Southern California Earthquake Center - SCEC SCEC/CME Tom Jordan (USC) Bernard Minster (SIO) Carl Kesselman (ISI) Reagan Moore (SDSC) Phil Maechling (USC)

SCEC Member Institutions (October 1, 2005)

SCEC/CME - Terashake Kim B. Olsen (SDSU) Bernard Minster (IGPP) Reagan Moore (SDSC) Steve Day (SDSU) Phil Maechling (USC) Tom Jordan (USC) Marcio Faerman (SDSC) Geoffrey Ely (IGPP) Boris Shkoller (IGPP) Carey Marcinkovich (EXxonMobil) Jacobo Bielak (CMU) David Okaya (USC) Ralph Archuleta (UCSB) Steve Cutchin (SDSC) Amit Chourasia (SDSC) George Kremenek (SDSC) Yuanfang Hu (SDSC) Arun Jagatheesan (SDSC) Nancy Wilkins-Diehr (SDSC) Richard Moore (SDSC) Bryan Banister (SDSC) Leesa Brieger (SDSC) Amit Majumdar (SDSC) Yifeng Cui (SDSC) Giridhar Chukkapalli (SDSC) Qiao Xin (SDSC) Donald Thorp (SDSC) Patricia Kovatch (SDSC) Larry Diegel (SDSC) Tom Sherwin (SDSC) Christopher Jordan (SDSC) Marcus Thiebaux (ISI) Julio Lopez (CMU)

SCEC/CME Digital Library Reagan W. Moore staff- SDSC PI Marcio Faermanpostdoc (now in Brazil)- dig lib George Kremenekstaff- data management Yuanfang Hugraduate student- dig lib Jing Zhugraduate student- dig lib Patrick Yaugraduate student- vis Amit Chourasiastaff (contributed effort) - vis Stephen Cutchinstaff (contributed effort) - vis Yifeng Cuistaff (contributed effort) - application Amitava Majumdarstaff (contributed effort) - application

Seismic Hazard Analysis Intensity measure: peak ground acceleration (PGA)Intensity measure: peak ground acceleration (PGA) Interval: 50 yearsInterval: 50 years Probability of exceedance: 2%Probability of exceedance: 2% Definition:Specification of the maximum intensity of shaking expected at a site during a fixed time interval Example:National seismic hazard maps (

Web Sites SCEC/CME – SCEC Digital Library – SCEC Terashake Simulations – Storage Resource Broker – Visualizations –

Intensity Measures Earthquake Forecast Model Attenuation Relationship 1 Standardized seismic hazard analysis Ground motion simulation Physics-based earthquake forecasting Ground-motion inverse problem AWM Ground Motions SRM Unified Structural Representation Faults Motions Stresses Anelastic model 2 AWP = Anelastic Wave Propagation SRM = Site Response Model RDMFSM 3 FSM = Fault System Model RDM = Rupture Dynamics Model Invert Other Data Geology Geodesy 4 Physics-basedsimulations Empiricalrelationships Improvement of models Seismic Hazard Analysis Computational Pathways

Unified Structural Representation Tectonic models Structural models Community Fault ModelCommunity Block Model Crustal Motion Map

IM Rup n,i Intensity-MeasureRelationship Earthquake-RuptureForecast Time Span Type, Level Source i Site OpenSHA A Computational Platform Seismic Hazard Analysis Pathway 1 OpenSHA Platform Field, Jordan & Cornell (2003)

Intensity Measures Earthquake Forecast Model Attenuation Relationship 1 Standardized seismic hazard analysis Ground motion simulation Physics-based earthquake forecasting Ground-motion inverse problem AWM Ground Motions SRM Unified Structural Representation Faults Motions Stresses Anelastic model 2 AWP = Anelastic Wave Propagation SRM = Site Response Model RDMFSM 3 FSM = Fault System Model RDM = Rupture Dynamics Model Invert Other Data Geology Geodesy 4 Physics-basedsimulations Empiricalrelationships Improvement of models Seismic Hazard Analysis Computational Pathways

SCEC Computations Terashake - simulate earthquakes in Southern California Cybershake - seismic hazard assessment Earthworks - simulate each observed earthquake

TS2.dyn.200m 30x 256 procs, 12 hrs, TG IA-64 GPFS Datastar GPFS Okaya 200m Media Okaya 100m Media 100m Reformatting 100m Transform 100m Filtering 200m moment rate HPSS SAM-QFS SDSC IA-64 TS2.dyn.100m 10x 1024 procs, 35 hrs Initial 200m Stress modify Initial 100m Stress modify TS2.wav.200m 3x 1024 procs, 35 hrs NCSA IA-64 Datastar p690 Datastar p655 Register to Digital Library SRB Visualization Analysis TeraShake-2 Simulations Network TG IA-64 GPFS-wan NCSA-SAN SDSC-SAN

Application Optimization

Goal –Capability for physics-based probabilistic seismic hazard calculation in Southern California, accounting for source complexity and 3D earth structure Design –All significant sources from 2002 National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project –Site-oriented Green functions optimized for 3D earth structure –Full representation of source complexity by stochastic sampling Plans –Phase I (2005): 6 sites, kinematic sources, low frequency (< 0.5 Hz) –Phase II (2006): 625 sites, pseudo-dynamic sources –Phase III (2007): Full map, dynamic sources Requirements –35,000 SU runtime per site & 10 TB data volume per site for Phases I & II –10 TB data volume must be accessible across grid during seismogram synthesis CyberShake Platform

Visualization Applications and Analyses SCEC Portal (OGCE portlets) Digital Library Services (seismogram extraction) Data grid (Storage Resource Broker) Teragrid Network (TCP/IP communication) Hardware (distributed storage systems) Vertical integration SCEC Digital Library A publication resource for earthquake science data

SCEC Digital Library

SCEC Portal Original portal based on OGCE portlet technology Migrating to GridSphere portlet technology and JSR168 compliant portlets –Compatibility with GEON portlets –Compatibility with generic SRB portlets Interface between user access and data storage within the SRB data grid

Digital Library Components Organization structure –Categorized simulation data by experiment Metadata attributes –Query on input parameters Naming –Logical file names Security –One-time passwords for administrative access

Organization

Metadata Metadata purposes Support browsing Support queries Support provenance Support knowledge

Analysis Tools Seismogram extraction –1-Terabyte data set per simulation –Data kept on disk –Backup copy on tape –Dynamically linked from portal to registered simulations

Seismogram Extraction

Challenges Size of data –SCEC digital library holds over 130 Terabytes of data –Replication of data needed to ensure preservation Planned analyses are substantially larger –Expect 600 Terabytes of simulation results Planned services (dynamic evaluation of each earthquake) will require automation –Dynamic creation of visualizations and access services

Research Challenges Data integrity –Commodity bit error rates are designed for GB data sets –Replication, federation, automated validation Efficient access to large scale data –MPI-IO interface to SRB data grid (OSU) Efficient parsing of data structures –Integration of HDF5 technology with data grids –Integration of Data Format Description Language Integration with digital library and preservation standards –METS - Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard –AIP - Archival Information Package

Storage Resource Broker Collection hierarchy –Schema extension –Bulk metadata loading –Query Distributed storage –Replication –Audit trails, quotas, checksums, versions –Access controls –Support for all types of storage systems

Conclusions SCEC/CME is developing a digital library that holds the state-of-the-art simulations of large earthquakes in Southern California –Organizes simulation data, derived data products –Integrating access to observational data as next step SCEC/CME collaboration and ETF have been critical to this success –Large scale visualizations required Teragrid resources –Data movement rates (10 TBs per day) require Teragrid networks –Storage of results done on Teragrid storage systems Future opportunities –Integration with GIS systems to composite views on data –Interoperability between related NSF programs (GEON, NEESgrid) –Integration of knowledge management systems on top of digital library

Visualizations

Visualizations

Movies –Surface displacement magnitude Mapped on surface topography Contoured –Velocity magnitude –Peak velocity magnitude –Velocity components Images –Peak spectral acceleration

TeraShake