Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 70270751

Magnitude, depth and methodological variations of spectral stress drop within the SCEC/USGS Community Stress Drop Validation Study using the 2019 Ridgecrest Earthquake Sequence

Abstract

We present the first ensemble analysis of the 56 different sets of results submitted to the ongoing Community Stress Drop Validation Study using the 2019 Ridgecrest, California, earthquake sequence. Different assumptions and methods result in different estimation of the source contribution to recorded seismograms, and hence to the source parameters (principally corner frequency, f c ⁠ , spectral stress drop, Δσ, and seismic moment, M 0 ⁠ ) obtained from modeling calculated source spectra. For earthquakes smaller than magnitude (M) 2.5 there is negligible correlation between the f c values obtained by different studies, implying that no present method is reliable using available data. For larger magnitude events, correlation between f c measurements of different studies, within even a small M range is always higher than spectral ⁠Δσ , because the f c measurements simply reflect the underlying physical decrease in f c with increasing M. We model the observed trends of submitted f c with both magnitude and depth. Most methods report an increase in spectral Δσ with M, although a magnitude‐invariant spectral Δσ is within the confidence limits. The depth dependence is smaller and depends on whether a study allows attenuation to vary with source depth; a combination of depth‐dependent attenuation correction, and depth‐dependent shear‐wave velocity can compensate for reported depth trends. We model the submitted values to remove differing M and depth variation to investigate the relative interevent variability. We find consistent relative variation between individual events, and also lower relative spectral Δσ in the northwest of the aftershock sequence, and higher on the cross fault and in the region of main fault intersection. This large‐scale comparison implies that absolute spectral Δσ estimates are dependent on the methods used; studies of different regions or using different methods should not be directly compared and improved constraints on path and site corrections are needed to resolve these absolute spectral Δσ differences.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Rachel E. Abercrombie, Annemarie S. Baltay. 2025-08-14. Magnitude, depth and methodological variations of spectral stress drop within the SCEC/USGS Community Stress Drop Validation Study using the 2019 Ridgecrest Earthquake Sequence. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120250056

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

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related discoveries

The U.S. Geological Survey 2025 Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands time-independent earthquake rupture forecast

We present the 2025 U.S. Geological Survey Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands (PRVI) time‐independent earthquake rupture forecast (ERF), developed for the 2025 update to the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for PRVI. The updated ERF improves upon a prior model from 2003, including an expanded fault inventory with slip‐rate estimates, updated seismicity catalogs, and refined subduction zone geometries and deformation models. It applies the fault‐system inversion methodology to solve for rates of ruptures on modeled faults, adapted from the 2023 NSHM (NSHM23) for the western United States, including the first application of the inversion to model rates on a U.S. subduction interface. Off‐fault and intraslab seismicity are constrained by observed seismicity and use updated methods developed for NSHM23. Uncertainties in model components are substantial, and the ERF represents epistemic uncertainties through a comprehensive logic tree consisting of 1.7 billion logic‐tree branches combined across all sources.

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands

The 1912 Ms 7.2 earthquake in the Denali region of central Alaska

The 2002 M w 7.9 earthquake in central Alaska ruptured 340 km on three faults—Susitna Glacier thrust fault, Denali fault, Totschunda fault—crossing both the Richardson Highway and the Alaska Pipeline. Its occurrence prompted renewed interest in historical large earthquakes that possibly originated on the Denali fault. One of these earthquakes was a M s 7.2 event on July 7, 1912, which we revisit with two approaches: (1) probabilistic relocation of the epicenter using globally recorded arrival times, and (2) compilation and reassessment of shaking intensity reports to estimate a macroseismic epicenter. Our preferred instrumental epicenter is west of the Parks Highway and in agreement with the maximum‐reported shaking, which was from the Parker–Browne expedition of Denali. We also relocated a M s 6.4 aftershock, whose epicenter is 11 km from the mainshock. Candidate faults for the 1912 earthquake include the Denali fault, the McLeod Creek thrust fault, and the Kantishna Hills thrust fault. Future analysis of active faults, paleoseismic results, 1912 instrumental data, and 1912 felt reports may help in interpreting the fault and mechanism of the 1912 earthquake.

Alaska

High-precision earthquake catalog for Minto Flats fault zone, central Alaska, reveals complex and conjugate faulting

The Minto Flats fault zone (MFFZ) in central Alaska is a left‐lateral strike‐slip fault system situated between the continental‐scale right‐lateral Denali and Kaltag‐Tintina faults. The MFFZ has the potential to generate magnitude 7 earthquakes, and it hosted a magnitude 6 earthquake in 1995. It has also produced exotic events, such as very‐low‐frequency earthquakes and nucleation signals. We use network‐matched filtering and relative earthquake relocation techniques to derive a detailed catalog of earthquake locations for the MFFZ. The catalog spans from August 2014 to December 2019, a time period including 13 temporary seismic stations in the region. Our results provide the most complete catalog for the MFFZ and include deeper events, clusters of shallow seismicity, and a complex and segmented fault structure not observed in the original regional catalog. We document right‐lateral strike‐slip faulting, conjugate to the main northeast‐striking left‐lateral faults of the MFFZ. Below Nenana basin, the relocated seismicity reveals northwest‐dipping left‐lateral faults, supporting the inference that deep crustal active faulting is associated with recent basin deformation.

Alaska