The Chilean GNSS Network: Current Status and Progress toward Early Warning Applications

Báez, J. C.; Leyton, Felipe; Campo, Francisco del Corral del J.; Bevis, Michael; Vigny, Christophe; Moreno, M.; Simons, M.; Kendrick, Eric; Parra, H.; Blume, F.

doi:10.1785/0220180011

Cited by 45 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some examples are presented in blue in Figures 4, S3a, and S3b, while in green are shown the results of the magnitude estimation using the PGD from GNSS data (Crowell et al, 2013;Melgar et al, 2015); the whiskers represent the estimated errors (standard deviation) for each point, and the height of the rectangle is proportional to the number of GNSS stations considered. The PGD methodology has been tested in Chile for large events (Crowell, Schmidt, et al, 2018;Báez et al, 2018), nevertheless, results that could be improved considering a local PGD regression instead a global estimation of Melgar et al (2015), used in this work. In the present study, we have considered results of GNSS time series computed using corrected orbits only, reproducing CSN's real-time conditions (Báez et al, 2018).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The PGD methodology has been tested in Chile for large events (Crowell, Schmidt, et al, 2018;Báez et al, 2018), nevertheless, results that could be improved considering a local PGD regression instead a global estimation of Melgar et al (2015), used in this work. In the present study, we have considered results of GNSS time series computed using corrected orbits only, reproducing CSN's real-time conditions (Báez et al, 2018). In this case, we computed the displacements relative to the position 10 min before the origin time.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How Fast Can We Reliably Estimate the Magnitude of Subduction Earthquakes?

Leyton

Ruiz

Báez

et al. 2018

Geophysical Research Letters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fast and reliable characterization of earthquakes can provide vital information to the population, even reducing the effects of strong shaking produced by them. In this study, we explore the minimum time required to estimate the magnitude for subduction earthquakes. Using traditional P wave earthquake early warning parameters and considering a progressively increasing time window, we are able to estimate magnitude for subduction earthquakes~30 s from the origin time (with an average residual of 0.01 ± 0.28). However, estimations for larger events (Mw ≥ 7.5) present larger errors (average residual of À0.70 ± 0.30). We complement our data with Global Navigational Satellite System observations for these events, enabling magnitude estimations~70 s from the origin time (average residual of À0.42 ± 0.41). We propose that rapid estimations of magnitude should consider, initially, P waves in a progressively increasing time window, and complemented with GNSS data, for large events.Plain Language Summary Fast and reliable magnitude estimation of earthquakes enables the preparation of the public to reduce its impact. Here we test known methods to rapidly estimate the magnitude of subduction earthquakes. We found encouraging results, taking a few tens of seconds to provide reliable values. However, results for larger events tend to underestimate the real magnitude. Hence, we propose the combination with other sources of information, such as Global Positioning System, that are able to resolve these larger events.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Fast Can We Reliably Estimate the Magnitude of Subduction Earthquakes?

Leyton

Ruiz

Báez

et al. 2018

Geophysical Research Letters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Central Andes GPS Project (Brooks et al, ) and South America Geodynamic Activities (Klotz et al, ) GPS marks in the area were remeasured at the same time to gather a data set of almost 70 survey points, measured at least 3 times and up to 7 times (see Table S1 and Klein et al, , for more details about the network and measurements). The sGPS data set is augmented by observations from recently installed cGPS stations operated by the Centro Sismologico Nacional de Chile (CSN; Báez et al, ), together with a selection of well‐distributed permanent stations across the South American continent (International GPS Service; Beutler et al, ), ( Red Argentina de Monitoreo Satelital Continuo ; Piñón et al, ), and Rede Brasileira de Monitoramento Contínuo networks. This data set is processed using a differential approach (GAMIT/GLOBK software), following methods outlined in Herring et al (, ) and with the same approach used by previous studies in Central North Chile (Klein et al, ; Métois et al, ; Vigny et al, ).…”

Section: Gps Observationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deep Transient Slow Slip Detected by Survey GPS in the Region of Atacama, Chile

Klein

Duputel

Zigone

et al. 2018

Geophysical Research Letters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We detected a long‐term transient deformation signal between 2014 and 2016 in the Atacama region (Chile) using survey Global Positioning System (GPS) observations. Over an ∼150 km along‐strike region, survey GPS measurements in 2014 and 2016 deviate significantly from the interseismic trend estimated using previous observations. This deviation from steady state deformation is spatially coherent and reveals a horizontal westward diverging motion of several centimeters, along with a significant uplift. It is confirmed by continuous measurements of recently installed GPS stations. We discard instrumental, hydrological, oceanic, or atmospheric loading effects and show that the transient is likely due to deep slow slip in the transition zone of the subduction interface (∼40‐ to 60‐km depth). In addition, daily observations recorded by a continuous GPS station operating between 2002 and 2015 highlight similar transient signals in 2005 and 2009, suggesting a recurrent pattern.

show abstract

“…Where GPS observations are available, we extract co-seismic offsets from GPS time series [42] or use rapidly reported co-seismic offsets. We draw GPS time series or offsets from processing facilities (e.g., UNAVCO, the Nevada Geodetic Laboratory [43], ARIA), from network managers such as the Chilean GNSS network [16,44], or from other sources. We generate co-seismic line-of-sight displacements from SAR observations with standard, open source, processing packages (GMTSAR and ISCE) [45,46].…”

Section: Geodetic Response Workflow: Under the Hoodmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Earthquake Response with Imaging Geodesy: Recent Examples from the USGS NEIC

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The U.S. Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center leads real-time efforts to provide rapid and accurate assessments of the impacts of global earthquakes, including estimates of ground shaking, ground failure, and the resulting human impacts. These efforts primarily rely on analysis of the seismic wavefield to characterize the source of the earthquake, which in turn informs a suite of disaster response products such as ShakeMap and PAGER. In recent years, the proliferation of rapidly acquired and openly available in-situ and remotely sensed geodetic observations has opened new avenues for responding to earthquakes around the world in the days following significant events. Geodetic observations, particularly from interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) and satellite optical imagery, provide a means to robustly constrain the dimensions and spatial complexity of earthquakes beyond what is typically possible with seismic observations alone. Here, we document recent cases where geodetic observations contributed important information to earthquake response efforts-from informing and validating seismically-derived source models to independently constraining earthquake impact products-and the conditions under which geodetic observations improve earthquake response products. We use examples from the 2013 Mw7.7 Baluchistan, Pakistan, 2014 Mw6.0 Napa, California, 2015 Mw7.8 Gorkha, Nepal, and 2018 Mw7.5 Palu, Indonesia earthquakes to highlight the varying ways geodetic observations have contributed to earthquake response efforts at the NEIC. We additionally provide a synopsis of the workflows implemented for geodetic earthquake response. As remote sensing geodetic observations become increasingly available and the frequency of satellite acquisitions continues to increase, operational earthquake geodetic imaging stands to make critical contributions to natural disaster response efforts around the world.

show abstract

The Chilean GNSS Network: Current Status and Progress toward Early Warning Applications

Cited by 45 publications

References 39 publications

How Fast Can We Reliably Estimate the Magnitude of Subduction Earthquakes?

How Fast Can We Reliably Estimate the Magnitude of Subduction Earthquakes?

Deep Transient Slow Slip Detected by Survey GPS in the Region of Atacama, Chile

Global Earthquake Response with Imaging Geodesy: Recent Examples from the USGS NEIC

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About