USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Journal of Seismology”

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.

1,229 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
USGS2026

Wavelet Inversion for SliP (WISP): Open-source earthquake slip modeling software

Models of the spatiotemporal evolution of earthquake slip, termed finite-fault models, are a critical component of rapid earthquake and tsunami response, earthquake forecasting, seismic ground-motion estimates, and studies of earthquake kinematics. Here, we detail a newly released finite-fault modeling software, Wavelet Inversion for SliP (WISP), in use at the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) and available to the public. WISP version 1.1.0 allows inversion of teleseismic body and surface waves, as well as local strong-motion, static and dynamic Global Navigation Satellite System, and satellite imagery (e.g., Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar) observations on single or multiple planar fault segments. The software is used in NEIC rapid response of earthquakes M w ≥ 7, generally resulting in a published model within the first few hours after the event origin time. The rupture location and dimensions are then used as inputs to downstream products to estimate earthquake shaking, predict loss, and model the likelihood of secondary hazards, namely landslides and liquefaction. WISP is also used in research studies to evaluate the characteristics of complex ruptures including multifault ruptures and earthquake doublets, among others. The WISP version 1.1.0 software release is composed of Python-wrapped FORTRAN code to accomplish the inversion procedure. A simple command line interface facilitates ease of use even for those with only a cursory knowledge of Python scripting. WISP version 1.1.0 includes a Jupyter Notebook tutorial demonstrating use of the software for modeling the 2015 M w 8.3 Illapel, Chile, earthquake. In parallel with the tutorial, we demonstrate the typical usage of the WISP software using the M w 8.3 Illapel earthquake example here.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2025

Relationship between peak and cumulative ground motions from 49 Mw 3-6 earthquakes in the San Francisco Bay Area

We examine the relationship between peak ground velocity (PGV) and cumulative absolute displacement (CAD) for 49 M w 3 – 6 earthquakes in the San Francisco Bay Area (SFBA) and gain insight into the spatiotemporal partitioning of seismic energy in ground motion records with respect to source, path, and site effects. PGV and CAD are positively correlated, but there can be large deviations from the average trend. For example, ground motion records with either very long duration resonance or short pulse-like motions will have higher or lower CAD, respectively, but could have very similar PGV. We perform principal component analysis (PCA) on PGV-CAD for >7000 records in the SFBA with the goal of investigating what influences positive or negative anomalies in cumulative motions. PCA rotates the PGV-CAD datapoints into two principal components, where the one with the larger variance, which we call the “primary intensity” represents mostly the distance-dependence of ground motion amplitudes. The other principal component, which we call the “excess motion”, represents the deviation from cumulative motions that would be typical for a ground motion record with a given PGV. The excess motion will be positive in the case of records with long duration ringing and will be negative for short duration pulse-like ground motions. We find that excess motion is generally positive at sites in sedimentary basins and in soft sediments around the SF Bay. Excess motion is generally negative in the very near field, as well as at sites on hard bedrock. We discuss the findings here in terms of implications for seismic hazard applications and other wave propagation phenomena.

California↗
USGS2026

Cascadia Subduction Zone science: Call for the next generation community seismic velocity model

The Cascadia subduction zone (CSZ) hosts major seismic and tsunami hazards, yet key questions persist about the relationship between margin structure, fluid distribution, episodic tremor and slip, shallow megathrust behavior, shaking and tsunamigenesis, and the resulting hazard estimates. Addressing these problems requires an empirically grounded, three‐dimensional seismic velocity model to illuminate subsurface structure and properties and to provide a basis for geophysical studies such as earthquake simulations and ground‐motion estimation. In May 2024, the National Science Foundation‐funded Cascadia Region Earthquake Science Center (CRESCENT) community velocity model (CVM) working group, with U.S. Geological Survey and regional partners, convened a workshop to identify priorities for such a model. Participants emphasized the features necessary for addressing key science questions, including implementing findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability (FAIR) access, capturing along‐strike and along‐dip structural heterogeneity, resolving shallow offshore–onshore structure, constraining elastic properties and quantifying their uncertainties for numerical wave propagation simulations, their validation benchmarks, and supporting associated accurate earthquake ground‐motion simulations and hazard assessments. This article describes the priorities defined in the workshop, and a description of how, guided by these needs, CRESCENT plans to develop multiple generations of a CVM to advance CSZ science and improve seismic and tsunami hazard modeling across the Pacific Northwest. The CVM will span the CSZ from the surface to ∼100 km depth, offshore and east of the Cascades into Idaho (∼132°–110° W) and the southern and northern tectonic regime transitions (∼36°–52° N) to capture the entire tectonic system as well as its surroundings.

Cascadia Subduction Zone↗
USGS2026

Rupture into slow-slip fault regime during the 2018 Mw 6.9 Island of Hawaiʻi earthquake is followed by modest postseismic slip

On 4 May 2018, a M w 6.9 earthquake occurred on the south flank of Kīlauea, in the midst of an historic event that included a voluminous eruption from Kīlauea’s lower East Rift zone and caldera collapse at its summit. The earthquake was a consequence of both short‐ and long‐term stress buildup due to magmatic activity associated with the eruption and steady flank motion, respectively, and it revealed features of Kīlauea’s décollement fault that can inform understanding of future earthquake activity. We used geodetic data to determine the distributions of slip during the coseismic and postseismic periods and compared these with areas of known fault slip during past earthquakes and slow‐slip events (SSEs). The 2018 earthquake ruptured into an area of the décollement fault that was active during quasi‐regular SSEs that occurred in the two decades prior to 2018 but that have not been observed since. The coseismic slip model indicates that the amount of motion on the décollement fault was several times greater than what typically occurred during SSEs, suggesting that it may take decades for the fault to rebuild stress to the point at which SSEs will occur again. Postseismic afterslip also occurred in an area of the fault known to experience slow slip; however, unlike at other creeping faults, postseismic afterslip was rapid, being largely over within 2–3 days. The rapid nature and small magnitude of the postseismic afterslip may be due to the lack of a viscoelastic relaxation component, which is possibly a result of the shallow dip of the décollement fault not transferring stress efficiently into the lower crust.

Hawaii↗
USGS2025

Seismic intensities, ground motions and basin amplification from the 2022 Mw 6.4 Ferndale, California intraslab earthquake

On December 20, 2022, a Mw 6.4 earthquake occurred at a depth of 18 km within the subducting Gorda plate in the Mendocino Triple Junction (MTJ), one of the most seismically active regions of the contiguous United States, causing widespread damage to local communities. Here we document the seismic intensities, ground motions, and basin amplification effects recorded by this earthquake across Humboldt County as part of an ongoing scientific effort to understand subduction zone earthquake hazards. Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) values from our post-earthquake field survey report shaking intensities as high as VIII (Severe). Strong ground motion data from 54 seismic stations were processed to calculate amplitude and frequency content parameters across Northern California. The maximum calculated geometric mean PGA and PGV are 1053 cm/s 2 and 52 cm/s (respectively), both recorded within the 3 km deep Eel River sedimentary basin. Comparisons with four published Ground Motion Prediction Equations indicate that PGA and PGV measurements align with expected attenuation-distance patterns for intraslab earthquakes of this nature. Within the Eel River Basin, ground motions for frequencies above 1 Hz are amplified, with respect to reference stations, by factors greater than 2. Our findings suggest that peak ground motions were mainly caused by sedimentary basin site-effects within the Eel River basin, although rupture directivity may have also increased ground motion amplitudes locally. While the Ferndale area is primarily impacted by shallow intraslab earthquakes, our results also raise questions about site-response and basin amplification hazards from a potential megathrust earthquake. The high seismicity rates of the southernmost Cascades call for stronger regional preparedness and improved strategies to mitigate the effects of such a large-scale disaster.

California↗
USGS2026

Simulated ground motion dataset in the Azores Plateau, Portugal, on rock and soil sites

Building on a previously developed bedrock dataset, this study extends the Azores Plateau ground motion simulations to include soil-amplified records and introduces a comprehensive validation framework. Soil amplification is modeled using one-dimensional soil profiles. A stochastic source-based approach is employed to generate the dataset, incorporating randomization of input-model parameters to account for the aleatory uncertainty in seismic activity. The accuracy of the dataset is verified through a comprehensive validation framework, showing that the randomization effectively captures variance and inter-period correlation observed in records. This work provides a robust dataset for advancing seismic hazard and risk assessment in the Azores Plateau.

central and eastern Azores islands↗
USGS2025

Nodal seismic deployment on Mauna Loa volcano, Hawaii: Dataset and preliminary insights

Mauna Loa is the largest active volcano on Earth, comprising ∼51% of the Island of Hawai‘i’s landmass and posing significant risks to the island’s communities, infrastructure, and natural environment. Historical eruptions have produced lava flows that have reached the ocean in as little as 3 hr. The timing and location of such lava flows in the past 200 yr underscore how critical determination of the location and geometry of magma storage and structure is for volcanic hazard assessment and eruption forecasting. Now, after nearly 38 yr of volcanic quiescence, Mauna Loa has erupted again. On 27 November 2022, fissures initiated within the summit caldera and then migrated to the northeast rift zone, where they generated a large lava flow that threatened a major highway. To improve our understanding of the geometry of this magma system, we deployed a temporary nodal array on Mauna Loa in the summer of 2024. This increased our seismic coverage sufficiently to image this magmatic system. This nodal array consists of 33 seismometers distributed on and around the volcano and was deployed for over three months to record seismic signals. The primary objective of this project is to resolve the high‐resolution seismic velocity structure and characterize seismic features associated with magma storage and ascent pathways. In this article, we present an overview of the deployment, evaluate the quality of the data, and show example recordings to evaluate the suitability of the data set for future seismic investigations, including earthquake relocation, seismic tomography, and receiver function analysis. Comparisons with nearby permanent broadband and short‐period seismic stations demonstrate that the nodal array recorded high‐quality waveforms, making it a valuable resource for constraining the magmatic system beneath Mauna Loa at multiple scales.

Hawaii↗
USGS2024

On algorithmically determined versus traditional macroseismic intensity assignments

The utility of macroseismic data, defined as the effects of earthquakes on humans and the built environment, has been increasingly recognized following the advent of online systems that now produce unprecedented volumes of macroseismic intensity information. Contributed reports from the U.S. Geological Survey “Did You Feel It?” (DYFI) system ( Wald et al ., 1999 ) are used to generate intensity values with an algorithm based on seminal work by Dengler and Dewey (1998) . The algorithm was developed initially to reproduce intensity values assigned by expert opinion using questionnaire results collected by telephone survey. In this article, I discuss reasons why intensity values from (self‐selected) DYFI responses can differ from values that would be assigned by expert opinion given more complete data from randomly selected participants. For example, with the data used by Dengler and Dewey (1998) , intensities near 4 could be determined from the percentage of people who felt shaking in each town. With less spatially rich data from self‐selected participants, this percentage often cannot be determined reliably. Audible noises are key additional diagnostic criteria for modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) 4, but, although the DYFI system includes a question about noise, following Dengler and Dewey (1998) , the DYFI algorithm does not include a noise indicator. At the upper end of the scale, as defined the DYFI algorithm yields a maximum intensity value of 9.05, nominally corresponding to peak ground acceleration of 75% g . These and other factors can result in DYFI values that are low compared to traditional MMI values assigned using expert opinion, even absent factors that can bias traditional MMI assignments. Modern ground‐motion intensity conversion equations determined using DYFI intensities are expected to be appropriate for DYFI intensities, but the results of this study suggest that biases may be introduced if DYFI and traditional intensities are assumed to be interchangeable.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2025

A scientific vision and roadmap for earthquake rupture forecast developments, a USGS perspective

We articulate a scientific vision and roadmap for the development of improved Earthquake Rupture Forecast models, which are one of the two main modeling components used in modern seismic hazard and risk analysis. One primary future objective is to provide fully time-dependent models that include both elastic rebound and spatiotemporal clustering nationwide, which is particularly important for shorter-term hazard and risk considerations (e.g., earthquake insurance products). We also discuss the importance and perennial challenges associated with quantifying epistemic uncertainties, including those associated with deformation-model slip rates, un-quantified sampling errors with respect to off-fault seismicity, and any spatial covariances. The need for more physics-based approaches is also emphasized, as is the benefit of adding model valuation (quantifying usefulness) to our verification and validation protocols. Given the multidisciplinary and system-level nature of this activity, modular design is critical. Future updates will also draw from best-available science by both the United States Geological Survey and the external community. The primary goal of this paper is to highlight plans that guide research and facilitate community engagement with model development, especially with respect to lowering the entry barrier for early career scientists and engineers. The paper is written so readers can focus on the sections that interest them most (see table of contents), with the Introduction and Discussion providing a stand-alone overview and summary.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
USGS2025

Seismic moment and local magnitude scales in Ridgecrest, CA from the SCEC/USGS Community Stress Drop Validation Study

We illustrate the systematic difference between moment magnitude and local magnitude caused by underlying earthquake source physics, using seismic moments submitted to the Statewide California Earthquake Center/United States Geological Survey Community Stress Drop Validation Study 2019 Ridgecrest data set. While the relationship between seismic moment and moment magnitude ( M or M w ) of log 10 ( M 0 ) ~ 1.5* M is uniformly valid for all earthquake sizes by definition (Hanks and Kanamori, 1979), the relationship between local magnitude M L and moment is itself magnitude dependent. For moderate events, ~3< M < ~6, M and M L are coincident; for earthquakes smaller than ~3, M L ~ 1.0 log 10 M 0 (Hanks and Boore, 1984). This is a physical consequence of the corner frequency fc becoming larger than the upper frequency of observation and implies that M L and M differ systematically by a factor of 1.5 for these small events. While this idea is not new, we propose a new, continuous relationship between local magnitude and moment, for magnitudes 2 to 6 which extrapolates to smaller and larger magnitudes, applicable to southern California specific to the Ridgecrest region. We make use of the plethora of seismic moments as submitted by many participants of the Community Stress Drop study, compared to the Southern California Seismic Network (SCSN) catalog magnitudes. Overall, the seismic moments in the Community Study recover moment magnitude well, so we use our new M L - M 0 to convert M L to M , refining the SCSN operational M Lr scale. This systematic difference of 50% in slope between local and moment magnitude at small magnitudes has implications for spectral stress drop estimates, earthquake ground motion modeling, as well as other magnitude scales and earthquake occurrence statistics.

California↗
USGS2025

Estimating earthquake source depth using teleseismic broadband waveform modeling at the USGS National Earthquake Information Center

The U.S. Geologic Survey National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) monitors global seismicity, producing a catalog of earthquake source parameters in near-real-time to provide information that can help mitigate the societal impact of earthquakes. The NEIC commonly relies on teleseismic observations to constrain earthquake source parameters (e.g., location, depth, magnitude, and mechanism) due to a lack of local and regional observations. For these ‘teleseismic’ events, depth phase (i.e., pP , sP ) arrival time observations provide the best estimate on source depth. However, depth phases are often difficult to accurately identify and/or pick. Therefore, NEIC relies on waveform modeling, such as those determined from W-phase ( M ww ), body wave ( M wb ), and regional ( M wr ) moment tensor estimations, to provide constraints on source depth. While depth estimates from these approaches are informative, higher frequency observations provide more precise estimates because depth phases are more prominently observed at higher frequencies. Here, we present NEIC’s relatively high-frequency (~0.04 to 1 Hz) teleseismic waveform modeling approach, termed Synthetic Depth Phase Modeling (SynDepth), for determining source depth. SynDepth was developed to provide NEIC with a tool that enables rapid, accurate, and quantifiable estimates of earthquake source depth in cases where locator depths are not reliable. This relatively simple and fast procedure searches over 1 km-incremented source depths and an expanding triangular source-time function to find the best-fitting solution. We compare automatic SynDepth solutions for a dataset of 1,216 earthquakes (M5.5-M7.6) between 2017 and 2021 to NEIC-derived depth estimates from other methods. Our approach provides a robust depth estimate for earthquakes lacking local arrival time data, and it minimizes the need for analyst review of depth-phase picks ( pP , sP ) or using predefined ‘fixed’ depths.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2026

Stress states on the eve of past earthquakes inform earthquake rupture through fault complexity along the San Andreas and San Jacinto faults

Estimating the evolving state of stress along active fault systems can provide insight into the conditions that generated past ground‐rupturing earthquakes and influenced their ability to propagate through areas of geometric complexity, such as fault branches and stepovers. We use quasi‐static forward numerical models that incorporate the 3D complex configuration of active faults in southern California to estimate shear tractions on the geometrically complex southern San Andreas and San Jacinto faults from 1000 to 1900 C.E. These tractions include interseismic accumulation of traction due to tectonic loading, viscoelastic relaxation of shear stress within the upper crust between earthquakes, and effects of other earthquakes on the fault network. We simulate ground‐rupturing earthquakes based on the along‐strike earthquake extents modeled by Scharer and Yule (2020) , assuming that stress drop is complete in each earthquake. We use Monte Carlo simulations to estimate uncertainty in evolving shear tractions due to uncertainties in earthquake timing and in upper‐crustal viscosity. Pre‐earthquake shear tractions typically do not exceed ∼2 MPa. Although ruptures with length <200 km have pre‐earthquake shear tractions that range from near zero to ∼1.75 MPa, these tractions are not less than ∼0.4 MPa for earthquakes with rupture length >200 km. Earthquakes with long (>200 km) ruptures occur only in the single‐stranded part of the system, whereas those with short (<125 km) rupture length and high pre‐earthquake shear traction occur near fault stepovers and branches. This suggests that high accumulated shear traction encourages longer rupture propagation, but may not be sufficient to overcome geometric complexities. This modeling approach informs our understanding of rupture propagation and provides estimates of fault shear tractions that are unavailable from direct measurements.

Callifornia↗
USGS2025

Using gridded seismicity to forecast the long-term spatial distribution of earthquakes for the 2025 Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands National Seismic Hazard Model

Gridded (or background) seismicity models are a critical component of probabilistic seismic hazard assessments, accounting for off‐fault and smaller‐magnitude earthquakes. They are typically developed by declustering and spatially smoothing an earthquake catalog to estimate a long‐term seismicity rate that can be used to forecast future earthquakes. Here, we present new gridded seismicity models for use in the 2025 National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands (PRVI). The previous PRVI NSHM was released in 2003, and our new models incorporate updates to both data and methodology. We utilize an updated earthquake catalog based on improved Puerto Rico Seismic Network data with newly characterized completeness epochs. The catalog is divided into crustal, subduction interface, and intraslab seismicity using new methods and Slab2 subduction zone geometries. To forecast the long‐term spatial distribution of earthquakes, we use an updated methodology developed for the 2023 U.S. 50‐state NSHM, considering three declustering methods and two spatial smoothing methods based on 2D Gaussian kernels. To adapt it for the complex seismotectonics of the region, we also adopt probabilistic methods to account for events with unknown depths and uncertainties in tectonic classification, and develop a new method for spatial scaling to counteract the effects of spatial variability in network coverage while maintaining the use of smaller events. Finally, we test the performance of these spatial models in forecasting the location of M w ≥ 5earthquakes in the region. Our updated methodology improves the representation of epistemic uncertainty relative to the 2003 model, and our results demonstrate the effectiveness of the new measures we have introduced to address heterogeneities in network detection and systematically evaluate forecast performance.

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands↗
USGS2024

How does the onset of offset influence geologic slip rates?

Geologic slip rates are typically based on the displacement accrued by a geomorphic or stratigraphic feature and the age of the offset feature. Because slip rates are commonly calculated by dividing the displacement of a faulted marker by its age, they contain two open time intervals: the elapsed time between the age of an offset feature and the age of the earthquake that displaced the feature, and the time between the present‐day and the most recent earthquake. Here, we explore the influence of including unconstrained open intervals in geologic slip rate calculations. We test the degree to which these open intervals affect geologic slip rates and their uncertainties, and we find that their influence depends primarily on mean earthquake recurrence intervals (RIs). Slip rates on faults with longer RIs, such as the Wasatch fault, can be greatly influenced by an increase of up to 20% when accounting for open intervals. In contrast, slip rates on faults with shorter RIs, such as the San Andreas fault, are only slightly influenced by the assumption that slip rates calculated over open intervals approximate those calculated over closed intervals. Our analyses indicate that faults with moderate slip rates (∼0.2–5 mm/yr) are sensitive to both open interval effects themselves, as well as methods to quantify and account for these effects. We re‐evaluate how slip rates are calculated and defined in displacement–time space using published deformation records. We explore the utility of assigning a probability distribution to the initiation of offset of the oldest faulted feature and the timing of the most recent earthquake (MRE). We find that calculating geologic slip rates without using probability distributions that capture the timing of the MRE and the onset of offset of the oldest faulted feature, especially on slow‐to‐moderate slip rate faults, can lead to systematic underestimation of average geologic slip rates.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2025

Site response and wave propagation effects in the eastern United States

Fourier amplitude spectra from regional earthquakes in the eastern United States are used in a parametric inversion for source, path, and site effects. Five earthquakes are selected for analysis during the installation of the United States National Seismic Network (US), Earthscope’s USArray Transportable Array (TA), and other temporary arrays to maximize station coverage. A global search algorithm is used to solve for site response from 0.1 to 15 Hz, corner frequency, geometrical spreading ( r - γ ), and frequency dependent anelastic attenuation in the form Q(f) = Q o f α . Tradeoff between moment and geometric spreading is handled by fixing the moment. The tradeoff between corner frequency and Q(f) is solved by selecting the value of corner frequency that minimizes an objective function defined over all stations. Values of site response and attenuation parameters show a strong spatial correlation with the physiographic provinces of the eastern United States. Site response for the Atlantic Coastal Plain is consistent with previous work using spectral ratios relative to a reference site, defined by strong resonance peaks correlated with the thickness of sediments. Site response for the other physiographic provinces is markedly different from the coastal plain, with a lack of distinct resonance peaks and a broad moderate high at frequences from 0.1 to 0.5 Hz consistent with the hard-rock geology of the regions. Like site response, Q(f) has a strong correlation with physiographic province, showing lower values on the coastal plain and higher values inland. Geometric spreading exponent, γ, decreases with increasing hypocenter distance from just above 1 at a few tens of kilometers to 0.9 at 500 km. The limited range in geometric spreading values is attributed to starting the Fourier transform window at the S ‐wave arrival for all distances and averaging over multiple wave types.

eastern United States↗
USGS2025

A newly identified creeping strand of the Concord fault, San Francisco Bay Area

The Concord fault constitutes a major branch of the Pacific–North America transform plate boundary in Northern California, bridging the strike‐slip Bartlett Springs ‐ Green Valley Fault system to the north with the Greenville and Calaveras Faults to the south. Like many faults in the San Francisco Bay Area its long‐term slip is partially accommodated by aseismic slip (creep). Although creep has been recognized and monitored on the northern half of the fault for decades, the precise location of the southern half of the fault and its slip rate—whether accommodated seismically or aseismically—has remained enigmatic. How slip transfers between the Concord and Greenville or Calaveras faults to the south remains an outstanding question. New field observations presented here indicate that the active trace of the fault south of downtown Concord is not where previously interpreted and is indeed actively creeping. We report observations of shallow creep continuing >7 km farther south along the Concord fault than previously reported, along a fault strand not previously recognized for most of its length. This is evident as right‐laterally deflected concrete curbs and sidewalk slabs on both sides of every street that crosses the fault at a high angle in southeast Concord and northeast Walnut Creek. We document the magnitude and location of these deflections to estimate accumulated right‐lateral aseismic slip expressed in engineered structures. Offsets of these piercing lines range from 8 to 18 cm, over widths varying from narrow breaks along centimeter‐scale concrete joints to 10‐m‐wide zones of deflection. Significantly, this active trace is ∼400 m west of where the Quaternary active trace has previously been inferred, placing it within—rather than bounding—the built area of suburban Concord. Slip along the fault has already caused infrastructure damage. These results revise our understanding of the southern Concord fault and help constrain its seismic potential.

California↗
USGS2026

Characterizing precariously balanced rocks (PBRs) in the eastern United States for estimating maximum past earthquake ground motions

Fragile geologic features (FGFs) can be used to estimate an upper bound to the strength of earthquake ground shaking in the past thousands to tens of thousands of years. FGFs could be especially useful in the eastern United States, where few active faults are available for paleoseismic studies and where low seismic attenuation means that an earthquake could damage FGFs at large distances. This article describes a pilot study of one form of FGF, precariously balanced rocks (PBRs), in the Blue Ridge of Virginia, ∼160 km from the central Virginia seismic zone (CVSZ) and ∼100 km from Virginia’s Giles County seismic zone (GCSZ). The main goal is to develop and refine methods for studying PBRs in the eastern United States. Photogrammetric 3D models of the rocks were used to locate their centers of mass and delineate their basal contacts, with the latter corroborated by wrapping a wire around the bases to verify the circumferences. Relations between hill geometry and amplification were used to estimate topographic amplification. Seismometers on the PBRs provided the frequencies, amplitudes, and directions of rocking after giving the rocks gentle pushes. The levels of ground shaking likely to topple the rocks were compared with the median hazard curves from the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Seismic Hazard Model and were used to map magnitudes of earthquakes in the nearby region likely to topple the rocks. Results indicate that an M w ≥ 7.5 earthquake is needed in the CVSZ or near the 2020 Sparta, North Carolina, earthquake to topple the two most fragile PBRs and that an earthquake of ~ M w 7–7.5 in the GCSZ is needed. The fragilities and estimated ages of the PBRs (20–40 ka) are thus consistent with the absence of such events in the historical record in the nearby region.

eastern United States↗
USGS2026

Simulation-based scenario ShakeMaps for large magnitude (MW6.5+) crustal earthquakes on the Seattle, Tacoma, and southern Whidbey Island faults, Washington, USA

Scenario ground‐motion maps based on empirical ground‐motion models (GMMs) provide a rapid and generally reliable means of estimating the amplitude and distribution of earthquake shaking. However, because GMMs are designed for broad applicability, they often rely on simplified representations of Earth structure, which can limit their accuracy in regions with complex source, path, and site effects. This can substantially impact the accuracy of predicted shaking in areas like western Washington State, where deep, interconnected basin structure exerts a strong influence on seismic‐wave propagation. In this study, we present a new suite of simulation‐based scenario ShakeMaps that characterize ground shaking from large‐magnitude ( ⁠ M W 6.5–7.5) earthquakes on the Seattle, Tacoma, and southern Whidbey Island faults. These maps are developed using results from recent 3D wave propagation simulations ( Stone et al. , 2022 , 2023 , 2025 ) that incorporate realistic rupture geometries, variable slip distributions, and a regional 3D seismic velocity model with shallow soils. Broadband ground motions are estimated by combining the low‐frequency (<1 Hz) deterministic seismograms from these studies with high‐frequency (1–10 Hz) stochastic seismograms. Simulated ground motions are corrected to account for the enforced minimum shear‐wave velocity and nonlinear site response. The resulting ShakeMaps represent median ground‐shaking estimates derived from multiple rupture scenarios with varying slip distributions and hypocenter locations for each fault. To extend ShakeMap coverage beyond the simulation domain (i.e., into eastern Washington, northern Oregon, and southwestern British Columbia), we scale GMM‐based ground‐motion estimates using amplification patterns observed in the simulations. These new ShakeMaps reveal the substantial influence of deep basin structure on shaking intensity, underscoring the importance of considering crustal structure complexity in regional hazard assessments for the Pacific Northwest.

Washington↗