Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · 70278166

Suitability of ground-motion models for seismic hazard assessment in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands

Abstract

We perform linear mixed-effects analyses with a ground-motion dataset to evaluate how well ground-motion models (GMMs) fit active crustal, subduction interface, and subduction intraslab earthquakes in Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands. Most of the GMMs reproduce the spatial variation in peak ground motions with earthquake magnitude and rupture distance but predict ground motions 0.3–1.0 natural log units (35%–270%) greater than observations. Two GMMs developed for Puerto Rico that are based on ground-motion records from mostly magnitude 4–5 earthquakes do not perform as well. We attribute the period-dependent overprediction in observed ground motions to differences between the observed site response and the linear site response in the GMMs. Consequently, we developed region-specific GMMs by adjusting the period-dependent linear site response coefficients and period-dependent constant coefficients to remove most of the bias between predicted ground motions and observations. For the analysis, we compile ground-motion records and process waveforms to build a dataset with 10,127 records at 72 stations from 849 magnitude 4.0–6.4 earthquakes between 1 January 2006 and 31 March 2024. The earthquakes include active crustal, subduction interface, and subduction intraslab events. We evaluate the GMMs using the time-averaged shear wave speed in the top 30 m ( ), which we compile from site surveys and proxy values computed from horizontal to vertical spectral ratios. Site terms exhibit strong consistency across GMMs and crustal and subduction earthquakes, indicating that the linear mixed-effects analysis successfully isolates the effects of local site response. The event terms show little spatial correlation and more substantial variability than in other regions, which we attribute to uncertainties in the earthquake magnitudes. This analysis guides the selection of the GMMs for the 2025 update of the National Seismic Hazard Model for Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 11.600915947553943° to 18.82717933247696° latitude; -67.55305355277572° to -58.8323914771386° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Brad T. Aagaard, Morgan P. Moschetti, Kyle B. Withers. 2026-04-09. Suitability of ground-motion models for seismic hazard assessment in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp4.70047

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 USGS reports

An examination of the reasons for, and variability of, the differences between response spectra and pseudo response spectra

For many decades, it has been common practice to overlook the differences between response spectra and pseudo response spectra. This practice stems from analyses indicating that the average difference between response spectra and pseudo response spectra is negligible for a viscous damping ratio of 5%, which is near-universally adopted. As others have shown, the differences depend strongly on the damping ratio, earthquake magnitude, and oscillator period, with larger differences for larger damping, smaller magnitudes, and longer periods. To quantify the full statistical distribution of the ratio of the absolute acceleration response spectrum (SA) to the pseudo absolute acceleration response spectrum (PSA), we fit empirical ratios with the generalized gamma distribution. Data for magnitudes from 4.0 to 5.5 give 95% prediction intervals for the ratio of 1.00–1.02 at 1 s and 1.01–2.24 at 10 s for 5% damping. For 30% damping, these intervals increase to 1.14–2.01 at 1 s and 1.62–11.8 at 10 s, respectively. Further, we demonstrate how the shape of the ground-motion Fourier amplitude spectrum interacts with the natural period of the oscillator to control the differences in the response spectra type. Routinely treating the two measures of acceleration response spectra as interchangeable may lead to unacceptable inconsistencies when the response spectra of individual records are important or when larger damping ratios are used, such as in direct displacement-based design. If one must convert between them, the uncertainty of the conversion should be accounted for during analysis.

Earthquake Spectra↗

Accounting for biases in the analysis of building damage data for the 2023 M7.8 Türkiye/Syria earthquake sequence

In the aftermath of a large earthquake, several practical constraints affect the systematic collection of data for assessing building damage. The available data are therefore typically incomplete, frequently missing key information such as the type of construction, age and geographic location. Moreover, the observations often favour certain locations and damage grades. In the absence of robust methods, using such data directly for characterising the building stock or conducting fragility assessments can introduce systematic bias. Using the 2023 M7.8 Türkiye/Syria earthquake sequence as a case study, we propose a statistical model that enables joint inference over the inventory and fragility of the building stock while explicitly accounting for sources of data error and missing information. The results show higher-than-expected vulnerability amongst several building types, particularly mid- and high-rise reinforced concrete buildings, which performed extremely poorly during the 2023 earthquake sequence. The proposed Bayesian framework provides rigorous uncertainty quantification that can be propagated to future applications.

Earthquake Spectra↗

Development of liquefaction-targeted design basis in U.S. seismic provisions

Seismic design criteria for new buildings in the United States have historically focused on life safety performance objectives through minimizing the potential for structural collapse. Development of design criteria to meet this performance objective has evolved over time, leading to the current, risk-targeted maximum considered earthquake (MCE R ) design basis. Corresponding MCE R seismic design loads incorporate the full range of probabilistic ground motion hazard information available from U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Models, as well as a representation of the uncertainty in structural collapse capacity. Despite these considerable advances in structural design criteria, guidelines for geotechnical hazards such as liquefaction-induced damage, which continue to be based on uniform ground-shaking hazard (i.e., MCE ground motions), are not well-connected with risk-based, collapse prevention performance objectives. This study, undertaken as part of Building Seismic Safety Council efforts to update recommended seismic provisions through the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, presents probabilistic, liquefaction-targeted design objectives and corresponding ground motion parameters, with a focus on improving consistency in first-level screening criteria for liquefaction hazard assessment. This study identifies a potential maximum acceptable annualized probability of liquefaction triggering ( P L,max ) of 2.5% in 50 years, above which liquefaction consequences and potential mitigation measures would be considered. The P L,max -based design basis is calibrated to effective probabilistic liquefaction hazard levels obtained in practice using current MCE peak ground accelerations, and could be implemented via a new liquefaction-targeted maximum considered earthquake (MCE L ) peak ground acceleration ( PGA L ). The proposed PGA L is derived from probabilistic liquefaction hazard curves and includes uncertainties inherent to liquefaction hazard modeling. The potential design effects of the proposed PGA L are demonstrated via comparison with current MCE PGA levels, effects on first-level liquefaction screening analyses, and improvements in the consistency of P L,max levels across the United States, and for a wide range of site conditions.

conterminous United States↗