Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

W. H. Bakun

Publications and source records attributed to W. H. Bakun.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2011

Epistemic uncertainty in the location and magnitude of earthquakes in Italy from Macroseismic data

Three independent techniques (Bakun and Wentworth, 1997; Boxer from Gasperini et al., 1999; and Macroseismic Estimation of Earthquake Parameters [MEEP; see Data and Resources section, deliverable D3] from R.M.W. Musson and M.J. Jimenez) have been proposed for estimating an earthquake location and magnitude from intensity data alone. The locations and magnitudes obtained for a given set of intensity data are almost always different, and no one technique is consistently best at matching instrumental locations and magnitudes of recent well-recorded earthquakes in Italy. Rather than attempting to select one of the three solutions as best, we use all three techniques to estimate the location and the magnitude and the epistemic uncertainties among them. The estimates are calculated using bootstrap resampled data sets with Monte Carlo sampling of a decision tree. The decision-tree branch weights are based on goodness-of-fit measures of location and magnitude for recent earthquakes. The location estimates are based on the spatial distribution of locations calculated from the bootstrap resampled data. The preferred source location is the locus of the maximum bootstrap location spatial density. The location uncertainty is obtained from contours of the bootstrap spatial density: 68% of the bootstrap locations are within the 68% confidence region, and so on. For large earthquakes, our preferred location is not associated with the epicenter but with a location on the extended rupture surface. For small earthquakes, the epicenters are generally consistent with the location uncertainties inferred from the intensity data if an epicenter inaccuracy of 2-3 km is allowed. The preferred magnitude is the median of the distribution of bootstrap magnitudes. As with location uncertainties, the uncertainties in magnitude are obtained from the distribution of bootstrap magnitudes: the bounds of the 68% uncertainty range enclose 68% of the bootstrap magnitudes, and so on. The instrumental magnitudes for large and small earthquakes are generally consistent with the confidence intervals inferred from the distribution of bootstrap resampled magnitudes.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
USGS2010

Modified Mercalli intensity assignments for the May 16, 1909, Northern Plains earthquake

We use newspaper accounts from the United States and Canada to assign modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) at 90 towns for the May 16, 1909 Northern Plains earthquake. Our MMI assignments generally are consistent with those plotted on Nuttli's (1976) isoseiemal map. The earthquake was felt over more than 1,500,000 km2 in the states of Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming and the provinces of Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, and Saskatchewan.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2009

Comment on "Revisiting the 1872 owens valley, California, earthquake" by Susan E. Hough and Kate Hutton

Bakun (2009) argues that the conclusions of Hough and Hutton (2008) are wrong because the study failed to take into account the Sierra Nevada attenuation model of Bakun (2006). In particular, Bakun (2009) argues that propagation effects can explain the relatively high intensities generated by the 1872 Owens Valley earthquake. Using an intensity attenuation model that attempts to account for attenuation through the Sierra Nevada, Bakun (2006) infers the magnitude estimate (M w 7.4–7.5) that is currently accepted by National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC).

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
USGS2009

Modified Mercalli Intensity Assignments for the May 16, 1909, Northern Plains Earthquake

We combine newspaper accounts and Nuttli's (1976) isoseismal map to assign modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) at 76 towns for the May 16, 1909 Northern Plains earthquake. The earthquake was felt across more than 1,500,000 km2 in the States of Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming and the Provinces of Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, and Saskatchewan.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2006

Regional intensity attenuation models for France and the estimation of magnitude and location of historical earthquakes

Intensity assignments for 33 calibration earthquakes were used to develop intensity attenuation models for the Alps, Armorican, Provence, Pyrenees and Rhine regions of France. Intensity decreases with ?? most rapidly in the French Alps, Provence and Pyrenees regions, and least rapidly in the Armorican and Rhine regions. The comparable Armorican and Rhine region attenuation models are aggregated into a French stable continental region model and the comparable Provence and Pyrenees region models are aggregated into a Southern France model. We analyse MSK intensity assignments using the technique of Bakun & Wentworth, which provides an objective method for estimating epicentral location and intensity magnitude MI. MI for the 1356 October 18 earthquake in the French stable continental region is 6.6 for a location near Basle, Switzerland, and moment magnitude M is 5.9-7.2 at the 95 per cent (??2??) confidence level. MI for the 1909 June 11 Trevaresse (Lambesc) earthquake near Marseilles in the Southern France region is 5.5, and M is 4.9-6.0 at the 95 per cent confidence level. Bootstrap resampling techniques are used to calculate objective, reproducible 67 per cent and 95 per cent confidence regions for the locations of historical earthquakes. These confidence regions for location provide an attractive alternative to the macroseismic epicentre and qualitative location uncertainties used heretofore. ?? 2006 The Authors Journal compilation ?? 2006 RAS.

Geophysical Journal International↗
USGS2006

Estimating locations and magnitudes of earthquakes in southern California from modified Mercalli intensities

Modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) assignments, instrumental moment magnitudes M, and epicenter locations of thirteen 5.6 ??? M ??? 7.1 "training-set" events in southern California were used to obtain the attenuation relation MMI = 1.64 + 1.41M - 0.00526 * ??h - 2.63 * log ??h, where ??h is the hypocentral distance in kilometers and M is moment magnitude. Intensity magnitudes MI and locations for five 5.9 ??? M ??? 7.3 independent test events were consistent with the instrumental source parameters. Fourteen "historical" earthquakes between 1890 and 1927 were then analyzed. Of particular interest are the MI 7.2 9 February 1890 and MI 6.6 28 May 1892 earthquakes, which were previously assumed to have occurred near the southern San Jacinto fault; a more likely location is in the Eastern California Shear Zone (ECSZ). These events, and the 1992 M 7.3 Landers and 1999 M 7.1 Hector Mine events, suggest that the ECSZ has been seismically active since at least the end of the nineteenth century. The earthquake catalog completeness level in the ECSZ is ???M 6.5 at least until the early twentieth century.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
USGS2006

MMI attenuation and historical earthquakes in the basin and range province of western North America

Earthquakes in central Nevada (1932-1959) were used to develop a modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) attenuation model for estimating moment magnitude M for earthquakes in the Basin and Range province of interior western North America. M is 7.4-7.5 for the 26 March 1872 Owens Valley, California, earthquake, in agreement with Beanland and Clark's (1994) M 7.6 that was estimated from geologic field observations. M is 7.5 for the 3 May 1887 Sonora, Mexico, earthquake, in agreement with Natali and Sbar's (1982) M 7.4 and Suter's (2006) M 7.5, both estimated from geologic field observations. MMI at sites in California for earthquakes in the Nevada Basin and Range apparently are not much affected by the Sierra Nevada except at sites near the Sierra Nevada where MMI is reduced. This reduction in MMI is consistent with a shadow zone produced by the root of the Sierra Nevada. In contrast, MMI assignments for earthquakes located in the eastern Sierra Nevada near the west margin of the Basin and Range are greater than predicted at sites in California. These higher MMI values may result from critical reflections due to layering near the base of the Sierra Nevada.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
USGS2005

Magnitude and location of historical earthquakes in Japan and implications for the 1855 Ansei Edo earthquake

Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) intensity assignments IJMA are used to derive intensity attenuation models suitable for estimating the location and an intensity magnitude Mjma for historical earthquakes in Japan. The intensity for shallow crustal earthquakes on Honshu is equal to -1.89 + 1.42MJMA - 0.00887?? h - 1.66log??h, where MJMA is the JMA magnitude, ??h = (??2 + h2)1/2, and ?? and h are epicentral distance and focal depth (km), respectively. Four earthquakes located near the Japan Trench were used to develop a subducting plate intensity attenuation model where intensity is equal to -8.33 + 2.19MJMA -0.00550??h - 1.14 log ?? h. The IJMA assignments for the MJMA7.9 great 1923 Kanto earthquake on the Philippine Sea-Eurasian plate interface are consistent with the subducting plate model; Using the subducting plate model and 226 IJMA IV-VI assignments, the location of the intensity center is 25 km north of the epicenter, Mjma is 7.7, and MJMA is 7.3-8.0 at the 1?? confidence level. Intensity assignments and reported aftershock activity for the enigmatic 11 November 1855 Ansei Edo earthquake are consistent with an MJMA 7.2 Philippine Sea-Eurasian interplate source or Philippine Sea intraslab source at about 30 km depth. If the 1855 earthquake was a Philippine Sea-Eurasian interplate event, the intensity center was adjacent to and downdip of the rupture area of the great 1923 Kanto earthquake, suggesting that the 1855 and 1923 events ruptured adjoining sections of the Philippine Sea-Eurasian plate interface.

Journal of Geophysical Research B: Solid Earth↗
USGS2005

Implications for prediction and hazard assessment from the 2004 Parkfield earthquake

Obtaining high-quality measurements close to a large earthquake is not easy: one has to be in the right place at the right time with the right instruments. Such a convergence happened, for the first time, when the 28 September 2004 Parkfield, California, earthquake occurred on the San Andreas fault in the middle of a dense network of instruments designed to record it. The resulting data reveal aspects of the earthquake process never before seen. Here we show what these data, when combined with data from earlier Parkfield earthquakes, tell us about earthquake physics and earthquake prediction. The 2004 Parkfield earthquake, with its lack of obvious precursors, demonstrates that reliable short-term earthquake prediction still is not achievable. To reduce the societal impact of earthquakes now, we should focus on developing the next generation of models that can provide better predictions of the strength and location of damaging ground shaking.

California↗
USGS2004

Catalog of significant historical earthquakes in the Central United States

We use Modified Mercalli intensity assignments to estimate source locations and moment magnitude M for eighteen 19th-century and twenty early- 20th-century earthquakes in the central United States (CUS) for which estimates of M are otherwise not available. We use these estimates, and locations and M estimated elsewhere, to compile a catelog of significant historical earthquakes in the CUS. The 1811-1812 New Madrid earthquakes apparently dominated CUS seismicity in the first two decades of the 19th century. M5-6 earthquakes occurred in the New Madrid Seismic Zone in 1843 and 1878, but none have occurred since 1878. There has been persistent seismic activity in the Illinois Basin in southern Illinois and Indiana, with M > 5.0 earthquakes in 1895, 1909, 1917, 1968, and 1987. Four other M > 5.0 CUS historical earthquakes have occurred: in Kansas in 1867, in Nebraska in 1877, in Oklahoma in 1882, and in Kentucky in 1980.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2003

An empirical model for earthquake probabilities in the San Francisco Bay region, California, 2002-2031

The moment magnitude M 7.8 earthquake in 1906 profoundly changed the rate of seismic activity over much of northern California. The low rate of seismic activity in the San Francisco Bay region (SFBR) since 1906, relative to that of the preceding 55 yr, is often explained as a stress-shadow effect of the 1906 earthquake. However, existing elastic and visco-elastic models of stress change fail to fully account for the duration of the lowered rate of earthquake activity. We use variations in the rate of earthquakes as a basis for a simple empirical model for estimating the probability of M ≥6.7 earthquakes in the SFBR. The model preserves the relative magnitude distribution of sources predicted by the Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities' ( WGCEP, 1999 ; WGCEP, 2002 ) model of characterized ruptures on SFBR faults and is consistent with the occurrence of the four M ≥6.7 earthquakes in the region since 1838. When the empirical model is extrapolated 30 yr forward from 2002, it gives a probability of 0.42 for one or more M ≥6.7 in the SFBR. This result is lower than the probability of 0.5 estimated by WGCEP ( 1988 ), lower than the 30-yr Poisson probability of 0.60 obtained by WGCEP ( 1999 ) and WGCEP ( 2002 ), and lower than the 30-yr time-dependent probabilities of 0.67, 0.70, and 0.63 obtained by WGCEP ( 1990 ), WGCEP ( 1999 ), and WGCEP ( 2002 ), respectively, for the occurrence of one or more large earthquakes. This lower probability is consistent with the lack of adequate accounting for the 1906 stress-shadow in these earlier reports. The empirical model represents one possible approach toward accounting for the stress-shadow effect of the 1906 earthquake. However, the discrepancy between our result and those obtained with other modeling methods underscores the fact that the physics controlling the timing of earthquakes is not well understood. Hence, we advise against using the empirical model alone (or any other single probability model) for estimating the earthquake hazard and endorse the use of all credible earthquake probability models for the region, including the empirical model, with appropriate weighting, as was done in WGCEP ( 2002 ).

California↗
USGS2003

Association of earthquakes and faults in the San Francisco Bay area using Bayesian inference

Bayesian inference provides a method to use seismic intensity data or instrumental locations, together with geologic and seismologic data, to make quantitative estimates of the probabilities that specific past earthquakes are associated with specific faults. Probability density functions are constructed for the location of each earthquake, and these are combined with prior probabilities through Bayes' theorem to estimate the probability that an earthquake is associated with a specific fault. Results using this method are presented here for large, preinstrumental, historical earthquakes and for recent earthquakes with instrumental locations in the San Francisco Bay region. The probabilities for individual earthquakes can be summed to construct a probabilistic frequency–magnitude relationship for a fault segment. Other applications of the technique include the estimation of the probability of background earthquakes, that is, earthquakes not associated with known or considered faults, and the estimation of the fraction of the total seismic moment associated with earthquakes less than the characteristic magnitude. Results for the San Francisco Bay region suggest that potentially damaging earthquakes with magnitudes less than the characteristic magnitudes should be expected. Comparisons of earthquake locations and the surface traces of active faults as determined from geologic data show significant disparities, indicating that a complete understanding of the relationship between earthquakes and faults remains elusive.

California↗
USGS2003

Estimating locations and magnitudes of earthquakes in eastern North America from Modified Mercalli intensities

We use 28 calibration events (3.7 < or = M < or = 7.3) from Texas to the Grand Banks, Newfoundland, to develop a Modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) model and associated site corrections for estimating source parameters of historical earthquakes in eastern North America. The model, MMI = 1.41 + 1.68 XM - 0.00345X Delta - 2.08log (Delta), where Delta is the distance in kilometers from the epicenter and M is moment magnitude, provides unbiased estimates of M and its uncertainty, and, if site corrections are used, of source location. The model can be used for the analysis of historical earthquakes with only a few MMI assignments. We use this model, MMI site corrections, and Bakun and Wentworth's (1997 technique to estimate M and the epicenter for three important historical earthquakes. The intensity magnitude M1 is 6.1 for the 18 November 1755 earthquake near Cape Ann, Massachusetts; 6.0 for the 5 January 1843 earthquake near Marked Tree, Arkansas; and 6.0 for the 31 October 1895 earthquake. The 1895 event probably occurred in southern Illinois, about 100 km north of the site of significant ground failure effects near Charleston, Missouri.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
USGS2003

Empirical modified Mercalli intensity site corrections for towns in eastern North America

Modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) assignments for earthquakes in eastern North America (ENA) were used by Bakun et al. (2003) and Bakun and Hopper (in press) to develop models for estimating the location and moment magnitude M of earthquakes in ENA from MMI observations. The MMI empirical site corrections developed and used by Bakun et al. (2003) and Bakun and Hopper (in press) are listed in this Open-file Report.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2002

Modified Mercalli Intensities (MMI) for some earthquakes in eastern North America (ENA) and empirical MMI site corrections for towns in ENA

Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) assignments for earthquakes in eastern North America (ENA) were used by Bakun et al. (submitted) to develop a model for eastern North America for estimating the location and moment magnitude M of earthquakes from MMI observations. MMI assignments for most of the earthquakes considered by Bakun et al. (submitted) are published. MMI assignments for 6 other earthquakes used by Bakun et al. (submitted) are listed in this report: November 18, 1755 near Cape Ann, Massachusetts; January 5, 1843 near Marked Tree, Arkansas; October 31, 1895 in southern Illinois; November 18, 1929 on the Grand Banks, Newfoundland; September 26, 1990 in southeast Missouri; and May 4, 1991 near Risco, Missouri. MMI empirical site corrections developed and used by Bakun et al. (submitted) are also listed in this report.

Arkansas;Illinois;Massachusetts;Missouri;Newfoundl↗
USGS2002

Modified Mercalli intensities (MMI) for large earthquakes near New Madrid, Missouri, in 1811-1812 and near Charleston, South Carolina, in 1886

Large historical earthquakes occurred in the eastern United States on December 16, 1811 near New Madrid, MO, on January 23, 1812 near New Madrid, MO, on February 7, 1812 near New Madrid, MO, and on September 1, 1886 near Charleston, SC. Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) assignments for these earthquakes were used by Bakun et al. (submitted) to estimate the location and moment magnitude M of these earthquakes from MMI observations. The MMI assignments used by Bakun et al. (submitted) are listed in this report.

Missouri, South Carolina↗
USGS2002

Comments on potential geologic and seismic hazards affecting Mare Island, Solano County, California

This report was prepared in response to a written request from the City of Vallejo, California, to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). By letter of October 4, 2002, the City requested that the USGS "provide advice to the City’s LNG Health and Safety Committee on its review of a potential liquid natural gas project" on the southern portion of Mare Island. The City specifically requested that the USGS advise the committee on potential hazards including fault rupture, earthquake ground motion, soil failure during earthquakes, tsunami and seiche, and landslides. The City requested that the USGS: (1) comment on these hazards, (2) describe its degree of confidence in its opinions, and (3) describe the scope of additional studies that will be needed if the City enters into an agreement with project sponsors. Advice was also requested on the selection of the safe shutdown and operating basis earthquakes as specified in the NFPA 59A standard (NFPA, 2001). This review of published reports and other publicly available information indicates that all of the hazards on which the USGS was asked to comment should be considered for the proposed project on the southern portion of Mare Island. Available information differs greatly for each of these potential hazards, and adequate understanding for design will require detailed site-specific investigations.

California↗