USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70003968

A global earthquake discrimination scheme to optimize ground-motion prediction equation selection

Abstract

We present a new automatic earthquake discrimination procedure to determine in near-real time the tectonic regime and seismotectonic domain of an earthquake, its most likely source type, and the corresponding ground-motion prediction equation (GMPE) class to be used in the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Global ShakeMap system. This method makes use of the Flinn–Engdahl regionalization scheme, seismotectonic information (plate boundaries, global geology, seismicity catalogs, and regional and local studies), and the source parameters available from the USGS National Earthquake Information Center in the minutes following an earthquake to give the best estimation of the setting and mechanism of the event. Depending on the tectonic setting, additional criteria based on hypocentral depth, style of faulting, and regional seismicity may be applied. For subduction zones, these criteria include the use of focal mechanism information and detailed interface models to discriminate among outer-rise, upper-plate, interface, and intraslab seismicity. The scheme is validated against a large database of recent historical earthquakes. Though developed to assess GMPE selection in Global ShakeMap operations, we anticipate a variety of uses for this strategy, from real-time processing systems to any analysis involving tectonic classification of sources from seismic catalogs.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Daniel Garcia, David J. Wald, Michael Hearne. 2012-02-15. A global earthquake discrimination scheme to optimize ground-motion prediction equation selection. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120110124

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗