USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70148596

Improved rapid magnitude estimation for a community-based, low-cost MEMS accelerometer network

Abstract

Immediately following the M w 7.2 Darfield, New Zealand, earthquake, over 180 Quake‐Catcher Network (QCN) low‐cost micro‐electro‐mechanical systems accelerometers were deployed in the Canterbury region. Using data recorded by this dense network from 2010 to 2013, we significantly improved the QCN rapid magnitude estimation relationship. The previous scaling relationship ( Lawrence et al. , 2014 ) did not accurately estimate the magnitudes of nearby (<35 km) events. The new scaling relationship estimates earthquake magnitudes within 1 magnitude unit of the GNS Science GeoNet earthquake catalog magnitudes for 99% of the events tested, within 0.5 magnitude units for 90% of the events, and within 0.25 magnitude units for 57% of the events. These magnitudes are reliably estimated within 3 s of the initial trigger recorded on at least seven stations. In this report, we present the methods used to calculate a new scaling relationship and demonstrate the accuracy of the revised magnitude estimates using a program that is able to retrospectively estimate event magnitudes using archived data.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Angela Chung, Elizabeth S. Cochran, Anna E. Kaiser, Carl M. Christensen, Battalgazi Yildirim, Jesse F. Lawrence. 2015-05-20. Improved rapid magnitude estimation for a community-based, low-cost MEMS accelerometer network. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120140232

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↗