Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 70276970

ShakeAlert Earthquake Early Warning System performance during the Mw 7.0 offshore Cape Mendocino earthquake

Abstract

The 5 December 2024 M w 7.0 Offshore Cape Mendocino earthquake was a challenging test of the U.S. West Coast ShakeAlert earthquake early warning system due to its offshore epicenter and limited near‐source station coverage. We analyzed real‐time performance of all components of the ShakeAlert system, including the seismic algorithms (earthquake point‐source integrated code [EPIC] and Finite‐fault rupture Detector [FinDer]), the geodetic algorithm (Geodetic First Approximation of Size and Time–peak ground displacement [GFAST‐PGD]), and network telemetry during the event. EPIC created the first solution for this earthquake 15 s after origin time with an initial magnitude estimate of M 5.6 and location error of 10 km from the Advanced National Seismic System epicenter. An early spurious trigger from station CE.89101 fortuitously maintained location accuracy and, correspondingly, magnitude accuracy. FinDer contributed its first solution at 18 s with a location estimate closer to the seismic network and produced two distinct rupture geometries, leading to minor fluctuations in estimated intensity contours. GFAST‐PGD did not meet alerting thresholds but otherwise performed as expected. Network latencies were <2 s for most stations, supporting the rapid detection of this earthquake by the system. Roughly five million alerts were delivered to cell phone devices in California and Oregon during this event. This was also the first instance of a school district‐wide ShakeAlert‐powered system being activated. Comparisons to recorded seismograms demonstrate that the maximum warning times before potentially damaging shaking (intensity 6+) were in the range of 5–55 s. Although the ShakeAlert system provided accurate solutions and useful alert delivery, this earthquake raised awareness of potential issues within the system, including the need for improved offshore location estimates, a combination of solutions from ShakeAlert servers, and handling of spurious triggers.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Angela I. Lux, Jessie K. Saunders, Jessica R. Murray, Jeffrey J. McGuire, Maren Bose, Sumant Jha, Deborah Smith, S. N. Dybing, Carl W. Ulberg, Jacob Alexander Crummey, Stephen Crane, Richard Allen, Robert Michael deGroot. 2026-04-17. ShakeAlert Earthquake Early Warning System performance during the Mw 7.0 offshore Cape Mendocino earthquake. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120250232

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