USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · 70263384

SCEC/USGS Community Stress Drop Validation Study: How spectral fitting approaches influence measured source parameters

Abstract

Spectral source parameters used to estimate an earthquake’s stress drop (Δσ) can vary significantly across measurement approaches. The Statewide California Earthquake Center/U.S. Geological Survey Community Stress-Drop Validation Study was initiated to compare source parameter estimates, focusing initially on a dataset from the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence. As part of that validation effort, here we focus on one potential source of uncertainty: whether spectral fitting approaches alone, applied to a common set of spectra from the 2019 Ridgecrest sequence result in different source parameter estimates. By using a common set of benchmark spectra analyzed across a consistent frequency band of 1–40 Hz, we eliminate many sources of variability. A subgroup of validation study participants volunteered to estimate the low-frequency displacement (Ω0) and corner frequency ( f c ) by fitting a smooth function to benchmark displacement spectra. Participants used linear- or log-sampled spectra, assumed a Brune or Boatwright spectral model, and applied different misfit criteria. We compare 17 approaches used to estimate Ω0, f c , and Δσ for 54 earthquake spectra. Our results reveal that 35% of events have Δσ estimates within a factor of two, whereas others exhibit variations exceeding an order of magnitude. The variability in Ω0 and f c can largely be attributed to whether a spectrum is consistent with the smooth function of an idealized simple crack model. The trade-off between Ω0 and f c may be more pronounced when using linearly sampled spectra, as higher frequency spectral bumps control the fits. As expected, methods that assumed a Boatwright model tended to have lower Ω0 and somewhat higher f c compared to those assuming a Brune model, although resulting Δσ estimates are similar. When compared to the overall validation study results, the fitting approach alone may account for between 5% and 90% (25% on average) of the total variability in spectral Δσ.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 35.25143920487821° to 36.16526962047753° latitude; -118.0604945971769° to -116.9963574607869° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Elizabeth S. Cochran, Annemarie S. Baltay, Shanna Chu, Rachel E. Abercrombie, Dino Bindi, X. Chen, Grace Alexandra Parker, Colin Pennington, Peter M. Shearer, Daniel T. Trugman. 2024-12-17. SCEC/USGS Community Stress Drop Validation Study: How spectral fitting approaches influence measured source parameters. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120240140

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

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related discoveries

Introduction to the special section on improving measurements of earthquake source parameters

Earthquake source parameters such as magnitude, seismic moment, source dimension, stress drop, and radiated energy are fundamental to understanding earthquake physics, and are also key ingredients in earthquake ground‐motion modeling, rupture simulation, and statistical seismology. However, the uncertainties in these parameters estimated from the radiated seismic wavefield are large due to variability in approaches, including site and attenuation characterizations, and so estimates for an individual earthquake made by different studies can vary greatly. Estimating spectral source parameters remains a popular topic, due to a combination of their intrinsic importance and their apparent ease of measurement, but also a controversial one, due to many sources of variability and large uncertainty. The available methods coupled with necessary parameter choices and assumptions in the analysis make it challenging for researchers to apply methods or understand the reliability in results or reported source parameters. This Special Section on Improving Measurements of Earthquake Source Parameters showcasing comparisons between methods and studies seeks to alleviate some of these difficulties to help the community identify the important components and trade‐offs of decomposing recorded seismograms into their source, path, and site components.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

The impact of source time function complexity on stress drop estimates

Earthquake stress drop—a key parameter for describing the energetics of earthquake rupture—can be estimated in several different, but theoretically equivalent, ways. However, independent estimates for the same earthquakes sometimes differ significantly. We find that earthquake source complexity plays a significant role in why theoretically (for simple rupture models) equivalent methods produce different estimates. We apply time‐ and frequency‐domain methods to estimate stress drops for real earthquakes in the SCARDEC (Seismic source ChAracteristics Retrieved from DEConvolving teleseismic body waves, Vallée and Douet, 2016 ) source time function (STF) database and analyze how rupture complexity drives stress‐drop estimate discrepancies. Specifically, we identify two complexity metrics—Brune relative energy (BRE) and spectral decay—that parameterize an earthquake’s complexity relative to the standard Brune model and strongly correlate with the estimate discrepancies. We find that the observed systematic magnitude–stress‐drop trends may reflect underlying changes in STF complexity, not necessarily trends in actual stress drop. Both the decay and BRE parameters vary systematically with magnitude, but whether this magnitude–complexity relationship is real remains unresolved.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

The U.S. Geological Survey 2025 Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands time-independent earthquake rupture forecast

We present the 2025 U.S. Geological Survey Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands (PRVI) time‐independent earthquake rupture forecast (ERF), developed for the 2025 update to the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for PRVI. The updated ERF improves upon a prior model from 2003, including an expanded fault inventory with slip‐rate estimates, updated seismicity catalogs, and refined subduction zone geometries and deformation models. It applies the fault‐system inversion methodology to solve for rates of ruptures on modeled faults, adapted from the 2023 NSHM (NSHM23) for the western United States, including the first application of the inversion to model rates on a U.S. subduction interface. Off‐fault and intraslab seismicity are constrained by observed seismicity and use updated methods developed for NSHM23. Uncertainties in model components are substantial, and the ERF represents epistemic uncertainties through a comprehensive logic tree consisting of 1.7 billion logic‐tree branches combined across all sources.

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands