Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Seismological Research Letteres”

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.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources
USGS2018

A suite of exercises for verifying dynamic earthquake rupture codes

We describe a set of benchmark exercises that are designed to test if computer codes that simulate dynamic earthquake rupture are working as intended. These types of computer codes are often used to understand how earthquakes operate, and they produce simulation results that include earthquake size, amounts of fault slip, and the patterns of ground shaking and crustal deformation. The benchmark exercises examine a range of features that scientists incorporate in their dynamic earthquake rupture simulations. These include implementations of simple or complex fault geometry, off‐fault rock response to an earthquake, stress conditions, and a variety of formulations for fault friction. Many of the benchmarks were designed to investigate scientific problems at the forefronts of earthquake physics and strong ground motions research. The exercises are freely available on our website for use by the scientific community.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

Laboratory tests of three Z‐Land Fairfield Nodal 5‐Hz, three‐component sensors

We conduct a number of laboratory tests at the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory to verify the self‐noise and fidelity in which 3 three‐component Fairfield Nodal Z‐Land, Generation 2, 5‐Hz sensors are able to record seismic signals. In addition to the incoherent self‐noise of the sensors, we estimate the sensitivity of the units in digital volts/m/s, the damping, and the free period. These three parameters allow us to completely characterize the response of the instruments. We find that the responses of all components match a mean‐derived response to within 5% of amplitude and 0.03 radians in phase. This close agreement suggests that for most applications a nominal response is suitable. We also checked the timing of the units as compared to a Quanterra Q330HR and found good agreement up to 200samples/s . Finally, we compared the results of our noise tests on these sensors to a couple of nodal sensors recently deployed at the Community Wavefield Demonstration Experiment in north‐central Oklahoma and found that local site noise and not the sensor self‐noise is a fundamental limiter in the resolution of these deployed sensors at frequencies above ∼0.1Hz .

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

Candidate products for operational earthquake forecasting illustrated using the HayWired planning scenario, including one very quick (and not‐so‐dirty) hazard‐map option

In an effort to help address debates on the usefulness of operational earthquake forecasting (OEF), we illustrate a number of OEF products that could be automatically generated in near‐real time. To exemplify, we use an M "> M 7.1 mainshock on the Hayward fault, which is very similar to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) HayWired earthquake planning scenario. Given that there is always some background level of hazard or risk, we emphasize that probability gains (the ratio of short‐term to long‐term‐average estimates) might be of particular interest to users. We also illustrate how such gains are highly sensitive to forecast duration and latency, with the latter representing how long it takes to generate the forecast and/or to take action. The influence of fault‐based information, which has traditionally been ignored in OEF, is also evaluated using the newly developed the third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast epidemic‐type aftershock sequence (UCERF3‐ETAS) model. We find that the inclusion of faults only makes a difference for hazard and risk metrics that are dominated by large‐event likelihoods. We also show how the ShakeMap of a mainshock represents a decent estimate of the ground motions that have a 6% chance of being exceeded due to aftershocks in the week that follows. The ultimate value of these types of OEF products can only be determined in the context of specific uses, and because these vary widely, institutions responsible for providing OEF products will depend heavily on user feedback, especially when making resource‐allocation decisions.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

Integrate urban‐scale seismic hazard analyses with the U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model

For more than 20 yrs, damage patterns and instrumental recordings have highlighted the influence of the local 3D geologic structure on earthquake ground motions (e.g., M "> M M 6.7 Northridge, California, Gao et al. , 1996 ; M "> M M 6.9 Kobe, Japan, Kawase, 1996 ; M "> M M 6.8 Nisqually, Washington, Frankel, Carver, and Williams, 2002 ). Although this and other local‐scale features are critical to improving seismic hazard forecasts, historically they have not been explicitly incorporated into the U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM, national model and maps), primarily because the necessary basin maps and methodologies were not available at the national scale. Instead, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), its partners, and external groups developed urban seismic hazard maps (urban models and maps) that consider detailed site effects in local areas (e.g., Wong et al. , 2002 ; Cramer et al. , 2006 ; Frankel et al. , 2007 ; Graves et al. , 2011 ). The disconnect between the urban and national hazard models, however, means that the national models, which underlie U.S. building codes and other applications, do not make use of all of the scientific results informing earthquake ground‐shaking hazards. We recommend that future U.S. national seismic hazard assessment make use of all available regional information, including that in urban models. In this column, we describe the roles of and differences between the urban and national models, and discuss the obstacles to and benefits of integrating the urban models with the national model. Future progress on this issue will require further coordination and implementation efforts between the USGS and external partners.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

A repeating event sequence alarm for monitoring volcanoes

A major challenge in volcanology is forecasting eruptions. Repeating earthquake sequences may precede volcanic eruptions or lava dome growth and collapse, providing an opportunity for short-term eruption forecasting. I develop an automated repeating earthquake sequence detector and near real-time alarm to send alerts when an in-progress sequence is identified. The algorithm is based on a standard event detector (e.g., STA/LTA) and subsequent correlation-matching procedure that identifies repeating event sequences. A notification algorithm determines when a sequence is in progress and sends alerts. I use eruptions of three Alaskan volcanoes as case studies to test the alarm, implementing it both in retrospect and in real-time during the 2016-2017 Bogoslof eruption. These case studies show that the alarm can successfully be used to detect and alert on sequences of repeating events in a timely manner.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

2018 one‐year seismic hazard forecast for the central and eastern United States from induced and natural earthquakes

This article describes the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 2018 one‐year probabilistic seismic hazard forecast for the central and eastern United States from induced and natural earthquakes. For consistency, the updated 2018 forecast is developed using the same probabilistic seismicity‐based methodology as applied in the two previous forecasts. Rates of earthquakes across the United States M ≥ 3.0 "> M ≥ 3.0 grew rapidly between 2008 and 2015 but have steadily declined over the past 3 years, especially in areas of Oklahoma and southern Kansas where fluid injection has decreased. The seismicity pattern in 2017 was complex with earthquakes more spatially dispersed than in the previous years. Some areas of west‐central Oklahoma experienced increased activity rates where industrial activity increased. Earthquake rates in Oklahoma (429 earthquakes of M ≥ 3 "> M ≥ 3 and 4 M ≥ 4 "> M ≥ 4 ), Raton basin (Colorado/New Mexico border, six earthquakes M ≥ 3 "> M ≥ 3 ), and the New Madrid seismic zone (11 earthquakes M ≥ 3 "> M ≥ 3 ) continue to be higher than historical levels. Almost all of these earthquakes occurred within the highest hazard regions of the 2017 forecast. Even though rates declined over the past 3 years, the short‐term hazard for damaging ground shaking across much of Oklahoma remains at high levels due to continuing high rates of smaller earthquakes that are still hundreds of times higher than at any time in the state’s history. Fine details and variability between the 2016–2018 forecasts are obscured by significant uncertainties in the input model. These short‐term hazard levels are similar to active regions in California. During 2017, M ≥ 3 "> M ≥ 3 earthquakes also occurred in or near Ohio, West Virginia, Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Illinois, Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

Ensemble smoothed seismicity models for the new Italian Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Map

We develop a long‐term (a few decades or longer) earthquake rate forecast for Italy based on smoothed seismicity for incorporation in the 2017–2018 Italian Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Maps (IPSHM). Because the earthquake rate models from previous IPSHM were computed using source zones that were drawn around seismicity and tectonic provinces, the present model will be the first introduction of the smoothed seismicity method into the IPSHM. Smoothed seismicity models are constructed from both historical CPTI15 (Catalogo Parametrico dei Terremoti Italiani, 1000–2014) and instrumental (1981–2016) earthquake catalogs and use both fixed and adaptive smoothing methods. We compute spatial likelihood values comparing the spatial distribution of observed earthquakes with a suite of trial earthquake rate models to optimize smoothing parameters and catalogs. Then we produce an ensemble model using two different smoothing models (adaptive and fixed) and two earthquake catalogs (historical and instrumental), which are weighted equally through a logic‐tree approach to improve the forecast capability. We also compare our optimized smoothed seismicity models with the best two models of the Italian Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability (CSEP) experiment and retrospectively test them with the CSEP methodology. We observed that the ensemble model performs slightly better than the optimized fixed and the adaptive smoothing seismicity models obtained in this study and the best time‐independent model of the CSEP Italian experiment. The preferred ensemble model forecasts an annual rate of 1.47 M ≥ 5.0 "> M ≥ 5.0 earthquakes, with higher rates mainly concentrating along the Apennines chain, eastern Alps, Calabria, and northeast Sicily. Finally, six ensemble models are created from the different smoothing methods using different weights through a logic‐tree approach to estimate the uncertainty associated with the model.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

Tilt Trivia: A free multiplayer app to learn geoscience concepts and definitions

Today’s technology is opening up new ways to learn. Here, we introduce Tilt Trivia, a suite of quiz‐style, multiplayer games for use on mobile devices and tablets (Android or Apple) to help students learn simple definitions and facts. This mobile device game was built using the Unity engine and has a multiplayer functionality that runs seamlessly, all day, every day. A single game consists of 6–10 questions that are selected at random from a base suite of 13–33 questions. A single Tilt Trivia game takes 3–7 min to complete and allows up to five players to play simultaneously in the same game space. To begin, players select a topical avatar to represent them in the game. While in the competitive playing field, players are presented with a question and then they simply tilt their tablets until their avatar rests on the correct answer marker (i.e., true or false). Because the playing field is constantly tilting, keeping your avatar on the correct answer requires a continual counter‐tilting motion of the tablet to maintain your position within the game. A countdown timer is incorporated requiring players to answer the questions as quickly as possible. At the end of the game, a leaderboard displays the players’ scores and rankings, a metric that motivates repeat play. Players have the option of jostling other players off of the correct answer in the hopes of netting the highest score. The game is configurable to any topic and currently there are games for eight different topics (see Data and Resources ).

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

Seismicity in the Challis, Idaho region, January 2014 - May 2017: Late aftershocks of the 1983 Ms 7.3 Borah Peak earthquake

In April 2014, after about 20 yrs of relatively low seismicity, an energetic earthquake sequence (maximum M L "> M L 4.8) began 25–30 km northwest of the 1983 M s "> M s 7.3 Borah Peak earthquake rupture area near the town of Challis, Idaho. This sequence ended in the fall of 2014, but in January 2015, a second energetic sequence (maximum M L "> M L 5.0) began about 20 km to the southeast. Modest seismicity has continued in both regions with ∼ 1000 "> ∼ 1000 earthquakes detected and located through May 2017. To better characterize the seismicity in the area, we deployed a seven‐station local seismometer network during April–October 2014; one of the stations remained active until July 2015. Here, we report updated locations for earthquakes in the Challis area for 1 January 2014–31 May 2017. Using a combination of absolute and differential arrival times, we generated a catalog of high‐accuracy relocations. The earthquakes clustered into four primary groups, three of them with strikes similar to the Lost River fault—the fault responsible for the 1983 Borah Peak event. We used a modified cut‐and‐paste method to determine moment tensors for 15 of the largest events. All of the moment tensors showed normal faulting with nodal plane strikes consistent with the trend of the relocated seismicity and the regional stress field. We suggest that the recent seismicity near Challis is best interpreted as a continuation of the 1983 M s "> M s Ms 7.3 Borah Peak aftershock sequence, which is unusually long compared to plate boundary aftershock sequences because of the lower regional strain rate.

Idaho↗
USGS2018

Mw 4.2 Delaware Earthquake of 30 November 2017

The 30 November 2017 Delaware earthquake with magnitude MW 4.2 occurred beneath the northeastern tip of the Delmarva Peninsula near Dover, Delaware. The earthquake and its aftershocks provide an opportunity to evaluate seismicity in a passive margin setting using much improved coverage by high-quality permanent broadband seismometers at regional distance ranges in the central and eastern United States. This is the largest instrumentally recorded earthquake in Delaware and triggered a collaborative rapid-response effort by seismologists at five institutions along the mid-Atlantic. As a result of this effort, eighteen portable seismographs were deployed in the epicentral region within 24 hours of the mainshock. High-quality seismic recordings at over 380 permanent regional broadband seismographic stations in the eastern United States show a remarkably small decrease in amplitude with distance between 800-2000 km. The mainshock focal mechanism shows predominantly strike-slip motion with a significant thrust component. The orientation of the subhorizontal P-axis is consistent with that of earthquakes in the nearby Reading-Lancaster seismic zone in Pennsylvania, but are rotated counter-clockwise about 45º from that of the MW 5.8 Mineral, Virginia earthquake. We detected small aftershocks below the normal event detection threshold by using a waveform cross-correlation detection method. This demonstrated the effectiveness of this approach for earthquake studies and hazard evaluation in the eastern United States. Based on their waveform similarities, repeating earthquakes with magnitudes greater than 1.5 are detected in 2010, 2015, and 2017. While there is a large time interval between events, 5 years and 2.2 years respectively, the events occur within a spatially tight cluster located near the 2017 Dover DE earthquake mainshock.

Delaware↗
USGS2018

Improving earthquake rupture forecasts using California as a guide

This article discusses ways in which earthquake rupture forecast models might be improved. Because changes are most easily described in the context of specific models, the third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3) and its presumed successor, UCERF4, is used as a basis for discussion. Virtually all of the issues and possible improvements discussed are nevertheless general and should therefore be applicable to other regions as well. Two common themes are a need for better epistemic uncertainty representation and the potential utility of physics‐based simulators. Given the large number of possible improvements, coupled with challenges in defining the potential value of each, which will vary among uses, community feedback is invaluable in terms of setting priorities. We should also strive to define more objective valuation metrics.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

Preface to the Focus Section on the Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability (CSEP): New results and future directions

The Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability (CSEP; Jordan, 2006 ) carries out fully prospective tests of earthquake forecasts, using fixed and standardized statistical tests and authoritative data sets, to assess the predictive skill of forecast models and to make objective comparisons between models. CSEP conducts prospective experiments at four testing centers around the world, at which more than 400 models and model versions are currently under evaluation. These models include a range of methods and scales from long‐term global earthquake forecasts to short‐term regional forecasts used for Operational Earthquake Forecasting (OEF). CSEP has also conducted retrospective tests and developed new testing methods in its quest to answer fundamental scientific questions, improve seismic hazard assessments, and develop new forecast methods for OEF.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

Development of a geodetic component for the U.S. West Coast Earthquake Early Warning System

An earthquake early warning (EEW) system, ShakeAlert, is under development for the West Coast of the United States. This system currently uses the first few seconds of waveforms recorded by seismic instrumentation to rapidly characterize earthquake magnitude, location, and origin time; ShakeAlert recently added a seismic line source algorithm. For large to great earthquakes, magnitudes estimated from the earliest seismic data alone generally saturate. Real‐time Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) data can directly measure large displacements, enabling accurate magnitude estimates for M w 7 + "> M w 7 + events, possibly before rupture termination. GNSS‐measured displacements also track evolving slip and, alone or in combination with seismic data, constrain finite‐fault models. Particularly for large‐magnitude, long‐rupture events, GNSS‐based magnitude and rupture extent estimates can improve updates to predicted shaking and thus alert accuracy. GNSS data processing centers at ShakeAlert partner institutions provide real‐time streams to the EEW system, and three geodetic EEW algorithms have been developed through the ShakeAlert collaboration. These algorithms will undergo initial testing within ShakeAlert’s computational architecture using a suite of input data that includes simulated real‐time displacements from synthetic earthquakes and GNSS recordings from recent earthquakes worldwide. Performance will be evaluated using metrics and standards consistent with those adopted for ShakeAlert overall. This initial assessment will guide method refinement and synthesis of the most successful features into a candidate geodetic algorithm for the ShakeAlert production system. In parallel, improvements to geodetic networks and streamlining approaches to data processing and exchange will ensure robust geodetic data availability in the event of an earthquake.

West coast↗
USGS2018

Sensor suite: The Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory Instrumentation Testing Suite

To standardize parameters used in seismometer testing and calibration and to make these algorithms accessible to the seismological community, we have developed a new seismometer testing software package called Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory (ASL) Sensor Test Suite. This software is written in Java and makes use of Seismological Exchange for Earthquake Data (SEED) format. Our goal is not to be all‐inclusive but instead to focus on a few of the instrumentation tests we view as critical when verifying a sensor’s performance. The tests include self‐noise, relative azimuth, relative gain, and estimation of the poles and zeros. For the self‐noise and the relative azimuth, we also include three‐component versions of these tests to allow for the case of sensors with potentially different orientations (e.g., boreholes). The software has been made available on GitHub with the hope that it will be useful for other seismologists who need to quickly verify various sensor parameters without having to write their own versions of the algorithms. Furthermore, by using a common platform and processing algorithms, it becomes possible to compare results among different tests with similar processing methods being used for both.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2018

Spatiotemporal analysis of the Foreshock-Mainshock-Aftershock sequence of the 6 July 2017 M5.8 Lincoln, Montana, earthquake

A MW 5.8 earthquake occurred on 6 July 2017 at 12.2 km depth, 11 km southeast of Lincoln in west central Montana. No major damage or injuries were reported; however, the widely felt mainshock generated a prolific aftershock sequence with more than 1200 located events through the end of 2017. The Lincoln event is the latest in a series of moderate-to-large earthquakes that have affected western Montana. We characterize the spatiotemporal evolution of the sequence using matched filter detection and multiple-event relocation techniques. Moment tensor solutions and aftershock locations indicate faulting occurred on a 9-km-long NNE-striking, near-vertical, strike-slip fault antithetic to the Lewis and Clark Line, the main through-going fault system. Seismicity primarily occurs between 6 and 16 km depth, consistent with seismicity in the Intermountain Seismic Belt. We estimate a fault rupture area of ~64 km2 and ~30 cm of average fault displacement. We identified four foreshocks in the three days prior to, and 3005 aftershocks in the three weeks following the mainshock. The supplemented catalog frequency-magnitude distribution has a b-value of 0.79 and a minimum magnitude of completeness of 0.7. The overall decay rate is consistent with a modified Omori decay law p-value of 0.76 and c-value of 0.32. This event demonstrates that unmapped faults antithetic to major geologic structures play a role in accommodating regional strain in Western Montana and can host significant earthquakes

Montana↗
USGS2018

Ground motions from induced earthquakes in Oklahoma and Kansas

Improved predictions of earthquake ground motions are critical to advancing seismic hazard analyses and earthquake response. The high seismicity rate from 2009 to 2016 in Oklahoma and Kansas provides an extensive data set for examining the ground motions from these events. We evaluate the ability of three suites of ground‐motion prediction equations (GMPEs)—appropriate for modeling tectonic earthquakes in active crustal and stable continental regions—to reproduce the observed ground motions. Mixed‐effects regressions are used to separate the ground‐motion residuals into bias, between‐event, and within‐event terms. Although the residuals depict differing accuracies in the ability of the three GMPE suites to predict the ground motions, some consistent trends emerge in the period, magnitude, and distance dependence. The trends suggest that aspects of the ground motions from these induced earthquakes are not well modeled by current tectonic GMPEs. Most important, we find evidence for relatively poor overall fit to the ground motions, by all of the GMPE suites, at periods less than about 0.2 s and above 3 s, greater‐than‐predicted magnitude scaling for small to moderate‐magnitude events ( ⁠ M ≲ 5 "> M ≲ 5 ⁠ ), higher‐than‐predicted within‐event variability above 3 s, and an apparent geometric attenuation that is stronger than average predictions at close distances ( ⁠ R ≲ 20    km "> R ≲ 20 km ) and short periods ( ⁠ T ≲ 1 s "> T ≲ 1 s ). Our results indicate that regionally appropriate GMPEs for induced earthquakes should be used for predicting ground motions in Oklahoma and Kansas.

Kansas, Oklahoma↗
USGS2018

Updated California aftershock parameters

Reasenberg and Jones (1989) introduced a statistical model for aftershock rate following a mainshock along with estimates of “generic” California parameter values based on past aftershock sequences. The Reasenberg and Jones (1989) model has been used for decades to issue aftershock forecasts following M ≥ 5 "> M ≥ 5 mainshocks in California. Here, we update the “generic” parameters for California through a fit to the aftershock sequences of M ≥ 5 "> M ≥ 5 mainshocks occurring since 1980. We find aftershock productivity values that are lower on average than the generic productivity reported by Reasenberg and Jones (1989) , likely because low‐productivity sequences were omitted from their analysis and possibly because of a trade‐off between productivity and b "> b ‐value. We confirm the observation of Llenos and Michael (2017) that southern California sequences are more productive on average than northern California sequences. The Mendocino area is much less productive; the hydrothermal areas in Long Valley, Coso, and the Salton Sea, in contrast, are much more productive. We also quantify the variability of the Reasenberg and Jones (1989) productivity parameter a "> a a between sequences with a normal distribution. This distribution of a "> a ‐values can be used to compute aftershock forecasts that include epistemic uncertainty and can be used as the prior for Bayesian updating of the a "> a a ‐value as a sequence progresses.

California↗
USGS2019

The current unlikely earthquake hiatus at California’s transform boundary paleoseismic sites

Paleoseismic and historical earthquake records used to quantify earthquake recurrence rates can also be used to test the likelihood of seismically quiescent periods. At principal paleoseismic sites in California on the San Andreas, San Jacinto, Elsinore, and Hayward faults, no ground‐rupturing earthquake has occurred in the last 100 yr, yet this interval is about three times the average interearthquake period for the ensemble of sites. We examine long paleoseismic records from these faults, as they carry most of the transform fault slip on the plate boundary, to see if the current hiatus has any precedent in the last 1000 yr. The selection of sites is designed to sample fault sections unlikely to have ruptured together, so their conditional probabilities of a hiatus can be combined as independent events. We find a 100‐yr hiatus is not predicted by common time‐dependent or time‐independent recurrence models. Paleoearthquake dating uncertainties can allow long open intervals at individual sites or subsets of sites, but do not explain the observed gap in the ensemble. After approximately removing redundancies in the full paleoearthquake record, the time‐independent probability of the current 100‐yr gap is of order 0.3%. This raises several questions. Do we live in a statistically exceptional time? Or does some wide‐scale effect modulate earthquake occurrence among sites over longer timescales? Finally, how should we understand seismic hazard estimates in California if the recurrence models on which they rely seem, at minimum, incomplete? Whether due to a statistical anomaly, some longer‐term modulation of earthquake occurrence, or another cause, our results emphasize that the hiatus of the last century has been exceptional.

California↗