USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · 70260166

Improving the Hawaiian seismic network for earthquake early warning

Abstract

The motivation for earthquake early warning (EEW) is the fact that in many applications a few extra seconds of notice ahead of the about-imminent strong shaking can provide significant benefit. Reducing data latencies, accelerating processing times, and tuning seismic station distributions increase time available for warning. We assess the feasibility of EEW for Hawai‘i and examine how additional stations or upgrades to existing stations can improve warning times. We designed an objective method to identify the most efficient sites for improving an existing seismic network’s coverage, taking both seismic station distribution and seismic hazard into account. The choice of locations for new seismic station sites is informed by improvements in warning time, considering the distribution of seismic hazard and exposure. New sites that improve warning time from earthquakes that are most likely to generate significant ground motions are given preference. This technique may be applied to any seismically active region and target infrastructure in which seismic hazard is spatially defined. We demonstrate this method’s use on the Island of Hawai‘i, with focus on warnings to astronomical observatories on Mauna Kea and island population centers Hilo and Kailua-Kona. We identified 13 candidate sites for new sensors, telemetry upgrades, or new station installations that should provide an additional 1–4 s of warning for the most probable damaging earthquakes in southern Ka‘ū and northern offshore regions in which 2–14 s and <4 s of warning are currently estimated, respectively.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Alicia Hotovec-Ellis, Paul Bodin, Weston Thelen, P. Okubo, John E. Vidale. 2017-02-08. Improving the Hawaiian seismic network for earthquake early warning. https://doi.org/10.1785/0220160187

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Digitizer Suite: The Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory Digitizer Testing Suite

Laboratory testing of digitizers and seismometers helps ensure that prior to deployment the instrumentation can produce high quality data and is operating within specifications. In this work we detail the software package called: the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory (ASL) Digitizer Test Suite. This Java software package provides several algorithms to verify various performance parameters of digitizers commonly used for recording analog seismic instruments. The goal of these tests is not to be exhaustive, but to identify common failures that could compromise the integrity of seismic data being recorded on the digitizer. For example, Sandia National Laboratories (e.g., Slad and Merchant, 2018) routinely do comprehensive testing of digitizers for various monitoring missions. While these tests reports are valuable for comprehensively characterizing a recording system, it would be resource intensive to conduct such tests on every seismic recorder used in a network. We focus on tests that include ways to estimate the sensitivity, timing, self-noise, and clip-level of the digitizer, as well as the fidelity of the signal being recorded. The software is publicly available and provides a way for the community to verify the integrity of a digitizer using a minimum amount of outside equipment.

Seismological Research Letters

The digital archivist: Automating legacy macroseismic data processing using large language models

Macroseismic data are a key resource to investigate shaking and damage from preinstrumental and early instrumental eras. However, data are often stored as inconsistently formatted reports describing observed shaking and damage, making manually parsing and interpreting accounts labor‐intensive. We introduce a novel workflow using Google’s Gemini 2.5 Pro large language model (LLM) to automate the extraction and structuring of macroseismic observations from summary reports. We apply this workflow to the 22 March 1957 M 5.3 Daly City, California, earthquake as a case study. We used Gemini to extract addresses, originally assigned modified Mercalli intensity values, and descriptions from each report. To address coordinate precision limits, addresses were geocoded via Google’s Geocoding application programming interface. This workflow yielded over 2300 geocoded intensity reports for the Daly City earthquake. We use the geocoded accounts, with the original report intensity assignments, to develop a shaking intensity map that in some respects rivals modern Did You Feel It? Maps. We also extract and present data for the 9 February 1971 M L 6.7 Sylmar, California, earthquake. Our results demonstrate the potential of LLMs for reliably extracting and analyzing large, unstructured macroseismic datasets. LLMs offer a scalable solution for rapidly digitizing macroseismic archives, enabling their broader use to constrain ground‐motion models in modern seismic hazard analysis and to improve our understanding of site effects in urban areas. The concepts explored here may also be applied to the handling of other legacy seismological and earth science data.

Seismological Research Letters