and other engineering applications (defined for return periods greater than ∼475 or less than ∼10,000 years). Changes in 2023 time-independent seismic hazard (both increases and decreases compared to previous NSHMs) are substantial because the new model considers more data and updated earthquake rupture forecasts and ground-motion components. In developing the 2023 model, we tried to apply best available or applicable science based on advice of co-authors, more than 50 reviewers, and hundreds of hazard scientists and end-users, who attended public workshops and provided technical inputs. The hazard assessment incorporates new catalogs, declustering algorithms, gridded seismicity models, magnitude-scaling equations, fault-based structural and deformation models, multi-fault earthquake rupture forecast models, semi-empirical and simulation-based ground-motion models, and site amplification models conditioned on shear-wave velocities of the upper 30 m of soil and deeper sedimentary basin structures. Seismic hazard calculations yield hazard curves at hundreds of thousands of sites, ground-motion maps, uniform-hazard response spectra, and disaggregations developed for pseudo-spectral accelerations at 21 oscillator periods and two peak parameters, Modified Mercalli Intensity, and 8 site classes required by building codes and other public policy applications. Tests show the new model is consistent with past ShakeMap intensity observations. Sensitivity and uncertainty assessments ensure resulting ground motions are compatible with known hazard information and highlight the range and causes of variability in ground motions. We produce several impact products including building seismic design criteria, intensity maps, planning scenarios, and engineering risk assessments showing the potential physical and social impacts. These applications provide a basis for assessing, planning, and mitigating the effects of future earthquakes.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2022

Ready for real time: Performance of Global Navigation Satellite System in 2019 Mw 7.1 Ridgecrest, California, rapid response products

Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSSs) have undergone notable advancement in the last few decades, leading to the availability of a dataset with capabilities well beyond its original intended purpose. The proliferation of high‐rate (1 Hz or greater) GNSS receivers in areas of seismological interest now allows for routine consideration of dynamic earthquake ground motions, with centimeter‐level displacement accuracy via precise point positioning methods. Real‐time (RT) GNSS observations, from stations that are both telemetered and processed to displacement with minimal latency, have lower accuracy compared to post‐processed (PP) GNSS displacements due to imprecise knowledge of atmospheric conditions, satellite clocks, and satellite orbits in RT. Whether the quality of RT high‐rate GNSS is sufficient for use in rapid response products remains to be thoroughly examined. Here, we highlight RT GNSS displacement time series processed during the 2019 M w "> M w Mw 7.1 Ridgecrest, California, earthquake in the context of common rapid‐response products, magnitude estimation, and kinematic fault‐slip models. We discuss how these data can be used to supplement RT seismic data for rapid characterization of significant earthquakes. We find that kinematic fault‐slip models using RT GNSS data retain the general spatiotemporal characteristics of those with PP data, with subtle differences in size and amplitude of modeled slip asperities. We demonstrate the effect of these rapid seismic source models using RT GNSS data on the U.S. Geological Survey product ShakeMap—a downstream ground‐motion prediction algorithm informed by the rupture dimensions estimated in the slip model. Discrepancies in the ShakeMap estimate are minor, within ±12% change, with the most severe variation at the fault edges. Our analysis suggests that, when used in conjunction with available seismic data sources, RT GNSS is sufficient and valuable for rapid earthquake characterization.

California↗

USGS2021

The US Geological Survey ground failure product: Near-real-time estimates of earthquake-triggered landslides and liquefaction

Since late 2018, the US Geological Survey (USGS) ground failure (GF) earthquake product has provided publicly available spatial estimates of earthquake-triggered landslide and liquefaction hazards, along with the qualitative hazard and population exposure-based alerts for M > 6 earthquakes worldwide and in near real time (within ∼30 min). Earthquake losses are oftentimes greatly aggravated by the impacts due to ground failure, yet those particular events with dramatic additional losses have not, heretofore, been rapidly identifiable. The GF product now provides situational awareness about the potential extent and severity of ground failure in the crucial time period before direct observations are available. We describe our implementation of the GF product and the lessons learned from the earthquakes that have occurred since the GF product was released. We describe the product design process, the underlying GF models, the methods we have developed for modeling uncertainty, and the development of the alert levels. The GF product has been produced in near real time for 320 events over the 2-year period since its public implementation in late 2018 through early 2021. The majority of these events yielded the lowest level (green) alerts for all ground-failure types, with 25 resulting in elevated hazard or exposure to landslides and 47 for liquefaction. In a qualitative comparison between the GF product alerts and GF occurrence information, we found that the product succeeds at assigning appropriate alert levels in the majority of cases. Based on our experience with the product, we have identified the following priorities for future improvements: (1) refinements of the underlying probabilistic models to incorporate severity and explicitly model the type of landslide/liquefaction; (2) development of models for fatalities and economic losses due to ground failure; and (3) estimation of the impacts of ground failure on infrastructure.

Earthquake Spectra↗