Geology Reports⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70241040

Incorporation of real-time earthquake magnitudes estimated via peak ground displacement scaling in the ShakeAlert Earthquake Early Warning system

Jessica R. Murray·Brendan W. Crowell·Mark Hunter Murray·Carl W Ulberg·Jeffrey J. McGuire·Mario Aranha·Mike Hagerty
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The United States earthquake early warning (EEW) system, ShakeAlert®, currently employs two algorithms based on seismic data alone to characterize the earthquake source, reporting the weighted average of their magnitude estimates. Nonsaturating magnitude estimates derived in real time from Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) data using peak ground displacement (PGD) scaling relationships offer complementary information with the potential to improve EEW reliability for large earthquakes. We have adapted a method that estimates magnitude from PGD ( Crowell et al. , 2016 ) for possible production use by ShakeAlert. To evaluate the potential contribution of the modified algorithm, we installed it on the ShakeAlert development system for real‐time operation and for retrospective analyses using a suite of GNSS data that we compiled. Because of the colored noise structure of typical real‐time GNSS positions, observed PGD values drift over time periods relevant to EEW. To mitigate this effect, we implemented logic within the modified algorithm to control when it issues initial and updated PGD‐derived magnitude estimates ( ⁠ M PGD "> M PGD "> M PGD PGD ⁠ ), and to quantify M PGD "> M PGD PGD uncertainty for use in combining it with estimates from other ShakeAlert algorithms running in parallel. Our analysis suggests that, with these strategies, spuriously large M PGD "> M PGD PGD will seldom be incorporated in ShakeAlert’s magnitude estimate. Retrospective analysis of data from moderate‐to‐great earthquakes demonstrates that the modified algorithm can contribute to better magnitude estimates for M w > 7.0 "> M w > 7.0 w>7.0 events. GNSS station distribution throughout the ShakeAlert region limits how soon the modified algorithm can begin estimating magnitude in some locations. Furthermore, both the station density and the GNSS noise levels limit the minimum magnitude for which the modified algorithm is likely to contribute to the weighted average. This might be addressed by alternative GNSS processing strategies that reduce noise.

Explore related subjects

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaArticle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jessica R. Murray, Brendan W. Crowell, Mark Hunter Murray, Carl W Ulberg, Jeffrey J. McGuire, Mario Aranha, Mike Hagerty. 2023-02-23. Incorporation of real-time earthquake magnitudes estimated via peak ground displacement scaling in the ShakeAlert Earthquake Early Warning system. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120220181

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗
USGS2026

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗