Geology topics

Sarah E. Minson

Publications and source records attributed to Sarah E. Minson.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

USGS2021

Robust earthquake early warning at a fraction of the cost: ASTUTI Costa Rica

We show that a fixed smartphone network can provide robust Earthquake Early Warning for at least two orders of magnitude less cost than scientific-grade networks. Our software and cloud-based data architecture that we have constructed for the Alerta Sismica Temprana Utilizando Teléfonos Inteligentes (ASTUTI; Earthquake Early Warning Utilizing Smartphones) network in Costa Rica is easily scaled and exported. Implementation comprises provisioning and installing modern smartphones in judicious locations. Stand-up time for regionally operational networks can be on the order of days. We evaluated a non-parametric ground-motion detection and alerting strategy that would alert the entire Costa Rican population of any event with a ground motion detection threshold of 0.55–0.65 %g at four neighboring stations. During a 6-month evaluation period ASTUTI detected and alerted on five of 13 earthquakes with M w 4.8–5.3 that caused felt Modified Mercalli Intensity shaking levels of 4.3–6. The system did not produce any false alerts and the undetected events did not produce wide-spread or significant felt shaking. System latencies were less than or similar to scientific-grade latencies. Alerts for all five detected events would have reached the capital city, San Jose, before strong S -wave shaking. This would have afforded time for Drop Cover Hold On actions by most residents. Two of the five alerts were triggered by P -waves suggesting that smartphone-based networks could approach the fastest theoretical EEW performance, especially with future expected improvements in smartphone sensors and processing algorithms.

AGU Advances↗

USGS2021

A framework for evaluating earthquake early warning for an infrastructure network: An idealized case study of a northern California rail system

Earthquake early warning (EEW) systems provide a few to tens of seconds of warning before shaking hits a site. Despite the recent rapid developments of EEW systems around the world, the optimal alert response strategy and the practical benefit of using EEW are still open-ended questions, especially in areas where EEW systems are new or have not yet been deployed. Here, we use a case study of a rail system in California’s San Francisco Bay Area to explore potential uses of EEW for rail systems. Rail systems are of particular interest not only because they are important lifeline infrastructure and a common application for EEW around the world, but also because their geographically broad yet networked infrastructure makes them almost uniquely well suited for utilizing EEW. While the most obvious potential benefit of EEW to the railway is to prevent derailments by stopping trains before the arrival of shaking, the lead time for warnings is usually not long enough to significantly reduce a train’s speed. In reality, EEW’s greatest impact is preventing derailment by alerting trains to slow down or stop before they encounter damaged track. We perform cost-benefit analyses of different decision-making strategies for several EEW system designs to find an optimal alerting strategy. On-site EEW provides better outcomes than source-parameter-based EEW when warning at a threshold of 120 gal (the level of shaking at which damage might occur) regardless of false alarm tolerance. A source-parameter-based EEW system with a lower alerting threshold (e.g., 40 gal) can reduce the exposure to potentially damaged track compared to an on-site system alerting at 120 gal, but a lower alerting threshold comes at the cost of additional precautionary system stops. The optimal EEW approach for rail systems depends strongly on the ratio of the cost of stopping the system unnecessarily to the potential loss from traversing damaged tracks.

California↗

USGS2021

Commentary: The role of geodetic algorithms for earthquake early warning in Cascadia

The ShakeAlert earthquake early warning (EEW) system issues public alerts in California and will soon extend to Oregon and Washington. The Cascadia subduction zone presents significant new challenges and opportunities for EEW. Initial publications suggested that EEW algorithms based on Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) data could provide improved warning for intraslab events and dramatically improved warning for offshore megathrust events, both of which contribute significantly to hazard in Cascadia. We find that some expectations in these publications were unrealistic, and we demonstrate that in general geodetic algorithms would not produce timely warnings for intraslab events nor warning times of two minutes or more for severe shaking from megathrust earthquakes. Nonetheless, lessons from recent earthquakes in Japan and California, for which alerts from seismic algorithms suffered from magnitude saturation and high data latencies, demonstrate the urgent need for rigorous testing of geodetic EEW as a potential complement to seismic EEW.

California, Oregon, Washington↗

USGS2020

Shaking is almost always a surprise: The earthquakes that produce significant ground motion

Although small earthquakes are expected to produce weak shaking, ground motion is highly variable and there are outlier earthquakes that generate more shaking than expected—sometimes significantly more. We explore datasets of M 0.5–8.3 earthquakes to determine the relative impact of frequent, smaller-magnitude earthquakes that rarely produce strong ground motion, to rare, large earthquakes that always cause strong shaking. We find that the natural variability of ground motion, combined with the Gutenberg–Richter magnitude–frequency relationship, ensures that most occurrences of any ground motion come from earthquakes of smaller magnitude than expected, often > 2 magnitude units smaller. This holds even for very strong shaking ( > 20% g ), suggesting that M < 7 earthquakes could be a significant source of damage.

Seismological Research Letters↗

USGS2020

Kinematics of fault slip associated with the July 4-6 2019 Ridgecrest, Californai earthquakes sequence

The 2019 Ridgecrest, California, earthquake sequence produced observable crustal deformation over much of central and southern California, as well as surface rupture over several tens of kilometers. To obtain a detailed picture of the fault slip involved in the 4 July M 6.4 foreshock and 6 July M 7.1 mainshock, we combine strong‐motion seismic waveforms with crustal deformation observations to obtain kinematic and static slip models of both events. We sample the regional seismic wavefield for both the foreshock and mainshock with three‐component records from 31 stations of the California Integrated Seismic Network. The deformation observations include Global Positioning System (GPS), Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR), and borehole strainmeter recordings of the dynamic strain field. These data collectively constrain the kinematic coseismic slip distributions of the events, with measurements variously observing coseismic slip from one event (e.g., seismic waveforms, kinematic solutions from continuous GPS, and strainmeter time series) or coseismic slip from both events combined (InSAR). We find that the foreshock ruptured two separate faults, one with left‐lateral strike slip on a northeast–southwest‐trending fault and the other with right‐lateral strike slip on an orthogonal fault, with unilateral rupture propagation along both. The mainshock ruptured a series of northwest–southeast‐trending faults with right‐lateral strike slip concentrated in the uppermost 6 km with exceptionally low‐rupture velocity averaging 1.0 – 1.5    km / s ">

California↗

USGS2020

Real-time performance of the PLUM earthquake early warning method during the 2019 M6.4 and M7.1 Ridgecrest, California, Earthquakes

We evaluate the timeliness and accuracy of ground‐motion‐based earthquake early warning (EEW) during the July 2019 M 6.4 and 7.1 Ridgecrest earthquakes. In 2018, we began retrospective and internal real‐time testing of the propagation of local undamped motion (PLUM) method for earthquake warning in California, Oregon, and Washington, with the potential that PLUM might one day be included in the ShakeAlert EEW system. A real‐time version of PLUM was running on one of the ShakeAlert EEW system’s development servers at the time of the 2019 Ridgecrest sequence, allowing us to evaluate the timeliness and accuracy of PLUM’s warnings for the M 6.4 and 7.1 mainshocks in real time with the actual data availability and latencies of the operational ShakeAlert EEW system. The latter is especially important because high‐data latencies during the M 7.1 earthquake degraded ShakeAlert’s performance. PLUM proved to be largely immune to these latencies. In this article, we present a retrospective analysis of PLUM performance and explore three potential regional alerting strategies ranging from spatially large regions (counties), to moderate‐size regions (National Weather Service public forecast zones), to high‐spatial specificity (50 km regular geographic grid). PLUM generated initial shaking forecasts for the two mainshocks 5 and 6 s after their respective origin times, and faster than the ShakeAlert system’s first alerts. PLUM was also able to accurately forecast shaking across southern California for all three alerting strategies studied. As would be expected, a cost‐benefit analysis of each approach illustrates trade‐offs between increasing warning time and minimizing the area receiving unneeded alerts. Choosing an optimal alerting strategy requires knowledge of users’ false alarm tolerance and minimum required warning time for taking protective action, as well as the time required to distribute alerts to users.

California↗

USGS2020

Optimizing earthquake early warning alert distance strategies using the July 2019 Mw6.4 and Mw7.1 Ridgecrest, California, earthquakes

The ShakeAlert earthquake early warning system aims to alert people who experience modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) IV+ shaking during an earthquake using source estimates (magnitude and location) to estimate median‐expected peak ground motions with distance, then using these ground motions to determine median‐expected MMI and thus the extent of MMI IV shaking. Because median ground motions are used, even if magnitude and location are correct, there will be people outside the alert region who experience MMI IV shaking but do not receive an alert (missed alerts). We use 91,000 “Did You Feel It?” survey responses to the July 2019 Mw 6.4 and Mw 7.1 Ridgecrest, California, earthquakes to determine which ground‐motion to intensity conversion equation (GMICE) best fits median MMI with distance. We then explore how incorporating uncertainty from the ground‐motion prediction equation and the GMICE in the alert distance calculation can produce more accurate MMI IV alert regions for a desired alerting strategy (e.g., aiming to alert 95% of people who experience MMI IV+ shaking), assuming accurate source characterization. Without incorporating ground‐motion uncertainties, we find MMI IV alert regions using median‐expected ground motions alert fewer than 20% of the population that experiences MMI IV+ shaking. In contrast, we find >94% of the people who experience MMI IV+ shaking can be included in the MMI IV alert region when two standard deviations of ground‐motion uncertainty are included in the alert distance computation. The optimal alerting strategy depends on the false alert tolerance of the community due to the trade‐off between minimizing missed and false alerts. This is especially the case for situations like the Mw 6.4 earthquake when alerting 95% of the 5 million people who experience MMI IV+ also results in alerting 14 million people who experience shaking below this level and do not need to take protective action.

California↗

USGS2020

Rapid geodetic observations of spatiotemporally varying postseismic deformation following the Ridgecrest earthquake sequence: The U.S. Geological Survey response

The U.S. Geological Survey’s geodetic response to the 4–5 July 2019 (Pacific time) Ridgecrest earthquake sequence comprised primarily the installation and/or reoccupation of Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) monumentation. Our response focused primarily on the United States’ Navy’s China Lake Naval Air Weapons Station base (NAWSCL). This focus was because much of the surface rupture occurred on the NAWSCL and because of NAWSCL access restrictions only permitting Federal and State of California personnel. In total, we measured or are still measuring at 24 sites, 14 of which were on the NAWSCL and, as of this writing, operational. The majority of sites were set up as continuous stations logging at either 1 sample per second or 1 sample per 15 s. Two stations were recording a 200 m cross‐rupture aperture starting ∼10 hr after the M 6.4 event, and they recorded the coseismic displacements of the M 7.1. Approximately, 1 hr after the M 7.1 event, two new stations were recording a ∼200 m cross‐rupture aperture of the surface rupture. In the days following, we established the rest of the stations ranging to a distance of ∼15 km from the M 7.1 principal rupture trace. The lack of differential displacement across the M 6.4 rupture during the M 7.1 event suggests that it did not reactivate the M 6.4 plane. The lack of differential cross‐fault displacement for both events suggests that rapid shallow afterslip did not occur at those two locations. The postseismic time series from these stations shows centimeters of horizontal displacement over periods of a few months. They record a mixture of fault‐parallel and fault‐normal displacements that, in conjunction with analysis of more spatially complete Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar displacement fields, suggest that both poroelastic and afterslip phenomena occur along the M 6.4 and 7.1 rupture planes. Using preliminary data from these and other regional stations, we also explore the Ridgecrest sequence’s effect on regional GNSS time series and the differentiation of long‐term postseismic motions and secular deformation rates. We find that redefining a common‐mode noise filter using different GNSS stations that are assumed to be unaffected by the earthquakes results in small but systematic differences in the regional velocity field estimate.

Seismological Research Letters↗

USGS2020

How often can Earthquake Early Warning systems alert sites with high intensity ground motion?

Although numerous Earthquake Early Warning (EEW) algorithms have been developed we still lack a detailed understanding of how often and under what circumstances useful ground motion alerts can be provided to end-users. Here we analyze the alerting performance of the PLUM, EPIC and FinDer algorithms by running them retrospectively on the seismic strong motion data of the 219 earthquakes in Japan since 1996 that exceeded Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) of 4.5 on at least 10 sites (Mw 4.5-9.1). Our analysis suggests that, irrespective of the algorithm, EEW end-users should be prepared that EEW can often but not always provide useful ground motion alerts. A majority of sites with moderate-strong ground motion (MMI 5-6) can generally get at least a few seconds of warning time from all algorithms. If such shaking is caused by a shallow crustal event, around 50% of such sites receive alerts with warning times >5 s. Many sites with severe-extreme ground motion (MMI >=8) can be alerted successfully in the case of very large offshore earthquakes, but less than 20% can be alerted ahead of time if such shaking is caused by a shallow crustal event. Our results provide detailed quantitative insight into the expected alerting performance for EEW algorithms under realistic conditions. The main caveat is that the largest shallow crustal event in our data set has Mw7.0, i.e. the data set does not contain very large strike slip events.

Journal of Geophysical Research↗

USGS2019

Coseismic slip and early afterslip of the M6.0 August 24, 2014 South Napa, California, earthquake

We employ strong motion seismograms and static offsets from the Global Positioning System, Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar, and other measurements in order to derive a coseismic slip and afterslip model of the M6.0 24 August 2014 South Napa earthquake. This earthquake ruptured an ∼13‐km‐long portion of the West Napa fault with predominantly right‐lateral strike slip. In the kinematic seismic slip inversions, we couple the coseismic slip and afterslip distributions by requiring both distributions to involve right‐lateral strike slip with positive amplitude, with the net static slip being the sum of the two. We consider several candidate fault geometries: a first involving two steeply east dipping fault planes that reach Earth's surface at the western surface trace (STW), where most surface rupture was observed, a second involving a steeply west dipping plane that also reaches Earth's surface at the STW, and a third involving a combination of two variably west dipping planes constrained to pass through the locus of postseismic seismicity located ∼1 km west of the STW. The data are best fit using the model of two east dipping fault planes, with coseismic slip up to ∼1.2 m on a dominant shallow asperity about 10 km north of the hypocenter and on deeper asperities on the southern part of the rupture. Afterslip up to 1 m is concentrated along the southern part of the rupture at depths 5 km, consistent with surface observations of afterslip. Seismic moments associated with coseismic slip and afterslip are 1.13×10 18 N m (Mw 6.00) and 3.64×10 17 N m, respectively.

California↗

USGS2019

Event detection performance of the PLUM earthquake early warning algorithm in southern California

We test the Japanese ground‐motion‐based earthquake early warning (EEW) algorithm, propagation of local undamped motion (PLUM), in southern California with application to the U.S. ShakeAlert system. In late 2018, ShakeAlert began limited public alerting in Los Angeles to areas of expected modified Mercalli intensity (⁠IMMI⁠) 4.0+ for magnitude 5.0+ earthquakes. Most EEW systems, including ShakeAlert, use source‐based methods: they estimate the location, magnitude, and origin time of an earthquake from P waves and use a ground‐motion prediction equation to identify regions of expected strong shaking. The PLUM algorithm uses observed ground motions directly to define alert areas and was developed to address deficiencies in the Japan Meteorological Agency source‐based EEW system during the 2011 Mw 9.0 Tohoku earthquake sequence. We assess PLUM using (a) a dataset of 193 magnitude 3.5+ earthquakes that occurred in southern California between 2012 and 2017 and (b) the ShakeAlert testing and certification suite of 49 earthquakes and other seismic signals. The latter suite includes events that challenge the current ShakeAlert algorithms. We provide a first‐order performance assessment using event‐based metrics similar to those used by ShakeAlert. We find that PLUM can be configured to successfully issue alerts using IMMI trigger thresholds that are lower than those implemented in Japan. Using two stations, a trigger threshold of IMMI 4.0 for the first station and a threshold of IMMI 2.5 for the second station PLUM successfully detect 12 of 13 magnitude 5.0+ earthquakes and issue no false alerts. PLUM alert latencies were similar to and in some cases faster than source‐based algorithms, reducing area that receives no warning near the source that generally have the highest ground motions. PLUM is a simple, independent seismic method that may complement existing source‐based algorithms in EEW systems, including the ShakeAlert system, even when alerting to light (⁠IMMI 4.0) or higher ground‐motion levels.

California↗

USGS2019

The limits of earthquake early warning accuracy and best alerting strategy

We explore how accurate earthquake early warning (EEW) can be, given our limited ability to forecast expected shaking even if the earthquake source is known. Because of the strong variability of ground motion metrics, such as peak ground acceleration (PGA) and peak ground velocity (PGV), we find that correct alerts (i.e., alerts that accurately predict the observed ground motion above a predetermined damage threshold) are not expected to be the most common EEW outcome even when the earthquake magnitude and location are accurately determined. Infrequently, ground motion variability results in a user receiving a false alert because the ground motion turned out to be significantly smaller than the damage threshold. More commonly, users will experience missed alerts when the system does not issue an alert but the user experiences potentially damaging shaking. Despite these inherit limitations, EEW can significantly mitigate earthquake losses for false-alert-arm-tolerant users who choose to receive alerts for expected ground motions much smaller than the level that could cause damage. Although this results in many false alerts for earthquakes that do not produce damaging ground shaking, it minimizes the number of missed alerts and produces overall optimal performance.

California↗

USGS2019

Peak ground displacement saturates exactly when expected: Implications for earthquake early warning

The scaling of rupture properties with magnitude is of critical importance to earthquake early warning (EEW) systems that rely on source characterization using limited snapshots of waveform data. ShakeAlert, a prototype EEW system that is being developed for the western United States, provides real-time estimates of earthquake magnitude based on P-wave peak ground displacements measured at stations triggered by the event. The algorithms used in ShakeAlert assume that the displacement measurements at each station are statistically independent and that there exists a linear and time-independent relation between log peak ground displacement and earthquake magnitude. Here we challenge this basic assumption using a comprehensive database of more than 130,000 vertical component waveforms from M4.5-M9 earthquakes occurring near Japan from 1997 through 2017 and recorded by the K-NET and KiK-net strong-motion networks. By analyzing the time-evolution of P-wave peak ground displacements for these earthquakes, we show that there is a break, or saturation, in the magnitude-displacement scaling that depends on the length of the measurement time window. We demonstrate that the magnitude at which this saturation occurs is well-explained by a simple and non-deterministic model of earthquake rupture growth. We then use the predictions of this saturation model to develop a Bayesian framework for estimating posterior uncertainties in real-time magnitude estimates which incorporates the expected time-dependence of the peak displacement measurements.

Journal of Geophysical Research B: Solid Earth↗

USGS2018

Development of a geodetic component for the U.S. West Coast Earthquake Early Warning System

An earthquake early warning (EEW) system, ShakeAlert, is under development for the West Coast of the United States. This system currently uses the first few seconds of waveforms recorded by seismic instrumentation to rapidly characterize earthquake magnitude, location, and origin time; ShakeAlert recently added a seismic line source algorithm. For large to great earthquakes, magnitudes estimated from the earliest seismic data alone generally saturate. Real‐time Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) data can directly measure large displacements, enabling accurate magnitude estimates for M w 7 + "> M w 7 + events, possibly before rupture termination. GNSS‐measured displacements also track evolving slip and, alone or in combination with seismic data, constrain finite‐fault models. Particularly for large‐magnitude, long‐rupture events, GNSS‐based magnitude and rupture extent estimates can improve updates to predicted shaking and thus alert accuracy. GNSS data processing centers at ShakeAlert partner institutions provide real‐time streams to the EEW system, and three geodetic EEW algorithms have been developed through the ShakeAlert collaboration. These algorithms will undergo initial testing within ShakeAlert’s computational architecture using a suite of input data that includes simulated real‐time displacements from synthetic earthquakes and GNSS recordings from recent earthquakes worldwide. Performance will be evaluated using metrics and standards consistent with those adopted for ShakeAlert overall. This initial assessment will guide method refinement and synthesis of the most successful features into a candidate geodetic algorithm for the ShakeAlert production system. In parallel, improvements to geodetic networks and streamlining approaches to data processing and exchange will ensure robust geodetic data availability in the event of an earthquake.

West coast↗

USGS2018

Research to improve ShakeAlert earthquake early warning products and their utility

Earthquake early warning (EEW) is the rapid detection of an earthquake and issuance of an alert or notification to people and vulnerable systems likely to experience potentially damaging ground shaking. The level of ground shaking that is considered damaging is defined by the specific application; for example, manufacturing equipment may experience damage at a lower intensity ground shaking than would cause damage to a building. Along the West Coast of the United States, the warning times for ground shaking could range as high as tens of seconds for moderate levels of ground shaking, or potentially longer, if a lower ground-shaking threshold is used to issue alerts. However, it is not always possible to provide advance warning of ground shaking, particularly for locations close to an earthquake that are most likely to experience very strong ground shaking. EEW alerts may be useful to individuals who can use a few seconds to move to a safe zone and to electromechanical systems that can take automatic actions to reduce damage and injuries. An EEW system, ShakeAlert, has been under development in the United States since 2006. Federal and State governments, as well as the private sector, are now investing in the ShakeAlert prototype system that will, when completed, become an operational public system for the West Coast of the United States. While the current prototype is delivering alerts to test users, improvements to the accuracy, timeliness, and utility of the alerts are needed. For this reason, it is essential that the ShakeAlert system be continuously improved through targeted research, involving not only the current ShakeAlert partner organizations, but also the broader scientific, engineering, and emergencyresponse communities. To this end, this report describes the opportunities for improvement that can be addressed through research and development over the next 5 years. Our recommendations are organized into four areas: (1) understand EEW capabilities and user needs, (2) make alerts as fast and accurate as possible, (3) ensure reliability when it counts, and (4) explore the use of new instrumentation. The first challenge is to understand EEW capabilities and user needs. EEW must deliver actionable information to people and to automated systems to mitigate short- and longterm impacts of damaging ground shaking, so development of EEW must be motivated by the needs of users. Within this challenge, we must study the technical capabilities and limitations of EEW in general, and the ShakeAlert system specifically. This includes development of performance metrics that assess the timeliness and accuracy of alerts to understand the value and utility of the ShakeAlert EEW product(s) for various user groups, including different industry sectors, emergency-management agencies, and the public. Research is needed to define the alerting choices that maximize the utility of the system for users and to determine what the available communication pathways are for providing timely alert information. Additionally, we engage users to assess how alerts will be used by different sectors to mitigate losses and to inform EEW product design. Further, social-science research is needed to develop alert messaging, including what relevant prior and follow-up information are required, to ensure effective use of alerts. The second challenge is to make alerts as fast and as accurate as possible. The timeliness and accuracy of an EEW alert is important because it will set in motion a series of actions and downstream products. An EEW alert will trigger notification across emergency-alert systems and across multiple communication channels to populations in impacted regions. The EEW alert region may grow as the earthquake fault-rupture length increases, and the EEW system’s characterization of it, evolves. We must continue research into new or improved seismic and geodetic waveform-processing methods necessary to rapidly characterize the expected ground shaking and associated uncertainties. It is important to thoroughly evaluate whether new methods improve alerts through more accurate ground-motion estimates and (or) reduced latencies (that is, longer warning times). New methods could include tracking the extent of a large rupture in real time (known as finite-fault algorithms) and ground-motionbased EEW algorithms. Additionally, ground motion predictions could be optimized for each earthquake as the earthquake fault rupture progresses by using, for example, event terms to shift ground-motion curves for more (or less) energetic ruptures. The third challenge is to ensure reliability when it counts. This challenge requires us to explore approaches that assess the expected performance of ShakeAlert across the range of earthquake magnitudes, locations, and depths that may occur within the alerting region. Large, damaging earthquakes and their associated aftershock sequences matter most for hazard and for EEW, but these large-earthquake sequences occur infrequently. We expect ShakeAlert to respond robustly to these large-earthquake sequences despite potentially long periods of relative seismic quiescence in the intervening years, and in spite of inevitable communication challenges that arise during and after a large earthquake. We must develop methods to utilize the broadest available datasets to test EEW performance, including ground-motion data recorded in other parts of the world. The observational period for large, damaging earthquakes in any particular region has been short in comparison to estimated large-earthquake recurrence times. Ground-motion records for very large, damaging western United States events and major aftershock sequences do not yet exist, nor do data exist for all potential sources of noise and spurious signals that ShakeAlert must be “tuned” to reject. In addition, robust synthetic data could provide the flexibility to test a wider range of earthquake magnitude, tectonic-setting, and noise scenarios than are covered by existing observational data. Synthetic ground-motion data must be thoroughly vetted against records of smaller magnitude earthquakes to ensure that they accurately capture both the onset and the amplitude of the ground shaking. The final challenge is to explore the use of new instrumentation. The development of EEW around the world to date has focused on the use of high-quality, scientific-grade seismic and geodetic instrumentation. The use of additional types of instrumentation or information may also improve EEW products by filling gaps in sensor coverage in countries that already have dense seismic networks or enable EEW in countries without such networks. We must keep up with these developments and continuously assess their value in supplementing existing EEW systems, such as ShakeAlert, or enabling EEW where such systems do not exist. Such developments include low-cost instrumentation with microelectromechanical system (MEMS) sensors and global positioning system (GPS)/global navigation satellite system (GNSS) antennas embedded in low-cost consumer electronics, sea-floor seismometers, geodetic instrumentation deployed along the Cascadia and Alaska megathrust margins of western North America, and borehole strainmeters that are already deployed across the region.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2018

Leveraging geodetic data to reduce losses from earthquakes

Seismic hazard assessments that are based on a variety of data and the best available science, coupled with rapid synthesis of real-time information from continuous monitoring networks to guide post-earthquake response, form a solid foundation for effective earthquake loss reduction. With this in mind, the Earthquake Hazards Program (EHP) of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Natural Hazards Mission Area (NHMA) engages in a variety of undertakings, both established and emergent, in order to provide high quality products that enable stakeholders to take action in advance of and in response to earthquakes. Examples include the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM), development of tools for improved situational awareness such as earthquake early warning (EEW) and operational earthquake forecasting (OEF), research about induced seismicity, and new efforts to advance comprehensive subduction zone science and monitoring. Geodetic observations provide unique and complementary information directly relevant to advancing many aspects of these efforts (fig. 1). EHP scientists have long leveraged geodetic data for a range of influential studies, and they continue to develop innovative observation and analysis methods that push the boundaries of the field of geodesy as applied to natural hazards research. Given the ongoing, rapid improvement in availability, variety, and precision of geodetic measurements, considering ways to fully utilize this observational resource for earthquake loss reduction is timely and essential. This report presents strategies, and the underlying scientific rationale, by which the EHP could achieve the following outcomes: The EHP is an authoritative source for the interpretation of geodetic data and its use for earthquake loss reduction throughout the United States and its territories. The USGS consistently provides timely, high quality geodetic data to stakeholders. Significant earthquakes are better characterized by incorporating geodetic data into USGS event response products and by expanded use of geodetic imaging data to assess fault rupture and source parameters. Uncertainties in the NSHM, and in regional earthquake models, are reduced by fully incorporating geodetic data into earthquake probability calculations. Geodetic networks and data are integrated into the operations and earthquake information products of the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS). Earthquake early warnings are improved by more rapidly assessing ground displacement and the dynamic faulting process for the largest earthquakes using real-time geodetic data. Methodology for probabilistic earthquake forecasting is refined by including geodetic data when calculating evolving moment release during aftershock sequences and by better understanding the implications of transient deformation for earthquake likelihood. A geodesy program that encompasses a balanced mix of activities to sustain missioncritical capabilities, grows new competencies through the continuum of fundamental to applied research, and ensures sufficient resources for these endeavors provides a foundation by which the EHP can be a leader in the application of geodesy to earthquake science. With this in mind the following objectives provide a framework to guide EHP efforts: Fully utilize geodetic information to improve key products, such as the NSHM and EEW, and to address new ventures like the USGS Subduction Zone Science Plan. Expand the variety, accuracy, and timeliness of post-earthquake information products, such as PAGER (Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response), through incorporation of geodetic observations. Determine if geodetic measurements of transient deformation can significantly improve estimates of earthquake probability. Maintain an observational strategy aligned with the target outcomes of this document that includes continuous monitoring, recording of ephemeral observations, focused data collection for use in research, and application-driven data processing and analysis systems. Collaborate on research, development, and operation of affordable, high-precision seafloor geodetic methods that improve earthquake forecasting and event response. Advance computational techniques and instrumentation to enable use of strategies like repeat-pass imagery and low-cost geodetic sensors for earthquake response, monitoring, and research. Engage stakeholders and collaborate with partner institutions to foster operational and research objectives and to safeguard the continued health of geodetic infrastructure upon which we mutually depend. Maintaining a vibrant internal research program provides the foundation by which the EHP can remain an effective and trusted source for earthquake science. Exploiting abundant new data sources, evaluating and assimilating the latest science, and pursuing novel avenues of investigation are means to fulfilling the EHP’s core responsibilities and realizing the important scientific advances envisioned by its scientists. Central to the success of such a research program is engaging personnel with a breadth of competencies and a willingness and ability to adapt these to the program’s evolving priorities, enabling current staff to expand their skills and responsibilities, and planning holistically to meet shared workforce needs. In parallel, collaboration with external partners to support scientific investigations that complement ongoing internal research enables the EHP to strengthen earthquake information products by incorporating alternative perspectives and approaches and to study topics and geographic regions that cannot be adequately covered internally. With commensurate support from technical staff who possess diverse skills, including engineering, information technology, and proficiency in quantitative analysis combined with basic geophysical knowledge, the EHP can achieve the geodetic outcomes identified in this document.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2018

The limits of earthquake early warning: Timeliness of ground motion estimates

The basic physics of earthquakes is such that strong ground motion cannot be expected from an earthquake unless the earthquake itself is very close or has grown to be very large. We use simple seismological relationships to calculate the minimum time that must elapse before such ground motion can be expected at a distance from the earthquake, assuming that the earthquake magnitude is not predictable. Earthquake early warning (EEW) systems are in operation or development for many regions around the world, with the goal of providing enough warning of incoming ground shaking to allow people and automated systems to take protective actions to mitigate losses. However, the question of how much warning time is physically possible for specified levels of ground motion has not been addressed. We consider a zero-latency EEW system to determine possible warning times a user could receive in an ideal case. In this case, the only limitation on warning time is the time required for the earthquake to evolve and the time for strong ground motion to arrive at a user’s location. We find that users who wish to be alerted at lower ground motion thresholds will receive more robust warnings with longer average warning times than users who receive warnings for higher ground motion thresholds. EEW systems have the greatest potential benefit for users willing to take action at relatively low ground motion thresholds, whereas users who set relatively high thresholds for taking action are less likely to receive timely and actionable information.

California↗

USGS2017

Compositional variations in sands of the Bagnold Dunes, Gale Crater, Mars, from visible-shortwave infrared spectroscopy and comparison with ground truth from the Curiosity Rover

During its ascent up Mount Sharp, the Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity rover traversed the Bagnold Dune Field. We model sand modal mineralogy and grain size at four locations near the rover traverse, using orbital shortwave infrared single scattering albedo spectra and a Markov-Chain Monte Carlo implementation of Hapke's radiative transfer theory to fully constrain uncertainties and permitted solutions. These predictions, evaluated against in situ measurements at one site from the Curiosity rover, show that XRD-measured mineralogy of the basaltic sands is within the 95% confidence interval of model predictions. However, predictions are relatively insensitive to grain size and are non-unique, especially when modeling the composition of minerals with solid solutions. We find an overall basaltic mineralogy and show subtle spatial variations in composition in and around the Bagnold dunes, consistent with a mafic enrichment of sands with cumulative transport distance by sorting of olivine, pyroxene, and plagioclase grains during aeolian saltation. Furthermore, the large variations in Fe and Mg abundances (~20 wt%) at the Bagnold Dunes suggest that compositional variability induced by wind sorting may be enhanced by local mixing with proximal sand sources. Our estimates demonstrate a method for orbital quantification of composition with rigorous uncertainty determination and provide key constraints for interpreting in situ measurements of compositional variability within martian aeolian sandstones.

Journal of Geophysical Research E: Planets↗