Search for: All records

Abstract I employ an elasticity‐based method to invert a geodetically derived surface velocity field in the western US using for present‐day surface strain rate fields with uncertainties. The method uses distributed body forces in a thin elastic sheet and allows for discontinuities in velocity across creeping faults using the solution for dislocations in a thin elastic plate. I compare the strain rate fields with previously published stress orientations and moment rates from geological slip rate data and previous geodetic studies. Geologic and geodetic moment rates are calculated using slip rate and off‐fault strain rates from the 2023 US National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) deformation models. I find that computed total geodetic moment rates are higher than NSHM summed moment rates on faults for all regions of the western US except the highest deforming rate regions including the Western Transverse Ranges and the northern and southern San Andreas Fault (SAF) system in California. Computed geodetic moment rates are comparable to the moment rates derived from the geodetically based NSHM deformation models in all regions. I find systematic differences in orientations of maximum horizontal shortening rate and maximum horizontal compressive stress in the Pacific Northwest region and along much of the SAF system. In the Pacific Northwest, the maximum horizontal stress orientations are rotated counterclockwise 40–90° relative to the maximum horizontal strain rate directions. Along the SAF system, the maximum horizontal stresses are rotated systematically 25–40° clockwise (closer to fault normal) relative to the strain rates. 

This release of SliDeFS fixes a few bugs in the first release, but more importantly, adds the capability to invert for off-fault distributed moment sources as well as fault slip deficit rates. What's Changed Full Changelog: https://github.com/kajjohns/SliDeFS/compare/v1.0.0...v2.0.0 

Abstract The potential for future earthquakes on faults is often inferred from inversions of geodetically derived surface velocities for locking on faults using kinematic models such as block models. This can be challenging in complex deforming zones with many closely spaced faults or where deformation is not readily described with block motions. Furthermore, surface strain rates are more directly related to coupling on faults than surface velocities. We present a methodology for estimating slip deficit rate directly from strain rate and apply it to New Zealand for the purpose of incorporating geodetic data in the 2022 revision of the New Zealand National Seismic Hazard Model. The strain rate inversions imply slightly higher slip deficit rates than the preferred geologic slip rates on sections of the major strike‐slip systems including the Alpine Fault, the Marlborough Fault System and the northern part of the North Island Fault System. Slip deficit rates are significantly lower than even the lowest geologic estimates on some strike‐slip faults in the southern North Island Fault System near Wellington. Over the entire plate boundary, geodetic slip deficit rates are systematically higher than geologic slip rates for faults slipping less than one mm/yr but lower on average for faults with slip rates between about 5 and 25 mm/yr. We show that 70%–80% of the total strain rate field can be attributed to elastic strain due to fault coupling. The remaining 20%–30% shows systematic spatial patterns of strain rate style that is often consistent with local geologic style of faulting. 

This release fixes an error in the Greens function calculations that existed in v1.0.0 and includes the capability of conducting a second minimization step in the inversion (invert_bodyforce.m). 

ABSTRACT As part of the 2022 revision of the Aotearoa New Zealand National Seismic Hazard Model (NZ NSHM 2022), deformation models were constructed for the upper plate faults and subduction interfaces that impact ground-shaking hazard in New Zealand. These models provide the locations, geometries, and slip rates of the earthquake-producing faults in the NZ NSHM 2022. For upper plate faults, two deformation models were developed: a geologic model derived directly from the fault geometries and geologic slip rates in the NZ Community Fault Model version 1.0 (NZ CFM v.1.0); and a geodetic model that uses the same faults and fault geometries and derives fault slip-deficit rates by inverting geodetic strain rates for back slip on those specified faults. The two upper plate deformation models have similar total moment rates, but the geodetic model has higher slip rates on low-slip-rate faults, and the geologic model has higher slip rates on higher-slip-rate faults. Two deformation models are developed for the Hikurangi–Kermadec subduction interface. The Hikurangi–Kermadec geometry is a linear blend of the previously published interface models. Slip-deficit rates on the Hikurangi portion of the deformation model are updated from the previously published block models, and two end member models are developed to represent the alternate hypotheses that the interface is either frictionally locked or creeping at the trench. The locking state in the Kermadec portion is less well constrained, and a single slip-deficit rate model is developed based on plate convergence rate and coupling considerations. This single Kermadec realization is blended with each of the two Hikurangi slip-deficit rate models to yield two overall Hikurangi–Kermadec deformation models. The Puysegur subduction interface deformation model is based on geometry taken directly from the NZ CFM v.1.0, and a slip-deficit rate derived from published geodetic plate convergence rate and interface coupling estimates. 

ABSTRACT We present the 2023 U.S. Geological Survey time-independent earthquake rupture forecast for the conterminous United States, which gives authoritative estimates of the magnitude, location, and time-averaged frequency of potentially damaging earthquakes throughout the region. In addition to updating virtually all model components, a major focus has been to provide a better representation of epistemic uncertainties. For example, we have improved the representation of multifault ruptures, both in terms of allowing more and less fault connectivity than in the previous models, and in sweeping over a broader range of viable models. An unprecedented level of diagnostic information has been provided for assessing the model, and the development was overseen by a 19-member participatory review panel. Although we believe the new model embodies significant improvements and represents the best available science, we also discuss potential model limitations, including the applicability of logic tree branch weights with respect different types of hazard and risk metrics. Future improvements are also discussed, with deformation model enhancements being particularly worthy of pursuit, as well as better representation of sampling errors in the gridded seismicity components. We also plan to add time-dependent components, and assess implications with a wider range of hazard and risk metrics. 

Abstract The 2022 revision of Aotearoa New Zealand National Seismic Hazard Model (NZ NSHM 2022) has involved significant revision of all datasets and model components. In this article, we present a subset of many results from the model as well as an overview of the governance, scientific, and review processes followed by the NZ NSHM team. The calculated hazard from the NZ NSHM 2022 has increased for most of New Zealand when compared with the previous models. The NZ NSHM 2022 models and results are available online. 

The US National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) was updated in 2023 for all 50 states using new science on seismicity, fault ruptures, ground motions, and probabilistic techniques to produce a standard of practice for public policy and other engineering applications (defined for return periods greater than ∼475 or less than ∼10,000 years). Changes in 2023 time-independent seismic hazard (both increases and decreases compared to previous NSHMs) are substantial because the new model considers more data and updated earthquake rupture forecasts and ground-motion components. In developing the 2023 model, we tried to apply best available or applicable science based on advice of co-authors, more than 50 reviewers, and hundreds of hazard scientists and end-users, who attended public workshops and provided technical inputs. The hazard assessment incorporates new catalogs, declustering algorithms, gridded seismicity models, magnitude-scaling equations, fault-based structural and deformation models, multi-fault earthquake rupture forecast models, semi-empirical and simulation-based ground-motion models, and site amplification models conditioned on shear-wave velocities of the upper 30 m of soil and deeper sedimentary basin structures. Seismic hazard calculations yield hazard curves at hundreds of thousands of sites, ground-motion maps, uniform-hazard response spectra, and disaggregations developed for pseudo-spectral accelerations at 21 oscillator periods and two peak parameters, Modified Mercalli Intensity, and 8 site classes required by building codes and other public policy applications. Tests show the new model is consistent with past ShakeMap intensity observations. Sensitivity and uncertainty assessments ensure resulting ground motions are compatible with known hazard information and highlight the range and causes of variability in ground motions. We produce several impact products including building seismic design criteria, intensity maps, planning scenarios, and engineering risk assessments showing the potential physical and social impacts. These applications provide a basis for assessing, planning, and mitigating the effects of future earthquakes.