Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · 70252535

Noise constraints on global body‐wave measurement thresholds

Abstract

Intermediate sized earthquakes (≈ M 4–6.5) are often measured using the teleseismic body‐wave magnitude ( ⁠𝑚b⁠ ). 𝑚b measurements are especially critical at the lower end of this range when teleseismic waveform modeling techniques (i.e., moment tensor analysis) are difficult. The U.S. Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) determines the location and magnitude of all M 5 and greater earthquakes worldwide within 20 min of the rupture time, and therefore accurate 𝑚b magnitude estimates are essential to fulfill its mission. To better understand how network geometry and noise levels affect the global response capabilities, we developed a method to spatially estimate the minimum measurable 𝑚b⁠ . To do this, we compare expected 𝑚b amplitudes at every station to the station’s background noise level. We find that using NEIC’s current network geometry and these idealized thresholds, NEIC can potentially estimate 𝑚b magnitudes down to M 4.5 globally. Low‐latitude regions in the Southern Hemisphere present the biggest opportunity to improve monitoring capabilities. However, logistically they also present the biggest hurdles for network operators. Finally, to test the resiliency of the network we removed the 20 most important stations and found the 𝑚b threshold remains 𝑚b 4.5. However, the region where only 𝑚b 4.5 and greater can be estimated increases and is again restricted to the Southern Hemisphere.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Adam T. Ringler, David C. Wilson, Paul S. Earle, William L. Yeck, David B. Mason, Justin T. Wilgus. 2024-03-25. Noise constraints on global body‐wave measurement thresholds. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120230246

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

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↗

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↗