Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Bulletin of Seismological Society of America”

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.

1,228 records · Page 6Linked to original sources
USGS2025

Fiber-optic sensing for earthquake hazards research, monitoring and early warning

The use of fiber‐optic sensing systems in seismology has exploded in the past decade. Despite an ever‐growing library of ground‐breaking studies, questions remain about the potential of fiber‐optic sensing technologies as tools for advancing if not revolutionizing earthquake‐hazards‐related research, monitoring, and early warning systems. A working group convened to explore these topics; we comprehensively examined the application of fiber optics in various aspects of earthquake hazards, encompassing earthquake source processes, crustal imaging, data archiving, and technological challenges. There is great potential for fiber‐optic systems to advance earthquake monitoring and understanding, but to fully unlock their capabilities requires continued progress in key areas of research and development, including instrument testing and validation, increased dynamic range for applications focused on larger earthquakes, and continued improvement in subsurface and source imaging methods. A key current stumbling block results from the lack of clear data archiving requirements, and we propose an initial strategy that balances data volume requirements with preserving key data for a broad range of future studies. In addition, we demonstrate the potential for fiber‐optic sensing to impact monitoring efforts by documenting the data completeness in a number of long‐term experiments. Finally, we outline the features of a instrument testing facility that would enable progress toward reliable and standardized distributed acoustic sensing data. Overcoming these current obstacles would facilitate progress in fiber‐optic sensing and unlock its potential application to a broad range of earthquake hazard problems.

California, Oregon, Washington↗
USGS2025

Haunted Summerville: Ghostly lights or earthquake lights?

Among the colorful local lore in the Charleston, South Carolina, area, are a number of ghost stories, shared not only over campfires but also in published books. Among the most well-known of the stories is the tale of the Summerville Light. Local lore holds that a strange light sometimes seen in a remote area is a lantern carried by the ghost of a local woman who once waited hours for her husband, who turned out to have been decapitated earlier that day in a train accident (DePoppe, 2023). Extant sources suggest the ghost stories began to circulate in the 1950s to 1960s. So pervasive was the lore that (Old) Sheep Island Road became known among local residents as Light Road, with a local stretch of road known today as Old Light Road. Reviewing the location where the lights appear as well as the nature of accounts, I suggest that many if not all of the anecdotal observations can be most readily attributed to natural phenomena, including earthquake lights from earthquakes that were too small to be felt. Accounts of lights near Summerville cluster in proximity to the generally accepted epicenter of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, where foreshocks to the 1886 mainshock were apparently concentrated, and within a few kilometers of three M3.5 – 4.4 earthquakes in 1959 and 1960.

South Carolina↗
USGS2025

Late Pleistocene kinematics of the Great Southern Puerto Rico Fault Zone, Puerto Rico

Several onshore faults in southern Puerto Rico have recently been recognized as Quaternary active. However, the kinematics of these faults, particularly any lateral component, remain largely unconstrained. It is difficult to characterize low strain‐rate faults, partially due to extensive erosional and anthropogenic landscape modification, steep relief, and frequent landsliding, limiting the preservation of geomorphic features that could serve as recorders of fault motion. Here, we constrain the kinematics along sections of the Great Southern Puerto Rico Fault Zone (GSPRFZ) on the southern coastal plain of Puerto Rico. We integrate ∼1‐m‐resolution light detection and ranging (lidar)‐derived topography, historical air photos, and field mapping to identify a series of ∼50–1200‐m‐long fault scarps and lineaments that trend northwest–southeast and extend for ≥25 km across the southern coastal plain. Fault scarps are primarily south facing, cut across topography, and displace Quaternary deposits and landforms. We document multiple offset geomorphic markers, including channel thalwegs and interfluves formed in deposits previously mapped as Quaternary piedmont alluvial plain. We observe both vertical (south‐side‐down) and right‐lateral meter‐scale displacements, which indicate that the GSPRFZ accommodates right‐lateral oblique motion in the late Pleistocene, consistent with northeast motion of the Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands microplate away from the Hispaniola block.

Puerto Rico↗
USGS2026

Landslide volume estimation from seismic waveform features using a global catalog of seismogenic events

Seismic waves generated by large, rapid landslides encode information about the source and can be analyzed rapidly following an event. Even remote landslides can pose hazards to downstream communities, so rapid detection and characterization using existing seismic monitoring networks could be beneficial. In this study, we expand on past regionally limited work by presenting a globally applicable method for estimating landslide volume from seismic features that could be integrated into future landslide seismic monitoring frameworks. We train the model using multivariable linear regression and five seismic features derived from recordings of 129 landslide events of a range of styles and locations with independently estimated volumes. We present two preferred models, one that combines long‐period (LP) and high‐frequency (HF) features and one for use on smaller landslides without observed long‐period signals. We find that our best‐performing model, applicable to landslides larger than 100,000 m 3 with signals containing observable long‐period energy, requires only two features: LP (20–100 s) absolute maximum amplitude and HF (1–5 Hz) rise time (time between the signal start and the maximum envelope amplitude) and has an R 2 score of 0.79. This model predicted volumes within one order of magnitude for 55 out of 58 events. We find that this combination mitigates the trade‐off between mass and acceleration and other variations of landslide style that limit methods based on amplitude alone.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2025

Long‐period ground motions from dynamic rupture simulations of large earthquakes on the creeping Hayward–Calaveras–Rodgers Creek fault system

he Hayward, Calaveras, and Rodgers Creek faults in the San Francisco Bay region of California have a high probability of producing a large earthquake in the next decades. Although these faults creep, the creep is insufficient to keep up with their relatively rapid slip rates on their deepest sections, so they have been storing tectonic strain since their last large earthquakes, with the Hayward’s and Rodgers Creek’s more than 150 yr ago. We do not know what the next large Hayward–Calaveras–Rodgers Creek earthquakes will look like or how strongly they will shake the San Francisco Bay region. Harris et al. (2021) used the 3D dynamic (spontaneous) rupture method to simulate large earthquakes on these creeping faults. In this article, we examine the resulting simulated long‐period ( T > 1 s) ground shaking from 0 to 50 km distance, for earthquakes nucleating on the Hayward fault and earthquakes nucleating on the Rodgers Creek fault. We compare these simulated long‐period ground motions with the Boore et al. (2014) well‐established empirically based ground‐motion model suitable for the slowest material velocity in our 3D velocity structure. We find that the simulated long‐period ground motions from the creeping‐fault earthquake scenarios produce a reasonable agreement with the empirical expectations if frictional cohesion is included only where it is appropriate.

California↗
USGS2026

Preface to the focus section on intraplate earthquakes

More than a half century after plate tectonics provided an overarching framework to explain earthquakes along active plate boundaries, numerous theories have been proposed to explain where, why, and how often earthquakes occur well away from active plate boundaries, but a paradigm remains elusive. Even the classification of earthquakes away from active plate boundaries as "intraplate" raises issues, with potentially important distinctions between Stable Continental Regions and more actively deforming regions including passive margins and failed rifts. Some of the largest known intraplate earthquakes themselves remain enigmatic, having occurred before the modern instrumental era. Hazard assessments are often data-limited: low fault-slip rates relative to landscape modification rates result in poor discoverability of fault sources, challenging the characterization of source zones and earthquake recurrence; the completeness and homogenization of instrumental earthquake catalogs using uncertain magnitude conversions can lead to uncertainties in earthquake recurrence; and, limited strong-motion observations for large-magnitude events at near-source distances leads to uncertainties in the selection and development of ground-motion models for seismic hazard studies. Data from recent intraplate earthquakes around the world—from the moment magnitude M 7.7 2001 Bhuj, India, earthquake 25 years ago to the 2024 M 4.8 Tewksbury, New Jersey earthquake—have yielded both new insights and new questions. The papers in this special focus discuss many of the long-standing challenges involved with intraplate earthquake investigations and provide a snapshot of the state of the art with current research to advance our understanding.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2025

What 25+ years of "Did You Feel It" intensities tell us about shaking in California

“When will the Big One happen?” is a question that people often have for earthquake scientists. But while waiting for the “Big One” to occur, people will usually experience frightening or damaging shaking from multiple relatively smaller‐magnitude earthquakes. Given this context, it raises the question: “Where does most of the damage come from?” Could smaller, yet more frequent, earthquakes account for the majority of reported impactful shaking? To explore this question, we consider reports of earthquake damage and felt shaking experiences from a catalog of community‐collected intensity values from the U.S. Geological Survey’s “Did You Feel It?” system. Comparing these intensities to expectations from a ground‐motion model, we find that earthquakes of magnitudes smaller than expected are responsible for most reported intensities of community decimal intensities (CDI) 4.5 and above (moderate and higher shaking intensity levels). (Here “expected value” is meant in its mathematical sense of the mean or equivalently median shaking intensity.) We also present a regional analysis of observed earthquake shaking for specific areas, detailing the maximum intensity experienced within a predetermined area. We identify several instances of M < 4.5 events that generated maximum intensities of CDI > 5 in regions in California surrounding the cities of Eureka, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego. Our results motivate the need to include smaller‐magnitude earthquakes in communications about earthquake hazard and risk reduction.

California↗
USGS2025

Updating regional‐scale geospatial liquefaction models with locally available geotechnical data

We present a method to update the geospatial liquefaction model used by the U.S. Geological Survey’s near‐real‐time ground failure product with subsurface geotechnical data. The geospatial model estimates liquefaction probability from peak ground velocity (via ShakeMap) and geospatial susceptibility proxies. In many regions, additional information relevant to constraining liquefaction likelihood is also available, including surface geology maps and subsurface geotechnical measurements. There is currently no mechanism to use these data in the ground failure product liquefaction model, even though these data could provide more precise constraints on spatial variations in the lithologic character of the soil (surface geology) and direct measurements of the subsurface mechanical properties that affect liquefaction occurrence and severity (geotechnical measurements). In this study, we develop a method to integrate these data with the geospatial model and assess how these data can improve regional‐scale predictions. We develop a Bayesian updating framework and apply it to the 1989 magnitude 6.9 Loma Prieta, California, earthquake, for which mapped observations are available to evaluate performance. We constrain the Bayesian framework with 373 Northern California cone penetration tests and liquefaction susceptibility classes based on the mapped surface geology. This Bayesian model incorporates geotechnical information into the geospatial model and more accurately predicts liquefaction occurrences than the geospatial model, while sacrificing less accuracy in terms of predicting the absence of liquefaction than the geotechnical model. In future applications, this approach could be adapted to update other geospatial models using locally available subsurface data.

California↗
USGS2024

Are field observations of surface rupture useful? An example from the 2023 Mw 7.8 Pazarcık, Turkey (Türkiye), earthquake

Field investigations have long been an important component of the scientific response to surface‐faulting earthquakes. However, in light of advances in remote data and models, the question arises whether field‐based observations of surface rupture remain useful for understanding rupture processes and seismic hazards. We approach this question using a field‐based study of the central 2023 M w 7.8 Pazarcık, Turkey (Türkiye), earthquake rupture, at the intersection of the east Anatolian fault (EAF) and Narlı fault. Our field observations include the surface rupture expression and extent of the central EAF and northernmost Narlı fault in generally forested and steep terrain and 68 measurements of left‐lateral surface displacement. These data improve our understanding of the Pazarcık rupture complexity, resolve the surface geometry of the Narlı fault–EAF connection, and exhibit a clear (>2 m) change in surface displacement across this intersection zone that confirms remote‐based coseismic slip models. Our study shows that focusing field efforts in areas of obscured or low‐resolution remote data can yield essential data for refining rupture extent, documenting perishable on‐fault displacement, and improving postearthquake situational awareness. A comparison of similarly large‐magnitude continental surface‐rupturing earthquakes indicates that displacement uncertainties relate to a complex set of factors, including measurement methods, rupture complexity, and displacement magnitude. Our study validates the need for postearthquake field observations, which, when driven by clear motivating questions and knowledge of methodological strengths and limitations, provide high‐resolution rupture data that complement remote‐based models.

Pazarcık↗
USGS2026

Magnitude conversion relations create substantial differences in seismic hazard models

Earthquake catalogs are essential data inputs for seismic hazard modeling. Because earthquake magnitudes are reported in a variety of types (e.g., local magnitudes and moment magnitudes), magnitude conversion relationships must be used to convert the different magnitude types present in a catalog to a uniform magnitude type to avoid biases in the hazard computation. However, these conversion relationships are often uncertain and have been shown to sometimes perform poorly. Here, we investigate the sensitivity of the gridded seismicity component of the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) to the catalog conversion equations in the Eastern United States. In the 2023 NSHM, magnitudes of various types were converted to moment magnitudes using equations developed by the Central and Eastern United States Seismic Source Characterization for Nuclear Facilities (CEUS‐SSCn), based on least‐squares (LS) regressions made using data from a catalog containing events up through 2008. We recompute these equations using events in the Advanced National Seismic System Comprehensive Earthquake Catalog with multiple magnitudes from 2000 to 2023. Although we prefer the use of orthogonal regressions for our datasets, LS regressions produce broadly similar results, with both approaches exhibiting large deviations from the CEUS‐SSCn conversions, especially at smaller magnitudes. We compare the spatial distribution of annual rates using three different models: (1) the 2023 NSHM conversions, (2) our updated conversions, and (3) no conversions. We find that the choice of conversions leads to substantial differences in the rate forecasts, which can greatly impact the seismic hazard model, particularly in regions with low‐seismicity rates such as the Eastern United States, where the hazard is dominated by gridded seismicity rather than a fault model.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2025

Searching for seismic precursors - The Barry Landslide hazard clean up

The Barry Landslide, located in Barry Arm of Prince William Sound, Alaska, poses a major hazard due to its steep, unstable slopes and the potential for a massive landslide-generated tsunami. With an estimated volume of 500–700 million cubic meters, the Barry Landslide could trigger highly destructive waves. In this study, we focus on seismic signals from the Barry Landslide, which are critical for providing timely tsunami warnings. Since the summer of 2020, the region has been instrumented to monitor the landslide, but the seismic record is complicated by the presence of nearby glaciers and frequent regional earthquakes. Among these signals, we analyze a specific class of short-duration, high-frequency seismic events that exhibit strong seasonal variability, increasing in rate from late summer to mid-winter before ceasing abruptly in late winter or early spring. Our analysis suggests that the source of these signals is likely near or beneath Cascade Glacier, adjacent to the landslide, rather than within the landslide mass itself. We apply detection algorithms to construct a time history for this signal type, which we then compare with environmental factors like precipitation, temperature, and slope displacement data from ground-based radar and remote sensing. Correlations indicate that these seismic events may be driven by seasonal hydrological changes, particularly the freeze-up of subglacial water pathways. While these events are not directly linked to landslide motion, they serve as indirect markers of subsurface hydrological conditions that influence slope stability. Our findings highlight the complex interplay between glaciers, groundwater, and landslide dynamics, emphasizing the need for multi-parameter monitoring to assess evolving geohazards in the region.

Alaska↗
USGS2026

Making many out of one: Synthetic geologic deformation model distributions for use in USGS NSHM25‐PRVI Puerto Rico-U.S. Virgin Island update

A key use‐case of geologic slip rates is within deformation models used in probabilistic seismic hazard analyses. Field‐derived geologic slip rates have formed the cornerstone of deformation models in such applications for decades. Recent advancements in seismic hazard analyses have expanded the use of faults for which geologic slip rates are not well constrained using categorical slip rate estimates. Because of these advancements, application of a geologic deformation model for use in 2025 U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Model Puerto Rico‐U.S. Virgin Islands (NSHM25‐PRVI) proved challenging due to: (1) a lack of field‐based geologic slip rates, and (2) a lack of epistemic uncertainty distributions within a broad range of estimated slip rates. Preliminary versions of the NSHM25‐PRVI model sampled these slip rate bins in a coincident manner along preferred and extreme value branches, which yielded untenable correlations in mean hazard results. To minimize the influence of correlated uncertainties amid these challenges, we develop a synthetic epistemic uncertainty distribution for deformation rate on each crustal fault. Each fault has a weighting schema across four possible distribution shapes: uniform, normal, triangular favoring local minima, and triangular favoring local maxima. The synthetic distributions are then sampled several times for each logic tree branch. The results provide a more realistic distribution of rates across the study region as compared with using correlated extrema sampling. This exploration of our method in a small region like PRVI can pave the way for larger‐scale, more complicated applications (e.g., western United States).

Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands↗
USGS2026

Earthquake ground-motion model adjustments for the San Francisco Bay area

We develop adjustments to ergodic ground‐motion models (GMMs) to improve their performance in the San Francisco Bay Area (SFBA). GMMs are widely used in hazard assessments to estimate characteristics of ground shaking based on known properties of the source, path, and site. Such models are often developed using datasets containing records from various regions, resulting in models that represent median ground‐motion behavior, which may not adequately represent ground motions within subregions. This is true for the SFBA, where ground motions attenuate more rapidly with distance than in many other parts of California that dominate GMM databases. To support improved seismic hazard estimates in the SFBA, we calculate regional constants and anelastic attenuation coefficient adjustments relative to two commonly used ergodic GMMs: BSSA14 ( Boore et al. , 2014 ) and ASK14 ( Abrahamson et al. , 2014 ). These adjustments are obtained for a suite of ground‐motion intensity measures (peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and 5%‐damped pseudospectral acceleration at oscillator periods ranging from 0.075 to 10 s) using mixed‐effects regression. Use of the regionally adjusted models reduces the overall bias by up to 0.5 natural log units for BSSA14 and up to 0.6 natural log units for ASK14. We demonstrate one application of our attenuation adjustments and their implications in an earthquake early warning case study of the 2014 M 6.0 South Napa earthquake. The predicted extent of shaking using the adjusted models better matches observed shaking at large source‐to‐site distances, especially for lower shaking intensities, thus potentially reducing overalerting. We encourage the use of our model adjustments when ergodic models are considered for seismic hazard studies in the SFBA.

California↗
USGS2026

Wavelet Inversion for SliP (WISP): Open-source earthquake slip modeling software

Models of the spatiotemporal evolution of earthquake slip, termed finite-fault models, are a critical component of rapid earthquake and tsunami response, earthquake forecasting, seismic ground-motion estimates, and studies of earthquake kinematics. Here, we detail a newly released finite-fault modeling software, Wavelet Inversion for SliP (WISP), in use at the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) and available to the public. WISP version 1.1.0 allows inversion of teleseismic body and surface waves, as well as local strong-motion, static and dynamic Global Navigation Satellite System, and satellite imagery (e.g., Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar) observations on single or multiple planar fault segments. The software is used in NEIC rapid response of earthquakes M w ≥ 7, generally resulting in a published model within the first few hours after the event origin time. The rupture location and dimensions are then used as inputs to downstream products to estimate earthquake shaking, predict loss, and model the likelihood of secondary hazards, namely landslides and liquefaction. WISP is also used in research studies to evaluate the characteristics of complex ruptures including multifault ruptures and earthquake doublets, among others. The WISP version 1.1.0 software release is composed of Python-wrapped FORTRAN code to accomplish the inversion procedure. A simple command line interface facilitates ease of use even for those with only a cursory knowledge of Python scripting. WISP version 1.1.0 includes a Jupyter Notebook tutorial demonstrating use of the software for modeling the 2015 M w 8.3 Illapel, Chile, earthquake. In parallel with the tutorial, we demonstrate the typical usage of the WISP software using the M w 8.3 Illapel earthquake example here.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2026

Cascadia Subduction Zone science: Call for the next generation community seismic velocity model

The Cascadia subduction zone (CSZ) hosts major seismic and tsunami hazards, yet key questions persist about the relationship between margin structure, fluid distribution, episodic tremor and slip, shallow megathrust behavior, shaking and tsunamigenesis, and the resulting hazard estimates. Addressing these problems requires an empirically grounded, three‐dimensional seismic velocity model to illuminate subsurface structure and properties and to provide a basis for geophysical studies such as earthquake simulations and ground‐motion estimation. In May 2024, the National Science Foundation‐funded Cascadia Region Earthquake Science Center (CRESCENT) community velocity model (CVM) working group, with U.S. Geological Survey and regional partners, convened a workshop to identify priorities for such a model. Participants emphasized the features necessary for addressing key science questions, including implementing findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability (FAIR) access, capturing along‐strike and along‐dip structural heterogeneity, resolving shallow offshore–onshore structure, constraining elastic properties and quantifying their uncertainties for numerical wave propagation simulations, their validation benchmarks, and supporting associated accurate earthquake ground‐motion simulations and hazard assessments. This article describes the priorities defined in the workshop, and a description of how, guided by these needs, CRESCENT plans to develop multiple generations of a CVM to advance CSZ science and improve seismic and tsunami hazard modeling across the Pacific Northwest. The CVM will span the CSZ from the surface to ∼100 km depth, offshore and east of the Cascades into Idaho (∼132°–110° W) and the southern and northern tectonic regime transitions (∼36°–52° N) to capture the entire tectonic system as well as its surroundings.

Cascadia Subduction Zone↗
USGS2025

Seismic intensities, ground motions and basin amplification from the 2022 Mw 6.4 Ferndale, California intraslab earthquake

On December 20, 2022, a Mw 6.4 earthquake occurred at a depth of 18 km within the subducting Gorda plate in the Mendocino Triple Junction (MTJ), one of the most seismically active regions of the contiguous United States, causing widespread damage to local communities. Here we document the seismic intensities, ground motions, and basin amplification effects recorded by this earthquake across Humboldt County as part of an ongoing scientific effort to understand subduction zone earthquake hazards. Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) values from our post-earthquake field survey report shaking intensities as high as VIII (Severe). Strong ground motion data from 54 seismic stations were processed to calculate amplitude and frequency content parameters across Northern California. The maximum calculated geometric mean PGA and PGV are 1053 cm/s 2 and 52 cm/s (respectively), both recorded within the 3 km deep Eel River sedimentary basin. Comparisons with four published Ground Motion Prediction Equations indicate that PGA and PGV measurements align with expected attenuation-distance patterns for intraslab earthquakes of this nature. Within the Eel River Basin, ground motions for frequencies above 1 Hz are amplified, with respect to reference stations, by factors greater than 2. Our findings suggest that peak ground motions were mainly caused by sedimentary basin site-effects within the Eel River basin, although rupture directivity may have also increased ground motion amplitudes locally. While the Ferndale area is primarily impacted by shallow intraslab earthquakes, our results also raise questions about site-response and basin amplification hazards from a potential megathrust earthquake. The high seismicity rates of the southernmost Cascades call for stronger regional preparedness and improved strategies to mitigate the effects of such a large-scale disaster.

California↗
USGS2025

Nodal seismic deployment on Mauna Loa volcano, Hawaii: Dataset and preliminary insights

Mauna Loa is the largest active volcano on Earth, comprising ∼51% of the Island of Hawai‘i’s landmass and posing significant risks to the island’s communities, infrastructure, and natural environment. Historical eruptions have produced lava flows that have reached the ocean in as little as 3 hr. The timing and location of such lava flows in the past 200 yr underscore how critical determination of the location and geometry of magma storage and structure is for volcanic hazard assessment and eruption forecasting. Now, after nearly 38 yr of volcanic quiescence, Mauna Loa has erupted again. On 27 November 2022, fissures initiated within the summit caldera and then migrated to the northeast rift zone, where they generated a large lava flow that threatened a major highway. To improve our understanding of the geometry of this magma system, we deployed a temporary nodal array on Mauna Loa in the summer of 2024. This increased our seismic coverage sufficiently to image this magmatic system. This nodal array consists of 33 seismometers distributed on and around the volcano and was deployed for over three months to record seismic signals. The primary objective of this project is to resolve the high‐resolution seismic velocity structure and characterize seismic features associated with magma storage and ascent pathways. In this article, we present an overview of the deployment, evaluate the quality of the data, and show example recordings to evaluate the suitability of the data set for future seismic investigations, including earthquake relocation, seismic tomography, and receiver function analysis. Comparisons with nearby permanent broadband and short‐period seismic stations demonstrate that the nodal array recorded high‐quality waveforms, making it a valuable resource for constraining the magmatic system beneath Mauna Loa at multiple scales.

Hawaii↗
USGS2024

On algorithmically determined versus traditional macroseismic intensity assignments

The utility of macroseismic data, defined as the effects of earthquakes on humans and the built environment, has been increasingly recognized following the advent of online systems that now produce unprecedented volumes of macroseismic intensity information. Contributed reports from the U.S. Geological Survey “Did You Feel It?” (DYFI) system ( Wald et al ., 1999 ) are used to generate intensity values with an algorithm based on seminal work by Dengler and Dewey (1998) . The algorithm was developed initially to reproduce intensity values assigned by expert opinion using questionnaire results collected by telephone survey. In this article, I discuss reasons why intensity values from (self‐selected) DYFI responses can differ from values that would be assigned by expert opinion given more complete data from randomly selected participants. For example, with the data used by Dengler and Dewey (1998) , intensities near 4 could be determined from the percentage of people who felt shaking in each town. With less spatially rich data from self‐selected participants, this percentage often cannot be determined reliably. Audible noises are key additional diagnostic criteria for modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) 4, but, although the DYFI system includes a question about noise, following Dengler and Dewey (1998) , the DYFI algorithm does not include a noise indicator. At the upper end of the scale, as defined the DYFI algorithm yields a maximum intensity value of 9.05, nominally corresponding to peak ground acceleration of 75% g . These and other factors can result in DYFI values that are low compared to traditional MMI values assigned using expert opinion, even absent factors that can bias traditional MMI assignments. Modern ground‐motion intensity conversion equations determined using DYFI intensities are expected to be appropriate for DYFI intensities, but the results of this study suggest that biases may be introduced if DYFI and traditional intensities are assumed to be interchangeable.

Seismological Research Letters↗