Appendix C—Deformation Models for UCERF3

Authors

Tom Parsons, U.S. Geological Survey
Kaj M. Johnson, Indiana University - Bloomington
Peter Bird, University of California - Los Angeles
Jayne Bormann, University of Nevada - Reno
Timothy E. Dawson, California Geological Survey
Edward H. Field, U.S. Geological Survey
William C. Hammond, University of Nevada - Reno
Thomas A. Herring, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Robert McCaffrey, Portland State UniversityFollow
Zheng-kang Shen, University of California - Los Angeles
Wayne R. Thatcher, U.S. Geological Survey
Ray J. Weldon II, University of Oregon
Yuehua Zeng, U.S. Geological Survey

Published In

USGS Open-File Report

Document Type

Technical Report

Publication Date

2013

Subjects

Earthquake hazard analysis -- California, Earthquake prediction -- California, Thrust faults (Geology), Subduction zones

Abstract

This document describes efforts to best characterize seismogenic deformation in and near California. The rate of hazardous earthquakes in California is expected to be proportional to deformation rates; in particular, the rates at which faults slip. Fault slip rates are determined from offsets of geologic and geomorphic features of measured age and by modeling geodetically determined surface displacement rates. Extensive use of geodesy in the form of Global Positioning System (GPS) observations is a new feature brought into the Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP) forecasts for the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, version 3 (UCERF3) model. Geodetic measurements are potentially more spatially comprehensive than geologic offset observations, which can be clustered. Applying either type of data is subject to considerable uncertainty. Geologic observations have dating and other measurement errors, and they often must be extrapolated long distances on fault sections. However, geodetic observations require a modeling step to translate them into estimates of fault slip rate, and they have poor resolution on closely spaced, locked faults. Details about fault slip rates from geologic offsets are presented in appendix B (this report). In this appendix we look at three deformation models that use geologic and geodetic constraints and compare/contrast them with the UCERF3 geological model and the UCERF2 deformation model. We present models, results, and evaluation for their use in the UCERF3 forecast.

Description

Appendix C of Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 3 (UCERF3). USGS Open-File Report, v. 2013–1165.

Produced by the Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities .

Persistent Identifier

http://archives.pdx.edu/ds/psu/15496

Citation Details

Parsons, T., K. M. Johnson, P. Bird, J.M. Bormann, T.E. Dawson, E.H. Field, W.C. Hammond, T.A. Herring, R. McCaffrey, Z.-K. Shen, W.R. Thatcher, R.J. Weldon II, and Y. Zeng, Appendix C—Deformation models for UCERF3, USGS Open-File Report, v. 2013–1165, 66 pp.