Geology topics

W. Marzocchi

Publications and source records attributed to W. Marzocchi.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2020

Pseudo-prospective evaluation of UCERF3-ETAS forecasts during the 2019 Ridgecrest sequence

The 2019 Ridgecrest sequence provides the first opportunity to evaluate Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast v.3 with epidemic‐type aftershock sequences (UCERF3‐ETAS) in a pseudoprospective sense. For comparison, we include a version of the model without explicit faults more closely mimicking traditional ETAS models (UCERF3‐NoFaults). We evaluate the forecasts with new metrics developed within the Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability (CSEP). The metrics consider synthetic catalogs simulated by the models rather than synoptic probability maps, thereby relaxing the Poisson assumption of previous CSEP tests. Our approach compares statistics from the synthetic catalogs directly against observations, providing a flexible approach that can account for dependencies and uncertainties encoded in the models. We find that, to the first order, both UCERF3‐ETAS and UCERF3‐NoFaults approximately capture the spatiotemporal evolution of the Ridgecrest sequence, adding to the growing body of evidence that ETAS models can be informative forecasting tools. However, we also find that both models mildly overpredict the seismicity rate, on average, aggregated over the evaluation period. More severe testing indicates the overpredictions occur too often for observations to be statistically indistinguishable from the model. Magnitude tests indicate that the models do not include enough variability in forecasted magnitude‐number distributions to match the data. Spatial tests highlight discrepancies between the forecasts and observations, but the greatest differences between the two models appear when aftershocks occur on modeled UCERF3‐ETAS faults. Therefore, any predictability associated with embedding earthquake triggering on the (modeled) fault network may only crystalize during the presumably rare sequences with aftershocks on these faults. Accounting for uncertainty in the model parameters could improve test results during future experiments.

California↗

USGS2020

Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis at regional and national scale: State of the art and future challenges

Seismic hazard modelling is a multi-disciplinary science that aims to forecast earthquake occurrence and its resultant ground shaking. Such models consist of a probabilistic framework that quantifies uncertainty across a complex system; typically, this includes at least two model components developed from Earth science: seismic-source and ground-motion models. Although there is no scientific prescription for the forecast length, the most common probabilistic seismic hazard analyses consider forecasting windows of 30 to 50 years, which are typically an engineering demand for building code purposes. These types of analyses are the topic of this review paper. Although the core methods and assumptions of seismic hazard modelling have largely remained unchanged for more than 50 years, we review the most recent initiatives which face the difficult task of meeting both the increasingly sophisticated demands of society and keeping pace with advances in scientific understanding. A need for more accurate and spatially precise hazard forecasting must be balanced with increased quantification of uncertainty and new challenges such as moving from time-independent hazard to forecasts that are time-dependent and specific to the time-period of interest. Meeting these challenges requires the development of science-driven models which integrate all information available, the adoption of proper mathematical frameworks to quantify the different types of uncertainties in the hazard model, and the development of a proper testing phase of the model to quantify its consistency and skill. We review the state-of-the-art of the national seismic hazard modeling, and how the most innovative approaches try to address future challenges.

Reviews of Geophysics↗

USGS2014

Operational earthquake forecasting can enhance earthquake preparedness

We cannot yet predict large earthquakes in the short term with much reliability and skill, but the strong clustering exhibited in seismic sequences tells us that earthquake probabilities are not constant in time; they generally rise and fall over periods of days to years in correlation with nearby seismic activity. Operational earthquake forecasting (OEF) is the dissemination of authoritative information about these time‐dependent probabilities to help communities prepare for potentially destructive earthquakes. The goal of OEF is to inform the decisions that people and organizations must continually make to mitigate seismic risk and prepare for potentially destructive earthquakes on time scales from days to decades. To fulfill this role, OEF must provide a complete description of the seismic hazard—ground‐motion exceedance probabilities as well as short‐term rupture probabilities—in concert with the long‐term forecasts of probabilistic seismic‐hazard analysis (PSHA).

Seismological Research Letters↗

USGS2004

Quantifying probabilities of volcanic events: The example of volcanic hazard at Mount Vesuvius

We describe an event tree scheme to quantitatively estimate both long- and short-term volcanic hazard. The procedure is based on a Bayesian approach that produces a probability estimation of any possible event in which we are interested and can make use of all available information including theoretical models, historical and geological data, and monitoring observations. The main steps in the procedure are (1) to estimate an a priori probability distribution based upon theoretical knowledge, (2) to modify that using past data, and (3) to modify it further using current monitoring data. The scheme allows epistemic and aleatoric uncertainties to be dealt with in a formal way, through estimation of probability distributions at each node of the event tree. We then describe an application of the method to the case of Mount Vesuvius. Although the primary intent of the example is to illustrate the methodology, one result of this application merits special mention. The present emergency response plan for Mount Vesuvius is referenced to a maximum expected event (MEE), the largest out of all the possible eruptions within the next few decades. Our calculation suggest that there is a nonnegligible (1-20%) chance that the next eruption could be larger than that stipulated in the present MEE. The methodology allows all assumptions and thresholds to be clearly identified and provides a rational means for their revision if new data or information are obtained. Copyright 2004 by the American Geophysical Union.

Mount Vesuvius↗

USGS2001

Common features and peculiarities of the seismic activity at Phlegraean Fields, Long Valley, and Vesuvius

We analyzed and compared the seismic activity that has occurred in the last two to three decades in three distinct volcanic areas: Phlegraean Fields, Italy; Vesuvius, Italy; and Long Valley, California. Our main goal is to identify and discuss common features and peculiarities in the temporal evolution of earthquake sequences that may reflect similarities and differences in the generating processes between these volcanic systems. In particular, we tried to characterize the time series of the number of events and of the seismic energy release in terms of stochastic, deterministic, and chaotic components. The time sequences from each area consist of thousands of earthquakes that allow a detailed quantitative analysis and comparison. The results obtained showed no evidence for either deterministic or chaotic components in the earthquake sequences in Long Valley caldera, which appears to be dominated by stochastic behavior. In contrast, earthquake sequences at Phlegrean Fields and Mount Vesuvius show a deterministic signal mainly consisting of a 24-hour periodicity. Our analysis suggests that the modulation in seismicity is in some way related to thermal diurnal processes, rather than luni-solar tidal effects. Independently from the process that generates these periodicities on the seismicity., it is suggested that the lack (or presence) of diurnal cycles is seismic swarms of volcanic areas could be closely linked to the presence (or lack) of magma motion.

California↗

USGS1998

Two-way coupling between Vesuvius eruptions and southern Apennine earthquakes, Italy, by elastic stress transfer

During the past 1000 years, eruptions of Vesuvius have often been accompanied by large earthquakes in the Apennines 50–60 km to the northeast. Statistical investigations had shown that earthquakes often preceded eruptions, typically by less than a decade, but did not provide a physical explanation for the correlation. Here, we explore elastic stress interaction between earthquakes and eruptions under the hypothesis that small stress changes can promote events when the Apennine normal faults and the Vesuvius magma body are close to failure. We show that earthquakes can promote eruptions by compressing the magma body at depth and opening suitably oriented near-surface conduits. Voiding the magma body in turns brings these same normal faults closer to Coulomb failure, promoting earthquakes. Such a coupling is strongest if the magma reservoir is a dike oriented normal to the regional extension axis, parallel to the Apennines, and the near-surface conduits and fissures are oriented normal to the Apennines. This preferred orientation suggests that the eruptions issuing from such fissures should be most closely linked in time to Apennine earthquakes. Large Apennine earthquakes since 1400 are calculated to have transferred more stress to Vesuvius than all but the largest eruptions have transferred to Apennine faults, which may explain why earthquakes more commonly lead than follow eruptions. A two-way coupling may thus link earthquakes and Vesuvius eruptions along a 100-km-long set of faults. We test the statistical significance of the earthquake-eruption correlation in the two-way coupling zone, and find a correlation significant at the 95% confidence level.

Journal of Geophysical Research B: Solid Earth↗