Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Data Science in Science”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

1,212 records · Page 10Linked to original sources
USGS2026

Altitude of the potentiometric surface and depth to water in the Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer, spring 2024

Potentiometric-surface and depth-to-water maps for spring 2024 were created for the Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer using groundwater-altitude data from 1,151 wells completed in the Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer and from the altitude of the top of the water surface in area rivers from 160 U.S. Geological Survey and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers streamgages. The potentiometric-surface and depth-to-water maps for 2024 were created to support investigations to characterize the Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer as part of the U.S. Geological Survey Water Availability and Use Science Program. Sufficient data were available to map the potentiometric surface and depth to water of the Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer for spring 2024 for about 83 percent of the aquifer area. The potentiometric contours ranged from 0 to 330 feet (ft) above the North American Vertical Datum of 1988. The regional direction of the groundwater gradient was generally to the south-southwest, except in areas of groundwater-altitude depressions, where the groundwater gradient direction was into the depression, and near rivers, where the groundwater gradient direction was either from the aquifer to the river or from the river into the aquifer. Groundwater depressions in the potentiometric-surface map are in the lower one-half of the Cache region and in most of the Grand Prairie and Delta regions. Depth to water by well in the Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer in spring 2024 ranged from 0.27 ft above land surface to 145.65 ft below land surface.

Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississip↗
USGS2025

Mapping bedrock outcrops in the Sierra Nevada Mountains (California, USA) using machine learning

Accurate, high-resolution maps of bedrock outcrops can be valuable for applications such as models of land–atmosphere interactions, mineral assessments, ecosystem mapping, and hazard mapping. The increasing availability of high-resolution imagery can be coupled with machine learning techniques to improve regional bedrock outcrop maps. In the United States, the existing 30 m U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Land Cover Database (NLCD) tends to misestimate extents of barren land, which includes bedrock outcrops. This impacts many calculations beyond bedrock mapping, including soil carbon storage, hydrologic modeling, and erosion susceptibility. Here, we tested if a machine learning (ML) model could more accurately map exposed bedrock than NLCD across the entire Sierra Nevada Mountains (California, USA). The ML model was trained to identify pixels that are likely bedrock from 0.6 m imagery from the National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP). First, we labeled exposed bedrock at twenty sites covering more than 83 km 2 (0.13%) of the Sierra Nevada region. These labels were then used to train and test the model, which gave 83% precision and 78% recall, with a 90% overall accuracy of correctly predicting bedrock. We used the trained model to map bedrock outcrops across the entire Sierra Nevada region and compared the ML map with the NLCD map. At the twenty labeled sites, we found the NLCD barren land class, even though it includes more than just bedrock outcrops, accounted for only 41% and 40% of mapped bedrock from our labels and ML predictions, respectively. This substantial difference illustrates that ML bedrock models can have a role in improving land-cover maps, like NLCD, for a range of science applications.

California↗
USGS2025

Meet the people where they are: Assessing user needs for aftershock forecast products in El Salvador, Mexico and the United States

Aftershock forecasts can help communities reduce their seismic risk by conveying how many aftershocks can be expected following a large earthquake, and how the expected number of aftershocks and their corresponding ground shaking evolves over time and space. Prior work finds that graphical forecast products may communicate such information better than only text or numbers. To identify which visual products can serve multiple user groups, we held workshops with members of several professions, including emergency managers, engineers, critical infrastructure operators, public health specialists, science communicators, and more. We conducted these workshops in El Salvador, Mexico and the United States to understand which forecast products may be effective across different countries. In these workshops, users performed small-group activities to elicit the types of aftershock forecast information that would support decisions in their respective roles and how this information would optimally be displayed. Maps of shaking hazards were frequently requested across all professions and countries, even for dissimilar forecast uses. The design of these maps, and other product needs, were differentiated by profession, country and other factors. Other forecast products, including those showing forecasts about the magnitudes and time periods of future aftershocks, also served a variety of users, but for different types of decisions. We found a greater variation in user needs by profession than by country, and that user needs also vary with time, communication channel and other contextual factors. We discuss practical implications for user-centered visual communication of operational aftershock forecasts.

International Journal for Disaster Risk Reduction↗
USGS2025

A scientific vision and roadmap for earthquake rupture forecast developments, a USGS perspective

We articulate a scientific vision and roadmap for the development of improved Earthquake Rupture Forecast models, which are one of the two main modeling components used in modern seismic hazard and risk analysis. One primary future objective is to provide fully time-dependent models that include both elastic rebound and spatiotemporal clustering nationwide, which is particularly important for shorter-term hazard and risk considerations (e.g., earthquake insurance products). We also discuss the importance and perennial challenges associated with quantifying epistemic uncertainties, including those associated with deformation-model slip rates, un-quantified sampling errors with respect to off-fault seismicity, and any spatial covariances. The need for more physics-based approaches is also emphasized, as is the benefit of adding model valuation (quantifying usefulness) to our verification and validation protocols. Given the multidisciplinary and system-level nature of this activity, modular design is critical. Future updates will also draw from best-available science by both the United States Geological Survey and the external community. The primary goal of this paper is to highlight plans that guide research and facilitate community engagement with model development, especially with respect to lowering the entry barrier for early career scientists and engineers. The paper is written so readers can focus on the sections that interest them most (see table of contents), with the Introduction and Discussion providing a stand-alone overview and summary.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
USGS2025

Characterizing Meteor Crater impact melts through geochemistry and textural analysis

The U.S. Geological Survey Astrogeology Science Center houses the Meteor Crater sample collection, an assemblage of over 2,500 meters of cuttings from 161 drill holes into Meteor Crater’s rim, flanks, and ejecta blanket. We have utilized this unique collection to study the composition and spatial distribution of impact-generated materials from within the ejecta blanket. Meteor Crater has historically been known to have generated only a relatively small amount of impact melt compared to other terrestrial craters of similar size. A detailed compositional and textural dataset of impact-derived melts from this impact can therefore be a useful asset in improving our understanding of crater formation, and in particular impact melt formation. We have characterized 42 impact-melt particles from Meteor Crater using a scanning electron microscope and an electron microprobe for textural and compositional analysis. We analyzed samples from six drill holes in the ejecta blanket, situated to the northwest, southeast, south, and southwest of the crater (ejecta northeast of the crater is devoid of impact melts). Impact melts were collected from drill cuttings at various depths within the ejecta blanket, ranging from a few centimeters below the surface down to ~6.5 meters. Backscattered electron (BSE) images were acquired for each analyzed impact-melt particle. To characterize the various textures and phases present in each impact melt, we also took many detailed BSE images. Our geochemical analyses include full spectral profiles using energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry and well-calibrated wavelength dispersive spectrometry for a number of phases, including minerals (olivine, pyroxene, and so on), pristine glass, and metallic inclusions. The full dataset is available in ScienceBase as a data release (Gullikson and others, 2024), accessible at https://doi.org/10.5066/P9OGAJ8P . Our goal for this Open-File Report is to provide a summary of this immense dataset, details on data collection, descriptions of the different phases observed within impact-melt particles (both geochemically and texturally), and observable trends.

Arizona↗
USGS2025

Flood-inundation maps for 14.8 miles of Little and Big Papillion Creeks in Omaha, Nebraska, 2023

Digital flood-inundation map libraries for two reaches that constitute 14.8 miles of Little and Big Papillion Creeks in Omaha, Nebraska, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Papio-Missouri River Natural Resource District. The flood-inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Program website at https://www.usgs.gov/mission-areas/water-resources/science/flood-inundation-mapping-fim-program , depict estimates of the areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at Little Papillion Creek at Irvington, Nebr. (USGS station 06610750), Little Papillion Creek at Ak-Sar-Ben at Omaha, Nebr. (USGS station 06610765), and Big Papillion Creek at Q Street at Omaha, Nebr. (USGS station 06610770) streamgages. Near-real-time stages at these streamgages may be obtained from the USGS National Water Information System database at https://doi.org/10.5066/F7P55KJN or from the National Weather Service Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service at https://water.weather.gov/ahps/ . Flood profiles were computed for two different reaches that constitute 14.8 miles of stream length in the study area by using hydraulic models. The models were calibrated by adjusting roughness coefficients to best represent the current (2022) stage-streamflow relation at the streamgages within the study reach. The hydraulic models were then used to compute water-surface profiles at 1-foot stage intervals for selected stage ranges to represent various flooding scenarios at the streamgages in each reach. The simulated water-surface profiles then were combined with a digital elevation model using a geographic information system, which had a 10-foot grid spacing to delineate the flooding extents and water depths for each stage. The availability of these flood-inundation maps, along with information regarding current stage from the USGS streamgages, can provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities and post flood recovery efforts.

Nebraska↗
USGS2026

Mountain goat declines in a protected, interior, native population

A shifting climate poses threats to alpine-adapted species including mountain goats. We used long-term (12 years) citizen science monitoring data and Bayesian N-mixture modeling to estimate population trends and drivers of population metrics among mountain goats in Glacier National Park (GNP). Median goats per site ( n = 37 sites) declined by 45% (95% credible interval [CRI] = 32%, 57%) from 77.8 (95% CRI = 64.4, 95.1) in 2008 to 42.3 (95% CRI = 34.3, 52.2) in 2019, with consistent declines from 2008 until 2015, when the number of estimated goats stabilized. The decline exceeds IUCN criteria for classifying a population as vulnerable, >30% declines over only two generations. Across years, relatively few goats occupied northwestern GNP. Goat numbers declined the most at northeastern sites, trended toward decline in most southern sites, and increased at only two west-central sites. The proportion of permanent snow and glaciers, the presence of natural mineral licks, and habituation strongly increased the initial abundance of goats in the area. Weather variables had the greatest influence on population growth rates, particularly precipitation between May 15 and June 15 of the previous summer, the neonatal period. Lower growth occurred with less snow water equivalent and lower mean winter temperature, early summer temperature, and early summer precipitation. Projected reductions of permanent snow, increasing spring and summer temperatures, and insufficient and variable spring precipitation raise concerns for the future of native goats in this region. Our analyses reveal ways to improve detection rates of goats during surveys, which is important for optimizing the precision of estimates and the power to detect future trends. Detection increased with goat habituation, retention of observers with experience, use of binoculars, and conducting surveys at lower temperatures and earlier dates. Improving detection will be particularly important given the lower number of goats currently observed in the park. Research to estimate park-wide population size, evaluate genetic structure and diversity, assess changing habitat, human recreation levels and forage, and forward-project climate effects on persistence will be crucial to understanding the context of these results and conserving this iconic, metapopulation at the southern edge of the distribution of native mountain goats.

Montana↗
USGS2025

Overview of The SCEC/USGS Community Stress Drop Validation Study using the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence

We present initial findings from the ongoing Community Stress Drop Validation Study to compare spectral stress‐drop estimates for earthquakes in the 2019 Ridgecrest, California, sequence. This study uses a unified dataset to independently estimate earthquake source parameters through various methods. Stress drop, which denotes the change in average shear stress along a fault during earthquake rupture, is a critical parameter in earthquake science, impacting ground motion, rupture simulation, and source physics. Spectral stress drop is commonly derived by fitting the amplitude‐spectrum shape, but estimates can vary substantially across studies for individual earthquakes. Sponsored jointly by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Statewide (previously, Southern) California Earthquake Center our community study aims to elucidate sources of variability and uncertainty in earthquake spectral stress‐drop estimates through quantitative comparison of submitted results from independent analyses. The dataset includes nearly 13,000 earthquakes ranging from M 1 to 7 during a two‐week period of the 2019 Ridgecrest sequence, recorded within a 1° radius. In this article, we report on 56 unique submissions received from 20 different groups, detailing spectral corner frequencies (or source durations), moment magnitudes, and estimated spectral stress drops. Methods employed encompass spectral ratio analysis, spectral decomposition and inversion, finite‐fault modeling, ground‐motion‐based approaches, and combined methods. Initial analysis reveals significant scatter across submitted spectral stress drops spanning over six orders of magnitude. However, we can identify between‐method trends and offsets within the data to mitigate this variability. Averaging submissions for a prioritized subset of 56 events shows reduced variability of spectral stress drop, indicating overall consistency in recovered spectral stress‐drop values.

California↗
USGS2026

Hyperspectral narrowband imaging spectroscopy: A new paradigm for Earth observation

This editorial introduces the Special Issue entitled “Hyperspectral Narrowband Imaging Spectroscopy: A New Paradigm for Earth Observation” in the August 2026 issue of Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing (PE&RS), the flagship journal of the American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ASPRS). This volume represents the fourth dedicated hyperspectral special issue published in PE&RS, following earlier contributions by Thenkabail et al. (2025, 2024a, 2024b), and continues ASPRS’s commitment to advancing cutting‑edge imaging spectroscopy research and its applications across Earth system science. Remote sensing is undergoing one of the most profound transformations in its history. The emergence of hyperspectral narrowband (HNB) imaging spectroscopy data, capable of acquiring hundreds of contiguous, narrow spectral bands, has shifted the discipline from observing Earth in a handful of broad spectral windows to capturing continuous spectral signatures of the Planet. This transition marks a decisive break from the multispectral paradigm that has dominated satellite remote sensing for nearly five decades, driven by the advent of new orbital imaging spectrometers such as EnMAP, PRISMA, and NASA’s EMIT, and by the forthcoming Surface Biology and Geology (SBG) mission ((Pires Silva et al., 2026; Bourriz et al., 2025; Thenkabail et al., 2025; Chabrillat et al., 2024; Aneece et al., 2024; Dave et al., 2024; Thenkabail et al., 2024a; Thenkabail et al., 2024b; Thenkabail, 2024a; Thenkabail, 2024b; Thompson et al., 2022; Kokaly et al., 2022; Aneece & Thenkabail, 2022; Cawse Nicholson et al., 2021; Guanter et al., 2021; Vangi et al., 2021; Thenkabail et al., 2021). These missions (e.g., Table 1) deliver unprecedented spectral fidelity, improved signal to noise ratios, and global coverage capabilities, enabling a new era of quantitative, spectroscopy based Earth observation. Where multispectral broadbands (MBBs) provide only a few discrete measurements along the electromagnetic spectrum, HNB systems deliver rich, diagnostic information that enables scientists to characterize Earth’s surface with unprecedented biochemical, biophysical, and structural detail (Figure 1a, 1b). The implications for environmental monitoring, agriculture, water resources, and mineral exploration are profound. Several overarching themes emerge: • Spectral fidelity matters. The ability to preserve subtle absorption features is essential for mineral mapping, vegetation trait retrieval, and biochemical modeling. • AI and deep learning are indispensable. From destriping to classification, modern analytics must be scalable, label‑efficient, and capable of exploiting the full spectral–spatial richness of HNB data. • Physics‑based and data‑driven approaches must converge. Radiative transfer models such as PROSAIL, enhanced with localized soil parameterizations, remain foundational for biophysical retrievals and model‑based inference. • Dimensionality reduction and feature extraction are critical. Techniques such as L1‑ISOMAP demonstrate that intelligent manifold learning can unlock the structure of fused, high‑dimensional datasets. • Next‑generation architectures must be interactive and multimodal. ICTNet exemplifies the future of hyperspectral classification: hybrid, synergistic, and capable of modeling both local textures and global spectral dependencies.

Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing (PE↗
USGS2024

Streams, springs, and volcanic lakes for volcano monitoring

Introduction Volcanic unrest can trigger appreciable change to surface waters such as streams, springs, and volcanic lakes. Magma degassing produces gases and soluble salts that are absorbed into groundwater that feeds streams and lakes. As magma ascends, the amount of heat and degassing will increase, and so will any related geochemical and thermal signal. Subsurface magma movement can cause pressurization that alters hydrostatic head and may induce groundwater discharge. Fluid-pressure changes have been linked to distal volcano-tectonic earthquakes (White and McCausland, 2016; Coulon and others, 2017) and phreatic eruptions (for example, Yamaoka and others, 2016). Clearly, changes in groundwater and surface waters are both indicators of unrest and clues to how and where magma is rising toward the surface. Where possible, it is prudent to incorporate real-time hydrologic data into multiparameter monitoring of restless volcanoes. Hydrologic dynamics can also be tracked by changes in groundwater levels that are commonly measured in shallow boreholes (see of Flinders, A.F., Lowenstern, J.B., Coombs, M.L., and Poland, M.P., eds., Recommended capabilities and instrumentation for volcano monitoring in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2024–5062–K, 5 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20245062k. ">chapter K , this volume, on boreholes; Hurwitz and Lowenstern, 2024). Although inferred to be common, relatively few volcano-hydrology anomalies are well documented, and many are essentially anecdotal (Newhall and others, 2001), reflecting the fact that high-resolution time series remain rare. Extreme examples include the 2008 eruption of Nevado del Huila, Colombia, where relatively minor phreatomagmatic eruptions were accompanied by expulsion of as much as 300 million cubic meters of groundwater from fissures high on the volcano (Worni and others, 2011), generating large lahars. Substantial decreases in flow rate from springs about 8 kilometers from the summit of Mayon Volcano, Philippines, have been noted before most eruptions in the 20th century (Newhall and others, 2001). Stream monitoring at Redoubt Volcano in 2009 allowed Werner and others (2012) to recognize that groundwater was unable to absorb (or scrub) the high flux of volcanic gas and that a high CO 2 /SO 2 precursor signal had been evident for 5 months prior to the eruption. A key to better interpreting hydrologic anomalies—or even identifying them—is therefore obtaining adequate baseline data. Most hydrologic monitoring at U.S. volcanoes has been accomplished by intermittent sampling surveys with annual or less frequent sampling (for example, https://hotspringchem.wr.usgs.gov/index.php ). More frequent sampling, however, generally is needed to establish reliable baselines. A recent hydrologic and hydrothermal monitoring experiment at 25 sites and 10 of the 12 level 4 (very high threat) volcanoes in the U.S. portion of the Cascade Range demonstrated that there is sufficient temporal variability in hydrothermal fluxes, even during quiescent periods, that one-time measurements will commonly have limited interpretive value (Crankshaw and others, 2018). Thus, surveys are best augmented with data from streamgages (for example, Evans and others, 2004; Bergfeld and others, 2008). Streamflow (water discharge) data allow measured temperature and specific conductance to be converted to heat and solute mass fluxes, which could be insightful parameters for detecting anomalous activity (McCleskey and others, 2012). At the Yellowstone Caldera, long-term monitoring of river solutes has allowed calculation of the chloride flux, a proxy for heat discharge (Hurwitz and others, 2007; McCleskey and others, 2016) from the subsurface magma. This is readily accomplished because data from streamgages are continuously recorded and archived by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water Information System (NWIS) (USGS, 2024). Similar studies on stratovolcanoes or shield volcanoes would be scientifically useful, and yet are logistically challenging, requiring streamgages on numerous radial drainages complemented by either frequent manual sampling or numerous deployments of equipment to measure water temperature and specific conductance as a proxy for water chemistry. Another challenge is that some volcanic areas, especially shield volcanoes, are characterized by near-surface porous rocks and soils, such that surface streams are rare and replaced by distant, dilute large-volume springs with only a trace of any original volcanically sourced water (Manga, 2001; Hurwitz and others, 2021). Volcanic lakes are worthy of special attention for monitoring efforts, as their temperature and composition can provide evidence of increased flux of volatile-rich fluids from below. Quantifying changes in volatile and heat release from magma can be simpler in lakes than for volcanoes with radial drainages and no major lakes. Moreover, volcanic lakes pose a range of hazards themselves, including phreatomagmatic eruptions, debris flows, flank collapse, tsunamis, and toxic gas release (Mastin and Witter, 2000; Delmelle and others, 2015; Manville, 2015; Rouwet and others, 2015)—hazards that have historically been responsible for substantial loss of life at many volcanoes worldwide (Manville, 2015). Catastrophic CO 2 release at Lake Nyos, Cameroon, in 1986 suffocated about 1,750 people and about 3,500 livestock and was probably triggered by a large landslide into the gas-saturated lake (Kling and others, 1987; Evans and others, 1993). Gas-charged springs in Soda Bay within Clear Lake (California) have caused almost a dozen deaths to bathers in the past hundred years (ABC News, 2000). A 2005 example of lake overturn and abundant gas release was documented at Mount Chiginagak in Alaska (Schaefer and others, 2008) but did not result in any human casualties. Although thermally stratified lakes, which promote trapping of exsolved magmatic gas, tend to develop in tropical regions, the phenomenon can also arise where salinity creates meromixis (a condition in which a lake does not mix completely), as occurs in Mono Lake, California (Jellison and Melack, 1993; Jellison and others, 1998). If magma erupts or flows into a lake, the interaction between hot magma and cold water can be explosive (Mastin and others, 2004; Zimanowski and others, 2015) and substantially expand the area affected by the eruption. Another hazard is the breaching of crater rims by landslides triggered by volcanic and (or) seismic activity. Under some circumstances, substantial volumes of water can be displaced, leading to large floods and lahars. Late Holocene lake flooding from Aniakchak Crater in the Alaska Peninsula (Waythomas, 2022) and from Paulina Lake in Newberry Crater, Oregon (Chitwood and Jensen, 2000), caused by the failure of outlet sills, testify to the substantial hazards at lake-filled calderas. Several volcanic systems in the United States host lakes known to receive heat and gas from underlying magma. These lakes vary widely in area, depth, and chemical composition. Lakes are present at level 4 volcanoes, including Crater Lake and Newberry Volcano in Oregon; Yellowstone Caldera in Wyoming; Long Valley Caldera, Clear Lake volcanic field, Medicine Lake, and Salton Buttes in California; and Aniakchak Crater, Mount Katmai, Fisher Caldera, Mount Okmok, and Kaguyak Crater, among others, in Alaska. A water lake was present in Halemaʻumaʻu, the crater of Kīlauea, Hawai‘i (fig. F1), from October 2019 to December 2020. Level 3 volcanoes with lakes include Mono Lake volcanic field (Calif.), Mount Bachelor (Ore.), Ukinrek Maars and Mount Chiginagak (Alaska), and Soda Lake (Nevada). In addition, there are lakes at many levels 1 and 2 volcanoes. In the United States, there are no strongly acidic lakes that receive abundant input of magmatic gas, such as those found at Mount Ruapehu (New Zealand), Ijen and Kelud (Indonesia), and Poás (Costa Rica). Nevertheless, many contain fluids that provide clues to magmatic processes below. Since publication of a previous report on recommended instrumentation for volcano monitoring (Moran and others, 2008), continuous hydrologic monitoring has become increasingly feasible. However, changes in water pressure, temperature, and chemistry remain, in general, poorly studied phenomena at volcanoes (Sparks, 2003; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2017). Recent efforts by the USGS have included the temporary study of Cascade Range volcanoes, which included frequent (15 minute to hourly) temporal sampling of temperature, depth, and conductivity (Crankshaw and others, 2018; Ingebritsen and Evans, 2019). At Yellowstone Caldera, many streamgages have now added thermistors and specific conductance sensors, allowing estimation of time-dependent chloride flux as a proxy for variations in subsurface heat flux (McCleskey and others, 2012, 2016). Efforts to better understand lakes have also accelerated, with bathymetric mapping and sampling carried out at several locations in the United States. Especially thorough work was done at Yellowstone Lake thanks to the Hydrothermal Dynamics of Yellowstone Lake (HD-YLAKE, https://hdylake.org ) project, funded primarily by the National Science Foundation. In addition to geophysical surveys and recovery of cores and other samples, HD-YLAKE investigations included remotely operated vehicle (ROV) investigations of hydrothermal vents on the lake floor (fig. F2). Data collected by the ROV provided a better understanding of the thermal and chemical influx from lake-bottom hydrothermal systems (Sohn and others, 2017). In this chapter, we focus on detecting changes in the chemistry, temperature, discharge, or water levels of streams, springs, and lakes that can be caused by seismicity, volumetric strains, or increases in gas flux associated with ascending magma. There is unavoidable overlap with other chapters of this report. Samples of water and gas can also be obtained in boreholes ( of Flinders, A.F., Lowenstern, J.B., Coombs, M.L., and Poland, M.P., eds., Recommended capabilities and instrumentation for volcano monitoring in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2024–5062–K, 5 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20245062k. ">chapter K , this volume; Hurwitz and Lowenstern, 2024), both shallow and deep. Gas monitoring ( of Flinders, A.F., Lowenstern, J.B., Coombs, M.L., and Poland, M.P., eds., Recommended capabilities and instrumentation for volcano monitoring in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2024–5062–E, 11 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20245062e.">chapter E , this volume; Lewicki and others, 2024) relies in part on samples from springs and wells, particularly where measurable gas plumes are absent. Water acts as a trigger and lubricant for landslides and sediment-rich floods, and so hydrology has obvious relevance for lahar monitoring, as discussed in of Flinders, A.F., Lowenstern, J.B., Coombs, M.L., and Poland, M.P., eds., Recommended capabilities and instrumentation for volcano monitoring in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2024–5062–H, 6 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20245062h. ">chapter H (this volume; Thelen and others, 2024). Shared situational awareness among scientists engaged in geophysical, gas, and hydrologic monitoring will improve overall understanding of the volcanic hazard.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2025

Estimated average annualized tsunami losses for the United States

Tsunami hazards are substantial threats to coastal communities across the United States (U.S.) and its territories. U.S. states and territories collaborate through the National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program (NTHMP) to develop their own tsunami-hazard information for outreach and evacuation planning. An effort to curate this tsunami-hazard information to support comprehensive risk analysis at the national level has not yet been completed. In support of this effort, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) collaborated with the NTHMP, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) starting in 2023. This collaboration included the collection and analysis of existing tsunami hazard data and methods in the U.S. Tsunami subject matter experts identified and selected scientifically defensible methods for estimating the risks to buildings and populations in coastal communities. These efforts may support decision making regarding resilience policies, priorities, strategies and funding levels. Tsunamis can be triggered by earthquakes, subaerial or submarine landslides, volcanic eruptions, glacial calving, near-earth objects, weather or other events. These events can cause severe destruction, injuries, and loss of life due to powerful currents and flooding. Tsunamis pose a substantial threat to the western United States and all U.S. territories, as described below. ■ Hawaii is threatened by distant tsunamis due to its central location in the Pacific Ocean basin and has a history of local events. ■ Alaska, particularly the Aleutian Islands, faces local tsunami threats due to proximity to the Alaska-Aleutian Subduction Zone, as well as distant tsunamis from around the Pacific Ocean basin. ■ The western coast of the U.S. is threatened by distant tsunamis from around the Pacific Ocean basin and local source tsunamis from earthquakes generated within the Cascadia Subduction Zone in the Pacific Northwest. ■ American Samoa faces local tsunami threats from earthquakes generated in the nearby Tonga Trench, as well as distant tsunami threats. ■ Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands are threatened by local tsunamis from the nearby Mariana Subduction Zone, as well as distant sources from around the Pacific Ocean Basin. ■ Puerto Rico and the United States Virgin Islands are threatened by multiple local and distant tsunami sources, such as the Puerto Rico Trench (PRT), given their location in the complex seismic region of the Caribbean Sea. Several historical events stand out because of their catastrophic impacts. ■ In the Pacific Northwest, the 1700 Cascadia earthquake caused a tsunami that affected coastal Native American communities, though the extent of the damage is not fully documented (Ludwin, et al., 2005). ■ In Puerto Rico, the 1918 earthquake triggered a tsunami that caused $77 million in damage in 2022 dollars and 116 fatalities, primarily along the western coast (Coffman et al., 1982). ■ The 1946 Aleutian Islands earthquake triggered a massive tsunami that devastated Hilo, Hawaii, killing 158 people and resulting in approximately $375 million in damage (adjusted to 2022 dollars) (Fisher et al., 2023). ■ The 1964 Alaska earthquake (M 9.2) generated tsunamis that caused severe destruction in some communities across Alaska, Oregon, and California. This disaster led to a total of 124 fatalities and approximately $2.9 billion in property damage (adjusted to 2022 dollars) (Brocher et al., 2014) (Alaska Science Center, 2024). ■ In American Samoa, a tsunami generated by the 2009 Samoa earthquake (Mw 8.1) caused widespread devastation, resulting in 34 confirmed fatalities (Apatu et al., 2013) and economic losses exceeding $160 million (adjusted to 2022 dollars) (DHS, 2011). More recent events, including the 2010 Chile earthquake, the 2011 Japan earthquake, and the 2022 Tonga volcanic eruption, resulted in millions of dollars in damage to numerous ports and harbors in the U.S. South Pacific territories, Hawaii, and along the west coast of the U.S. (Lynett, et al., 2022) (Wilson, et al., 2013). Since these events, the expansion of the built environment in lowlying areas along the coast has increased the exposure of buildings and people, thereby further escalating community risk from tsunamis. This report provides a comprehensive national assessment of earthquake-generated tsunami risk. It does not include impacts from tsunamis generated by landslides, volcanic eruptions, glacial calving, near-earth objects, weather, or other events. This study is based on the best available hazard data from the U.S. Pacific Coast (California, Oregon and Washington), Alaska, Hawaii, U.S. Pacific Territories (American Samoa, Guam and Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands) and Caribbean Territories (Puerto Rico and United States Virgin Islands). Tsunami risks associated with states along the East Coast, Gulf Coast, and Great Lakes are not included in this study because Hazus 6.1 software (FEMA 2024a) does not currently include the ability to analyze tsunami risk in those states. Once modeling capabilities and tsunami hazard data become available for additional states, FEMA may incorporate these data into future editions of this study.

Alaska, California, Hawaii Oregon, Washington↗
USGS2025

ShakeAlert®—Communication, education, outreach and technical engagement strategic vision

Executive Summary In 2006, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) began directly supporting ShakeAlert ® research and in 2012 the ShakeAlert demonstration system began testing ( Given and others, 2018 ). The ShakeAlert earthquake early warning (EEW) system is a partnership between the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the three West Coast States (Washington, Oregon, and California) served by the ShakeAlert System, which is part of the larger Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS). With more than 143 million people exposed to potentially damaging shaking in the United States ( Jaiswal and others, 2015 ), earthquakes are a national hazard. Most of our Nation’s earthquake risk is concentrated in the highly populated areas on the active plate tectonic boundaries on the West Coast of the conterminous United States. ShakeAlert is the first public alert system in the United States to provide rapid mass notification of earthquake detection, potentially offering seconds of warning before strong shaking arrives. A few seconds may not seem like much time, but the information in ShakeAlert Messages can be used to trigger automated actions that can prevent injury or death, reduce immediate damage, and speed recovery from earthquakes. The information product issued by the ShakeAlert system is called a ShakeAlert Message and is one of the information products and tools of the ANSS. The ShakeAlert System includes the USGS component, plus the pathways by which ShakeAlert-powered products and (or) services are delivered to end users. Alerts can be delivered to cell phones or be used to trigger automated systems to protect equipment, facilities, and infrastructure, such as slowing or stopping a train. ShakeAlert-powered automated actions can include fire house doors that can be opened to prevent jamming, heavy equipment (for example, trains, elevators, and cranes) that can be automatically stopped or parked in safe positions, and pipeline valves that can be closed to prevent surges and spills. A few seconds of warning also may be sufficient for people to take protective actions, such as drop, cover, and hold on or modified protective actions for a broad range of populations. Advance training may increase the benefit of a speedy response to an alert. Outreach and education about EEW may raise awareness of the overall earthquake threat and how people can best react when they receive an alert or feel shaking. ShakeAlert communication, education, outreach, and technical engagement (CEO&TE) efforts are highly collaborative and essential for the success of the ShakeAlert System. This strategic vision informs how the vast ShakeAlert CEO&TE Community operates and works together. The CEO&TE Community delineates a strategic framework that is intended to set the path for a long-term, sustainable approach to CEO&TE through three focus areas and five priorities. Focus Areas Technical engagement.— The objective of this focus area is to expand and broaden ShakeAlert technical engagement and implementation. External engagement.— This focus area targets engagement in long-term communication, education, and outreach planning, implementation, and evaluation. Internal engagement.— The purpose of this focus area is to build and sustain a robust infrastructure to optimize collaboration, information sharing, and project planning among the community of stakeholders charged with implementing ShakeAlert CEO&TE. Priorities The enumeration of the five priorities listed below does not suggest priority ranking. Public safety, preparedness, and resilience; Technical implementation and engagement; Consistent messaging and communication; Integration with other Federal and State earthquake hazards products; and Educational resources development and dissemination. This strategic vision is a tangible outcome of collaboration among many stakeholders beginning in July 2016. Since then, the work of the ShakeAlert CEO&TE Community has grown into an international effort. The USGS has developed, tested, and implemented a broad spectrum of communication, education, and outreach tools and resources—all of which recognize that seconds matter when it comes to safety and mitigating harm from earthquake hazards. The CEO&TE social science research effort has provided invaluable insights into the ShakeAlert System’s human interface. USGS-licensed technical partners develop, test, and implement real-world applications using ShakeAlert Messages. The success of ShakeAlert CEO&TE efforts is predicated on robust collaboration across numerous agencies, organizations, and groups. As such, this strategic vision outlines a “partnership model” that delineates roles and responsibilities to ensure alignment with focus areas and priorities. The partnership model includes the CEO&TE lead agency (USGS); its principal partners (State agencies and university partners); its implementation partners (for example, technical partners who build systems to deliver ShakeAlert-powered products and (or) services [focus area one]), earthquake education partners who work to increase public preparedness for seismic events (focus area two); and other organizations that work together to enhance the adoption and effectiveness of the ShakeAlert System. These partners collaborate and convene through a variety of working groups and forums, which are also described in this strategic vision and align with focus area three (internal engagement). The CEO&TE Community collaboratively developed its operating principles and a consensus-based, decision-making strategic framework to guide its collective work. Performance metrics are used to continually measure success. Ultimately, the USGS and ShakeAlert CEO&TE Community are advancing the ShakeAlert System that as of the publication of this strategic vision to “provide earthquake early warning for all” serves more than 50 million people.

Circular↗
USGS2025

International data gaps at the Center for Engineering Strong Motion Data

The Center for Engineering Strong Motion Data (CESMD) is utilized by seismologists, engineers, and disaster management professionals in the US and has historically achieved and distributed waveforms from across the globe for significant earthquakes. The increased access to the waveforms via Web API (Application Programming Interface) offers a unique opportunity to provide the community complete datasets, sampling a variety of tectonic environments and geologic conditions, increasing the number of available ground motion records for use in ground motion models (GMMs) and improving the accuracy of earthquake engineering evaluations. The objective of this study is to programmatically identify gaps in global event data from the past decade and backfill missing data gaps at CESMD. We first compare the CESMD catalog with the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) Comprehensive Earthquake Catalog identifying regions and time periods where strong-motion data is limited or inadequate. To backfill datasets at CESMD for significant events, we pinpoint regions and time intervals that lack information, creating a list of events for which we’d like to obtain data. An important facet of this work is identifying the source of data and metadata across earthquake repositories around the world and integrating these data repositories into our current strong-motion data processing workflow. In parallel with these newly processed datasets, we are developing a script to produce data origination citations to include provenance and attribution information to associate with respective datasets at CESMD. We showcase our methodology for identifying and filling data gaps at CESMD using three case studies (the 2018 Anchorage Alaska earthquake sequence, seismicity associated with the 2018 Hawaiian Kilauea volcano eruption, and several earthquakes in Turkey) and then outline our strategy to apply our data gap backfilling methods on an international scale.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2026

USGS Geochron—A database of geochronological and thermochronological dates and data—Technical documentation

Geochronological and thermochronological data are essential for constraining the timing and rates of geological processes, supporting geologic mapping, natural hazard assessment, and resource exploration. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Geochron Database is a centralized, relational database that integrates USGS and State geological survey data in accordance with the National Geologic Mapping Act of 1992 and its reauthorizations. This report documents the structure and development of the database, including its standardized schema, controlled vocabularies, and protocols for compiling legacy and newly published data. The database is designed to adhere to FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) data principles and currently (2026) includes data from a wide range of geochronological and thermochronological methods. Public access is provided through the USGS Geochron Database Explorer, a browser-based geographic information system (GIS) interface, and through versioned data releases available on ScienceBase, which provide sample-level summary data and detailed analytical information. The USGS Geochron Database is structured to be extensible, supporting the inclusion of additional methods and data types as they are compiled. This format ensures long-term utility and aligns with the Mapping Act’s directive to create a national archive of geochronological information that adds interpretive value to geologic map data. Its design reflects a commitment to data transparency, scientific reproducibility, and national geoscience priorities.

Data Report↗