1. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich Stefan Wiemer & Danijel Schorlemmer Swiss Seismological Service ETH Zurich Major contributions by: Edward (Ned) H. Field (USGS) ZMAP – OpenSHA – OpenSAF?

2. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich Outline ZMAP – a 10 year old idea/software for seismicity analysis. OpenSHA: A new concept in Seismic Hazard Assessment. OpenSAF: Dreaming on …

3. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich ZMAP Developed since 1993 with the intention of providing a GUI based seismicity analysis software. Mostly a research tool. Described in an Seismological Research Letter article in 2001. Matlab based, Open Source (about 100.000 lines of codes in ~ 700 scripts). About 100 – 150 users worldwide, used in about 50 - 70 publications.

4. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich ZMAP - capabilities Standard Tools: Maps, Histograms, cross-sections, Time series etc. Earthquake catalog quality and consistency. Magnitude shifts, completeness, blast contamination, etc. Real-time potential. Rate change analysis, mapping of rate changes in space-time. Significance. b-value analysis, mapping of b as a function of space and time. Aftershock sequence analysis. Time dependent hazard assessment. Stress tensor inversion based on focal mechanism data. Time to failure analysis. Fractal dimension analysis, mapping of D.

5. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich

6. Rate decrease Rate increase z-value

7. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich b-values along the SAF: Highly spatially heterogeneous

8. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich Example: Mc after Landers Completeness in the hours and days after a mainshock is considerably higher. Could this be improved?

9. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich A 01234 10 100 A B B Mc Magnitude of Completeness Example: Spatial variability of Mc Completeness is temporally and spatially highly heterogeneous. A detailed Mc(x,y,z,t) history should be constructed, maintained by the networks?

10. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich Example: Parkfield magnitude shift? 198019851990199520002005 0 2000 4000 198019851990199520002005 0 1000 Time Cumulative Number All 0 < M < 1 What happened around 1995 to the catalog of the Parkfield section of the San Andreas fault? Catalogs should be monitored routinely in the future to detect man-made (and natural) transients early on.

11. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich ZMAP – what worked well Matlab based: Efficient development, expandable, widely available, largely platform independent. Addresses a definite need in the seismological community. Nice research tool for those who know how to use it.

12. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich ZMAP – limitations Too complex. Not stable enough. No systematic users support (lately: Very limited support). No dedicated financial support to develop and maintain the software. Difficult to embed other codes (wrappers work sort of, e.g., stress tensor inversions). Does not work in parallel mode.

13. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich ZMAP – summary Has reached the end of its lifecycle? What would a new generation seismicity analysis software do? Can we make it GRID based? (Simulations can take days to weeks) Can we make it object oriented?

14. Creating a Distributed, Community-Modeling Environment in Support of the Working Group for the Development of Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models (RELM) Edward (Ned) H. Field (USGS) & Thomas H. Jordan (USC)

15. OpenSHA A Developing, Distributed Community-Modeling Environment for Seismic Hazard Analysis Design Criteria: open source, web enabled, & object oriented. Implementation: Java & XML, although the framework is programming-language independent, and some components will be “wrapped” legacy code (e.g., WG99 Fortran code).

16. Source + Attenuation + Site = Hazard

17. Seismic Hazard Analysis (1)Earthquake-Rupture Forecast Probability in time and space of all M≥5 ruptures (2) Ground-Motion Model “Attenuation Relationships” Full waveform modeling

18. OpenSHA Code Development :Ned Field, Sid Hellman, Steve Rock, Nitin Gupta, & Vipin Gupta SHA Framework: SRL submission (Field, Jordan, & Cornell) Validation: PEER Working-Group Test Cases Web Site: http://www.OpenSHA.org Design Evaluation: SCEC Implementation Interface

20. IM Rup n,i Intensity-MeasureRelationship Earthquake-RuptureForecast Each Source has N Earthquake Ruptures Time Span Type, Level Source i Site Generates Rupture Sources Probability of occurrence OpenSHA Objects Desired output is the probability that something of concern will happen over a specified time span

21. IM Rup n,i Intensity-MeasureRelationship Earthquake-RuptureForecast Each Source has N Earthquake Ruptures Time Span Type, Level Source i Site Generates Rupture Sources Probability of occurrence OpenSHA Objects Intensity-Measure Type/Level a specification of what the analyst (e.g., engineer) is worried about

22. IM Rup n,i Intensity-MeasureRelationship Earthquake-RuptureForecast Each Source has N Earthquake Ruptures Time Span Type, Level Source i Site Generates Rupture Sources Probability of occurrence OpenSHA Objects Site & Prob. Eqk Rupture The two main physical objects used in the analysis

23. IM Rup n,i Intensity-MeasureRelationship Earthquake-RuptureForecast Each Source has N Earthquake Ruptures Time Span Type, Level Source i Site Generates Rupture Sources Probability of occurrence OpenSHA Objects Intensity-Measure Relationship One of the major model component (a variety available or being developed).

24. IM Rup n,i Intensity-MeasureRelationship Earthquake-RuptureForecast Each Source has N Earthquake Ruptures Time Span Type, Level Source i Site Generates Rupture Sources Probability of occurrence OpenSHA Eqk Rupture Forecast The other main model components (A variety being developed in RELM).

25. Hazard Calculation IntensityMeasure Type & Level (IMT & IML) Intensity- Measure Relationship List of Supported Intensity-Measure Types List of Site-Related Independent Parameters Earthquake-RuptureForecast List of Adjustable Parameters Site Location List of Site- Related Parameters Web-Based Tools for SHA: Prob(IMT≥IML) Time Span

26. Community Fault Model Earthquake Forecast Fault Activity Database GPS Data (Velocity Vectors) Historical Earthquake Catalog Network Earthquake Catalog Source List Time Span

27. OpenSHA We want the various models and community databases to reside at their geographically distributed host institutions, and to be run-time accessible over the internet. This is an absolute requirement for making the community modeling environment both usable and manageable.

28. OpenSHA 1)The distributed system must be easy to use, which means hiding details as much as possible. 2)Analysis results must be reproducible, which means something has to keep track of all those details. 3)Computations must be fast, as web-based users aren’t going to want to wait an hour for a hazard map or synthetic seismograms. 4)We’ll need a mechanism for preventing erroneous results due to unwitting users plugging together inappropriate components. Building this distributed, community-modeling environment raises several issues that we don’t presently know how to deal with:

30. The SCEC ITR collaboration is helping: (a few examples and lots of $$$$$) Grid Computing: To enable run-time access to whatever high performance computing resources are available at that moment. This will help reduce the time to generate a hazard map, or a synthetic seismogram, from hours to (hopefully) seconds.

31. Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR&R) : To keep track of the relationships among components, and to monitor the construction of computational pathways to ensure that compatible elements are plugged together. The SCEC ITR collaboration is helping: (a few examples)

32. KR&R and Digital Libraries: To enable smart eDatabase inquiries (e.g., so code can construct an appropriate probability model for a fault based on the latest information found in the fault activity database). The SCEC ITR collaboration is helping: (a few examples)

33. Digital Libraries: To enable version tracking for purposes of reproducibility in an environment of continually evolving models and databases. The SCEC ITR collaboration is helping: (a few examples)

34. OpenSHA A Community-Modeling Environment for Seismic Hazard Analysis 1)An infrastructure for developing and testing arbitrarily complex (physics based; system level) SHA components, while putting minimal constraints on (or additional work for) the scientists developing the models. 2)Provides a means for the user community to apply the most advanced models to practical problems (which they cannot presently do). (summary)

35. OpenSHA More info available at: http://www.OpenSHA.org including exact object definitions and a library of Java classes that others might find useful

37. Back to good old Europe… What can we learn from OpenSHA for ZMAP?

38. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich NERIS offered an opportunity N6 - Task B. Building the foundation for a community based Seismicity Analysis Framework (OpenSAF). The information contained in modern earthquake data sets is currently exploited by seismologists using a variety of independent tools (e.g., SSLib, ZMAP, Wizmap, GMT, Slick, Coulomb 2.2) which have no interoperability or standardization. Better and more efficient exploitation of this information requires integrating set of modern, interactive, easy-to-use and accessible tools for visualization, quality assessment, data mining, statistical modeling, quantitative hypothesis evaluation and many other tasks. Such integration could be provided by a seismic data analysis framework (OpenSAF) - a centralized, Internet ready platform for accessing visualization and analysis tools. OpenSAF would be designed to interoperate closely with OpenSHA.

39. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich I learned: I am more objective-oriented, not object- oriented. Developing OpenSAF in Java (or similar) would, in our opinion, be a laudable objective; however, it would require a sustained effort and significant financial support. Is it worth it in this case? Or should we stick to a high level language? Where could the support come from? How can one make it a community-supported, sustainable effort? The Future

40. Swiss Seismological Service Zurich The alternative might be a new, modular, Matlab based research program that avoids the mistakes of the old ZMAP, and the ability to build stand-alone, streamlined modules for specific tasks (monitoring of completeness, rate changes, artifacts …). A ‘license fee’ from users that raises about 1 man-year might be feasible. The Future The End