Room: Exhibit Hall
Date: 5/1/2024
Session Time: 8:00 AM to 5:45 PM (local time)
Seismic monitoring is not only an essential component of earthquake response but also forms the backbone of a substantial amount of research into seismic hazards, the earthquake process and seismotectonics. To ensure networks best serve the public, media, government and academic communities, it is important to continue to develop monitoring networks' abilities to accurately and rapidly catalog earthquakes. Due to the operational environment of seismic monitoring, seismic networks encounter many unique challenges not seen by the research community. In this session, we highlight the unique observations and challenges of monitoring agencies and look to developments that may improve networks' ability to fulfill their missions. Seismic operation centers play a crucial role in collecting seismic data, and generating earthquake products including catalogs, warnings and maps of ground shaking. The purpose of the session is to foster collaboration between network operators, inform the wider seismological community of the interesting and challenging problems within network seismology and look to the future on how to improve monitoring capabilities. This session is not only an opportunity for monitoring agencies to highlight new developments in their capabilities, but we also encourage submissions describing new instrumentation, methods and techniques that would benefit network operations for detecting, locating and characterizing earthquakes, particularly in a near real-time environment.
Conveners:
Blaine Bockholt, Idaho National Laboratory (blaine.bockholt@inl.gov)
Renate Hartog, University of Washington (jhartog@uw.edu)
Kristine L. Pankow, University of Utah (pankowseis2@gmail.com)
Adam Ringler, U.S. Geological Survey (aringler@usgs.gov)
Dmitry Storchak, International Seismological Centre (dmitry@isc.ac.uk)
Poster Presentations
Participant Role | Details | Action |
---|---|---|
Submission | Improving Earthquake Monitoring Capabilities in Ohio With Low-Cost Robust Posthole Vaults | View |
Submission | Automated and Efficient Installation of AQMS | View |
Submission | Evaluation of Station Performance of the Idaho National Laboratory Seismic Monitoring Network Using Network Detection Thresholds | View |
Submission | Access to Seismic Waveform Data, Services and Products in the Euro-Mediterranean Region and Beyond: Status and Outlook of Orfeus Coordinated Programs | View |
Submission | From Dense Seismic Monitoring to Mass-Movement Hazards and Their Impacts: Demonstrating an Operational Workflow and Associated Data Services | View |
Submission | National Strong Motion Project’s Advancements in Station Health and Integration to the Earthquake Early Warning System in the San Francisco Bay Area | View |
Submission | Enhancing Data Resiliency With Dual-Feed Telemetry | View |
Submission | Field Evaluation of Seismic Sensors for Monitoring Earthquakes, Tsunamis, Volcanoes, and Geodesy | View |
Submission | Monitoring Induced Microseismicity (M>-1) With the Local Network at the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) | View |
Submission | Machine Learning Earthquake Catalog Performance for Characteristic Alaska Settings | View |
Submission | High Frequency Ground Motion and Electrical Calibrations of Seismometers Used at IMS Stations | View |
Submission | Applying Machine Learning Salves to Network Build-Out 'Growing Pains' at the Pacific Northwest Seismic Network | View |
Submission | Improving Automatic Post-Processing at the Southern California Seismic Network With Machine Learning Algorithms | View |
Submission | Building an Operational Low-Cost Seismic Network in Ukraine | View |
Submission | Comparative Analysis of Seismic Instrument Installations: Surface Vaulted Pier Mount, Direct Burial, and Bore Hole, Considering Noise Models | View |
Submission | Performance of Raspberry Shake vs. Kentucky Seismic and Strong-Motion Network Instruments | View |
Submission | Seismic Network Modernization and Expansion in Ukraine | View |
Submission | System Monitoring, Telemetry Quality Control, and Planning Tools for Scsn | View |
Submission | Next Generation In-Vault Power Distribution to Increase Network Reliability and Remote Ops Capability | View |
Submission | A Decade of the Seattle Liquefaction Array | View |
Submission | Assessment of Data Quality for the Alaska Geophysical Network | View |
Submission | AdriaArray – a Passive Seismic Experiment to Study the Geodynamics and Geohazards in Central Mediterranean | View |
Submission | Hydrothermal Monitoring Site in Norris Geyser Basin, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, United States of America | View |
Submission | Near Real-Time Earthquake Catalog for the Endeavour Segment of the Juan De Fuca Ridge: Integrating Community Code Into Ocean Networks Canada's Ocean 3.0 Data Portal | View |
Submission | Evolution of Volcano Hazards Monitoring of the Cascades Chain in Washington and Oregon: Cascades Volcano Observatory | View |
Submission | Northern California Earthquake Data Now Available in AWS Cloud | View |
Submission | A Review of Recent IDA Sensor Performance | View |
Submission | Quick Look at the Reoccupation and Installation of Seismic Stations at the NNSS | View |
Submission | Güralp SMART Sensors - A Comparison of Next Generation Mid-Band Seismometers and Traditional Sensor Technologies | View |
Submission | Seismic Data Compression and Telemetry Bandwidth Considerations for EEW | View |
Submission | Moment Magnitude Estimation Using Machine Learning Algorithms for Western United States | View |
Submission | Geophysical and Sea Level Monitoring in Puerto Rico | View |
Network Seismology: Recent Developments, Challenges and Lessons Learned [Poster Session]
Description