06/22/041 Data-Gathering Systems IRIS Stanford/ USGS UNAVCO JPL/UCSD Data Management Organizations PI’s, Groups, Centers, etc. Publications, Presentations, Data Products Supported by NSF/MREFC, NASA, USGS Supported by PI-Driven Proposals EarthScope Science Integration

06/22/042 EarthScope Science Integration IRIS Stanford/ USGS UNAVCO JPL/UCSD Data- Gathering Systems Data Management Organizations EarthScope Collaboratory Publications, Presentations, Data Products, Integrated Models, Predictive Simulations, etc. FSM RDM AWM SRM PI’s, Groups, Centers, etc.

What should be the structure and functionality of an EarthScope collaboratory? Example: SCEC Community Modeling Environment A collaboratory to support distributed scientific activities and product development by the SCEC community for seismic hazard analysis and risk reduction in Southern California (and elsewhere).

06/22/044 Pathway Instantiations SCEC Community Modeling Environment A collaboratory for system-level earthquake science Knowledge Base Ontologies Curated taxonomies, Relations & constraints Pathway Models Pathway templates, Models of simulation codes Code Repositories Data & Simulation Products Data Collections FSM RDM AWM SRM Storage GRID Pathway Execution Policy, Data ingest, Repository access Grid Services Compute & storage management, Security DIGITAL LIBRARIES Navigation & Queries Versioning, Replication Mediated Collections Federated access KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION Acquisition Interfaces Dialog planning, Pathway construction strategies Pathway Assembly Template instantiation, Resource selection, Constraint checking KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION & REASONING Knowledge Server Knowledge base access, Inference Translation Services Syntactic & semantic translation Computing Users

06/22/045 SCEC Crustal Motion Map 833 crustal velocity estimates at 762 points833 crustal velocity estimates at 762 points Co-seismic offsets for the Landers, Northridge & Hector Mine earthquakesCo-seismic offsets for the Landers, Northridge & Hector Mine earthquakes Data from SCIGNData from SCIGN CMM (Agnew et al., 2003)

06/22/046 SHA Computational Pathways Intensity Measures Earthquake Forecast Model Attenuation Relationship 1 Pathway 1: Standard Seismic Hazard Analysis AWM Ground Motions SRM Unified Structural Representation Faults Motions Stresses Anelastic model 2 AWP = Anelastic Wave Propagation SRM = Site Response Model Pathway 2: Ground motion simulation RDMFSM 3 FSM = Fault System Model RDM = Rupture Dynamics Model Pathway 3: Physics-based earthquake forecasting Invert Other Data Geology Geodesy 4 Pathway 4: Ground motion inverse problem Physics-basedsimulations Empiricalrelationships Improvement of models

06/22/047 IM Rup n,i Intensity-MeasureRelationship Earthquake-RuptureForecast Time Span Type, Level Source i Site OpenSHA A Community Modeling Environment for Seismic Hazard Analysis Pathway 1: OpenSHA Field, Jordan & Cornell (2002)

06/22/048 Example Application of Pathway 1: Scenarios for M 7.4 Southern San Andreas Rupture Courtesy of Ned Field, USGS, Pasadena Without soil & basin effects With soil & basin effects

06/22/049 SHA Computational Pathways Intensity Measures Earthquake Forecast Model Attenuation Relationship 1 1. Standardized Seismic Hazard Analysis 2. Ground motion simulation 3. Physics-based earthquake forecasting 4. 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-based simulations Empirical relationships Improvement of models

06/22/0410 SCEC Community Velocity Model H. Magistrale et al. (2000)

06/22/0411 SCEC Community Fault Model A. Plesch and J. Shaw (2003)

06/22/0412 Unified Structural Representation How can SCEC unify the development of structural models (e.g. CVM) with tectonic models (e.g. CFM)? Tectonic models Structural models Community Fault ModelCommunity Block Model

06/22/0413 SCEC Community Block Model Intended for use in: fault systems analysis (FEM) property modeling Set of interconnected, closed volumes that are bounded by major faults, as well as topography, base-of-seismicity, and Moho surfaces. J. Shaw et al. (2003)

06/22/0414 SHA Computational Pathways Intensity Measures Earthquake Forecast Model Attenuation Relationship 1 1. Standardized Seismic Hazard Analysis 2. Ground motion simulation 3. Physics-based earthquake forecasting 4. 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-based simulations Empirical relationships Improvement of models

06/22/0415 Pathway 3: Physics-Based Earthquake Forecast model feedback data processing model building Earthquake Rupture Forecast Geodetic Data Geologic Data Seismologic Data Other Data data Geodetic Deformation Map Fault Activity Database Earthquake Catalog Other Data Products data products Fault ModelBlock Model Deformation Model Earthquake Rupture Simulation models

06/22/0416 Unified Structural Representation Fault Systems Source Physics Ground Motion Seismic Hazard Analysis SHA Computational Pathways Five SCEC Focus Groups Fault ModelBlock Model Deformation Model Earthquake Rupture Forecast Seismic Hazard Products Anelastic Structure Attenuation Relationship Earthquake Rupture Simulation Ground Motion Simulation

06/22/0417 Pathway 2 Verification Co-supported by SCEC, SCEC/CME, PEER-Lifelines Participation by 5 groups developing FD and FE codes Validation through hierarchy of standardized test cases Production of 96,000 synthetic seismograms for 6 earthquake scenarios on each of 10 faults SRB archive now available in CME Results are being analyzed to improve attenuation relationships

06/22/0418 Pathway 3 Verification Supported by SCEC ESP Focus Group First workshop held in November, 2003 Second workshop planned for Summer, 2004 Results will be archived in CME

06/22/0419 Ingredients for Successful Science Integration Problem focus –Regional tectonics & hazards Common objectives –Community data products & models Community identity & organization –History of collaboration, interactive working groups Collaboratory infrastructure –Code validation, standardization of products Regular forums for assessing progress –Workshops, annual meeting Funding –To support collaboration/collaboratory activities