USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · ofr01113

hypoDD-A Program to Compute Double-Difference Hypocenter Locations

Abstract

HypoDD is a Fortran computer program package for relocating earthquakes with the double-difference algorithm of Waldhauser and Ellsworth (2000). This document provides a brief introduction into how to run and use the programs ph2dt and hypoDD to compute double-difference (DD) hypocenter locations. It gives a short overview of the DD technique, discusses the data preprocessing using ph2dt, and leads through the earthquake relocation process using hypoDD. The appendices include the reference manuals for the two programs and a short description of auxiliary programs and example data. Some minor subroutines are presently in the c language, and future releases will be in c. Earthquake location algorithms are usually based on some form of Geiger’s method, the linearization of the travel time equation in a first order Taylor series that relates the difference between the observed and predicted travel time to unknown adjustments in the hypocentral coordinates through the partial derivatives of travel time with respect to the unknowns. Earthquakes can be located individually with this algorithm, or jointly when other unknowns link together the solutions to indivdual earthquakes, such as station corrections in the joint hypocenter determination (JHD) method, or the earth model in seismic tomography. The DD technique (described in detail in Waldhauser and Ellsworth, 2000) takes advantage of the fact that if the hypocentral separation between two earthquakes is small compared to the event-station distance and the scale length of velocity heterogeneity, then the ray paths between the source region and a common station are similar along almost the entire ray path (Fréchet, 1985; Got et al., 1994). In this case, the difference in travel times for two events observed at one station can be attributed to the spatial offset between the events with high accuracy. DD equations are built by differencing Geiger’s equation for earthquake location. In this way, the residual between observed and calculated travel-time difference (or double-difference) between two events at a common station are a related to adjustments in the relative position of the hypocenters and origin times through the partial derivatives of the travel times for each event with respect to the unknown. HypoDD calculates travel times in a layered velocity model (where velocity depends only on depth) for the current hypocenters at the station where the phase was recorded. The double-difference residuals for pairs of earthquakes at each station are minimized by weighted least squares using the method of singular value decomposition (SVD) or the conjugate gradients method (LSQR, Paige and Saunders, 1982). Solutions are found by iteratively adjusting the vector difference between nearby hypocentral pairs, with the locations and partial derivatives being updated after each iteration. Details about the algorithm can be found in Waldhauser and Ellsworth (2000). When the earthquake location problem is linearized using the double-difference equations, the common mode errors cancel, principally those related to the receiver-side structure. Thus we avoid the need for station corrections or high-accuracy of predicted travel times for the portion of the raypath that lies outside the focal volume. This approach is especially useful in regions with a dense distribution of seismicity, i.e. where distances between neighboring events are only a few hundred meters. The improvement of double-difference locations over ordinary JHD locations is shown in Figure 1 for about 10,000 earthquakes that occurred during the 1997 seismic crisis in the Long Valley caldera, California. While the JHD locations (left panel) show a diffuse picture of the seismicity, double-difference locations (right panel) bring structural details such as the location of active fault planes into sharp focus.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Felix Waldhauser. 2001. hypoDD-A Program to Compute Double-Difference Hypocenter Locations. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr01113

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona