USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “The Seismic Record”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 361 records · Page 20Linked to original sources
USGS2023

Investigations of ambient noise velocity variations in a region of induced seismicity near Greeley, Colorado

Wastewater injection has induced earthquakes in Northeastern Colorado since 2014. We apply ambient noise correlation techniques to determine temporal changes in seismic velocities in the region. We find no clear correlation between seismic velocity fluctuations and either injection volumes or seismicity patterns. We do observe apparent annual variations in velocity that may be associated with hydrologic loading or thermoelastic strain. In addition, we model uniform and vertically localized velocity perturbations, and measure the velocity change with 1D synthetic seismograms. Our results indicate that our methods underestimate the known velocity change, especially at shorter station distances and when variations are restricted to a horizontal layer. If injection does cause measurable velocity changes, its effect is likely diluted in cross correlations due to its localized spatial extent around injection wells.

Colorado↗
USGS2023

“Aftershock Faults” and what they could mean for seismic hazard assessment

We study stress‐loading mechanisms for the California faults used in rupture forecasts. Stress accumulation drives earthquakes, and that accumulation mechanism governs recurrence. Most moment release in California occurs because of relative motion between the Pacific plate and the Sierra Nevada block; we calculate relative motion directions at fault centers and compare with fault displacement directions. Dot products between these vectors reveal that some displacement directions are poorly aligned with plate motions. We displace a 3D finite‐element model according to relative motions and resolve stress tensors onto defined fault surfaces, which reveal that poorly aligned faults receive no tectonic loading. Because these faults are known to be active, we search for other loading mechanisms. We find that nearly all faults with no tectonic loading show increase in stress caused by slip on the San Andreas fault, according to an elastic dislocation model. Globally, faults that receive a sudden stress change respond with triggered earthquakes that obey an Omori law rate decay with time. We therefore term this class of faults as “aftershock faults.” These faults release ∼4% of the moment release in California, have ∼0.1%–5% probability of M 6.7 earthquakes in 30 yr, and have a 0.001%–1% 30 yr M 7.7 probability range.

California↗
USGS2023

Fault roughness at seismogenic depths and links to earthquake behavior

Fault geometry affects the initiation, propagation, and cessation of earthquake rupture, as well as, potentially, the statistical behavior of earthquake sequences. We analyze 18,250 (−0.27 < M < 4.4) earthquakes of the 2016–2019 Cahuilla, California, swarm and, for the first time, use these high‐resolution earthquake locations to map, in detail, the roughness across an active fault surface at depth. We find that the strike‐slip fault is 50% rougher in the slip‐perpendicular direction than parallel to slip. 3D mapping of fault roughness at seismogenic depths suggests that roughness varies by a factor of 8 for length scales of 1 km. We observe that the largest earthquake ( M 4.4) occurred where there is significant fault complexity and the highest measured roughness. We also find that b ‐values are weakly positively correlated with fault roughness. Following the largest earthquake, we observe a distinct population of earthquakes with comparatively low b ‐values occurring in an area of high roughness within the rupture area of the M 4.4 earthquake. Finally, we measure roughness at multiple scales and find that the fault is self‐affine with a Hurst exponent of 0.52, consistent with a Brownian surface.

California↗
USGS2023

Nonlinear radiation damping: A new method for dissipating energy in dynamic earthquake rupture simulations

Dynamic earthquake rupture simulations are used to understand earthquake mechanics and the ground shaking that earthquakes produce. These simulations can help diagnose past earthquake behavior and are also used to generate scenarios of possible future earthquakes. Traditional dynamic rupture models generally assume elastic rock response, but this can lead to peak on‐fault slip rates and ground shaking that are higher than those inferred from seismological observations. Some have approached this challenge using inelastic off‐fault rock behavior to dissipate energy, but the addition of inelasticity can make it difficult to select parameters and establish suitable initial conditions, and increases the model’s complexity and computational cost. We propose a new method that works by adding a nonlinear radiation damping term to the friction law, with the surrounding rocks remaining linear elastic. Our new method results in lower peak slip rates, reduced seismic radiation, and an increasing slip‐weakening critical distance with increasing rupture propagation distance, all within a linear elastic model. In addition, it is easy to implement.

The Seismic Record↗
USGS2023

Rapid characterization of the February 2023 Kahramanmaraş, Turkey, earthquake sequence

The 6 February 2023 M w "> M w 7.8 Pazarcık and subsequent M w "> M w 7.5 Elbistan earthquakes generated strong ground shaking that resulted in catastrophic human and economic loss across south‐central Türkiye and northwest Syria. The rapid characterization of the earthquakes, including their location, size, fault geometries, and slip kinematics, is critical to estimate the impact of significant seismic events. The U.S. Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) provides real‐time monitoring of earthquakes globally, including rapid source characterization and impact estimates. Here, we describe the seismic characterization products generated and made available by the NEIC over the two weeks following the start of the earthquake sequence in southeast Türkiye, their evolution, and how they inform our understanding of regional seismotectonics and hazards. The kinematics of rupture for the two earthquakes was complex, involving multiple fault segments. Therefore, incorporating observations from rupture mapping was critical for characterizing these events. Dense local datasets facilitated robust source characterization and impact assessment once these observations were obtained and converted to NEIC product input formats. We discuss how we may improve the timeliness of NEIC products for rapid assessment of future seismic hazards, particularly in the case of complex ruptures.

The Seismic Record↗
USGS2023

Rupture directivity of the 25 October 2022 Mw 5.1 Alum Rock earthquake

The 25 October 2022 M w 5.1 Alum Rock earthquake shows strong evidence for southeast rupture directivity along the central Calaveras fault (CCF), as indicated by observed ground motions and simulated kinematic ruptures. Peak ground accelerations (PGAs) and peak ground velocities (PGVs) are notably higher to the southeast, with an order of magnitude difference for stations at the same distance but different azimuths. In addition, PGAs are lower than that predicted by ground‐motion models by a factor of 3 on average in all the directions, indicating a low stress drop (∼1.57 MPa). Directivity function modeling and ground‐motion simulations both indicate rupture propagation to the southeast with rupture velocity between 2.3 and 2.5 km/s. We suggest that the southward rupture propagation and relatively low stress drop may be typical of M ∼5 earthquakes on this portion of the CCF.

Califronia↗
USGS2023

Evaluating a prospective fault-based stress-transfer forecast for the M7.9 Wenchuan earthquake region 15 years later

Four days after the 12 May 2008 M 7.9 Wenchuan earthquake struck the Sichuan region of China, we submitted a prospective earthquake forecast based on transfer of stress from the mainshock onto significant faults crossing through populated areas. We identified where the largest aftershocks were likely to occur that could cause loss of life. We returned the revised article to the journal on 5 June 2008, marking the last day of our observation period. The primary testable features are locations and focal mechanisms of larger ( M ≥ 4.5) earthquakes; did these events happen on or very near the faults we said they would? Did they have the same strikes, dips, and rakes as the faults we modeled? In retrospect, is the stress transfer method consistent with all M ≥ 4.5 earthquakes that occurred? We find all but one M ≥ 4.5 aftershock with known focal mechanisms located on stress‐increased faults, and their focal mechanism parameters overlap with geological characteristics we used in making calculations. Six of the seven lethal M > 4.5 earthquakes that occurred in the region since 5 June 2008 were located on stress‐increased faults, with the lone exception triggered by hydraulic fracturing.

The Seismic Record↗
USGS2023

The 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, Earthquake: Relic railroad offset reveals rupture

In the absence of documented surface rupture during the 1 September 1886 Charleston earthquake, there has been considerable speculation about the location and mechanism of the causative fault. We use an inferred coseismic offset of the South Carolina Railroad and additional numerical constraints to develop an elastic deformation model—a west‐dipping fault following strands of two previously identified faults. The constraints are consistent with a blind rupture with 6.5 ± 0.3 m of dextral slip and 2 ± 0.5 m of reverse slip below 450 m depth. We propose that repeated slip on this fault has raised the Penholoway Marine Terrace >6 m since ∼770 ka. The inferred coseismic slip on the fault in an M w 7.3 earthquake is consistent with the distribution of damage in 1886.

South Carolina↗
USGS2023

3D Dynamic rupture modeling of the 6 February 2023, Kahramanmaraş, Turkey Mw 7.8 and 7.7 earthquake doublet using early observations

The 2023 Turkey earthquake sequence involved unexpected ruptures across numerous fault segments. We present 3D dynamic rupture simulations to illuminate the complex dynamics of the earthquake doublet. Our models are constrained by observations available within days of the sequence and deliver timely, mechanically consistent explanations of the unforeseen rupture paths, diverse rupture speeds, multiple slip episodes, heterogeneous fault offsets, locally strong shaking, and fault system interactions. Our simulations link both earthquakes, matching geodetic and seismic observations and reconciling regional seismotectonics, rupture dynamics, and ground motions of a fault system represented by 10 curved dipping segments and embedded in a heterogeneous stress field. The M w 7.8 earthquake features delayed backward branching from a steeply branching splay fault, not requiring supershear speeds. The asymmetrical dynamics of the distinct, bilateral M w 7.7 earthquake are explained by heterogeneous fault strength, prestress orientation, fracture energy, and static stress changes from the previous earthquake. Our models explain the northward deviation of its eastern rupture and the minimal slip observed on the Sürgü fault. 3D dynamic rupture scenarios can elucidate unexpected observations shortly after major earthquakes, providing timely insights for data‐driven analysis and hazard assessment toward a comprehensive, physically consistent understanding of the mechanics of multifault systems.

The Seismic Record↗
USGS2023

Rapid surface rupture mapping from satellite data: The 2023 Kahramanmaraş, Turkey (Türkiye), earthquake sequence

The 6 February 2023 Kahramanmaraş, Turkey (Türkiye), earthquake sequence produced > 500 km of surface rupture primarily on the left‐lateral East Anatolian (~345 km) and Çardak (~175 km) faults. Constraining the length and magnitude of surface displacement on the causative faults is critical for loss estimates, recovery efforts, rapid identification of impacted infrastructure, and fault displacement hazard analysis. To support these efforts, we rapidly mapped the surface rupture from satellite data with support from remote sensing and field teams, and released the results to the public in near‐real time. Detailed surface rupture mapping commenced on 7 February and continued as high‐resolution (< 1.0 m/pixel) optical images from WorldView satellites (2023 Maxar) became available. We interpreted the initial simplified rupture trace from subpixel offset fields derived from Advanced Land Observation Satellite2 and Sentinel‐1A synthetic aperture radar image pairs available on 8 and 10 February, respectively. The mapping was released publicly on 10 February, with frequent updates, and published in final form four months postearthquake ( Reitman, Briggs, et al. , 2023 ). This publicly available, rapid mapping helped guide fieldwork and constrained U.S. Geological Survey finite‐fault and loss estimate models, as well as stress change estimates and dynamic rupture models.

Kahramanmaraş↗
USGS2024

Paleoseismology of the Sawtooth fault and implications for fault behavior in the epicentral region of the 2020 Mw 6.5 Stanley, Idaho, earthquake

The 2020 moment magnitude ( M w ⁠⁠ ) 6.5 Stanley, Idaho, earthquake raised questions about the history and extent of complex faulting in the northwestern Centennial Tectonic Belt (CTB) and its relation to the Sawtooth normal fault and Eocene Trans‐Challis fault system (TCFS). To explore faulting in this area, we excavated a paleoseismic trench across the Sawtooth fault along the western margin of the CTB, and compared an early Holocene (9.1 ± 2.1 ka, 1δ ⁠ ) rupture at the site with lacustrine paleoseismic data and fault mapping in the 2020 epicentral region. We find: (1) a history of partial to full rupture of the Sawtooth fault ( M w ⁠ 6.8–7.4), (2) that shorter ruptures ( M w ≤ ⁠⁠6.9 ) are likely along distributed and discontinuous faults in the epicentral region, (3) that this complex system that hosted the 2020 earthquake is not directly linked to the Sawtooth fault, (4) that the northeast‐trending TCFS likely plays a role in controlling fault length and rupture continuity for adjacent faults, and (5) that parts of the TCFS may facilitate displacement transfer between normal faults that accommodate crustal extension and rotation. Our results help unravel complex faulting in the CTB and imply that relict structures can help inform regional seismic hazard assessments.

Idaho↗
USGS2024

Shallow faulting and folding beneath south‐central Seattle, Washington State, from land‐based high‐resolution seismic‐reflection imaging

The geologic framework of the Seattle fault zone (SFZ) has been extensively studied, but the structure and fault strand locations in the central portion of the fault zone through the city of Seattle have remained controversial. Much of what is known about the SFZ has come from light detection and ranging (lidar)‐topographic surveys and paleoseismic investigations of fault scarps primarily west of Puget Sound, regional gravity and aeromagnetic modeling, and multiscale marine seismic imaging in waters both west and east of Seattle. We analyze ∼24 km of land‐based P ‐wave seismic‐reflection data that fill in a critical gap in our understanding of the SFZ beneath the urban areas of West Seattle, south‐central Seattle, and Mercer Island. These data image deformed strata in the upper 1 km, including upwarped Tertiary rock and younger sediments. Collectively, these data provide evidence for multiple Quaternary‐active thrust faults, back thrusts, and sub‐basins within the SFZ beneath the city of Seattle. The results indicate that multiple and potentially active back thrusts in the upper ∼500 m extend across the length of the SFZ and the entire urban corridor that may be analogous to those on Bainbridge Island west of Puget Sound.

Washington↗
USGS2024

Distinct yet adjacent earthquake sequences near the Mendocino Triple Junction: 20 December 2021 Mw 6.1 and 6.0 Petrolia, and 20 December 2022 Mw 6.4 Ferndale

Two earthquake sequences occurred a year apart at the Mendocino Triple Junction in northern California: first the 20 December 2021 �w 6.1 and 6.0 Petrolia sequence, then the 20 December 2022 �w 6.4 Ferndale sequence. To delineate active faults and understand the relationship between these sequences, we applied an automated deep‐learning workflow to create enhanced and relocated earthquake catalogs for both the sequences. The enhanced catalog newly identified more than 14,000 M 0–2 earthquakes and also found 852 of 860 already cataloged events. We found that deep‐learning and template‐matching approaches complement each other to improve catalog completeness because deep learning finds more M 0–2 background seismicity, whereas template‐matching finds the smallest M < 0 events near already known events. The enhanced catalog revealed that the 2021 Petrolia and 2022 Ferndale sequences were distinct in space and time, but adjacent in space. Though both the sequences happened in the downgoing Gorda slab, the shallower Ferndale sequence ruptured within the uppermost slab near the subduction interface, while the onshore Petrolia sequence occurred deeper in the mantle. Deep‐learning‐enhanced earthquake catalogs could help monitor evolving earthquake sequences, identify detailed seismogenic fault structures, and understand space–time variations in earthquake rupture and sequence behavior in a complex tectonic setting.

California↗
USGS2024

Making phase-picking neural networks more consistent and interpretable

Improving the interpretability of phase‐picking neural networks remains an important task to facilitate their deployment to routine, real‐time seismic monitoring. The popular phase‐picking neural networks published in the literature lack interpretability because their output prediction scores do not necessarily correspond with the reliability of phase picks and can even be highly inconsistent depending on how we window the waveform data. Here, we show that systematically shifting the waveforms during training and using an antialiasing filter within the neural network architecture can substantially improve the consistency of the output prediction scores and can even make them scale with the signal‐to‐noise ratios of the waveforms. We demonstrate the improvements by applying these approaches to a commonly used phase‐picking neural network architecture and using waveform data from the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence.

The Seismic Record↗
USGS2024

Uncertainty in ground-motion-to-intensity conversions significantly affects earthquake early warning alert regions

We examine how the choice of ground‐motion‐to‐intensity conversion equations (GMICEs) in earthquake early warning (EEW) systems affects resulting alert regions. We find that existing GMICEs can underestimate observed shaking at short rupture distances or overestimate the extent of low‐intensity shaking. Updated GMICEs that remove these biases would improve the accuracy of alert regions for the ShakeAlert EEW system for the West Coast of the United States. ShakeAlert uses ground‐motion prediction equations (GMPEs), which calculate spatial distributions of peak ground acceleration (PGA) and peak ground velocity (PGV) from earthquake source estimates, combined with GMICEs to translate GMPE output into modified Mercalli intensity (MMI). We find significant epistemic uncertainty in alert distances; near‐source MMI estimates from different GMICEs can differ by over 1 MMI unit, and MMI extents used for public EEW alerts can differ by hundreds of kilometers for larger magnitude earthquakes ( M ∼6.5+). We use a catalog of “Did You Feel It?” shaking reports to evaluate how well GMICEs predict observed shaking. Our preferred GMICE is the one that computes MMI using PGV for high intensities and transitions to using PGA for nondamaging intensities. These results motivate updating GMICE relationships more generally, including in ShakeMap applications.

The Seismic Record↗
USGS2024

What do we know without the catalog? Eliciting prior beliefs from experts for aftershock models

Fitting parametric seismological models to earthquake catalogs often comes with numerical challenges, especially when catalogs are small. An alternative way to quantify parameter values for a seismic region is by eliciting expert opinions on the seismological characteristics that each parameter corresponds to. For instance, expert beliefs on aftershock patterns can be formulated into prior distributions for aftershock parameters, for example, for the epidemic‐type aftershock sequence (ETAS) model. We illustrate such a method by not only eliciting priors for ETAS parameters for the Pacific Northwest (PNW), a subduction zone with a complex tectonic environment, but also a relatively small catalog. We compare these priors with those suggested by the ETAS literature for global subduction zones, discussing implications for aftershock forecasting for the PNW.

The Seismic Record↗