SSA 2019 Annual Meeting Program

2019 Annual Meeting 23–26 APRIL 2019 • SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Seismological Society of America

Add New Layers to Your Quaternary Research δ18O now included free with 14C on carbonate and water/ice δ13C measured directly on the sample via IRMS Maximize your budget with free consultation and cancellation Radiocarbon Dating Consistent Accuracy, Delivered on Time

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON CONTENTS 2 Message from SSA President Peter Shearer 3 Important Information 4 Meeting at a Glance 5 SSA Annual Luncheon and Awards Ceremony 6 Exhibitors 7 Travel Grant Recipients 8 Tuesday Workshops All information in 10 Opening Keynote this program is current 11 Town Hall Meeting as of 4 April 2019. 14 Special Interest Groups For the latest information, 15 Public Policy Luncheon download our event app at 16 Saturday Field Trips core-apps.com/dl/seismology 17 Code of Conduct Share your meeting tweets and photos: #SSA2019 18 Lightning Talks 21 William B. Joyner Memorial Lecture 22 Technical Sessions 36 Overview of Technical Program 40 Poster Sessions 42 Technical Program SSA Annual Meeting 202027–30 April ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO Co-chaired by Rick Aster (Colorado State University) and Brandon Schmandt (The University of New Mexico) 1

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA Welcome to the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Seismological Society of America. It’s time to present research, reconnect with colleagues and make new friends who share your passion for seismology. During the next three days together, we’ll explore our broadest range of topics yet, starting with seismology on Mars and earthquake early warning systems in the Pacific Northwest. If there’s a new development in our science, you’ll find it in our diverse set of member-created technical sessions. The Society is enormously grateful to our meeting Co-Chairs, Michael Bostock of the University of British Columbia and Joan Gomberg of the U.S. Geological Survey, for curating the fascinating program detailed in these pages. We’d also like to extend a special welcome to the members of the European Seismological Commission and the Seismological Society of Japan. Each year SSA aims to deliver more at our meetings. More time to talk face-to-face with your peers. More opportunities to learn about tools that can assist your daily work. More reasons to return to your research with new enthusiasm. This year’s program—with new workshops made possible by the Kanamori Fund and Special Interest Group gatherings courtesy of REF TEK—is no exception. Special thanks go to the donors who funded our meeting travel grants and to the veterans who volunteered to mentor our student and early-career members this week. Your contributions represent an important investment in the future of our science. With members in more than 70 countries, the SSA community is united by our global mission. Thank you for all you do to advance earthquake science. We are honored to have you with us. Enjoy the meeting! Peter Shearer SSA President 2018–19 2

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON WELCOME TO SEATTLE HELPFUL DETAILS AND SPECIAL EVENTS WORTH NOTING The Basics Get to Know Your Colleagues and Their Work Wi-Fi Information Network: Seismology 2019; Password: SSA2019 Lightning Talks Don’t miss our series of five-minute slide Code of Conduct presentations on Wednesday from 6-7 PM in All attendees are expected to comply with SSA’s the Grand Ballroom. Lightning events are fast, Code of Conduct (see page 17). Questions or fun and informative! concerns? Contact Executive Director Nan Broadbent at [email protected] or 408-647-5811. Posters and Break We want you to have plenty of presentation time Download the SSA Meeting App with your peers, so enjoy the posters during Our app keeps you connected to your colleagues breaks in the Grand Ballroom and Fifth Avenue. and the latest meeting information. Download it at Wednesday, 5:30–6:30 PM, Thursday, 3–4 PM core-apps.com/dl/seismology and Friday, 2:45–3:45 PM. Say Cheese Women in Seismology Reception By entering the Annual Meeting facility, all attendees Gail Atkinson, professor of Earth Sciences, consent to being photographed or recorded on University of Western Ontario, will deliver video by SSA. These images, photos and/or videos remarks at this networking gathering Thursday, may be used in future Society communications to 7:30–9 PM, Cascade Ballroom I. RSVP at the promote the organization or document its history. registration desk is required. Luncheons Meet the Editors Luncheon seating will be offered on a first-come, This is your chance for face time with the editors first-served basis. Late arrivals may dine in over- of SSA’s peer-reviewed journals. Meet BSSA flow rooms: St. Helens (Wednesday) and Grand Editor-in-Chief Thomas L. Pratt and SRL Editor-in- Crescent (Thursday and Friday) but will miss any Chief Zhigang Peng and successor Allison Bent on scheduled luncheon programming. Thursday, 9:45–10:45 AM, in the Grand Ballroom. Seismology is Beautiful Student and Early-Career Pick up your free 2020 Annual Meeting poster Members Only created by Hatch Show Print starting Thursday in the Grand Foyer. And be sure to hang it up at home Mentoring Breakfast or work—it’s a beautiful way to count down the Ask questions, discuss your research and days until we meet again! network with professional seismologists in this social breakfast for student and early-career Need a Receipt? members. Thursday, 7–8:15 AM, Grand Ballroom. SSA members can print a copy of their meeting RSVP at the registration desk is required. registration receipt by logging in at seismosoc.org and accessing their contributions from the Members’ Free Headshots Area. All other attendees can receive receipts by Space is limited. Inquire at the Registration Desk emailing their full name to [email protected]. for more details. Speaker Ready Room Location: Olympic. Hours: Tuesday, 2–7 PM, Wednesday and Thursday, 7 AM–6 PM and Friday, 7 AM–4:30 PM. 3

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA MEETING AT A GLANCE Tuesday / 23rd Wednesday / 24th Thursday / 25th Friday / 26th 1–4 PM 7:30–8:30 AM 7–8:15 AM 7:30–8:30 AM Workshop: Achieve Morning Coffee Student and Early- Morning Coffee Your Career Goals Grand Foyer & Career Mentoring Grand Foyer & Elliott Bay Grand Ballroom Breakfast Grand Ballroom Grand Ballroom 1–4 PM 7:30 AM–5 PM 7:30 AM–5 PM Workshop: Getting Registration 7:30–8:30 AM Registration Published – Writing a Grand Foyer Morning Coffee Grand Foyer Good Scientific Paper Grand Foyer & Pike 8:30 AM–5:30 PM Grand Ballroom 8:30 AM–5 PM Technical Sessions Technical Sessions 1–4:30 PM 7:30 AM–5 PM Workshop: Developing 9:45–10:45 AM Registration 9:45–10:45 AM and Visualizing Posters and Break Grand Foyer Posters and Break Community Seismic Fifth Avenue & Fifth Avenue & Velocity Models Grand Ballroom 8:30 AM–5:15 PM Grand Ballroom Pine Technical Sessions Noon–2 PM Noon–1:15 PM 12:30–4:30 PM SSA Annual Luncheon 9:45–10:45 AM Luncheon Workshop: Machine and Awards Ceremony Posters and Break Grand Ballroom Learning for Seismology Grand Ballroom Fifth Avenue & Cascade Ballroom II Grand Ballroom Noon–1:15 PM 3:30–4:15 PM Special Interest Group: 1–4:30 PM Posters and Break Noon–1:30 PM Seismic Instruments Workshop: Measuring Fifth Avenue & Public Policy Luncheon for the Coming Decade Fault Parameters and Slip Grand Ballroom Grand Ballroom Cascade Ballroom II from Geodetic Imaging Data using GeoGateway 5:30–6:30 PM 3–4 PM 2:45–3:45 PM Online Tools Posters and Break Posters and Break Posters and Break Vashon Fifth Avenue & Fifth Avenue & Fifth Avenue & Grand Ballroom Grand Ballroom Grand Ballroom 3–7:30 PM Registration 6–7 PM 5:30–6:30 PM Saturday / 27th Grand Foyer Lightning Talks Joyner Lecture Grand Ballroom Grand Ballroom 7:30 AM–10 PM 4:30–6 PM Field Trip: Cascadia Welcome Reception 7–8 PM 6:30–7:30 PM Earthquakes by Canoe Grand Foyer Early-Career and Joyner Reception Student Reception Grand Foyer & 8 AM–6:30 PM 5:10–5:50 PM Cascade Ballroom I Grand Crescent Field Trip: Earthquake Opening Keynote by Geology of Seattle Bruce Banerdt, InSight 7:30–9 PM 7:30–9 PM principal investigator Special Interest Group: Women in Seismology 6:45–11 AM and principal research Offshore Facilities for Reception Fieldtrip: Facilities scientist at NASA’s Jet Solid Earth Geoscience Cascade Ballroom I Tour of University of Propulsion Laboratory Cascade Ballroom II Washington and PNSN Grand Ballroom 8–9:30 PM Special Interest Group: 6–7:30 PM Canadian Cordillera Town Hall: The Why, Array (CCArray) How, Where and What of Cascade Ballroom II Earthquake Early Warning Cascade Ballroom I 4

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON SHARING PRESENTATIONS ON SOCIAL MEDIA Live-tweeting and sharing of SSA Annual Meeting presentations and other content is encouraged as a way to share information from the conference. Please consider using the meeting hashtag #SSA2019 in your posts or tweets. If a meeting presenter does not wish for her/his presentation to be shared on social media channels, she/he should make an announcement about this preference before the presentation. Presenters should be aware that most meeting sessions are open to members of the news media, and some sessions are open to the public. SSA encourages compliance with presenters' requests on social media sharing but cannot guarantee compliance with these requests. Please consult the SSA Meetings Code of Conduct for further guidance on appropriate meeting behavior. x SSA ANNUAL LUNCHEON AND x AWARDS CEREMONY WEDNESDAY, 24 APRIL, NOON–2 PM GRAND BALLROOM Co-Chaired By Peter Shearer, SSA Board Past President • Susan Hough, SSA Board President SSA Celebrates David M. Boore 2018 Harry Fielding Reid Medal Amanda Thomas Lucy Jones 2018 Charles F. Richter Early Career Award 2018 Frank Press Public Service Award New SSA Travel Grants Go Global If there’s a scientific destination you’ve been dreaming of, SSA can help get you there. Introduced in 2018, Global Travel Grants offer eligible* student members financial support to participate in small meetings and workshops (1,000 or fewer attendees) in the U.S. or of any size abroad that directly relate to their study of earthquake science or seismology. Applications are accepted annually in February and July. Grants approved in 2018 ranged from $520 to $2,000 for travel to conferences in Canada, Israel, Italy, Japan and the U.S. *For more information: seismosoc.org/awards/global-travel-grant 5

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA EXHIBITORS BOOTH #1 BOOTH #3 BOOTH #4 BOOTH #2 BOOTH #7 BOOTH #6 BOOTH #5 BOOTH #10 BOOTH #9 BOOTH #8 BOOTH #11 BOOTH #12 ® BOOTH #14 BOOTH #13 6

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON CONGRATULATIONS, TRAVEL GRANT RECIPIENTS Each of the recipients listed below received free registration to the Annual Meeting as well as a cash stipend for travel expenses. SSA is grateful to our members and friends who gave generously to the Society’s Kanamori Fund, General Fund and Student Travel Grant Fund, which make these grants possible. Student Travel Grants Joel D. Simon, Princeton University Drake M. Singleton, San Diego State University and Lauren S. Abrahams, Stanford University Ariana L. Astorga, UGA/CNRS/IFSTTAR/ISTerre University of California, San Diego Han Bao, University of California, Los Angeles Jiong Wang, University of California, Santa Barbara Ian P. Cooper, Weston Observatory, Boston College Nan Wang, San Diego State University Rachel L. Hatch, University of Nevada, Reno Zongbo Xu, Boise State University David Heath, Colorado State University Zhengyang Zhou, Washington University in St. Louis Isabel Hong, Rutgers University Michael Mann, Cornell University International Travel Grants Jason S. Padgett, University of Rhode Island Samantha Marie Palmer, University of Western Ontario Lepolt Linkimer, Universidad de Costa Rica Marshall Pontrelli, Tufts University Chuanbin Zhu, GFZ German Research Centre John M. Rekoske, U.S. Geological Survey, Colorado for Geosciences School of Mines European Seismological Commission/ SSA Travel Grant Elif Tuerker, University of Potsdam SSA 2021 Annual Meeting 27–30 APRIL • ANCHORAGE, AL ASK A Co-chaired by Carl Tape and Michael West (University of Alaska Fairbanks) 7

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA TUESDAY WORKSHOPS SSA is grateful for your donations to the Kanamori Fund, which sponsored this year’s professional development workshops. Achieve Your Career Goals 1–4 PM, ELLIOTT BAY SSA members only This workshop focuses on strategies and tactics to understand what you can, could and should be doing for your career. Topics include how to conduct a job search in academia, consulting or government agencies; the pros and cons of working in each sector; how potential employers find job seekers and other career-related questions. Attendees will also have the chance to actively learn about and practice skills that can help them get the job and advance their careers, such as interview skills, having a polished social media presence and marketing their value. Following the workshop, attendees may participate in one-on-one career consultations. Instructor: Alaina Levine (Quantum Success Solutions) Developing and Visualizing Community Seismic Velocity Models 1–4:30 PM, PINE Laptops are required to participate in hands-on activities Three-dimensional seismic velocity models play an important role in many aspects of seismological research, including strong ground motion modeling, earthquake location and inversions for Earth structure. This workshop will discuss the challenges and best practices for developing and maintaining community velocity models, as well as explore software and tools for visualizing 3-D models. Attendees will explore a variety of currently available community velocity models, learn scientific and technical differences between models and work with Southern California Earthquake Center and Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS) software tools to investigate properties of the models. Attendees will examine SCEC’s Unified Community Velocity Model framework, an open-source software developed to help researchers use velocity models for ground motion simulations. The workshop will include hands-on tutorials using the IRIS Data Management Center’s Earth Model Collaboration ParaView Visualization Plugins. ParaView is an open-source data analysis and visualization application, and these plugins are designed to extend and expand its functionalities so it can be used for 3-D visualization of Earth models and spatial datasets. Instructors: Erin Wirth (USGS), Philip Maechling (Southern California Earthquake Center), Manoch Bahavar (Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology) 8

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Getting Published – Writing a Good Scientific Paper 1–4 PM, PIKE Through group discussions and an analysis of effective examples of writing, figures, tables, citations and supplementary material, participants will learn all the nuts and bolts of good papers from the experts who know. The workshop also covers how to pick a publisher and respond to comments. Instructors: Roland Burgmann (University of California, Berkeley), John Ebel (Boston College), Brent Grocholski (Science) Machine Learning for Seismology 12:30–4:30 PM, CASCADE BALLROOM II Laptops are recommended This workshop offers an introduction to machine learning concepts and a hands-on look at how to use them in seismological research. After a look at introductory machine learning topics such as regression, classification, clustering, data cleaning, feature engineering and automatic feature extraction with deep learning, attendees will learn about the practical issues that are encountered when applying these meth- ods to waveform and seismicity data. Follow along with the examples and become familiar with workflows that can easily be adopted in your future research. The example code and data will be provided so that attendees can continue to experiment after the workshop. Instructors: Karianne Bergen (Harvard), Qingkai Kong (University of California, Berkeley), Zefeng Li (Caltech), Youzuo Lin (Los Alamos National Laboratory), Maruti Kumar Mudunuru (Los Alamos National Laboratory), Daniel Trugman (Los Alamos National Laboratory) Measuring Fault Parameters and Slip from Geodetic Imaging Data using GeoGateway Online Tools 1–4:30 PM, VASHON GeoGateway provides online tools for analysis, modeling and response using geodetic imaging data. The main application of GeoGateway is to analyze and model crustal deformation related to earthquakes and measure fault slip. The tools focus on airborne InSAR data from NASA’s airborne UAVSAR platform and Global Positioning System (GPS) position time series, displacements and velocities. This workshop provides an overview of geodetic imaging and a hands-on experience working with the tools available through GeoGateway. Attendees will gain an understanding of GPS time series and produce GPS station velocities, displacements, co-seismic offsets and post-seismic motions. Attendees will also analyze UAVSAR data to measure fault slip and crustal deformation, as well as learn to identify signals reflecting solid Earth processes versus signal from error sources. The workshop is geared toward geologists and students who want to apply geodetic imaging data to their research. Instructors: Andrea Donnellan (Jet Propulsion Laboratory), Lisa Grant Ludwig (University of California, Irvine), John Rundle (University of California, Davis) 9

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA OPENING KEYNOTE InSight: Opening a New World for Seismology TUESDAY, 5:10–5:50 PM, GRAND BALLROOM The InSight mission landed in Mars’ Elysium Planitia on 26 November 2018. Twenty-two days later, it placed the first broad-band seismometer on the surface of another planet, which will help scientists investigate the processes of terrestrial planet formation and evolution by using the “traditional” geophysical techniques of seismology, geodesy and heat flow measurement. Bruce Banerdt, InSight principal investigator and principal research scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, provides an overview of the first few months of observations and the mission’s goal of learning more about Mars’ deep interior. Photo, above: Bruce Banerdt, InSight Principal Investigator, NASA JPL, left, Hallie Gengl, Data Visualization Developer, NASA JPL, right, and other NASA InSight team members celebrate after the first image of Mars from the Mars InSight lander, Monday, Nov. 26, 2018 inside the Mission Support Area at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. InSight, short for Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy and Heat Transport, is a Mars lander designed to study the \"inner space\" of Mars: its crust, mantle and core. Photo Credit: (NASA/Bill Ingalls) 10

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Town Hall Meeting: The Why, How, Where and What of Earthquake Early Warning TUESDAY, 23 APRIL, 6–7:30 PM, CASCADE BALLROOM I Why should we prepare for earthquakes in the Pacific Northwest? How could seconds of warning help make us less vulnerable to damage and injury? How do Earthquake Early Warning (EEW) systems work, and when might we have one? Both SSA members and members of the general public are invited to a discussion of EEW systems in the Pacific Northwest, including how they function, how they can prevent damage and injury and when they plan on being implemented throughout the region. Screen capture from ShakeAlert demo (source: Pacific Northwest Seismic Network) SSA Welcomes EEW Experts: Sandi Doughton, Seattle Times science reporter and author of Full-Rip 9.0: The Next Big Earthquake in the Pacific Northwest, will simulate a large earthquake and explain why the Pacific Northwest needs an EEW system. Scott Miles, an expert in disaster risk reduction in the Department of Human Centered Design and Engineering at the University of Washington, will speak about what he learned from his experiences in Mexico, where EEW has been in use for years. Rachel Lanigan, ShakeAlert program manager at RH2 Engineering, shares what this local engineering firm and its clients are doing to use ShakeAlert capabilities to make our infrastructure more resilient when earthquakes occur. Harold Tobin, director of the Pacific Northwest Seismic Network (PNSN) at the University of Washington and a leader in the West Coast ShakeAlert EEW system explains how it works and when it will be operational. Doug Toomey, co-director of the PNSN at the University of Oregon, will hold a Q&A session for members of the public to ask questions and share their views. 11

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA THANK YOU They volunteer their time and talents to each issue of SSA’s world-class journals, the Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (BSSA) and Seismological Research Letters (SRL). The Society is grateful to these editors for their dedication to the pages that power our mission. BSSA Nicola Litchfield SRL Sheri Molnar Editor-in-Chief Kim Olsen Editor-in-Chief Adrien Oth Thomas L. Pratt Stefano Parolai Zhigang Peng Arben Pitarka Associate Editors Adrian Rodriguez-Marek Associate Editors Danijel Schorlemmer Allison Bent Mark Stirling Brendan Crowell Fabian Bonilla Cezar I. Trifu Abhijit Ghosh Richard Briggs Nicholas van der Elst Thomas GÖebel Thomas Brocher Ivan G. Wong Erol Kalkan Eric Chael Cleat P. Zeiler Zefeng Li Martin C. Chapman Xyoli Perez-Campos Fabrice Cotton Brandon Schmandt Luis Angel Dalguer Eric M. Thompson John Douglas Hongfeng Yang Delphine D. Fitzenz Matthew Gerstenberger Column Editors Ronni Grapenthin Hiroshi Kawase Oliver S. Boyd Yann Klinger Alan Kafka Abhijit Ghosh John Ebel Taka’aki Taira Maurice Lamontagne Kim Olsen 12

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Want Your Research Read? There has never been a better time to publish your work in the journals of the Seismological Society of America. Impact numbers are rising. The timeline between acceptance and publication is decreasing. Interested in learning more? Meet BSSA Editor-in-Chief Thomas L. Pratt, SRL Editor-in-Chief Zhigang Peng and his successor, Allison Bent, and our dedicated team of volunteer associate editors on Thursday from 9:45 to 10:45 AM in the Grand Ballroom. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America The premier journal of advanced research in earthquake seismology Impact factor: 2.343 Welcome to the leading source of peer-reviewed research in seismology and related disciplines. Special issues continue to shine more light on the events and technology that shape our understanding of seismology. Seismological Research Letters A journal with a broad appeal and perspective Impact factor: 3.734 Explore our one-of-a-kind peer-reviewed forum for communication among seismologists, engineers and earthquake hazards-policy professionals. SRL articles are generally informal, informational and enjoyed by readers across a wide range of disciplines. FOCUS SECTIONS COMING SOON May: Subduction Processes in the Americas November: Regional Seismic Networks in North America CALL FOR PAPERS Focus Section on the 30 November, 2018 Anchorage Earthquake Submission Deadline: 19 July 2019 More information is available at: seismosoc.org/publications/calls-papers 13

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS Thanks to our generous sponsor REF TEK, all Special Interest Group gatherings are free to attend, but RSVP is required. See registration desk. Offshore Facilities for Solid Earth Geoscience WEDNESDAY, 24 APRIL, 7:30–9 PM, CASCADE BALLROOM II This meeting will focus on the current state and future evolution of offshore facilities available for Solid Earth geoscience research. Topics include cutting-edge infrastructure that is and will continue to be instrumental for supporting seismic and other geophysical studies in the offshore environment, such as the U.S. Ocean Bottom Seismic Instrument Pool, the National Marine Seismic Research Facility and the Ocean Observatories Initiative. Collectively, these facilities represent a unique capability to sample the solid earth at variable spatio-temporal resolutions across the ~70 percent of the globe covered by the oceans. We will provide overviews of the current state of several offshore facilities. Representatives from relevant oversight committees will discuss future priorities for frontier offshore facilities. Conveners: Emily Roland (University of Washington), Anne Trehu (Oregon State University), Jackie Caplan-Auerbach (Western Washington University) Canadian Cordillera Array (CCArray) THURSDAY, 25 APRIL, 8–9:30 PM, CASCADE BALLROOM II This meeting will provide an update on the CCArray (ccarray.org). This new international initiative seeks to develop an integrated plate boundary observatory that bridges critical gaps in seismological and GNSS station coverage along the North American plate boundary region in western Canada. The goal of CCArray is to enable trans- disciplinary research focused on Earth systems processes and boundaries from the core to the magnetosphere. Attendees are encouraged to contribute ideas to the design and implementation of the network and become involved in this research program. Conveners: David Eaton (University of Calgary), Roy Hyndman (University of Victoria), Pascal Audet (University of Ottawa) Seismic Instruments for the Coming Decade FRIDAY, 26 APRIL, NOON–1:15 PM, CASCADE BALLROOM II Explore recently developed seismic instrumentation technologies and discuss their performance and usability. Participants will focus on instrumentation that is or will be implemented as part of the Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS) capabilities. In recent years there have been many developments in seismic instrumentation used widely in research seismology, from improved emplacement methods for broadband sensors to autonomous (“nodal”) geophone sensors. IRIS has gained substantial experience with post- hole-style sensor installations in Alaska and is embarking on a multi-year effort to enable a new level of wavefield imaging capability as part of the IRIS PASSCAL program. Over the next several years IRIS will implement a system of instruments dedicated to rapid response efforts for geohazard events, considering such features as ultra-portable packaging concepts, mesh- network telemetry and combined seismic-GNSS capability. Convener: Bob Woodward (IRIS) 14

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON PUBLIC POLICY LUNCHEON Barb Graff, director, Seattle Office of Emergency Management Seismic Retrofit of Unreinforced Masonry Buildings THURSDAY, 25 APRIL, NOON–1:30 PM, GRAND BALLROOM Learn about the state of Seattle’s earthquake readiness from Barb Graff, director of the Seattle Office of Emergency Management. Graff is responsible for the team that manages the all-hazard community-wide emergency management program for the City of Seattle. Since 2005, the Seattle Emergency Operations Center has coordinated a city-wide response to 16 major exercises and 50 incidents, eight of which resulted in a Presidential Declaration. Interested in the Politics of Science? Apply today for the 2019 Geoscience Congressional Visits Day Currently enrolled students are invited to apply for a travel grant to attend the Geoscience Congressional Visits Day (Geo-CVD) in Washington, D.C., 10-11 September 2019. Entering its 12th year, Geo-CVD brings geoscientists, geoscience researchers, students, professionals, educators and executives to Washington, D.C. to both raise visibility and increase support for the geosciences. It puts scientists at the intersection of science and policy—now more important than ever before! Travel grant recipients will learn about conducting congressional visits and meet with members of Congress or congressional staff to discuss the importance of geoscience research and education. For more information, visit SSA’s website: seismosoc.org/us-government-relations/geocvd. Deadline to apply: 11 July 2019 15

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA SATURDAY FIELD TRIPS Oh, the seismic sites we will see! Pre-registration is required for these field trips. Inquire at the registration desk today. Cascadia Earthquakes by Canoe 7:30 AM–10 PM Trip Leader: Brian Atwater (scientist emeritus, USGS) View clues to great earthquakes on the Cascadia subduction thrust– clues that tell of recurrent subsidence and associated tsunamis in the past 2,000 years. Bus departs The Westin at 8 AM and reaches the Copalis River three hours later. Participants will spend four hours paddling canoes, inspecting muddy river banks and walking in a ghost forest. Return to the hotel in late evening. Earthquake Geology of Seattle 8 AM–6:30 PM Trip Leaders: Ralph Haugerud (USGS), Elizabeth Barnett (Shannon & Wilson, Inc.), Bill Laprade (Shannon & Wilson, Inc.) and Elizabeth Davis (University of Washington) Explore the geomorphology and stratigraphy of Seattle that record the history of crustal faulting and determine site response to earthquakes on all sources. Bus departs The Westin at 8:30 AM to explore the South Beach of Discovery Park and Jose Rizal Park before stopping at Alki Point for lunch and discussion of the last large earthquake on the Seattle fault. Other stops: Terminal 107 Park, the Diagonal Avenue South Public Shoreline and the Pike Brewing Company. Recommended: shoes appropriate for a two-mile walk with 250 feet of elevation gain, sandy beach, cobbled beach, riprap and muddy river bank; waders or tight-laced shoes and a change of clothes. Facilities Tour of University of Washington and PNSN 6:45–11 AM Trip Leader: Ian Stone (University of Washington) Tour the University of Washington (UW) campus and its seismic research facilities. Depart The Westin at 7:15 AM and ride the Link light rail to campus. Tour starts at 8 AM at Pacific Northwest Seismic Network’s (PNSN) headquarters. Learn about the daily operations of the seismic network, the seismic hazards unique to the region as well as the network’s ongoing projects, including the implementation of earthquake early warning. Attendees will visit the Rapid Response Research Facility’s equipment library and learn about facility operations. Last stop: UW Oceanography’s newest research vessel, the R/V Rachel Carson, for a look at its lab, tools and the role it plays in seismic exploration of the Puget Sound and surrounding coastal areas. Image: Martin Kraft (photo.martinkraft.com) License: CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons 16

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON SSA CODE OF CONDUCT SSA is committed to fostering the exchange of scientific ideas by providing a safe, productive and welcoming environment for all SSA sponsored meeting participants, including attendees, staff, volunteers and vendors. We value the participation of every member of the community and want all participants to have an enjoyable and fulfilling experience. All participants at SSA meetings are expected to be considerate and collaborative, communicating openly with respect for others, and critiquing ideas rather than individuals. Behavior that is acceptable to one person may not be acceptable to another, so use discretion to be sure that respect is communicated. Unacceptable Behavior Examples of unacceptable behavior include, but are not limited to: • Physical or verbal abuse of any kind. • Threatening or stalking any participant. • Making inappropriate comments whether verbal or digital related to gender, gender identity and expression, age, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, ethnicity, religion (or lack thereof), national origin, or other legally protected group status or characteristics. • Inappropriate use of nudity and/or sexual images or language in public spaces or in presentations. • Harassment intended in a joking manner still constitutes unacceptable behavior. • Retaliation for reporting harassment is also a violation of this Code of Conduct, as is reporting an incident in bad faith. Reporting Unacceptable Behavior Any participant experiencing or witnessing behavior that at any time in their judgment constitutes an immediate or serious threat to public safety is advised to contact emergency services immediately (for hotel security, dial 7777 from any house phone; or 911) and to notify on-site venue security and SSA staff. If you are the subject of unacceptable behavior or have witnessed any such behavior, you are encouraged to notify an SSA staff member, call 408-647-5811, and write the Executive Director Nan Broadbent by emailing [email protected]. Writing down the details of the incident is also recommended. Requests for confidentiality will be honored to the extent possible. Consequences SSA staff (or their designee) or security may take any action deemed necessary and appropriate for any unacceptable behavior, including but not limited to that described above. Possible actions include removal of a participant from the meeting, without refund. Suspension or termination of membership in SSA, denial to participate in future SSA events or meetings, or other action(s) may be taken in SSA’s sole discretion, depending on the severity of the unacceptable behavior. SSA is committed to handling all situations to the best of its ability. However, this Code of Conduct is informational and is not a contract. 17

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA LIGHTNING TALKS The Lightning Talks comprise an hour of 10 five-minute talks. WEDNESDAY, 24 APRIL, 6 PM, GRAND BALLROOM The Evolution of Rapid Response largely to meet the demands of the second World War. We show that, by 1941, significant stress perturbations Adam M. Pascale ([email protected]) from the Wilmington and other nearby fields extended about 2-3 km from a production horizon. For oil fields Real-time telemetry of seismic data started to become where wells were drilled to 2-4 km depth, signifcant affordable for small observatories in the 1980s and stress perturbation thus extended to the top of the ’90s, usually over leased phone lines using point-to- seismogenic crust. Thus, this mechanism can plausibly point modems. With the arrival of the World Wide account for the occurrence of half-dozen moderate Web, indirect data telemetry using Internet Protocols (magnitude 4-5) earthquakes in the Los Angeles Basin made connectivity simpler, and with expanding cellular between 1938 and 1944. The advent of widespread network coverage and ever-reducing data costs, quality water flooding, or fluid-injection recovery, methods data telemetry is now commonplace. around 1960 appears to have mitigated induced earthquake risk. The process of responding to earthquakes hasn’t changed (get data, analyze, publish), but the approach Visualization on Shaky Ground? How to Display and time frame has changed greatly. Over 30 years we an Aftershock Forecast have moved from: pagers that summoned us to the observatory; to SMS messages; carrying computers Max Schneider ([email protected]) and modems to dial up the office to download data; using laptops with cellular data access; and finally Earthquake forecasts are based on statistical estimates tablets and mobile phones with customised apps for of seismicity rates, which have multiple sources of rapid response. The time from earthquake to initial uncertainty. How can we communicate a forecasted reviewed solution has reduced from an hour or more earthquake rate together with its uncertainty, to (traffic permitting), to half an hour using laptops and facilitate seismic decision-making under uncertainty? traditional programs, to just minutes using apps. In an experiment, we evaluate the effectiveness of three competing visualizations of aftershock forecasts To make a Duty Seismologist’s life less stressful requires and their uncertainties. Subjects perform realistic easy data access, and a simple analysis and publishing judgment tasks, and responses and response times are process. Distributing reviewed information rapidly is compared across visualizations. We discuss the design becoming more important in this age of instant social of such an experiment and provide first results. media sharing, and the tools need to adapt accordingly. Century Old Induced Seismicity in LA Seismology From the Roof of the World to the Irrawaddy Delta Susan E. Hough ([email protected]) Emily Wolin ([email protected]) Induced earthquakes have received a great deal of attention in recent years, both within and outside of The active tectonics of the Himalaya and Indo-Burman the scientific community. But can earthquakes also be regions produce some of the highest earthquake haz- induced by primary oil production? In general, uncom- ards and risks in the world. Efforts to improve seismic pensated oil extraction will lower pore pressures, which monitoring and earthquake hazard characterization will tend to stabilize nearby faults. Oil withdrawal can face logistical, financial and political challenges in also, however, perturb subsurface stresses, which can developing and maintaining the high-quality, real-time potentially destabilize faults. We use a modern model- sensor networks and specialized staff needed to mon- ing approach to calculate the stress perturbation asso- itor local seismicity and to record and analyze strong ciated with oil production in the southwest Los Angeles ground motions. We present an overview of recent Basin during the late 1930s through mid-1940s. Oil projects to expand and densify seismic networks and production ramped up sharply during this period, characterize ground motions for hazard assessment. 18

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON In Myanmar, a new national seismic network comprising on the strong motion data of the 219 largest events 19 broadband and strong-motion stations has recorded in Japan since 1996 (Mw 3.4-9.1). We analyze how three M≥6 earthquakes in its first three years of oper- often they are able to provide correct and timely ation, and continues to record 2-4 M≥4.5 earthquakes alerts. We find that for strong and medium ground per month. In Nepal, a steadily expanding network of motion (MMI~<7.5) a majority of sites can get useful low-cost Raspberry Shake sensors installed in schools alerts. Sites with more extreme ground motion can in the mountains of western Nepal and around the often be alerted successfully in the case of very large Kathmandu Valley is beginning to enable improved subduction zone earthquakes, but only in <20 percent monitoring of local seismicity and further investiga- of cases for shallow crustal events. Our results provide tion of basin effects observed during the 2015 M7.8 a detailed, quantitative and largely assumption-free Gorkha earthquake. Data from these rapidly-developing insight into what EEW can and cannot do. seismic networks are largely freely available. The expansion and operation of these networks is made Practical Limitations of Earthquake possible by a dedicated and skilled group of scientists, Early Warning engineers, teachers and volunteer station hosts. David J. Wald ([email protected]) GNSS Global Seismic Monitoring EEW is coming to the U.S. West Coast, as it should. Timothy I. Melbourne ([email protected]) But can it deliver on what’s been promised? Basic principles, lessons learned from the EEW experience in The ongoing global proliferation of real-time GNSS Japan and an appraisal of the communication chal- networks has blanketed many of Earth’s tectonically lenges along with the possible response actions asso- active regions with receivers that straddle active crustal ciated with EEW, all point to more limited opportunities faults and tsunamigenic subduction zones, volcanoes, to warn and protect than envisioned. That is, potential landslides and many other sources of natural hazards. In warning times are less impressive—and possible some seismically active regions such as the western mitigation actions are likely to be less effective—than US, the number of GNSS receivers now rivals or exceeds often purported. In essence, seismic network operators seismometers available for earthquake and tsunami have less than 5 seconds to make a highly visible, monitoring. A recent tally of public-facing casters yields critically important public decision—a serious technical over 3,500 GNSS stations available for hazards miti- challenge in its own right. Yet widely communicating gation through real-time positioning. CWU is currently actionable warnings turns out to be even more difficult. point-positioning 850 stations globally and is working Recent studies and events in the U.S. and Japan have to expand that number to include all available stations, shown that under most circumstances, areas with to make them available to the public via a variety of damaging shaking levels are likely to receive almost data-sharing interfaces, and to provide seismic point- no warning; moderately shaken areas will likely receive and finite-fault estimation routines for the major subduc- a short—a few seconds—warning. Only lightly shaking tion zones that can be used in real time by earthquake areas will most likely receive a significant warning— and tsunami hazards monitoring agencies. 10 seconds or more. I illustrate how we might better communicate the concept of the no-warning zone by An Apples-to-Apples Comparison of Three comparing warning timeliness—properly accounting Earthquake Early Warning Algorithms for warning alerting, receipt and response times— with maps of strongly shaken and affected areas. Men-Andrin Meier ([email protected]) Crisis + Time = Humor? How often, and under which circumstances, can Earthquake Early Warning (EEW) algorithms provide Sara K. McBride ([email protected]) useful alerts? Although numerous EEW algorithms have been proposed and developed to date, we do not When, where, how and with whom humor helps ease have a detailed understanding of how often they can science communication during crisis. provide useful ground motion alerts to end users. To find out, we have run the EPIC, PLUM and FinDer algorithms under realistic and identical conditions 19

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA LIGHTNING TALKS, CONTINUED Marijuana, Mother’s Milk and How Do You Get to Mars? Earthquake Precursors Practice, Practice, Practice David D. Jackson ([email protected]) Bruce Banerdt ([email protected]) In 1982, President Ronald Reagan and his wife, Nancy Using seismology to study the interior structure and Reagan, joined the forces of the War on Drugs. In processes of the other planets of our solar system several public appearances, Nancy emphasized the seems to be a no-brainer. Yet after a flurry of extraterres- dangers of marijuana because many hard drug users trial seismometer deployments by Apollo and Viking in reported prior marijuana consumption. Marijuana was the 1970s, there was a 40-year seismic drought before labeled a “gateway drug” to the hard stuff. Comedian SEIS was placed on the surface of Mars by InSight at the George Carlin perceptively noted that by the same logic beginning of this year. This was despite no fewer than 14 a more potent gateway drug would be mother’s milk, landers being dispatched to the surface of Mars during since virtually all hard drug users had consumed that that period. As it happens, this was not for lack of trying, before their drug additions. Carlin apparently realized as there were more than 15 serious proposals during that the concern was based on observed conditional that period either to include seismometers in Mars- probability of prior marijuana use given later hard drug bound payloads or even to launch dedicated geophysical use, just the reverse of the relevant condition. We who missions. Having been involved in most of those, I will deal with earthquake precursors wouldn’t make that talk about some of my personal experiences in trying to mistake, would we? “make it rain” during that long hiatus. 2019 Eastern Section-SSA Annual Meeting 3–5 NOVEMBER 2019 • COLUMBUS, OHIO Co-chaired by Daniel Pradel (The Ohio State University) and Christine Goulet (University of Southern California) Members of the Eastern Section-SSA advance the science of seismology of Eastern North America, intraplate seismology and the careers of emerging scientists. For meeting details, visit: seismosoc.org/inside-eastern-section/annual-meeting 20

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON WILLIAM B. JOYNER MEMORIAL LECTURE: Simulating Realistic Earthquake Ground Motions THURSDAY, 25 APRIL, 5:30–6:30 PM, GRAND BALLROOM Robert W. Graves Robert W. Graves Research Geophysicist, U.S. Geological Survey Ground motion simulations are an important resource for augmenting recorded motions, assessing impacts for scenario earthquakes and exploring parametric sensitivity. Providing confidence that simulations are realistic requires demonstrating that they not only reproduce motions from past earthquakes, but also that they can predict motions for future events. Ideally, simulations should capture effects due to complexities in the rupture process, as well as effects due to large-scale (e.g., basins) and small-scale (e.g., scattering or site effects) variations in the seismic velocity structure. Accounting for these features is challenging due to uncertainty in the expected ranges of the required parameters. Furthermore, adding increased detail to the model space increases the computational requirements. Simulation approaches have traditionally been classified as “deterministic” or “stochastic” depending on the level of complexity used to describe earthquake rupture and wave propagation effects. Because of knowledge limitations and computational cost, the deterministic approach is typically employed for lower frequencies (< 1 Hz) and the stochastic approach at higher frequencies (> 1Hz). This distinction naturally leads to a hybrid approach, where the separate low- and high-frequency responses are combined to produce a broadband response. In my talk, I will describe the features behind the hybrid simulation approach along with exam- ples of its application to model recorded earthquake ground motions. I will also describe refine- ments to the deterministic approach that extend its range of applicability to higher frequencies. Finally, I will summarize those cases where simulations are most beneficial and explore some frontiers scientists are facing in ground motion simulations. The Joyner Memorial Lectureship, made possible by donations to the Joyner Fund, was established by SSA in cooperation with the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute to honor William Joyner’s distinguished career at the U.S. Geological Survey and his abiding commitment to the exchange of information at the interface of earthquake science and earthquake engineering. 21

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA TECHNICAL SESSIONS temporal trends in rupture length and displacement from high- resolution surface topography (e.g., from lidar and unmanned The 2018 Eruption of Kīlauea Volcano, Hawai‘i aircraft systems); and (5) techniques for synthesizing The 2018 volcano-seismic activity on Kīlauea, Hawai‘i earthquake histories and developing fault-rupture scenarios. manifested in three distinct phases: (1) a magma intrusion along the Lower East Rift Zone, beginning 30 April, resulting Session Chairs: Christopher B. DuRoss ([email protected]), in eruptive fissures that eventually produced the highest flow Mark Zellman ([email protected]), Stephen rates ever recorded at Kīlauea; (2) a M6.9 earthquake on 4 May Angster ([email protected]). located under the south flank of Kīlauea; the second largest event in Hawaii instrumented history; and (3) the episodic Advances in Ocean Floor Seismology collapse of Halema‘uma‘u crater at the Kīlauea summit from Marine seismology has enjoyed a rapid growth in recent mid-May to early-August. Advances in techniques to assess years, as significant advances have been realized in sensors, the temporal evolution of seismicity, seismic parameters and deployment and data recovery methods. Continued structure and to link changes to dynamic shifts in eruption development of these technologies have led to greater behavior, are exciting advances in monitoring, particularly capability to pose, and answer, more questions regarding techniques that do so in a largely automated fashion. This the tectonics, seismicity and geodynamics associated with session will focus on improving our scientific understanding the ocean floors. We invite contributions detailing not only of seismicity with respect to volcanic and tectonic activity at recent and ongoing seismological research on the ocean floors, Kīlauea, the 2018 M6.9 event, caldera collapse processes and but also focusing on hardware, software and deployment advances in techniques that address the temporal evolution innovations that can facilitate new revelations for ocean of seismic parameters that may accompany these eruptive bottom seismological research. phases. We invite contributions that include new observations, modeling and other pertinent studies. Topics include, but Session Chairs: Charlotte A. Rowe ([email protected]), Susan M. are not limited to: automated or semi-automated location Bilek ([email protected]), Michael Begnaud ([email protected]). methods, source rupture processes, foreshock and aftershock studies, early warning systems and geophysical imaging. We Advances in Tectonic Geodesy seek contributions from diverse fields to facilitate a multi- Geodetic datasets such as GPS, InSAR and measurements of disciplinary discussion. strain and tilt are critical to observing many tectonic processes. Geodetic data is often complementary to seismic data, with Session Chairs: Jefferson C. Chang ([email protected]), the ability to record aseismic transients such as slow slip events. Charlotte A. Rowe ([email protected]), Ellen M. Syracuse Geodetic data record the active accumulation of tectonic ([email protected]). strain across seismogenic faults, which are often used to create locking models used in seismic hazard mapping. These data are Advances in Intraplate Earthquake Geology also critical to monitoring volcanic processes, such as inflation Paleoseismic studies of intraplate faulting in regions such as the and deflation, which are useful in forecasting and monitoring Basin and Range Province, Walker Lane and crustal Pacific eruptions. Significant recent advances have been made in the Northwest are often challenged by slow (<5 mm/yr) slip rates, field of seafloor geodetic observations, which require novel long (> 1 k/yr) earthquake recurrence times, distributed faulting instrumentation and techniques. Seafloor observations are key and limited event preservation because of episodic sedimentary to constraining locking in shallow subduction environments and pedogenic processes. To address open questions about and studying offshore volcanic processes. In addition, a wealth earthquake timing and rupture length in these regions, extract of land based geodetic data in many areas has enabled rapid new information on potential seismic sources and better progress in the study of various tectonic processes. In this characterize intraplate faulting for seismic-hazard models, new session, we welcome contributions from any topic related to techniques and dense and high-quality data are required. geodetic observations, modeling and interpretation of geodetic data and development of geodetic techniques as they relate to This session will include invited and contributed tectonics. Contributions may describe analyses of seismic or presentations focused on how new data and methods in other complementary data in addition to geodetic data. We earthquake geology advance our understanding of intraplate especially encourage contributions which focus on any of the faulting. In particular, we welcome presentations on (1) high- following topics: resolution and/or long-term earthquake timing, recurrence • Advances in geodetic measurement techniques, including and slip rate constraints; (2) the application of Bayesian modeling to geochronological data; (3) methods of evaluating seafloor geodesy and propagating paleoseismic uncertainties; (4) spatial and • Novel modeling, inversion or data processing approaches applicable to geodetic data 22

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON • Studies which rigorously explore the role of geodetic data in by including physics-based models of stress transfer or results constraining hazards, including those that analyze GPS noise from numerical simulators of earthquake occurrence on fault networks? For long-term forecasts, PSHA often relies on • Geodetic studies of recent geophysical events, including the seismicity rates obtained by smoothing declustered earthquake 2018 eruptive activity at Kilauea volcano catalogs. Would other declustering methods improve the forecasts or should we abandon declustering altogether and • Studies focusing on aseismic phenomena, including slow include aftershocks in hazards assessments and building codes? slip, post-seismic processes and viscoelastic mantle flow Some PSHA now also includes deformation information from plate motions or geodetic monitoring. How do we Session Chairs: Noel M. Bartlow ([email protected]), best combine that information with the seismicity rates? Kang Wang ([email protected]). For all forecasts, how do we include fault-based information and do we need better ways to address earthquake catalog Advances, Developments and Future Research incompleteness and uncertainty? A critical step is testing these into Seismicity in Natural and Anthropogenic forecasting methods and the forecasts themselves, for example Fluid-Driven Environments using approaches from the Collaboratory for the Study of Induced seismicity has been associated with many fluid- Earthquake Predictability (CSEP). As we develop tests we related anthropogenic activities, such as hydraulic fracturing, need to consider the role of local versus global tests, prospective geothermal exploitation, waste-water injection and reservoir versus retrospective tests and tests of forecast ingredients versus impoundment. However, fluid-induced seismicity can also be complete forecasts. Questions about testing are particularly observed in natural environments, such as volcanic systems. timely as CSEP develops its second phase of operations. Finally, Through recent advances in seismic monitoring, a closer we need to communicate these forecasts with different users examination of such seismicity can be achieved, particularly to help inform a variety of decisions. These communications with regards to understanding the role of highly-pressurized methods range from hazard curves for engineers to simplified fluids at depth and the consequences this may have at the text or graphics for the people impacted by the earthquake, surface. However, several fundamental questions remain, broadcast media, emergency managers and first responders. including: What factors control fluid-induced seismicity? Working alongside our social science colleagues is an important What can be inferred from the seismicity in terms of step to understanding more about our users, the channels ongoing processes? Can this information be used to inform they prefer and what information they need most to inform hazard assessment, e.g., forecast volcanic eruptions or large their decisions. We seek contributions that address any of induced earthquakes? Can comparisons between fluid- the questions posed above or other ideas on how to improve induced seismicity from different environments improve our earthquake forecasts. understanding of the source processes involved? Session Chairs: Andrew J. Michael ([email protected]), This session aims to bring together a variety of topics related Camilla Cattania ([email protected]), David D. Jackson to fluid-induced seismicity to further our understanding ([email protected]), Sara K. McBride (skmcbride@ of the physics behind earthquakes that are both natural usgs.gov), Warner Marzocchi ([email protected]), and anthropogenic. We welcome contributions relating to Maximilian J. Werner ([email protected]). seismicity in any fluid-driven environment. We are looking for abstracts related to lab experiments, statistical analysis, Building, Using and Validating 3D field observations and novel techniques in data processing/ Geophysical Models interpretation that characterize the physical conditions and Geophysical models, such as 3D geologic and seismic velocity mechanisms of fluid-related seismicity.” models, are needed in three and sometimes four dimensions for a host of applications from predicting earthquake ground Session Chairs: Rebecca O. Salvage (rebecca.salvage1@ motions to locating natural resources to planning subsurface ucalgary.ca), Megan Zecevic ([email protected]), infrastructure. Many types of observations can be used to Ruijia Wang ([email protected]). inform geophysical models including geologic mapping, borehole data, active and passive seismic imaging, potential Better Earthquake Forecasts field observations and observations from other direct and Earthquake forecasts have a wide range of applications indirect methods. Geophysical theory or empirical models from short-term guidance during earthquake sequences and may also be used to solve for missing geophysical attributes swarms to being an ingredient in long-term Probabilistic given other related observations, for example, solving for Seismic Hazards Assessments (PSHA). In this session, we S-wave velocity and density given the P-wave velocity. Further, will discuss what makes an earthquake forecast useful and some observations sample distinct locations while others how to improve them. For short-term forecasts of swarms average over volumes of varying size and different methods and earthquake sequences, most current, official forecasts are based on statistical models of earthquake clustering such as the Reasenberg & Jones model or the ETAS (Epidemic Type Aftershock Sequences) model. Can we improve these 23

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA of informed interpolation and extrapolation may be used to Characterizing Faults, Folds, Earthquakes and reconcile observations, theory and empirical relationships Related Hazards in the Pacific Northwest into a single geophysical model. We seek contributions in This session will showcase recent advances in quantifying the which researchers have developed and/or applied methods for activity and impacts of active faults and folds that accommodate reconciling multiple datasets into a unified geophysical model. oblique plate convergence along the Cascadia margin. We invite Discussion should address the advantages and disadvantages of studies that characterize recent deformation related to the Juan various types of datasets and methods in an effort to improve de Fuca-North America plate boundary, including offshore and validate the next generation of geophysical models. structures, the plate interface and slab and upper plate structures Applications of geophysical models to improve assessment from the forearc to the backarc. We welcome contributions of hazard and risk, particularly in novel ways or for novel from the fields of tectonic geomorphology, paleoseismology, applications, are also encouraged. geophysics and others that exploit lidar, bathymetry, seismic, potential field, GPS, InSAR and other high-resolution data to Session Chairs: Oliver Boyd ([email protected]), map active Cascadia structures and characterize their hazards. William J. Stephenson ([email protected]), Brad Aagaard ([email protected]). Session Chairs: Scott E. K. Bennett ([email protected]), Ashley R. Streig ([email protected]), Colin Amos (colin.amos@ Causes and Consequences of the Columbia River wwu.edu), Megan Anderson ([email protected]). Flood Basalts Flood basalt eruptions represent the largest volcanic events Coseismic Ground Failure and Impacts on the Built on Earth and the most recent one occurred 16 million years and Natural Environment ago. It covered most of eastern Oregon and parts of western In this session, we invite presentations on coseismic landslides Idaho and southern Washington. In many cases, flood and liquefaction, and their impacts on the built environment. basalts are associated with the presence of hotspots, such as in We encourage submissions on empirical and analytical Yellowstone. While processes driving the flood basalt event models, sensitivity analyses, data collection and analyses and originate in the asthenosphere, the connection between these scenario exercises. We welcome submissions focusing on both processes and the subsequent modification of the lithospheric local and regional-scales, especially those addressing data or plate is still poorly understood. methods that bridge the gap between detailed local studies and generalized regional or global models. Submissions addressing This session welcomes studies focused on the origin, the effect of frequency content, duration, or improved ground evolution and dynamics of the Columbia River flood basalts motion intensity measures on ground failure triggering are and the Yellowstone system. We welcome contributions from encouraged, as well as considerations of regional differences. geology, geochemistry, geochronology and geophysics that Additionally, we encourage submissions on the collection and explore the architecture and dynamics of the crust-mantle analysis of ground failure impacts and development of proxies system in the Columbia River flood basalts region. for predicting the likelihood and the spatial distribution of earthquake ground failure impacts. Session Chairs: A. Christian Stanciu (cstanciu@uoregon. edu), YoungHee Kim ([email protected]), Eugene D. Session Chairs: Alex Grant ([email protected]), Kate Humphreys ([email protected]), Robert W. Clayton E. Allstadt ([email protected]), Eric M. Thompson ([email protected]). ([email protected]), Keith Knudsen ([email protected]). Central and Eastern North America and Intraplate Current and Future Challenges in Engineering Regions Worldwide Seismology This session aims to be a home for a wide variety of The impressive ongoing densification of modern high-quality presentations tied together by a shared intraplate setting. earthquake monitoring networks in most earthquake prone Submissions treating crustal to lithospheric imaging in countries means that near-field strong ground motions—which cratonic regions such as new results from EarthScope data, dominate earthquake hazard—are increasingly recorded paleoseismology of intraplate faults, geodynamic models of worldwide. Earthquake records are then made available to the continental seismicity, geodetic observations in low strain-rate seismological and engineering communities through open access regions, ground-motion and attenuation models and any other databases and associated, state-of-the art web services. These studies focused away from active plate boundaries are warmly high-quality earthquake waveforms are typically acquired at encouraged. a variety of recording sites, ranging from rocklike ground to very soft sediments, with well characterized geotechnical and Session Chairs: Will Levandowski (will.levandowski@ geophysical properties. This allows novel, physically sound tetratech.com), Weisen Shen ([email protected]), representations of site terms in empirical ground-motion models Christine A. Powell ([email protected]). and for reliably constraining reference rock ground motions. At the same time, tremendous advances in computational seismology allow physics-based numerical simulations of 24

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON strong ground motions to reliably complement and further Earthquake Source Parameters: Theory, constrain ground-motion prediction efforts and hazard studies, Observations and Interpretations by providing opportunities to model and test the impacts of Understanding origin and spatio-temporal evolution of complex source characteristics on expected ground motions. seismicity needs a careful quantitative analysis of earthquake Ground-motion models are one of the key ingredients of seismic source parameters for large sets of earthquakes in studied hazard assessments for tectonic and induced earthquakes, seismic sequences. Determining focal mechanisms, seismic increasingly implemented also in real-time or rapid fashion to moment tensors, static stress drop, apparent stress and other promptly identify potential associated impacts and losses and to earthquake source parameters provides an insight into tectonic optimize emergency response. Earthquake impact mitigation, stress and crustal strength in the area under study, material that chiefly relies on modern earthquake resistant construction properties and prevailing fracturing mode (shear/tensile) in practice, requires effective translation of scientific investigation the focal zone, and allows investigating earthquake source into building codes and requires continuous dialogue between processes in greater detail. In addition, studying relations the seismological and engineering communities. With this between static and dynamic source parameters and earthquake background, this session welcomes novel and multi-disciplinary size is essential for understanding the self-similarity of rupture contributions focusing on the current “grand challenges” in processes and scaling laws and for improving our knowledge of engineering seismology like: (a) prediction of near-field strong ground motion prediction equations. ground motions; (b) prediction of reference rock ground motions; (c) new approaches to empirical and computational This session focuses on methodological as well as observational ground motion modelling (including novel functional forms aspects of earthquake source parameters of natural or induced and predictors and attempts to reduce prediction uncertainties); earthquakes in a broad range of magnitudes from large to (d) advanced site characterization (beyond the use of Vs,30 and small earthquakes, including acoustic emissions in laboratory site classes); (e) real-time/rapid earthquake hazard and impact experiments. Presentations of new approaches to determination assessment; and (f) translation of seismological science into of focal mechanisms, seismic moment tensors and other source building codes. We aim at a rich discussion that brings together parameters, as well as case studies related to analysis of earthquake experiences and ideas from the operational and research source parameters are welcome. We also invite contributions communities, and from empirical and numerical modelers. related to scaling of static and dynamic source parameters, to Students and early-career seismologists are encouraged to self-similarity of earthquakes and inversions for stress and other present their ongoing and recent works. physical parameters in the focal zone. Session Chairs: Carlo Cauzzi ([email protected]), Session Chairs: Vaclav Vavrycuk ([email protected]), Douglas Ralph J. Archuleta ([email protected]), Fabrice Cotton S. Dreger ([email protected]), Grzegorz Kwiatek ([email protected]), Nicolas Luco ([email protected]), ([email protected]). Alberto Michelini ([email protected]), Stefano Parolai ([email protected]), Ellen Rathje ([email protected]), Emerging Science from the EarthScope David Wald ([email protected]). Transportable Array in Alaska and Western Canada The USArray Transportable Array deployment in Alaska and Earthquake Ground Motions and Structural Response Western Canada was completed in the fall of 2017 with 194 in Subduction Zones: A Focus on Cascadia telemetered broadband seismic and infrasound expected to Accurate estimates of earthquake ground motions and collect data though the summer of 2020. This unprecedented structural response in subduction zone settings are critical systematic broadband coverage of the entirety of continental to improving seismic hazard assessment and community Alaska and far northwestern Canada provides the seismological resilience. This is especially true in the Cascadia subduction community with a dataset intended to help illuminate long- zone, with its susceptibility to multiple types of earthquake standing questions and aid in new discoveries. The diverse sources (e.g., megathrust, crustal and intraslab), the presence tectonic environment of Alaska and northwest Canada of deep sedimentary basins and proximity to major cities such provides a world-class setting for investigating seismicity, plate as Portland, Oregon; Seattle, Washington; and Vancouver, boundaries, distributed intraplate deformation, subduction, British Columbia. active volcanism, infrasound phenomena and a myriad of other Earth processes. This session welcomes emerging studies using We invite studies focusing on ground motion estimates all or part of this new community asset to investigate structures using a variety of seismological approaches (e.g., observational, ranging from the crust to core, active tectonics, local, regional theoretical, numerical modeling), as well as those that assess the and teleseismic earthquakes or other elastic wave sources and response of man-made structures and the underlying local site seismic wave propagation. due to earthquake ground motions. We welcome results from all subduction zone systems, with a particular focus on those that Session Chairs: Natalia A. Ruppert ([email protected]), may improve our understanding of seismic hazard in Cascadia. Kevin M. Ward ([email protected]), Meghan S. Miller ([email protected]). Session Chairs: Erin Wirth ([email protected]), Marine A. Denolle ([email protected]), Nasser A. Marafi ([email protected]), Valerie Sahakian ([email protected]). 25

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA Environmental Seismology: Glaciers, Rivers, Explore the Fault2SHA Paradigms Across the Ponds Landslides and Beyond After the formalization of a Fault2SHA working group Environmental seismology is the study of seismic signals inside the European Seismological Commission (2016), generated at and near the surface created by environmental some initiatives for presenting new data sets and the latest forces in the atmosphere, hydrosphere or solid Earth. integration of fault sources in SHA models in Latin Americas Contributions to this session are welcome on a wide variety were organized by the Executive Committee in the “Old of topics including (but not limited to) the seismic signals Word” (http://fault2sha.net/what/) and at a fruitful session associated with landslides, rock falls, debris flows, lahars, snow at SSA2018. This session aims at exploring differences and avalanches, cliff or pinnacle resonance, bedload transport, fluid similarities in treating fault data in seismic hazard assessment flow in open and confined channels, open water waves, tides, across the Ponds (the Oceans). Descriptions of earthquake glacial stick-slip, iceberg calving, crevassing, extreme weather, sources coming from field observations and from modelling, other anthropogenic sources. In addition, other processes discussions on how to handle uncertainties in source monitored by seismic waves such as permafrost, groundwater, representation for Seismic Hazard Assessment (i.e. probability soil moisture using seismometers or DAS data are welcome. of multi-fault ruptures) and contributions to the identification Contributions that seek to conduct monitoring, create physical of 3D, geometrically complex fault systems and their or statistical models of source processes or systems, detect incorporation in either physics-based or probabilistic seismic events, characterize a wave propagation environment, or hazard results are welcome. interact with other branches of the Earth or social sciences are additionally encouraged. This session is jointly organized by the European Seismological Commission and SSA. Session Chairs: Bradley Paul Lipovsky (brad_lipovsky@fas. harvard.edu), Marine A. Denolle ([email protected]), Session Chairs: Laura Peruzza ([email protected]), Rick Aster ([email protected]). Edward H. Field ([email protected]), Richard Styron ([email protected]), Alessandro Valentini Evolving Best Practices for Station Buildout in EEW ([email protected]). and New Permanent Networks On the U.S. West Coast, the U.S. Geological Survey and Explosion Seismology Applications its partner institutions, University of California, Berkeley, Explosion sources are an important component of seismology Caltech, the University of Oregon and the University of and are used in everything from characterization of geologic Washington are focusing on completing the build-out of environments to nuclear test identification. In regions of low the infrastructure for initial implementation of ShakeAlert natural background seismicity, mine blasting can dominate Earthquake Early Warning (EEW) in the United States. monitoring catalogs and finding and separating these sources Over the next few years, the number of EEW-capable seismic from tectonic earthquakes is important for hazard estimation. stations must at least double from today’s ~850 contributing Recent work using template matching, waveform modeling stations. This effort requires planning regarding station density for moment tensors and combining seismic and acoustic and type as well as complex logistics including siting, legal data has shown great success in discriminating explosions and environmental permitting, equipment specification and from earthquakes and other sources. With the advent of delivery. Other important topics include data quality and inexpensive and easy to deploy arrays and networks of sensors, latency, continuous monitoring systems, delivery of alerts and the wavefield produced by explosions is being studied with other technical topics. This session invites contributions from unprecedented detail. We welcome abstracts on explosion any EEW system operator on all these topics related to EEW source physics, wave propagation, large-N network design, build, including case studies for current and planned seismic multi-physics data fusion and advanced processing techniques networks as well as new ideas for developing EEW deployments applied to explosion sources. and collaborations with contributing networks that are novel for their design or approach in handling these issues. Session Chairs: William R. Walter ([email protected]), Robert E. Abbott ([email protected]), Jessie L. Bonner Session Chairs: Fabia Terra ([email protected]), ([email protected]), Catherine M. Snelson ([email protected]). Mouse Reusch ([email protected]), Tim Parker ([email protected]), Geoffrey Bainbridge Facebook and Twitter and Snapchat, Oh My! ([email protected]). The Challenges and Successes of Using Social Media to Communicate Science to the Public Social media is becoming a more important component of communicating science and local hazard information to the public. With the rise of this new media and the internet of things, scientists now have a more direct connection to communicate not only science information but also near real-time information about seismic hazards (e.g. tsunami alerts, earthquake information). However, this new 26

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON communication avenue is a double-edged sword, as the same Frontiers in Earthquake Geology: social media can be used to spread misinformation or create Bright Futures and Brick Walls unrealistic expectations from the public regarding how and Since its infancy in the mid-1960s, the study of earthquake when local hazard information is disseminated. Here we geology and paleoseismology has grown into a multi-disciplinary invite presentations that relate to the use of social media as field. In concert, we have seen an increase in the precision and an education and outreach tool or as a method to disseminate detail of coseismic earthquake observations and of complex fault hazard information including but not limited to: case studies behavior, including multi-fault rupture, earthquake triggering of using social media to disseminate emergency information, and fault interaction. In addition to the challenges of combining applications of social media as an education and outreach tool, various geochronologic techniques, event stratigraphy and challenges and successes in using social media to communicate geomorphic surface reconstruction, paleoseismologic studies with the public and new methods or techniques that aim to must also reconcile evidence from the upper several meters of improve interactions on social media. the Earth with processes that initiate at several kilometers depth and with various models of rupture scenarios and earthquake Session Chairs: Elizabeth A. Vanacore (elizabeth.vanacore@ recurrence. Despite these challenges, scientists are using new and upr.edu), Sara K. McBride ([email protected]). improved methods and concepts to characterize both regional and local fault behavior, compare short term deformation rates From Drifting to Anchored: Advances in Improving with longer-term geologic slip rates, add critical constraints to Absolute Hypocenter Location Accuracy for dynamic rupture models and improve estimates of fault rupture Natural, Induced and Explosion Seismic Events length, earthquake magnitude and fault slip rates. Accurate, absolute geographic location of seismic event hypocenters is important for characterizing seismic activity This session covers recent advancements, ongoing challenges and estimating seismic hazard. The increasing societal demands and the future of earthquake geology. We welcome submissions for robust and actionable hazard estimation of natural and focused on incorporating new concepts and methods that induced earthquakes, the requirements for nuclear explosion improve our understanding of short- and long-term fault monitoring and other social and economic needs require behavior, place controls and insight on rupture modeling and improved hypocenter accuracy and robust error estimation. provide new constraints on seismic hazard analyses. But, in general, seismic event locations are not well anchored to the geographic Earth because they depend on poorly Session Chairs: Lydia Staisch ([email protected]), Brian L. distributed and distant seismogram measurements, simplified Sherrod ([email protected]), Stuart Nishenko ([email protected]), and erroneous Earth models and approximated physical H. Gary Greene ([email protected]). processes. While many common hypocenter relocation methods can precisely constrain relative locations, hypocenters Imaging Subduction Zones remain poorly constrained in absolute geographic coordinates. Subduction zones host most of the deep earthquakes on Earth. Only in rare cases is there relatively direct and accurate “ground The dynamic processes within subduction zones create volcanic truth” (GT) information on location that can be derived from arcs, control the global volatile cycle that impacts the climate static source displacement or from the known source of a and lead to orogeny that is responsible for the rise of mountains, human caused event or explosion. e.g., the Andes mountains along the Andean subduction zone. Although there have been tremendous advances in imaging Error estimates for seismic location fall into at least three subduction zones (especially in Japan and Cascadia) with main classes: (1) True, absolute geographic error (hypocenter increasing seismic data coverage and improved imaging theory - GT); (2) Nominal absolute error (nominal hypocenter and methods, it is still very challenging to obtain consistent 3D uncertainties output by location algorithms or other analyses high-resolution seismic images of these systems. Such high- without GT); and (3) Nominal relative location errors. Here resolution images are critical in definitively answering questions we welcome observational, theoretical and methodological such as how volatiles are recycled, what are the pathways of melt contributions addressing determination of absolute geographic migration and whether or not serpentine exists in the “cold location of seismic events. We specifically ask - is it possible to nose” of the mantle wedge or the cold core of the slab mantle. achieve true absolute hypocenter estimates with representative The goal of this session is to motivate discussion on the current uncertainties? If yes, what methods and data are needed to state of subduction zone imaging with a special focus placed achieve this goal? We also welcome contributions on absolute on new seismic array deployments (e.g., OBS) and advanced and relative location procedures and their nominal error seismic imaging methods (e.g., ambient noise tomography, estimates that relate to improving absolute geographic location migration imaging and full waveform inversion) that can accuracy. explore and fully utilize big seismic data sets to better image subduction zones. We welcome and encourage research topics Session Chairs: Alexandros Savvaidis (alexandros.savvaidis@ on robust imaging method development and applications and beg.utexas.edu), Anthony Lomax ([email protected]), William L. image interpretations of global subduction zones. Yeck ([email protected]), Stephen C. Myers ([email protected]). Session Chairs: Min Chen ([email protected]), Eric D. Kiser ([email protected]), Zhongwen Zhan ([email protected]). 27

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA Injection-Induced Seismicity Large Data Set Seismology: Strategies in Induced seismicity related to oil and gas production has been Managing, Processing and Sharing Large a growing concern in the last few years. Although the majority Geophysical Data Sets of wastewater disposal and hydraulic fracturing operations As seismology grows increasingly data rich, studies are being do not generate seismicity or large magnitude events, there designed that use ever larger volumes of available data. The have been few reports of damaging earthquakes in North strategies for collecting, processing and sharing these data are America, resulting in some damages to infrastructure and other evolving accordingly. In cases when the traditional research properties. This led to an increased demand for appropriate pattern of downloading, managing and processing data locally risk assessment and management of induced seismicity and the becomes untenably slow, new approaches are required. These development of effective risk mitigation strategies. Injection- strategies may include employing a compute cluster, either induced seismicity and associated risk and hazard have been operated by a research group, an institutional HPC resource the subject of many studies and research. However, there are or a cloud computing provider. Researchers may use new still many questions to answer. In this session, we welcome technologies and frameworks to orchestrate more advanced contributions on geomechanics, numerical modelings, case processing workflows aimed at large scale computation, e.g. studies, induced seismicity forecasting and risk assessment Hadoop. Furthermore, they may employ stream processing, techniques, estimating ground motions, assessing liquefaction, where data are processed as it is collected from a center, thus lateral spreading, site amplification and infrastructure damage. mitigating the local storage issues. Ultimately, working with large data sets challenges researchers to be more informed and Session Chairs: Sepideh Karimi (sepidehkarimi@ deliberate about computation, data transmission, compression nanometrics.ca), Zia Zafir ([email protected]), Dario and storage. This shift in data processing scale has a number of Baturan ([email protected]), David Shorey implications for both data providers and research processing ([email protected]). pipelines and a variety of approaches are being used to address these changes. We invite researchers and data providers The InSight Mission—Seismology on Mars to describe their experiences in collecting, managing and and Beyond processing large data sets. The InSight mission landed on Mars on November 26, 2018 and was the first to place an ultra-sensitive broad band Session Chairs: Chad Trabant ([email protected]), seismometer on the surface of another planet. It will provide Jonathan K. MacCarthy ([email protected]). key information on the composition and structure of an Earth- like planet that has gone through most of the evolutionary Large Intraslab Earthquakes stages of the Earth up to, but not including, plate tectonics. The physical processes associated with intermediate-depth and Using seismology, geodesy and heat flow measurement, InSight deep-focus earthquakes are not well understood. However, aims to determine the thickness and structure of the Martian understanding these events can provide insights into earthquake crust and mantle, the size and state of the core, the planet’s mechanics, subduction dynamics, mineral physics and mantle thermal state and the level of tectonic activity and rate of thermal structures. In addition, some intermediate-depth meteorite impacts. earthquakes can pose significant hazards to local communities. Therefore, investigating rupture processes of these earthquakes The two-year (one Mars year) InSight mission ushers in a new has both significant intellectual and societal relevance. era in planetary seismology. In the coming years and decades Recently large intermediate-depth and deep-focus earthquakes NASA may launch missions to explore the interiors of our have occurred at multiple subduction zones with distinct Moon, Venus and the “Ocean Worlds” of the Solar System (e.g., characteristics, including the 2013 M8.3 Sea of Okhotsk Europa, Enceladus and Titan). While the focus of these mission earthquake, the 2015 M7.5 Hindu Kush earthquake, the concepts vary from fundamental geophysics to detection of life 2015 M7.8 Bonin Islands earthquake, the 2017 M8.2 Mexico and conditions for life, seismological exploration of planetary earthquake and the 2018 M8.2 and M7.9 Fiji doublet. The bodies’ interiors is likely to play a key role in understanding high-quality seismic records of these events provide excellent planetary state and evolution by helping to determine their opportunities to probe kinematic and dynamic processes of thermal and chemical make-up. these earthquakes, to differentiate their associated physical mechanisms, to investigate geodynamics of different subduction We invite contributions that provide overviews of the InSight zones and to understand the related seismic hazards. We mission, including description of its experiments, instruments, welcome contributions on all aspects of intra-slab earthquakes, models, data access and services, as well as observations made in including but not limited to rupture process, foreshocks and the first few months of operation. We also invite contributions aftershocks, dynamic triggering, geodynamic modeling, mineral that describe past and future seismological exploration of the laboratory experiments and seismic imaging of slabs. Solar System. Session Chairs: Zhongwen Zhan ([email protected]), Session Chairs: Sharon Kedar ([email protected]), Wenyuan Fan ([email protected]), Linda M. Warren Mark P. Panning ([email protected]), William B. ([email protected]). Banerdt ([email protected]). 28

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON The M7 Anchorage Earthquake: Testing the Session Chairs: Youzuo Lin ([email protected]), Sepideh Karimi Resiliency of South-Central Alaska ([email protected]), Takahiko Uchide The M7 Anchorage Earthquake of November 30, 2018 ([email protected]), Qingkai Kong ([email protected]), struck under Alaska’s most densely populated urban area, Dario Baturan ([email protected]), Zhigang Peng and generated the strongest ground motions in south-central ([email protected]), Ting Chen ([email protected]), Alaska since the Great 1964 Alaska Earthquake. The Andrew Delorey ([email protected]), Min Chen Anchorage earthquake is the third Mw≥7 earthquake in the ([email protected]), Chengping Chai ([email protected]), subducting Pacific Plate to impact south-central Alaska in Paul Johnson ([email protected]). the past three years. The rupture appears to have occurred inside the Pacific Plate and generally propagated upward and Metamaterials, Resonances and Seismic Wave northward toward the plate interface. Strong ground motions Mitigation, an Emerging Trend in Seismology across the Anchorage and Mat-Su Valley regions caused The study of the interaction between waves propagating in a major impacts to the built environment and local economy, medium and its structure continues to be one of the most active estimated in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Yet, despite research areas of wave physics and notably seismology. After the shaking severity most buildings, critical facilities and the introduction of a new class of artificially engineered media lifelines performed remarkably well. Damage was generally called “metamaterials” in electromagnetism and acoustics, the minor to moderate though spread across a large geographic idea that full control on wave propagation can be achieved area. In this session, we invite contributions from all fields through an appropriate design of the medium’s microstructure addressing an array of topics including, but not limited to, is now widely accepted. In elasticity for instance, several the earthquake source, propagation and ground motion laboratory experiments have shown how waves can be stopped, observations, geodetic observations, geotechnical impacts converted or amplified using resonant inclusions or periodic to the built environment and ground failures placed in the arrangement of heterogeneities. This evokes the compelling context of the local geology. We also seek perspectives that question whether metamaterial concepts can be scaled up and address community preparedness, mitigation measures, work for seismic waves at earthquakes frequencies. resiliency to seismic hazards and lessons learned. Major research directions are emerging in this area including Session Chairs: Michael West ([email protected]), the development of barriers for seismic waves, the design of Robert C. Witter ([email protected]). periodic frames for buildings and, at a larger scale, the study of city layouts that exploit building resonances and site-city Machine Learning in Seismology interaction (SCI) to mitigate the propagating seismic field. Recent advances in computer science and data analytics have brought machine-learning (ML) techniques, including deep We invite theoretical, numerical and experimental learning, to the forefront of seismological research. While contributions dealing with metamaterials, site-city interaction ML methods continue to produce impressive successes in and wave control applications, including ground borne conventional artificial intelligence (AI) tasks, they also start vibrations, to the field of geophysics and seismic engineering. to show powerful applicability in augmenting big data analysis in seismology by improving accuracy and efficiency compared Session Chairs: Andrea Colombi ([email protected]), to the traditional methods. Successful ML applications in Philippe Gueguen ([email protected]), seismology include seismic event detection, seismic signal Antonio Palermo ([email protected]). classification, earthquake parameter estimation, signal denoising, ground motion prediction, subsurface tomography, Methods for Site Response Estimation aftershock pattern recognition and efficient visualization. Assessing the influence of soil and rock properties on the strength However, challenges remain in terms of discovering new of earthquake ground shaking is an area of active research because ML methods that can be applied to seismic and other of the importance of such “site effects” to realistically quantify geophysical data to learn about Earth’s subsurface structure potential seismic risk to infrastructure. The hazards community and the underlying processes of Earth such as earthquakes. is moving beyond simple measurements of Vs30 (average Furthermore, instead of considering ML models as “black shear-wave velocity in the upper 30 m) to measuring, modeling boxes,” developing human-interpretable ML models and and predicting more accurate site response. These approaches learning about their decision-making process also remain as include inverting various datasets for shear wave velocities at a grand challenges in ML field. The goal of this session is to range of depths, identifying hard boundaries that influence site highlight some of most recent ML results in our seismology response and also developing methods for direct measurement community to motivate discussions of new ML research of site response through, such as spectral ratios using earthquake directions in seismology and beyond. or ambient noise signals. In this session we invite abstracts on innovative methods for site response characterization, data This session is jointly organized by the Seismological Society collection approaches needed for such characterizations, as well as of Japan and SSA. case studies showing the application of these methods. Session Chairs: Thomas L. Pratt ([email protected]), Lisa S. Schleicher ([email protected]), Lee M. Liberty ([email protected]). 29

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA Modeling and Understanding of High-Frequency New Frontiers in Global Seismic Monitoring and Ground Motion Earthquake Research Seismic wave attenuation is an important topic for both Driven by the societal expectation for timely, accurate seismology and engineering, as it enters in the prediction of information, the past decade has seen dramatic improvements ground motions, site response analyses and the assessment as a result of increased computational efficiency, seismic data of seismic hazards. In this session, we would like to bring in coverage and improved communication technology. While studies focusing on high-frequency ground motion and its aspects of earthquake research have taken advantage of this attenuation, as this may have significant impact on the site evolution, the adoption of improvements in earthquake response and engineering design. As physics-based broadband monitoring has not been fully leveraged. In real-time simulations can reach unprecedented high frequencies, such monitoring, earthquakes are characterized in a vacuum, without studies can be of help in understanding ground motion at high leveraging knowledge of past events. New data types may help frequencies crucial to the seismic response of certain structures, characterize earthquakes more quickly and accurately. New especially for critical facilities. opportunities exist for rapidly communicating information. With these advances, global seismic monitoring can improve the This session aims at collecting contributions as to how quality and timeliness of information shared with the public. physics-based and empirical modeling handle high-frequency ground motion. We welcome simulation studies that may shed A U.S. Geological Survey Powell Center Working Group light on the nature of high-frequency attenuation of ground explored these issues at a recent meeting, attempting to motion, in particular considering also a proper statistical prioritize future opportunities in earthquake monitoring treatment of the uncertainties associated with data collected and research. Areas of focus identified by the group included in the field, the laboratory and through analysis of ground improved agency communication during earthquake response; motion records. Topics of interest include crustal attenuation leveraging insights from the nuclear monitoring community in studies, fmax, kappa, spectral analysis studies (stress drop processing array data for earthquake detection and association; and Q), potential trade-offs between kappa and source, path use of machine learning techniques to improve the reliability and site effects, rock and site characterization studies, as well of source characterization; compressing the timeline of rapid as contributions on the quantification and interpretation of source characterization; and improving our use of social media scattering and intrinsic attenuation. Further contributions and crowd-sourced data. We solicit contributions that further that help quantify uncertainties in high-frequency attenuation explore these and related issues. We seek to more clearly and corresponding ground motion models are also particularly identify priorities of future monitoring efforts, what new welcome. technologies can improve the speed and accuracy of monitoring and how to improve communication and coordination between Session Chairs: Marco Pilz ([email protected]), Ashly Cabas groups involved in earthquake response and research. ([email protected]), Olga Ktenidou ([email protected]). Session Chairs: Gavin P. Hayes ([email protected]), Paul Earle New Approaches to Geophysical Research ([email protected]), Kristine Pankow ([email protected]), Using Dense Mixed Sensor and Broadband Alberto Michelini ([email protected]). Seismology Arrays Researchers are deploying complementary geophysical Next Generation Earthquake Early Warning instruments such as high and low gain seismic velocity sensors, Systems: Advances, Innovations and Applications accelerometers, infrasound, GNSS, MT in dense and sparse arrays Recent scientific advances in real-time data processing, source along with broadband seismic sensors. Some of these techniques characterization and ground motion prediction shape the require longer-term deployments than others and contributors future of earthquake early warning (EEW) systems. Machine- are encourage to discuss these constraints and tradeoffs when learning based techniques take conventional event detection considering these types of combined instrument observations. algorithms to the next level by successfully identifying concurrent seismic radiations from multiple sources and We would encourage session contributors to present their reducing the number of false triggers. Integration of real- research, motivation and innovative approaches to geophysical time seismic and GPS data reduce uncertainties on source studies using mixed sensor deployment techniques for Earth characterization by providing additional insights on event and climate sciences observations including: broadband and magnitude, fault slip and rupture geometry. Ground-motion geophone velocity sensors, accelerometers, GNSS, tilt, pressure algorithms that make use of real-time observed amplitudes, and infrasound, magnetotelluric instruments. Presentations regional wave propagation attributes and frequency-dependent may describe the results, challenges and discoveries of the site amplification allow for the reliable prediction of shaking multidisciplinary approach to geophysical studies. intensities. Incorporation of building/facility inventory and associated vulnerabilities allows prediction of where damage Session Chairs: Tim Parker ([email protected]), potential is high for rapid aftermath response. Ninfa Bennington ([email protected]), Bruce Townsend ([email protected]). 30

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON This session seeks contributions from the latest advances Non-Traditional Application of Seismo-Acoustics in the field of earthquake early warning, including (but not for Non-Traditional Monitoring limited to): Seismo-acoustic measurements have been shown to be • real-time earthquake location, rupture and ground motion sensitive for detecting, locating and characterizing natural environmental phenomena, animal communications and characterization techniques/algorithms; military activities. There are however other phenomena and • insights gleaned from multi-disciplinary real-time data sets; activities producing seismo-acoustic signals. For example, • challenges related to complex ruptures and concurrent events; the operation of industrial facilities generates mechanical • characterization of prediction uncertainties and risk- energy that potentially propagates into the air as acoustic and infrasonic waves and/or into the solid earth as seismic waves. oriented probabilistic early warnings; The types and intensity of vibrational signals recorded at the • tsunami potential and early warning at local and global scales; sensors vary according to the specifics of the machinery and • case studies, testing and performance evaluation of their relative location with respect to the sensors. Innovative analyses techniques can extract useful information from these existing systems; signals and help us monitor the machinery or related activities. • near real-time of damage predictions for post-disaster We welcome submissions on collection and application of seismo-acoustic data and techniques that shed light on non- management. traditional monitoring of facilities and activities. This session is jointly organized by the Seismological Society of Session Chairs: Monica Maceira ([email protected]), Japan and SSA. Chengping Chai ([email protected]), Omar Marcillo ([email protected]). Session Chairs: Angela I. Chung ([email protected]), Emrah Yenier ([email protected]), Numerical Modeling of Earthquake Ground Motion, Men-Andrin Meier ([email protected]), Mark Novakovic Seismic Noise, Rupture Dynamics and Seismic ([email protected]), Mitsuyuki Hoshiba Wave Propagation ([email protected]), Yuki Kodera Continuous development of numerical modeling methodology ([email protected]). in seismology is driven by emerging requirements in the observational seismology, advances in the mathematical Next Generation Seismic Detection sciences, evolution of computer architectures and programming A range of new technologies are revolutionizing how we can models, adaptation of methods originating in other scientific detect and characterize seismic events. These include the fields, as well as by practical applications including site- use of new types of sensors to record motion, as well as new specific seismic hazard assessment. This session is a forum for algorithms to process the geophysical data that they generate. presenting advances in numerical methodology, whether the Real-time processing of geodetic data is now the norm as principal context is observational, mathematical/numerical, the number of GNSS receivers streaming continuous data is computational or application. steadily increasing. Tens of millions of smartphones equipped with both GNSS and accelerometer sensors have been deployed We invite contributions focused on development, throughout the western US, while hundreds of millions verification and validation of numerical-modeling methods exist throughout tectonically regions globally, and these are and methodologically important applications especially increasingly being harnessed in myriad new ways through to earthquake ground motion, seismic noise and rupture crowd-sourcing. Seismic detection by voice- and shaking- dynamics, including applications from field of induced activated Internet of Things offer to push sensor density far seismicity with particular focus on multi-physics aspects. higher still. Machine learning algorithms are being applied Examples may include combining fluid migration and stress to a wide variety of geophysical data and are improving our transfer in porous media with rupture dynamics and wave capability to detect events of interest. We invite contributions propagation in poro-elastic media and full seismic cycle from researchers developing new and innovative ways to detect simulations. We encourage contributions on the analysis of and characterize seismic events. methods, fast algorithms, high-performance implementations, large-scale simulations, non-linear behavior, multi-scale Session Chairs: Timothy Melbourne ([email protected]), problems and confrontation of methods with data. Richard M. Allen ([email protected]), Gavin P. Hayes ([email protected]), Raymond J. Willemann (raywillemann@ Session Chairs: Peter Moczo ([email protected]), Steven gmail.com), G. Eli Baker ([email protected]). M. Day ([email protected]), Jozef Kristek ([email protected]). 31

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA Observations of Volcanism in the Three Spheres: We also welcome contributions that use other observational Land, Air and Sea or modeling techniques to characterize stress or deformation Volcanoes are naturally situated at the intersection of the along the margin and those that that summarize past, present solid Earth with the air and/or sea. As a result, we can probe and future offshore instrument deployments along the Pacific the volcanic system using a diverse range of observable waves: Northwest. seismic, infrasonic and hydroacoustic. While these waves can undergo conversions and move between spheres, information Session Chairs: Pascal Audet ([email protected]), is typically lost in the conversion process and is best analyzed Mladen Nedimovic ([email protected]), Emily Roland in the sphere where the source originates. Thus, observations in ([email protected]), Shuoshuo Han ([email protected]), the different spheres may be necessary to fully characterize and Suzanne Carbotte ([email protected]). understand volcanic activity. Photonic and Non-Inertial Seismology Recent advances have been made using combinations of Emerging photonic and non-inertial seismic measurements of these observables in complementary ways to improve our ground motion that use laser interferometery or a networked understanding of volcanoes in eruption and repose. Monitoring array of stationary receivers (e.g., GNSS) instead of a classical networks are increasingly using infrasound to detect “mass-on-a-spring” are expanding our capacity to observe the explosions, lahars and other subaerial activity. Underwater structure and dynamics of Earth systems. These photonic cabled networks, such as that at Axial Seamount and other and non-inertial tools include fiber-optic and distributed instrumentation are opening new possibilities for monitoring fiber-optic strain sensors (e.g., interferometers, Bragg grating and studying submarine volcanism. Additionally, new seismic methods, DAS) and ring-laser rotational sensors. There are technologies, such as large-N arrays, are allowing for more key theoretical and practical differences (advantages and thorough seismic studies. New or improved methods—such disadvantages) between inertial and non-inertial sensors, which as machine learning techniques—for processing, analyzing are the present focus of many seismological and computational and combining the variety of data collected from volcanoes science research groups worldwide. These include measurement are also needed to improve our understanding of volcanism. of strain and rotation, perhaps in addition to particle velocity, In this session, we encourage interdisciplinary studies but also and the ability to record terabytes of Large-N seismic data with welcome new studies that showcase the diversity of advances in meter-scale sensor spacing. Also, seismogeodetic techniques volcano seismology within a single sphere. Topics may include such as GNSS precise point positioning increases the dynamic scientific studies as well as work focusing on techniques and range and accuracy of (particularly large) ground displacements instrumentation.” and strain. Because non-inertial data often contain information on displacement gradients of a seismic wavefield (i.e., strain), Session Chairs: Alicia J. Hotovec-Ellis ([email protected]), there is a need to develop a fundamental theoretical framework Gabrielle Tepp ([email protected]), Jackie Caplan-Auerbach to cope with this new data type. Moreover, the diverse ([email protected]), Mel Rodgers advantages of non-inertial seismology make way for new data ([email protected]). analysis methods, or the adaptation of existing methods to this new data type, with the potential to make novel observations Offshore Subduction Zone Structure and of the planet. This session aims to crosscut the emerging space Seismicity Along Pacific Northwest: From the of photonic and other non-inertial seismological methods with Gorda Plate to the Queen Charlotte Fault contributions on sensor design, technical instrumentation The Cascadia subduction zone extends along the Pacific aspects and current roadblocks, inertial/non-inertial Northwest from Cape Mendocino in the south to northern comparisons, case studies involving theoretical and real datasets Vancouver Island in the north. However, convergence and applications ranging from basic science to engineering/ continues farther north beneath Haida Gwaii along the Queen monitoring. Charlotte Fault, where the Pacific and North America plates meet. Across this entire area, several oceanic plates (Explorer, Session Chairs: Nathaniel J. Lindsey (natelindsey@ Juan de Fuca, Gorda, Pacific) and one continental plate berkeley.edu), Patrick Paitz ([email protected]), (North America) interact forming a myriad of structures and Paul Bodin ([email protected]), Jamie Steidl ([email protected]), a complex stress regime, with most of the important tectonic Eileen Martin ([email protected]), Zefeng Li boundaries and associated seismicity located offshore. In this ([email protected]). session we invite contributions that focus on investigating the offshore structure and convergent tectonics along the Cascadia subduction zone and the Queen Charlotte Fault using marine geophysical data, especially those that are centered on or include active and/or passive source seismic studies. 32

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Problem Unsolved: Knowledge Gaps at the We invite abstracts related to algorithm development, testing Intersection of Earthquake Engineering Practice and validation of methodologies, machine-learning techniques and Research to analyze GNSS data, analyses in combination with seismic Earthquake engineering is a perpetual balancing act between data in real-time and more. established methods and innovative techniques. Established best practices and existing code are backed by published This session will also provide a venue for those involved research as well as engineering consensus, but for some cases in operating real-time GNSS networks to discuss current may lead to unrealistic results. The engineer’s desire to improve developments both in field operations and at data management and optimize the design requires adoption of new practices centers. Building redundancy into critical data paths, efforts and techniques that are actively being researched. These newer to lower latency and the upgrade of communications to meet practices may expose deficiencies in scientific understanding the needs of systems being built for public-safety, methods for of which the research community is unaware. Alternatively, quantifying solution quality, as well seeking ways to integrate the practitioner may not be aware of the full range of research existing GNSS and seismic network infrastructure are topics on these techniques. The intent of this session is to promote of interest to this session. We also encourage presentations on a dialogue between the earthquake engineering research and the latest advances in the use of cloud architecture to manage practice communities, and to suggest possible directions for the data and, the exploratory use of software such as Kafka and new research to fill in these gaps. Elasticsearch at data operations centers.” This session invites engineering practitioners and researchers Session Chairs: Brendan W. Crowell ([email protected]), to submit case studies that illustrate difficulties they have Kathleen Hodgkinson ([email protected]), encountered in their practice, owing to gaps in scientific Alberto Lopez ([email protected]), Benjamin A. Brooks knowledge. The session also invites papers on recent research ([email protected]), Joe Henton ([email protected]), illuminating known gaps in understanding of earthquake Jeffrey J. McGuire ([email protected]), David J. Mencin engineering practice. Submissions highlighting any earthquake ([email protected]). engineering problem are welcome, as are those in the area of risk analysis and mitigation for disaster resilience. Submissions Science Gateways and Computational Tools for in the areas of seismic risk/hazard analysis, ground response Improving Earthquake Research analysis, soil-structure interaction and liquefaction analysis are Science gateways allow research communities to access shared particularly encouraged. data, software, computing services, instruments, educational materials and other resources. Advances in earthquake Session Chairs: Youssef M. A. Hashash ([email protected]), science are becoming increasingly tied to the ability to Shahriar Vahdani ([email protected]), Brady Cox fuse and model multiple data types, requiring advances in ([email protected]), Albert Kottke (albert.kottke@gmail. computational infrastructure. Earthquake scientists must com), Recep Cakir ([email protected]), Bahareh rely on computational laboratories to integrate disparate Heidarzadeh ([email protected]), David P. Teague data sets and perform simulation experiments, particularly ([email protected]), Gilead Wurman ([email protected]). because earthquake processes span multiple spatial and temporal scales, ranging from microscopic, millisecond source Recent Developments in High-Rate Geodetic physics to long-term, global tectonic scales. This session Techniques and Network Operations for focuses on identifying best technologies and management Earthquake and Tsunami Early Warning and Rapid strategies of science gateways for facilitating data access and Post-Earthquake Response science analysis through user interfaces, middleware and Over the past decade, geodetic techniques have become community networking capabilities. Abstracts discussing invaluable to rapid evaluation of earthquake hazards, both in advances in computational infrastructure and data synthesis real-time and for post-earthquake response. Techniques have for enhancing earthquake science, including software, included, but are not limited to, high-rate GNSS, strainmeters, supercomputing, simulation models, sensor technology, ocean bottom pressure sensors, gravimeters and collocated heterogeneous data sets, cloud computing, management of huge seismic/geodetic instrumentation. These instruments and data volumes and development of community standards are techniques are particularly useful for extracting moment release encouraged. Abstracts identifying management strategies and and rupture extent for large subduction earthquakes, although recommendations for analytics software to provide a feedback they have been shown to provide good source information for loop for making science gateways useful are also encouraged. moderate sized events as well. Additionally, high-rate geodetic data and associated models can help improve ground motion Session Chairs: Andrea Donnellan ([email protected]), characterization and prediction. This session seeks proposals Lisa Grant Ludwig ([email protected]), Philip J. Maechling that utilize geodetic instrumentation for the rapid modeling ([email protected]). of earthquakes and tsunamis, both from the perspective of operational early warning and rapid post-earthquake response. 33

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA Science, Hazards and Planning in Subduction Seismology BC(d)E: Seismology Before the Zone Regions Subduction zones host the Earth’s largest faults and many of Current (digital) Era its active volcanoes. Subduction systems also play a central We are in the early stages of the seismological digital era, and role in the formation and accretion of continental crust and high-quality digital recordings of earthquakes are plentiful. are responsible for recycling oceanic crust and volatiles into But there is still much to learn from the early instrumental the mantle. This session explores the latest multidisciplinary era with analog recordings on paper, film, or other media; scientific advances in subduction zones around the world, from the pre-instrumental era with earthquake information including their mechanics, structure, evolution and dynamics through reported observations; and from pre-historic times from the trench to the backarc. We welcome studies that through paleoseismological investigations. The digital era explore such topics as seismicity, tremor and deformation encompasses only a tiny fraction of recorded seismic history. transients, including the slip behavior of faults and tsunami The synthesis of information from the pre-digital eras, genesis, as well as studies that explore the geologic signatures combined with modern analyses and modeling, presents new of these processes. Below the arc, studies may explore volatile opportunities to learn and discover. and magma migration, mantle wedge dynamics and melt production in the lower crust. We invite presentations that highlight the finding, preserving and/or using of paleoseismological or historic observational The dynamic processes inherent to subduction zones data alone or in conjunction with modern data. Uses may also challenge society’s prosperity given the potential for include the exploration of key open questions concerning natural disasters with broad regional impacts. These natural fault and earthquake processes, seismotectonics and seismic disasters are often compound events, as in the case where hazard; quantification of uncertainties in using historical large earthquakes can trigger both landslides and tsunamis. and paleoseismological data. Presentations may highlight the The successful mitigation of these natural hazards requires a use of seismic data to explore other phenomena such as slow thorough scientific understanding of the underlying processes. slip events, ambient noise, storm surges, tectonic tremors, Therefore, we also welcome studies that explore the recurrence, acoustic phases, induced seismicity, landslides, icequakes and probability, potential impacts and mitigation strategies of these avalanches, and describe recent efforts to develop durable and natural hazards. accessible archives of original sources and datasets. We will conclude the presentations with an open discussion of best Session Chairs: David Schmidt ([email protected]), practices and identification of actionable tasks to advance reuse Lori Dengler ([email protected]), Will Levandowski of analog data and move preservation efforts forward. ([email protected]), Kathy Davenport ([email protected]), Jamey Turner (jamey.turner@ Session Chairs: Susan E. Hough ([email protected]), tetratech.com), Rick Wilson ([email protected]), Lorraine Hwang ([email protected]), Allison L. Bent Brendan W. Crowell ([email protected]). ([email protected]), Maurice Lamontagne (maurice. [email protected]), Emile Okal (e-okal@northwestern. The Science of Slow Earthquakes from edu), Brian Young ([email protected]), Graziano Ferrari Multi-Disciplinary Perspectives ([email protected]). Recognition of slow earthquake phenomena originated in Cascadia and Japan. Since the discovery of slow earthquakes, their study has continued to advance rapidly. Discussion in this joint session with Seismological Society of Japan (SSJ) is proposed to advance understanding of the phenomena not only in these two zones, but in many subduction zones around the Pacific Ocean, as well as other tectonic settings. The proximity of slow slip phenomena in subduction zones to great megathrust earthquakes highlights the importance of this topic for seismic hazard. The goal of the session is to bring together research on slow earthquake phenomena that uses a variety of tools from seismology, geodesy, numerical modeling and laboratory studies, for various tectonic settings and spatial and temporal scales. This session is jointly organized by the Seismological Society of Japan and SSA. Session Chairs: Kazushige Obara ([email protected]), Kenneth C. Creager ([email protected]), Heidi Houston ([email protected]), Takanori Matsuzawa ([email protected]). 34

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON State of Stress and Strain in the Crust and For instance, the 2018 NSHM update mainly incorporated Implications for Fault Slip Based on Observational, NGA-East for U.S. Geological Survey (Goulet et al., 2017) in Numerical and Experimental Analysis the central and eastern U.S. The NGA-East ground motion Understanding the stress and strain distributions in the crust model marks a significant change in how we characterize the and specifically near fault zones is essential towards refining epistemic uncertainty in ground motions, and it is essential knowledge on deformation processes, fault mechanics and that we be able to evaluate and understand the model without earthquake source physics. This session focuses on (1) the the additional complexity of source model or implementation estimation of the state of stress/strain and (2) the analysis of changes that are necessary to include in longer update cycles. stress/strain distributions at different spatial and temporal This session focuses on the latest such models and the tools and scales by soliciting works based on theory, observational data, techniques used to evaluate them. The 2014 update to NSHM modeling and laboratory experiments. Contributions are for the conterminous U.S. saw the adoption of UCERF3, encouraged but not limited to address the following questions: NGA-West2 and new adaptive smoothing techniques for 1) How are stress and strain distributed in lab experiments and gridded seismicity sources. The 2018 update brought in NGA- nature and how can we bridge the two environments? 2) What East and considered basin amplification effects in the western are insights from numerical simulations on stress state and to U.S. Forthcoming updates will consider NGA-Subduction, the what extent can models help in interpreting observations such use of the UCERF3 inversion methodology for Alaskan fault as earthquakes or slow slip events? 3) What can we extract from systems and further use of simulation-based ground motions. geodetic, geologic, borehole and seismic data regarding the state The latest models also commonly present implementation of stress at regional and local scales? 4) How can spatial stress/ and application challenges. We invite submissions on, but not strain variations from long-term data compilations improve limited to, the NSHM components listed above. In particular, our knowledge of fault zone structure, earthquake mechanics, submissions should focus on sensitivity testing, comparative aseismic slip? 5) How can information on the state of stress/ analysis, implementation techniques, new evaluation tools or strain be used to improve seismic hazard assessments? metrics, new uses and applications of existing analyses (e.g. deaggregation) or uncertainty analysis. Session Chairs: Niloufar Abolfathian ([email protected]), Patricia Martinez-Garzon ([email protected]), Session Chairs: Peter M. Powers ([email protected]), Thomas H. W. Goebel ([email protected]). Allison M. Shumway ([email protected]), Mark D. Petersen ([email protected]), Sanaz Rezaeian ([email protected]), Structural Seismology: From Crust to Core Richard W. Briggs ([email protected]), Robert C. Witter Seismic imaging of the Earth’s inaccessible interior, spanning ([email protected]), Charles S. Mueller ([email protected]). from the lower crust to the deepest inner core, has achieved better resolution and accuracy due to improvements in data Using Repeating Seismicity to Probe Active Faults coverage, computational power, as well as modelling and Repeating seismicity provides a novel means of monitoring inversion algorithms. We invite contributions highlighting fault zone processes at depths commonly inaccessible. Various results of analyses of new datasets as well as applications of forms of repeating seismicity exist, and we invite studies from new algorithms for revealing detailed Earth structure across the broad suite of repeating seismicity including earthquakes, length-scales, from local to global, and throughout the interior, long-period events and low-frequency earthquakes. Recent from crust to core. studies have shown that repeating seismicity can be used to infer fault slip-rates and physical properties at depths Session Chairs: Vedran Lekic ([email protected]), Jessica relevant to earthquake nucleation. With growing datasets and C. E. Irving ([email protected]), Andrew J. Schaeffer computationally efficient routines for detection of repeating ([email protected]), Meghan S. Miller seismicity it is now possible to probe faults in great detail and ([email protected]). for long durations. Data from catalogs of repeating seismicity can provide the basis for physically realistic models of U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard earthquake cycles and triggering and interaction of seismicity. Model Components We invite contributions relating to field and laboratory The U.S. Geological Survey will soon complete the 2018 observations of repeating seismicity, advances in the detection update to the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for and parameterization of repeating seismicity and the modelling the coterminous U.S. This update has begun an experiment of repeating seismicity. with a more frequent update process that shortens the time between releases from six to three years on average. More Session Chairs: Calum J. Chamberlain (calum.chamberlain@ frequent updates permit fewer model changes per update, vuw.ac.nz), Amanda M. Thomas ([email protected]), more opportunities for adoption by a wide array of users and William B. Frank ([email protected]). release of the latest models representing best-available science. 35

OVERVIEW OF TECHNICAL PROGRAM SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA 36ORAL SESSIONS WEDNESDAY, 24 APRIL Time Grand Crescent Vashon Cascade I Cascade II Puget Sound Pike Pine Elliott Bay 8:30–9:45 am Photonic and Advances in …Advances The Science Characterizing U.S. Geological Earthquake Machine Non-Inertial Intraplate in Improving of Slow Faults, Folds, Survey National Ground Motions Learning in Seismology Earthquake Absolute Earthquakes Earthquakes and Seismic Hazard and Structural Seismology Geology Hypocenter from Multi- Related Hazards Model Response in Location Disciplinary in the Pacific Components Subduction Accuracy for Perspectives Northwest Zones: A Focus Natural, Induced on Cascadia and Explosion Seismic Events 10:45 am– …Geophysical Explosion Noon Research Using Seismology Dense Mixed Applications Sensor and Broadband Seismology Arrays Noon–2 pm SSA Annual Luncheon and Awards Ceremony, Grand Ballroom 2:15– Evolving Best Frontiers in Explosion The Science of Characterizing Better Earthquake Ground Machine 3:30 pm Practices for Earthquake Seismology Slow Earthquakes Faults, Folds, Earthquake Motions and Learning in Geology: Applications from Multi- Earthquakes Forecasts Structural Response Seismology Station Buildout Bright Futures (continued) Disciplinary and Related in Subduction (continued) in EEW and and Brick Walls Perspectives Hazards in the Zones: A Focus New Permanent (continued) Pacific Northwest on Cascadia Networks (continued) (continued) 3:30–4:15 pm Posters and Break, Fifth Avenue and Grand Ballroom 4:15– Advances in Frontiers in Explosion Science, Hazards Offshore Better Modeling and Science 5:30 pm Ocean Floor Earthquake Seismology and Planning in Subduction Earthquake Understanding of Gateways and Geology: Applications Subduction Zone Zone Structure Forecasts High-Frequency Computational Seismology Bright Futures (continued) Regions, Part I and Seismicity (continued) Ground Motion Tools for of II Along the Pacific Improving and Brick Walls Earthquake (continued) Northwest… Research 5:30–6:30 pm Posters and Break, Fifth Avenue and Grand Ballroom 6–7 pm Lightning Talks, Grand Ballroom 7–8 pm Early-Career and Student Reception, Cascade I 7:30–9 pm Special Interest Group: Offshore Facilities for Solid Earth Geoscience, Cascade II

THURSDAY, 25 APRIL Time Vashon Cascade I Cascade II Puget Sound Pike Pine Elliott Bay Numerical Modeling 7–8:15 am Student and Early-Career Mentoring Breakfast, Grand Ballroom of Earthquake Ground Motion, 8:30–9:45 am The InSight Earthquake Science, Hazards Advances in Explore the Current and Seismic Noise, Mission – Source Parameters: and Planning in Tectonic Geodesy Fault2SHA Future Challenges Rupture Dynamics Seismology on Theory, Subduction Zone Paradigms Across in Engineering and Seismic Wave Mars and Beyond Observations and Regions, Part II the Ponds Seismology Propagation Interpretations of II 10:45 am– Facebook and Central and Numerical Modeling Noon Twitter and Eastern North of Earthquake Snapchat, Oh My! America and Ground Motion, The Challenges Intraplate Seismic Noise, and Successes of Regions Rupture Dynamics 23–26 APRIL 2019 Using Social Media Worldwide and Seismic Wave to Communicate Propagation Science to the (continued) Public Large Data Set Seismology: Noon–1:30 pm Public Policy Luncheon, Grand Ballroom Strategies in Managing, Processing 1:45–3 pm Earthquake Imaging Recent Developments Central and Current and and Sharing Large Source Parameters: Subduction Zones in High-Rate Eastern North Future Challenges Geophysical Theory, Geodetic Techniques America and in Engineering Data Sets Observations and and Network Intraplate Seismology SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Interpretations Operations for Regions (continued) (continued) Earthquake and Worldwide Tsunami Early (continued) Warning and Rapid Post-Earthquake Response 3–4 pm Posters and Break, Fifth Avenue and Grand Ballroom 4–5:15 pm Earthquake Imaging Next Generation Central and Problem Unsolved: Source Parameters: Subduction Zones Earthquake Eastern North Knowledge Gaps Theory, (continued) Early Warning America and at the Intersection Observations and Systems: Advances, Intraplate of Earthquake Interpretations Innovations and Regions Engineering (continued) Applications Worldwide Practice and (continued) Research 5:30–6:30 pm Joyner Lecture, Grand Ballroom 6:30–7:30 pm Joyner Reception, Grand Foyer and Grand Crescent 37 7:30–9 pm Women in Seismology Reception, Cascade I 8–9:30 pm Special Interest Group: Canadian Cordillera Array (CCArray), Cascade II

ORAL SESSIONS FRIDAY, 26 APRIL SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA 38Time Vashon Cascade I Cascade II Puget Sound Pike Pine Elliott Bay Next Generation 8:30–9:45 am Building, Using Injection-Induced Large Intraslab The 2018 Eruption Seismology BC(d)E: Methods for Seismic Detection and Validating 3D Seismicity Earthquakes of Kīlauea Volcano, Seismology Before Site Response New Frontiers in Geophysical Models Hawai‘i the Current (digital) Estimation Global Seismic Era Monitoring 10:45 am– Structural The M7 Anchorage and Earthquake Noon Seismology: From Earthquake: Testing Research Crust to Core the Resiliency of Using Repeating South-Central Seismicity to Probe Alaska Active Faults Noon–1:15 pm Luncheon, Grand Ballroom Non-Traditional Application of Noon–1:15 pm Special Interest Group: Seismic Instruments for the Coming Decade, Cascade II Seismo-Acoustics for Non-traditional 1:30– State of Stress and Advances, The M7 Anchorage Observations of Seismology BC(d)E: Methods for Monitoring 2:45 pm Strain in the Crust Developments and Earthquake: Testing Volcanism in the Seismology Before Site Response Future Research the Resiliency of Three Spheres: the Current (digital) Estimation and Implications into Seismicity South-Central Land, Air and Sea Era (continued) (continued) for Fault Slip Based in Natural and Alaska (continued) on Observational, Anthropogenic Numerical and Fluid-Driven Experimental Environments Analysis 2:45–3:45 pm Posters and Break, Fifth Avenue and Grand Ballroom 3:45–5 pm State of Stress and Advances, Emerging Causes and Environmental Metamaterials, Strain in the Crust Developments and Science from Consequences Seismology: Resonances and and Implications Future Research the EarthScope of the Columbia Glaciers, Rivers, Seismic Wave for Fault Slip Based into Seismicity Transportable River Flood Basalts Landslides and Mitigation, an on Observational, in Natural and Array in Alaska and Beyond Emerging Trend Numerical and Anthropogenic Western Canada in Seismology Experimental Fluid-Driven Analysis (continued) Environments (continued)

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Seismic Tomography—Past, Present, Future Credit: Michael Afanasiev & Andreas Fichtner, ETH Zurich A NEW SSA MEETING, OCTOBER 2020 During the past decade, the field of seismic tomography has made a tremendous leap forward. Ambient noise interferometry has emerged and matured; modern computational resources enable 3D elastic full-waveform inversion; dense receiver networks provide unprecedented volumes of data; we start to be able to see tiny changes of Earth structure over time. This meeting is intended to serve as a platform to critically discuss what has been and what remains to be achieved. Specific topics include but are not limited to: the quantitative interpretation of tomographic images, uncertainty analysis and reproducibility, the role and accessibility of rapidly growing HPC resources and necessary improvements in data acquisition and modeling technology. Co-Chairs: Andreas Fichtner (ETH Zürich) Clifford Thurber (University of Wisconsin-Madison) October 2020 Look for more details this summer at seismosoc.org Questions? [email protected] 39

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA POSTER SESSIONS Wednesday, 24 April FIFTH AVENUE ROOM • Advances in Intraplate Earthquake Geology • Evolving Best Practices for Station Buildout in EEW and New Permanent Networks • New Approaches to Geophysical Research Using Dense Mixed Sensor and Broadband Seismology Arrays • Photonic and Non-Inertial Seismology GRAND BALLROOM • The Science of Slow Earthquakes from Multi-Disciplinary Perspectives • Frontiers in Earthquake Geology: Bright Futures and Brick Walls • Characterizing Faults, Folds, Earthquakes and Related Hazards in the Pacific Northwest • Offshore Subduction Zone Structure and Seismicity Along Pacific Northwest: From the Gorda Plate to the Queen Charlotte Fault • Earthquake Ground Motions and Structural Response in Subduction Zones: A Focus on Cascadia • Better Earthquake Forecasts • U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Model Components • Coseismic Ground Failure and Impacts on the Built and Natural Environment • Explosion Seismology Applications • From Drifting to Anchored: Advances in Improving Absolute Hypocenter Location Accuracy for Natural, Induced and Explosion Seismic Events • Machine Learning in Seismology • Modeling and Understanding of High-Frequency Ground Motion • Science Gateways and Computational Tools for Improving Earthquake Research Thursday, 25 April FIFTH AVENUE ROOM • Earthquake Source Parameters: Theory, Observations and Interpretations • Facebook and Twitter and Snapchat, Oh My! The Challenges and Successes of Using Social Media to Communicate Science to the Public • The InSight Mission—Seismology on Mars and Beyond GRAND BALLROOM • Central and Eastern North America and Intraplate Regions Worldwide • Next Generation Earthquake Early Warning Systems: Advances, Innovations and Applications • Recent Developments in High-Rate Geodetic Techniques and Network Operations for Earthquake and Tsunami Early Warning and Rapid Post-Earthquake Response • Advances in Tectonic Geodesy • Science, Hazards and Planning in Subduction Zone Regions • Imaging Subduction Zones • Current and Future Challenges in Engineering Seismology • Explore the Fault2SHA Paradigms Across the Ponds • Metamaterials, Resonances and Seismic Wave Mitigation, an Emerging Trend in Seismology • Numerical Modeling of Earthquake Ground Motion, Seismic Noise, Rupture Dynamics and Seismic Wave Propagation • Large Data Set Seismology: Strategies in Managing, Processing and Sharing Large Geophysical Data Sets • Building, Using and Validating 3D Geophysical Models 40

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Friday, 26 April FIFTH AVENUE ROOM • Advances, Developments and Future Research into Seismicity in Natural and Anthropogenic Fluid-Driven Environments • Injection-Induced Seismicity • Observations of Volcanism in the Three Spheres: Land, Air and Sea • The 2018 Eruption of Kīlauea Volcano, Hawai‘i • Non-Traditional Application of Seismo-Acoustics for Non-Traditional Monitoring GRAND BALLROOM • Environmental Seismology: Glaciers, Rivers, Landslides and Beyond • Using Repeating Seismicity to Probe Active Faults • State of Stress and Strain in the Crust and Implications for Fault Slip Based on Observational, Numerical and Experimental Analysis • The M7 Anchorage Earthquake: Testing the Resiliency of South-Central Alaska • Large Intraslab Earthquakes • Structural Seismology: From Crust to Core • Emerging Science from the EarthScope Transportable Array in Alaska and Western Canada • New Frontiers in Global Seismic Monitoring and Earthquake Research • Next Generation Seismic Detection • Methods for Site Response Estimation • Problem Unsolved: Knowledge Gaps at the Intersection of Earthquake Engineering Practice and Research • Seismology BC(d)E: Seismology Before the Current (digital) Era 41

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA TECHNICAL PROGRAM Wednesday, 24 April—Oral Sessions Presenting author is indicated in bold. Time Grand Crescent Vashon Cascade I Cascade II Photonic and Non-Inertial Advances in Intraplate From Drifting to The Science of Slow Seismology Earthquake Geology Anchored: Advances Earthquakes from Multi- in Improving Absolute Disciplinary Perspectives. 8:30 am Optical Measurements of Student: What Controls Hypocenter Location Jointly organized by the Temperature and Strain of the Maximum Magnitude Accuracy for Natural, Seismological Society of New Zealand’s Alpine Fault. of Continental Normal Induced and Explosion Japan and SSA Broderick, N. G. R., Faulting Earthquakes? Seismic Events Loveday, J., van Wijk, K., Neely, J. S., Stein, S. Slow Earthquake Townend, J., Sutherland, R. Absolute Hypocentral Segmentation as a Barrier Location Improvements to the 2011 Tohoku-Oki With 3D Velocity Model Earthquake Rupture. Optimization: Application Nishikawa, T., Matsuzawa, T., to Duvernay, Western Ohta, K., Uchida, N., Canada. Vaezi, Y., Nishimura, T., Ide, S. Booterbaugh, A., Stacey, M., Karimi, S., Baturan, D. 8:45 am Fiber Optic Sensing of Local Student: Towards Accuracy and Uncertainty Short-Term Bidirectional and Regional Earthquakes. Time-Dependent of TexNet Absolute Interaction between Slow Slip Mellors, R. J., Gok, R., Modelling of Episodic Seismic Event Location Events and Three Devastating Messerly, M., Pax, P., Yu, C., Earthquake Occurrence in West Texas. Earthquakes in Mexico. Mart, C., Morency, C., on Intraplate Faults. Lomax, A., Savvaidis, A. Cruz-Atienza, V. M., Sherman, C., Wang, H. Griffin, J. D., Stirling, M. W., Tago, J., Villafuerte, C., Wang, T., Clark, D. Kostoglodov, V., Real, J., Ito, Y., Franco, S. I., Nishimura, 9 am A Velocity-Based Earthquake Invited: Postglacial Feature-Based Bayesian T., Kazachkina, E., Santoyo, Detection System Using Paleoseismicity of the Teton Inference for Seismic Event M. A., Zavala-Hidalgo, J. Downhole DAS Arrays – Normal Fault Recorded by Monitoring. A Close Look at Slow and Examples From SAFOD. Lake Sediments in Grand Catanach, T. A., Fast Earthquakes Under the Lellouch, A., Yuan, S., Spica, Z., Teton National Park, WY. Downey, N. J., Young, C. J. Aleutian Islands. Ghosh, A., Li, B. Biondi, B., Ellsworth, W. Larsen, D. J., Crump, S. E., Blumm, A. 9:15 am Distributed Acoustic Sensing Paleoseismic History and Machine Learning for Slow Slip Events: (DAS) for Continuous Slip Rate of the Teton Fault Emulation of Seismic-Phase Earthquakes in Slow Motion. Monitoring of Near-Surface at the Buffalo Bowl Site. Travel Times in 3D Earth Michel, S., Avouac, J., Properties Using Coda Wave DuRoss, C. B., Gold, R. D., Models. Gualandi, A. Interferometry. Briggs, R. W., Delano, J., Myers, S., Jensen, D., Rodríguez Tribaldos, V., Ostenaa, D., Zellman, M., Simmons, N. Dou, S., Lindsey, N. J., Ulrich, Cholewinski, N., Wittke, S., C., Robertson, M., Freifeld, B. Mahan, S. M., Daley, T. M., Monga, I., Tracy, C., Ajo-Franklin, J. B. 42

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Time Puget Sound Pike Pine Elliott Bay Characterizing Faults, U.S. Geological Survey Earthquake Ground Machine Learning in Folds, Earthquakes and National Seismic Hazard Motions and Structural Seismology. Jointly Related Hazards in the Model Components Response in Subduction organized by the Pacific Northwest Zones: A Focus on Seismological Society of Cascadia Japan and SSA 8:30 am A Kinematic Model for 2018 Update of the Downdip Extension of Large A Probabilistic Framework Late Cenozoic Fault U.S. National Seismic Intraslab Earthquakes and for Vs30. Motion Within the Greater Hazard Model. Its Engineering Implications. Mital, U., Yong, A., Cascadia Subduction System. Petersen, M. D., Shumway, A. Ji, C., Archuleta, R. J., Hao, J. Iwahashi, J., Savvaidis, A. McCrory, P. A., Wilson, D. S. M., Powers, P., Mueller, C. S., Moschetti, M. P., Frankel, A., Rezaeian, S., McNamara, D. E., Hoover, S. M., Luco, N., Boyd, O. S., Rukstales, K., Jaiswal, K., Thompson, E. M., Clayton, B., Field, E. H., Zeng, Y. 8:45 am Invited: Evidence for a Additional Period and Site Rupture Model of a Using Machine Learning to Quaternary-Active Fault Class Maps for the 2018 Hikurangi Mw 8.6 Improve Ground Motion Network in the Forearc USGS National Seismic Megathrust Earthquake for Prediction Equations. of Southwestern British Hazard Model. Strong Motion Simulations. Aagaard, B. Columbia. Shumway, A. M., Rezaeian, S., Somerville, P., Bayless, J., Morell, K., Regalla, C., Powers, P., Petersen, M. D. Pitarka, A., Skarlatoudis, A. Bennett, S. E. K., Leonard, L. J., Amos, C., Lynch, E., Harrichhaussen, N., Graham, A. 9 am Near-Surface Geophysical, Evaluation of Ground Using Noise Correlation Student: Real-Time Geological and Geodetic Motion Models for USGS to Improve the Seismic Earthquake Detection Constraints on the Seismic Seismic Hazard Forecasts: Velocity Model of the Seattle and Phase Picking Using Hazard of the Leech River NGA-Subduction. Basin and 3D Simulations Temporal Convolutional Fault in the Northern McNamara, D. E., of Large Earthquakes. Networks. Cascadia Forearc. Wolin, E., Petersen, M. D., Frankel, A., Bodin, P. Zhu, W., Mousavi, M., Leonard, L. J., Graham, A., Shumway, A. M., Powers, P., Beroza, G. C. Morell, K., Regalla, C., Moschetti, M. P. Harrichhausen, N., Elliott, J., Jiang, Y., Amos, C., Lynch, E. 9:15 am Student: An Earthquake Uncertainties in Probabilistic Student: Topographic Invited: Smart Phone Nest in Cascadia. Seismic Hazard Analysis Response to Ground Motion Based Bridge Seismic Merrill, R., for a Poisson Earthquake From Modeled Seattle Fault Monitoring and Vibration Bostock, M. G. Occurrence Model. Earthquakes. Status Realization by Time Zeng, Y., Petersen, M. D. Stone, I., Vidale, J. E. Domain Convolutional Neural Network. Dang, J., Shrestha, A., Wang, X. 43

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA Wednesday, 24 April (continued) Time Grand Crescent Vashon Cascade I Cascade II Photonic and Non- Advances in Intraplate From Drifting to The Science of Slow Inertial Seismology… Earthquake Geology Anchored… Earthquakes… Student: Quaternary The IASPEI Reference Seafloor Pressures, 9:30 am Experimental Assessment Geologic Mapping and Event (GT) List (1959-2017) Temperatures, Ocean of Rocking and Torsion in Paleoseismic Assessment of Maintained by the ISC. Circulation and Plate- Civil Engineering Structures the Warm Springs Valley Lentas, K., Storchak, D. A., Interface Slow Slip. Using 3C and 6C Sensors. Fault, Washoe County, Di Giacomo, D., Harris, J. Gomberg, J., Hautala, S., Guéguen, P., Guattari, F., Nevada. Chupik, C. M., Johnson, P., Chiswell, S., Laudat, T. Koehler, R. D. Wallace, L. M., Webb, S. 9:45– Posters and Break, Fifth Avenue and Grand Ballroom 10:45 am New Approaches to Advances in Intraplate Explosion Seismology The Science of Slow Geophysical Research Earthquake Geology Applications Earthquakes from Multi- Using Dense Mixed (continued) Disciplinary Perspectives Sensor and Broadband Late Quaternary Slip (continued) Seismology Arrays Rates and Holocene 10:45 am Lessons From Two Years Paleoearthquakes of Insights From the Source Interaction Between ETS of Multi-Sensor Structural the Eastern Yumu Shan Physics Experiments on (Episodic Tremor and Slip) Monitoring at the UC Fault, Northeast Tibet: Seismic Waves Generated by and Long-Term Slow Slip San Diego Geisel Library. Implications for Kinematic Explosions. Event in Nankai Subduction Goldberg, D. E., Golriz, D., Mechanism and Seismic Walter, W. R., Zone. Bock, Y., Lo, E., De Vivo, L., Hazard. Ford, S. R., Pitarka, A., Obara, K. Kuester, F., Wang, X., Ren, J., Xu, X., Zhang, S., Pyle, M., Pasyanos, M. E., Hutchinson, T., Maher, R. Zhao, J., Ding, R. Ichinose, G. A., Chiang, A., Mellors, R. J., Ezzedine, S. M., Vorobiev, O. Y., Dodge, D., Matzel, E., Wagoner, J., Hauk, T., Sullivan, D. 11 am Clarifying the Distribution Invited: Recent Relationship Between DPRK Characteristic Tectonic of Magmatic Fluids Within Paleoseismic and Tectonic Nuclear Events and Near- Tremor Activity Observed the Yellowstone Volcanic Geomorphic Studies of the Field Response to Chemical Over Multiple Slow Slip System: A Magnetotelluric Meers Fault, Oklahoma Explosions in the Source Cycles in the Mexican and Seismic Study. Reveal Longer Rupture Physics Experiment Series. Subduction Zone. Bennington, N. L., Schultz, Lengths and More Surface Steedman, D. W., Husker, A., Frank, W. B., A., Bowles-Martinez, E., Deforming Earthquakes in Bradley, C. R. Gonzalez, G., Kostoglodov, V., Thurber, C. H., Farrell, J., the Last 6,000 Years. Kazachkina, E. Lin, F. Streig, A. R., Bennett, S. E. K., Hornsby, K. T., Chang, J. C., Mahan, S. 44

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Time Puget Sound Pike Pine Elliott Bay Characterizing Faults, U.S. Geological Survey Earthquake Ground Machine Learning in Folds, Earthquakes… National Seismic… Motions… Seismology Impacts on Catastrophe Invited: Nonlinear Robust Arrival Time 9:30 am Seismic Risk Assessment for Loss Modeling from Multi- Broadband Simulations Uncertainty Estimation British Columbia, Accessible Segment and Multiple Fault of M9 Megathrust Using Gaussian Blurring. Via Web Portal. Ruptures in UCERF3. Earthquakes in the Peterson, M. G., Vollmer, C., Bird, A. L., Journeay, J., Lee, Y., Graf, W. Cascadia Subduction Zone. Young, C. J., Stracuzzi, D. Hastings, N., Cassidy, J. F., Roten, D., Olsen, K. B., Wagner, C. Takedatsu, R., Wang, N. 9:45– Posters and Break, Fifth Avenue and Grand Ballroom 10:45 am Characterizing Faults, U.S. Geological Survey Earthquake Ground Machine Learning in Folds, Earthquakes National Seismic Hazard Motions and Structural Seismology (continued) and Related Hazards in Model Components Response in Subduction the Pacific Northwest (continued) Zones: A Focus on (continued) Cascadia (continued) 10:45 am Mapping Coda Q Across Updating the Seismic Source An Overview of the A Deep Neural Network Western Canada: From an Model for a New USGS NGA-Subduction to Identify Foreshocks in Active Subduction Zone to a Earthquake Hazard Map Research Program. Real Time. Stable Craton. of Alaska. Haeussler, P. J., Bozorgnia, Y., Abrahamson, Karunanidhi, V. Farahbod, A., Cassidy, J. F. Bender, A. M., Witter, R. C., N., Ahdi, S. K., Ancheta, Brothers, D. S., Liberty, L. M. T. D., Archuleta, R. J., Atkinson, G. M., Boore, D. M., Campbell, K. W., Chiou, B. S. J., Contreras, V., Darragh, R. B., Gregor, N., Idriss, I., Ji, C., Kamai, R., Kishida, T., Kuehn, N. M., Magistrale, H., Mazzoni, S., Parker, G. A., Si, H., Silva, W., Stewart, J. P., Walling, M., Wooddell, K. E., Youngs, R. R. 11 am Student: Slip and Strain Deformation in the NGA-Subduction Database. Realistic Synthetic Accumulation Along the August 2018 Mw 6.4 Ahdi, S. K., Ancheta, T. D., Broadband Ground Motions Sadie Creek Fault, Northern Kaktovik (North Slope), Bozorgnia, Y., Chiou, B. S. J., by Machine Learning. Olympic Mountains, WA. Alaska Earthquake. Contreras, V., Darragh, R. B., Li, Z., Zhu, W., Hauksson, E., Duckworth, W. C., Rollins, C., Meyer, F., Kishida, T., Kuehn, N. M., Beroza, G. C. Amos, C., Schermer, E. R., Xue, X., Holtkamp, S. G., Kwok, A. O., Lin, P., Loveless, J. P., Rittenour, T. M., Freymueller, J. T. Youngs, R. R., Stewart, J. P. Perez, Y. E. 45

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA Wednesday, 24 April (continued) Time Grand Crescent Vashon Cascade I Cascade II New Approaches to Advances in Intraplate Explosion Seismology The Science of Slow Geophysical Research… Earthquake Geology… Applications… Earthquakes… 11:15 am New High Resolution Very High-Resolution Seismic Distributed Acoustic Periodic Occurrence of the Low Powered Broadband Reflection Imaging of the Sensing Observations and Slow Slip Events Off Kyushu Digitizer System, Pegasus. Low-Angle Panamint Valley Modeling of the DAG Series Island, Southwest Japan, Townsend, B., Moores, A., Normal Fault System, of Chemical Explosions. Based on Spatial Gradients Pelyk, N., Parker, T. Eastern California. Abbott, R. E., Mellors, R. J., of Displacement Rate Field Gold, R. D., Stephenson, W. Pitarka, A. and Activities of Small J., Kirby, E., Woolery, E. W., Repeating Earthquakes. Briggs, R. W., DuRoss, C. B., Iinuma, T., Uchida, N. Delano, J., Odum, J., Leeds, A., Paris, D., Sethanant, I., von Dassow, W. 11:30 am Student: Aftershock Paleoseismic Investigation Surface Ground Motion Low-Frequency Earthquake Monitoring with a of the Freds Mountain Fault Prediction for Chemical Slip Model Using the Heterogeneous Seismic and the Western Lemmon Explosions in Alluvium. Northern Cascadia Array Network. Valley Fault Zone, North Bonner, J. L., Zeiler, C. P., of Arrays. Creager, K. C., Pearson, K. M., Valleys-Reno, Nevada. White, R. L., McLin, K. L., Chestler, S. R. Lekic, V., Pratt, T. L., Dee, S., Ramelli, A. R., Steedman, D. W., Roman, D. C., Wagner, L. S., Koehler, R. D., Mahan, S., Ezzedine, S. M. Kim, W. De Masi, C. 11:45 am Student: Calibrating the Student: Geometry and Beyond Perret & Bass: Data Student: Spectra and 2016 IRIS Community Geomorphic Expression of Analysis and Simulation of Mechanics of Slow to Fast Wavefields Experiment Strike-Slip Faulting in the DAG-1 & DAG-2 Chemical Contained Laboratory Nodal Sensors for Amplitude Central Walker Lane. Explosions. Earthquakes. Statics and Orientation Pierce, I. K. D., Ezzedine, S. M., Vorobiev, Wu, B., McLaskey, G. Errors. Wesnousky, S. G., O. Y., Steedman, D. W., Bolarinwa, O. J., Owen, L. A. Bonner, J. L., Antoun, T. H., Langston, C. A. Bradley, C. R., Walter, W. R. Noon– SSA Annual Luncheon and Awards Ceremony, Grand Ballroom 2 pm Evolving Best Practices Frontiers in Earthquake Explosion Seismology The Science of Slow for Station Buildout in Geology: Bright Futures Applications (continued). Earthquakes from Multi- EEW and New Permanent and Brick Walls Disciplinary Perspectives Networks (continued) 2:15 pm Network Expansion Earthquake and Tsunami Reconstruction of the Slow Slip and Tremor: A Challenges in Alaska. Hazards in the Inland Sea Three-Dimensional Acoustic Review of the Role of Water Dalton, S. M. of the San Juan Archipelago, Wavefield Induced by SPE Expelled From Subducting Salish Sea of Washington Explosions and Implications Plate. State. for Explosion Yield Hyndman, R. D. Greene, H., Barrie, J., Todd, Estimation. B. J., Nishenko, S. Kim, K., Ford, S. R., Chiang, A., Bowman, D. C. 46

23–26 APRIL 2019 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON Time Puget Sound Pike Pine Elliott Bay Characterizing Faults, U.S. Geological Survey Folds, Earthquakes… National Seismic… Earthquake Ground Machine Learning in An Integrated Geodetic Motions… Seismology… 11:15 am A Post-Glacial Record Tectonic Model for Alaska. of Large, Strike-Slip Elliott, J., Freymueller, J. T. Cascadia-Specific NGA- Seismic Signal Clustering Earthquakes on the Sadie Subduction Ground Motion Using Deep-Self-Supervised Creek Fault, Northern Models for Interface and Networks. Olympic Peninsula, WA. Intraslab Events with Mousavi, M., Zhu, W., Amos, C., Schermer, E. R., Regionalized Site Response. Beroza, G. C. Angster, S., Delano, J., Parker, G. A., Stewart, J. P., Duckworth, W. C., Hassani, B., Atkinson, G. M., Nelson, A. R., Sherrod, B. L. Boore, D. M. 11:30 am Student: Shallow Offshore Updated GK17 Ground A Partially Non-Ergodic Student: Rapid Prediction Deformation in the Seattle Motion Prediction Equation NGA Subduction Ground of Earthquake Ground Fault Zone: Insights From for Shallow Crustal Motion Prediction Equation Shaking Intensity Using High Resolution Seismic Continental Earthquakes and Its Application to Raw Waveform Data and Reflection Imagery. and Use of Proper Cascadia. a Convolutional Neural Moore, G. L., Roland, E., Terminology. Kuehn, N. M., Bozorgnia, Y., Network. Bennett, S. E. K., Watt, J., Graizer, V. Campbell, K. W., Gregor, N. Jozinovic, D., Lomax, A., Kluesner, J., Brothers, D. S. Michelini, A. 11:45 am The Gales Creek Fault – Alaska Megathrust Source Subregional Attenuation of Sequencing Seismic Data and Active Northward Migration Characterization for Ground Motion Amplitudes Models. Lekic, V., Kim, D., of an Oregon Forearc Sliver. Tsunami Hazard. Thio, H. for Japan Megathrust Baron, D., Menard, B. Wells, R. E., Blakely, R. J., Earthquakes. Campbell, K. W. Redwine, J., Bemis, S. Noon– SSA Annual Luncheon and Awards Ceremony, Grand Ballroom 2 pm Characterizing Faults, Better Earthquake Earthquake Ground Machine Learning in Folds, Earthquakes Forecasts Motions and Structural Seismology (continued) and Related Hazards in Response in Subduction the Pacific Northwest Zones: A Focus on (continued) Cascadia (continued) 2:15 pm Invited: Student: Invited: Student: Comparison of NGA-Sub Non-Negative Tensor Crustal Deformation Near Improving Physics-Based Developed Ground Motion Factorization for the Mendocino Triple Earthquake Forecasts for Models for Subduction Interpretable Unsupervised Junction Inferred From GPS- the 2016-2017 Central Earthquakes. Signal Discovery in Derived Strain Rate Maps. Italy Earthquake Sequence. Gregor, N., Abrahamson, N., Continuous Seismic Data. Nuyen, C., Schmidt, D. A., Mancini, S., Segou, M., Al Atik, L., Atkinson, G. M., Nebgen, B. T., Crowell, B. W. Werner, M. J., Cattania, C. Boore, D. M., Bozorgnia, Y., MacCarthy, J. K., Campbell, K. W., Chiou, B. Alexandrov, B. S. J., Gulerce, Z., Hassani, B., Kishida, T., Kuehn, N. M., Midorikawa, S., Mazzoni, S., Parker, G. A., Si, H., Stewart, J. P., Youngs, R. R. 47

SEISMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA Wednesday, 24 April (continued) Time Grand Crescent Vashon Cascade I Cascade II Evolving Best Practices Frontiers in Earthquake Explosion Seismology The Science of Slow for Station Buildout… Geology… Applications… Earthquakes… 2:30 pm Oregon’s Multi-Hazard Recurrence of Large Upper Infrasound Source Modeling Offshore Seismic Monitoring Network: Plate Earthquakes in the and Data Inversion Using Attenuation Heterogeneity Recent Growth and Puget Lowland. Coupled Seismo-Acoustic and Implications for Pore- Future Directions. Sherrod, B. L., Styron, R. H., Simulations. Fluid Pressure in Gisborne Toomey, D., O’Driscoll, L. J., Angster, S. Poppeliers, C., Preston, L. Slow-Slip Region, Northern Walsh, L. K., Meyer, S. Hikurangi Margin, North Island, New Zealand. Nakai, J., Sheehan, A. F., Abercrombie, R. E., Eberhart-Phillips, D. 2:45 pm Expanding the Berkeley Mw 7.8 2016 Kaikoura, Explosion Source Models Probing Fault Frictional Digital Seismic Network for New Zealand Earthquake: and the Scattering Origin Properties During Afterslip Earthquake Early Warning Hundalee Fault of Regional Phases From Up- and Down-Dip of the (EEW): Operations, Paleoseismology. SPE Phase 1 Coda Spectral 2017 Mw 7.3 Iran-Iraq Installation and Upgrades Stirling, M. W., Barrell, Ratios. Earthquake With Space to Seismic Monitoring. D. J. A., Williams, J. N., Phillips, W. S., Patton, H. J., Geodesy. Terra, F., Hellweg, M., Sauer, K. M., van den Berg, E. J. Cleveland, K. M., Larmat, C., Wang, K., Bürgmann, R. Merritt, J. M., Allen, R. M., Stead, R. J. Ferry, D., Arba, R. 3 pm Optimizing Borehole Station A Multi-Fault Model Testing Explosion Source A Meso-Scale Take on the and Array Performance, Estimation From Tsunami Models From Yield and Modeling of Fault Zone Enabled by the Trillium Slim Data: An Application to Depth Analysis of Chemical Faulting Behaviors. Borehole 120 Seismometer. the 2018 M7.9 Kodiak Explosions Conducted Fitzenz, D. D., Maury, V., Bainbridge, G., Parker, T., Earthquake. in Alluvium. Piau, J. Townsend, B. Hossen, M., Sheehan, A. F., Pasyanos, M. E., Satake, K. Walter, W. R., Ford, S. R. 3:15 pm Testing the Readiness of Invited: Slip Rates Are Application of Advanced Aseismic Slip Phenomena in Strong Motion Sensors for Dead. Long Live Slip Rates. Numerical Techniques to Southern Cascadia. Earthquake Early Warning. Briggs, R. W., Gold, R. D. Improve the Estimation Bartlow, N. M., Materna, K., Massin, F., Clinton, J., of Explosion Yield and Bürgmann, R. Racine, R., Rossi, Y. Quantify Its Uncertainty. Yoo, S. 3:30– Posters and Break, Fifth Avenue and Grand Ballroom 4:15 pm 48