High-Pass Corner Frequency Selection for Implementation in the USGS Automated Ground Motion Processing Tool

We update the ground-motion characterization for the 2023 National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the conterminous United States. The update includes the use of new ground-motion models (GMMs) in the Cascadia subduction zone; an adjustment to the central and eastern United States (CEUS) GMMs to reduce misfits with observed data; an updated boundary for the application of GMMs for shallow, crustal earthquakes in active tectonic regions (i.e. western United States (WUS)) and stable continental regions (i.e. CEUS); and the use of improved models for the site response of deep sedimentary basins in the WUS and CEUS. Site response updates include basin models for the California Great Valley and for the Portland and Tualatin basins, Oregon, as well as long-period basin effects from three-dimensional simulations in the Greater Los Angeles region and in the Seattle basin; in the CEUS, we introduce a broadband (0.01- to 10-s period) amplification model for the effects of the passive-margin basins of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains. In addition, we summarize progress on implementing rupture directivity models into seismic hazard models, although they are not incorporated in the 2023 NSHM. We implement the ground-motion characterization for the 2023 NSHM in the US Geological Survey’s code for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, nshmp-haz-v2, and present the sensitivity of hazard to these changes. Hazard calculations indicate widespread effects from adjustments to the CEUS GMMs, from the incorporation of Coastal Plain amplification effects, and from the treatment of shallow-basin and out-of-basin sites in the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles region, as well as locally important changes from subduction-zone GMMs, and from updated and new WUS basins.

Section: Selecting Modifying and Combining Gmmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The 2023 US National Seismic Hazard Model: Ground-motion characterization for the conterminous United States

Moschetti,

Aagaard,

Ahdi

et al. 2024

“…Accordingly, we sought an automated or semi-automated alternative, and ultimately decided to use the USGS open-source software gmprocess (Hearne et al, 2019). We introduced options in gmprocess to improve the high-pass corner frequency selection, to facilitate manual review of waveforms, and to resolve other differences between gmprocess and past NGA project processing protocols such as the choice to filter/differentiate/integrate in the time versus frequency domains (Ramos-Sepúlveda et al, 2023b).…”

Section: Cena Ground-motion Databasementioning

confidence: 99%

Data-driven adjustments for combined use of NGA-East hard-rock ground motion and site amplification models

Ramos-Sepúlveda,

Stewart,

Parker

et al. 2024

Model development in the Next Generation Attenuation-East (NGA-East) project included two components developed concurrently and independently: (1) earthquake ground-motion models (GMMs) that predict the median and aleatory variability of various intensity measures conditioned on magnitude and distance, derived for a reference hard-rock site condition with an average shear-wave velocity in the upper 30 m ( VS30) = 3000 m/s; and (2) a site amplification model that modifies intensity measures for softer site conditions. We investigate whether these models, when used in tandem, are compatible with ground-motion recordings in central and eastern North America (CENA) using an expanded version of the NGA-East database that includes new events from November 2011 (end date of NGA-East data curation) to April 2022. Following this expansion, the data set has 187 events, 2096 sites, and 16,272 three-component recordings, although the magnitude range remains limited (∼4 to 5.8). We compute residuals using 17 NGA-East GMMs and three data selection criteria that reflect within-CENA regional variations in ground-motion attributes. Mixed-effects regression of the residuals reveals a persistent pattern in which ground motions are overpredicted at short periods (0.01–0.6 s, including peak ground acceleration (PGA)) and underpredicted at longer periods. These misfits are regionally variable, with the Texas–Oklahoma–Kansas region having larger absolute misfits than other parts of CENA. Two factors potentially influencing these misfits are (1) differences in the site amplification models used to adjust the data to the reference condition during NGA-East GMM development relative to CENA amplification models applied since the 2018 National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM), and (2) potential bias in simulation-based factors used to adjust ground motions from the hard-rock reference condition to a VS30 = 760 m/s condition. We provide adjustment factors and their epistemic uncertainties and discuss implications for applications.

Usability of Community Seismic Network recordings for ground-motion modeling

Mohammed,

Shams,

Nweke

et al. 2024

A source of ground-motion recordings in urban Los Angeles that has seen limited prior application is the Community Seismic Network (CSN), which uses low-cost, micro–electro–mechanical system (MEMS) sensors that are deployed at much higher densities than stations for other networks. We processed CSN data for the 29 earthquakes with M > 4 between July 2012 and January 2023 that produced CSN recordings, including selection of high- and low-pass corner frequencies ( fcHP and fcLP, respectively). Each record was classified as follows: (1) Broadband Record (BBR)—relatively broad usable frequency range from fcHP < 0.5 to fcLP > 10 Hz; (2) Narrowband Record (NBR)—limited usable frequency range relative to those for BBR; and (3) Rejected Record (REJ)—noise-dominated. We compare recordings from proximate (within 3 km) CSN and non-CSN stations (screened to only include cases of similar surface geology and favorable CSN instrument housing). We find similar high- to medium-frequency ground motions (i.e. peak ground acceleration (PGA) and Sa for T < 5 s) from CSN BBR and non-CSN stations, whereas NBRs have lower amplitudes. We examine PGA distributions for BBR and REJ records and find them to be distinguished, on average across the network, at 0.005 g, whereas 0.0015 g was found to be the threshold between usable records (BBR and NBR) and pre-event noise. Recordings with amplitudes near or below these thresholds are generally noise-dominated, reflecting environmental and anthropogenic ground vibrations and instrument noise. We find nominally higher noise levels in areas of high-population density and lower noise levels by a factor of about 1.5 in low-population density areas. By applying the 0.0015 g threshold, limiting distances for the network-average site condition, based on the expected fifth-percentile ground-motion levels, are 89, 210, 280, and 370 km for M 5, 6, 7, and 8 events, respectively.