TRAVEL SUPPORT SCHOLARSHIPS

Scholarship application period ended March 22, 2022.

Undergraduates, graduate students, and postdocs from U.S. domestic colleges and universities are all eligible to apply for travel support scholarships. Applications will be accepted from March 1st-22nd, and we anticipate awarding scholarships by early April.

If selected, you will receive three (3) nights single-occupancy lodging at the Sheraton Pittsburgh Hotel at Station Square for the nights of June 13-15, and up to $500 for eligible travel-related expenses (e.g. airfare, taxi, meals). You will still be required to pay the workshop registration fee. If you are awarded a scholarship, IRIS will book your hotel room on your behalf.

HOTEL

Note: If you are a student scholarship recipient please do not book your hotel room. A single-occupancy hotel room will be booked on your behalf by IRIS.

Sheraton Pittsburgh Hotel at Station Square
300 W Station Square Dr
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
(412) 261-2000
Hotel Website

AIRPORT

The 2022 SAGE/GAGE Workshop will be held in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The nearest airport is Pittsburgh International Airport (PIT). The airport is located 18 miles (35 minutes) from the hotel.

GROUND TRANSPORTATION:

• The Port Authority of Allegheny County is pleased to offer service to Pittsburgh International Airport via the West Busway (28X Airport Flyer). The route runs to and from PIT, Downtown Pittsburgh, Robinson Towne Center, and Oakland on a regular schedule.
• Lyft/Uber range between approximately $40-$50/one way.
• Taxis are also readily available at the airport to the Sheraton for around $50/one way (not including gratuity).

If you're driving to the hotel from PIT: Take 376 East to Exit 69C. Turn right and continue for approximately one mile. Turn right and follow sign for Route 51 North - McKees Rocks/West End. Be in the right lane at the light. At next T-intersection, turn right toward Carson Street. The hotel is approximately 1.5 miles on the left.

PARKING

On-site parking is available at the hotel for a fee of $30/day.

THINGS TO DO IN PITTSBURGH, PA

• Carnegie Museum of Natural History (CMNH)
• The Andy Warhol Museum

Workshop At-a-Glance:
Day 0 - Monday, June 13th - Pre-meeting short courses and field trip
Day 1 - Tuesday, June 14th - First full day of the workshop (plenaries, SIGs, posters)
Day 2 - Wednesday, June 15th - Second full day of the workshop
Day 3 - Thursday, June 16th - Final half-day of the workshop, concludes at noon

A list of attendees is not yet available.

In preparation for the 2022 SAGE/GAGE Workshop, we have implemented a number of steps to ensure the maximum level of safety and protection for in-person workshop participants.  This page is regularly updated so participants can easily stay informed on the evolving safety practices and policies we have in place.

Our COVID safety policy is built around a three-pronged strategy: Vax, Mask, and Test

Vax

• Only individuals with CDC-designated up-to-date COVID-19 vaccinations will be permitted to attend the workshop in person

• All in-person participants must submit proof of their vaccination status via a secure third-party portal prior to the start of the workshop

• Individuals who do not or cannot provide proof of up-to-date COVID-19 vaccination status are encouraged to participate in the workshop virtually via our virtual registration option

Mask

• All in-person participants will be required to wear masks while indoors, unless they are giving a presentation, or actively eating or drinking

Test

• On-site rapid test kits will be available at no cost for any participants who feel unwell and/or have COVID-like symptoms

• Attendees who test positive during or within 5 days prior to the workshop must refrain from all in-person workshop participation and follow CDC guidance on quarantine and isolation

Additional steps we are taking include

• To the extent possible, participant seating will be arranged with an eye toward maintaining social distancing (e.g. in the plenary hall, or in breakout rooms)

• Student scholarship recipients will be provided with single-occupancy rooms, rather than double-occupancy rooms (as has been standard practice for past workshops)

• We encourage all workshop attendees to follow CDC best practices for protecting themselves and those around them from becoming infected

External Resources for COVID Information

CDC's COVID-19 website
CDC guidance for travelers
City of Pittsburgh COVID-19 Information
Pittsburgh area COVID-19 testing locations

Tuesday Poster Session (June 14, 2022, 4:15-5:45pm ET)

Listed by posterboard number

1. Seismic body-wave velocity and attenuation tomography of the upper mantle and crust beneath Alaska
   Cristhian Salas, University of California Santa Barbara; Zachary Eilon, University of California Santa Barbara
2. Seismic Constraints on the Structure of Alaska: A Review
   Xiaotao Yang, Purdue University; Michael Everett Mann, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution; Gary Pavlis, Indiana University; S. Shawn Wei, Michigan State University; Karen Fischer, Brown University; Margarete Jadamec, University at Buffalo; Andrew Scheaffer, Geological Survey of Canada Pacific Division
3. Azimuthal Anisotropy along the Alaska Subduction Zone from Earthquake and Ambient Noise Rayleigh Waves
   Zongshan Li, Washington University in St. Louis; Douglas Wiens, Washington University in St. Louis
4. Incoming Plate Seismicity and Relation to the Seismic Cycle at the Alaska Subduction Zone
   Patrick Matulka, Washington University in St. Louis; Zongshan Li, Washington University in St. Louis; Doug Wiens, Washington University in St. Louis; Grace Barcheck, Cornell University; Geoff Abers, Cornell University; Natalia, Ruppert, Alaska Earthquake Center
5. Seismic velocity structure near 2020-2021 major earthquakes at the Alaska Peninsula
   Fan Wang, Michigan State University; S. Shawn Wei, Michigan State University; Connor Drooff, Michigan State University; Julie Elliott, Michigan State University; Jeffrey T. Freymueller, Michigan State University; Natalia Ruppert, University of Alaska Fairbanks; Haijiang Zhang, University of Science and Technology of China
6. Increasing the usability of ocean-bottom seismometer data: The OBSIC metrics website
   Andrew Barclay, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution; John Collins, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
7. Novel Autonomous and Cabled OBS Solutions for Offshore Seismic Research
   James Lindsey, Guralp
8. Variations in ground motion amplification on the Cascadia submarine forearc from short-period OBS recordings of intra-Gorda plate earthquakes
   Nathan Miller, USGS; Pablo Canales, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
9. Small-scale convection tomographically imaged beneath the Pacific plate using a dense OBS array
   Zachary Eilon, University of California Santa Barbara; Lun Zhang, University of California Santa Barbara; James Gaherty, Northern Arizona University; Donald Forsyth, Brown University; Joshua Russell, Brown University
10. Surface-Wave Anisotropy of Old Oceanic Lithosphere and Asthenosphere in the Southwest Pacific
    Joseph Phillips, Northern Arizona University; James B. Gaherty, Northern Arizona University; Joshua B. Russell, Brown University; Zachary C. Eilon, University of California Santa Barbara; Donald W. Forsyth, Brown University; Joseph S. Byrnes, Northern Arizona University
11. Pacific upper-mantle shear attenuation and velocity from ocean-bottom observations and implications for asthenospheric temperature and melt
    Joshua Russell, Brown University; Colleen Dalton, Brown University
12. Waveform Modeling of Seismo-Acoustic Records from MERMAID Instruments in the Pacific
    Sirawich Pipatprathanporn, Princeton University; Frederik Simons, Princeton University; Joel Simon, Princeton University; Jessica Irving, University of Bristol
13. The 15 January 2022 Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha'apai Eruption as Recorded by MERMAID
    Frederik Simons, Princeton University; Joel D. Simon, Princeton University; Yong Yu, SUSTECH; Sirawich Pipatprathanporn, Princeton University; Jessica C.E. Irving, Bristol University
14. Bridge Asynchronous Seismic Observations with Ambient Noise Three-station Interferometry
    Shun Zhang, University of Colorado Boulder; Michael H. Ritzwoller, University of Colorado Boulder
15. U-CORS: An Underwater Continuously Operating Reference Station for Deep Seafloor Geodesy
    Terance J. Schuh, Princeton University; Frederik J. Simons, Princeton University; Hayden Radke, DBV Technology; Harold T. Vincent, DBV Technology
16. A Bedrock GNSS Network for Continuous Measurement of Glacial Discharge
    Surendra Adhikari, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory
17. Seismoelectric exploration of an englacial aquifer on the Greenland Ice Sheet
    Kristin Poinar, University at Buffalo; Courtney Shafer, University at Buffalo
18. Detecting and Estimating Position Biases due to Ice in GNSS Antennas
    Peter Matheny, The Ohio State University; Demian Gomez; David Saddler; Eric Kendrick; Stephanie Konfal; Terry Wilson; Michael Bevis
19. Icequake Scaling and Periodicity at a Rift on the Ross Ice Shelf, Antarctica
    Kathrine Udell Lopez, University of Maryland; Mong-Han Huang, University of Maryland; Vedran Lekic, University of Maryland; Kira Olsen, University of Maryland and Goddard Space Flight Center
20. Geothermal Heat Flux Estimation Across Antarctica and Its Implication for Ice-bedrock Interface Condition
    Shun Zhang, University of Colorado Boulder; Michael H. Ritzwoller, University of Colorado Boulder
21. UKANET: interrogating Earth rheology in Antarctica via GNSS measurements of the response to surface mass balance anomalies
    Pippa Whitehouse, Durham University; Achraf Koulali, Newcastle University; Peter Clarke, Newcastle University; Mike Bentley, Durham University; Grace Nield, Durham University; Terry Wilson and POLENET partners, Ohio State University; Matt King, University of Tasmania; Michiel van den Broeke, Utrecht University; Bert Wouters, Utrecht University; and project partners at UNAVCO and British Antarctic Survey
22. Earthquake -- Slow Slip Interactions: a 2017 example from Costa Rica
    Mahsa Afra, University of South Florida; Mitchell Hastings, University of South Florida; Surui Xie, University of California; Nicholas Voss, University of South Florida; Esteban Chaves, Observatorio Vulcanologico y Sismologico de Costa Rica; Cyril Muller, Observatorio Vulcanologico y Sismologico de Costa Rica; Marino Protti, Observatorio Vulcanologico y Sismologico de Costa Rica; Rocco Malservisi, University of South Florida; Timothy Dixon, University of South Florida; Alvaro Alvarez Calderon, Instituto Geografico Nacional
23. Detection and Characterization of Very Low Frequency Earthquakes in the Cascadia Slip Transition Zone Part I: Transcontinental Wavefields from the Transportable Array
    Wenyuan Fan, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego; Andrew J. Barbour, U.S. Geological Survey; Jeffrey J. McGuire, U.S. Geological Survey; Yihe Huang, University of Michigan; Guoqing Lin, University of Miamil; Elizabeth S. Cochran, U.S. Geological Survey; Ryo Okuwaki, University of Tsukuba, Japan
24. Detection and Characterization of Very Low Frequency Earthquakes in the Cascadia Slip Transition Zone: Part II: Crustal Deformation from the Plate Boundary Observatory Strainmeter Network
    Andrew J. Barbour, U.S. Geological Survey; Wenyuan Fan, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego; Jeffrey J. McGuire, U.S. Geological Survey
25. Offshore very low frequency earthquakes (VLFEs) in Cascadia -- frictional patchwork in seismogenic zone?
    Abhijit Ghosh, University of California, Riverside; Kuntal Chaudhuri, University of California, Riverside
26. New Science Project in Japan: Science of Slow-to-Fast Earthquakes
    Satoshi Ide, University of Tokyo; Yohei Hamada, JAMSTEC; Asuka Yamaguchi, AORI Univ. Tokyo; Yoshihiro Ito, DPRI Kyoto Univ.; Yoshiyuki Tanaka, Dept EPS Univ. Tokyo; Aitaro Kato, ERI Univ. Tokyo; Takanori Matsuzawa, NIED
27. Processing techniques for optimizing the detectability of synthetic shallow slow slip events in seafloor pressure data from the Alaska margin
    Erik Fredrickson, University of Washington; Joan Gomberg, US Geological Survey; William Wilcock, University of Washington; Susan Hautala, University of Washington; Albert Hermann, NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory; H. Paul Johnson, University of Washington
28. Short-Term Slow Slip Events at Alaska Subduction Zone and their Association with Tremors in the Vicinity
    Dhamsith Weerasinghe, Bowling Green State University; Yuning Fu, Bowling Green State University
29. Converted-wave elastic reverse time migration imaging of the Cascadia Subduction Zone
    Leah Langer, USGS; Fred Pollitz; Jeff McGuire; Paul Bodin
30. Mapping out spatial variability in the subduction plate interface properties using high frequency P-to-S mode conversions
    Kiara Daly, Cornell University; Geoffrey Abers, Cornell University
31. Estimating objective locking distributions of the Kamchatka subduction zone from GNSS data using a modified Metropolis-Hastings approach
    Gareth Funning, University of California, Riverside
32. Evidence for Caribbean Plate subduction in Southern Costa Rica
    James Bourke, Rutgers University; Vadim Levin, Rutgers University; Ivonne Arroyo, Rutgers University; Lepolt Linkimer, Rutgers University
33. Advances in real-time GPS monitoring of locked segments of the Nazca/South America megathrust subduction zone, for tsunami early-warning in Ecuador
    Patricia Mothes, Instituto Geofisico, Escuela Politecnica Nacional, Quito Ecuador; Sandro Vaca, Instituto Geofisico, Escuela Politecnica Nacional, Quito Ecuador; Wilson Acero, Instituto Geofisico, Escuela Politecnica Nacional, Quito Ecuador; Andres Herrera, Instituto Geofisico, Escuela Politecnica Nacional, Quito Ecuador; Brendan W. Crowell, Pacific Northwest Seismic Network, Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA; Jorge Aguilar, Instituto Geofisico, Escuela Politecnica Nacional, Quito Ecuador; Monica Segovia, Instituto Geofisico, Escuela Politecnica Nacional, Quito Ecuador
34. Modeling Mechanisms for trench parallel flow in the Cocos-Nazca Subduction System
    Bailey Valint, University at Buffalo; Margarete Jadamec, University at Buffalo
35. Strain partitioning and the accommodation of oblique convergence along the Queen Charlotte Fault
    Olumide Adedeji, University of New Mexico; Lindsay Lowe Worthington, University of New Mexico; Emily C Roland, Western Washington University; Maureen A L Walton, Naval Research Lab; Mladen R Nedimovic, Dalhousie University; Collin Brandl, University of New Mexico; Lazaro Garza, Western Washington University; Jose Castillo Castellanos, Dalhousie University
36. Effect of Plate Coupling and Initial Slab Dip on Dynamic Weakening in the Asthenosphere
    Vivek Bhavsar, University at Buffalo SUNY; Margarete Jadamec, University at Buffalo SUNY; Matthew Knepley, University at Buffalo SUNY
37. Investigating the Mechanics of Strain Partitioning at the Rakhine-Bangladesh Megathrust Using InSAR Time-series
    Jeng-Hann Chong, University of New Mexico; Eric Lindsey, University of New Mexico
38. A Joint Inversion Algorithm of GNSS and InSAR Data for Surface 3-D Velocity and Strain Rate Fields
    Jeonghyeop Kim, Stony Brook University; Mradula Vashishtha, Stony Brook University; William Holt, Stony Brook University
39. Controls on Strain Accommodation in Rift Development across the Turkana Depression
    Martin Musila, Tulane University; Cynthia Ebinger; Ian Bastow; Rebecca Bendick; Garrett Sullivan; Rita Kounoudis; Chris Ogden
40. Regional Stress Variations in Southeast Asia
    Prakash Timsina, New Mexico State University; Thomas Hearn, New Mexico State University; James Ni, New Mexico State University
41. Constraints on crustal stress for South Island, New Zealand
    Olivia Walbert, University of Michigan; Eric Hetland, University of Michigan
42. Spatiotemporal variations of stress and strain in the crust near 2019 Ridgecrest Earthquake Sequence
    Niloufar Abolfathian, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology; Eric Fielding, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology
43. Displaced rocks as an indicator of ground motion during the 4 July 2019 M6.4 Ridgecrest earthquake
    Malinda Zuckerman, Arizona State University; Jacqueline Caplan-Auerbach, Western Washington University; J Ramon Arrowsmith, Arizona State University; Colin Amos, Western Washington University
44. Leveraging Robotics and AI for Geosciences: Rock Search, Mapping, and Dynamic Analysis
    Zhiang Chen, Arizona State University; Jnaneshwar Das, Arizona State University; Ramon Arrowsmith, Arizona State University
45. Imaging the rupture process and postseismic deformation of the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence with high-resolution geodetic data
    Kang Wang, University of California Berkeley; Roland Burgmann, University of California Berkeley
46. Insights on earthquake source processes from the azimuthal variation of the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake source spectra
    Meichen Liu, University of Michigan; Jing Ci Neo, University of Michigan; Yihe Huang, University of Michigan
47. Insight into Earthquake Source Processes from Large Moment Tensor Catalogs
    Boris Rösler, Northwestern University; Seth Stein, Northwestern University
48. The 2020 Mw 7.0 Neon Karlovasion (Samos) Earthquake: Source characteristics from joint inversion (GNSS, InSAR and ground motion) and tsunami energetics
    Yu-Sheng Sun, University of Oregon; Diego Melgar, University of Oregon; Angel Ruiz Angulo, University of Iceland; Athanassios Ganas, National Observatory of Athens, Institute of Geodynamics; Tuncay Taymaz, Istanbul Technical University; Brendan Crowell, University of Washington; Xiaohua Xu, University of Texas, Institute for Geophysics; Varvara Tsironi, National Observatory of Athens, Institute of Geodynamics; Ilektra Karasante, National Observatory of Athens, Institute of Geodynamics; Seda Yolsal-Cevikbilen, Istanbul Technical University; Tuna Eken, Istanbul Technical University
49. Using Bayesian seismic refraction and electrical resistivity to study critical zone science and near-surface geophysics
    Mong-Han Huang, University of Maryland; Berit Hudson Rasmussen, University of Maryland; Jonathan Perkins, U.S. Geological Survey; Kathrine Udell Lopez, University of Maryland
50. Geophysical Investigations of Impact-Induced Porosity
    Peter James, Baylor University
51. Defining research and teaching priorities that could be advanced through a Near-Surface Geophysics (NSG) Center
    Sarah Kruse, University of South Florida; Xavier Comas, Florida Atlantic University; Brooks Hanson, AGU; Kennedy Doro, University of Toledo; Tiffani Holmes, Fort Valley State University; Rosemary Knight, Stanford University; Burke Minsley, USGS; John McDaris, Carleton College; Isabel Morris, New Mexico Tech; Veronica Rodriquez Tribaldos, LBL; Lee Slater, Rutgers University; Victor Tsai, Brown University; Chi Zhang, University of Vienna
52. The IGUaNA modules: Teaching Geophysics with Societally-Relevant Questions in Introductory-Level Courses
    Sarah Kruse, University of South Florida; Andy Parsekian, University of Wyoming; Lee Slater, Rutgers University; Carol Ormand, Carleton College; Danielle Sumy, IRIS; John Taber, IRIS
53. Using Introductory level Geoscience Instruction to Analyze the face of Geology through 3D Visualization
    Gillian Goldhagen, University of California, Riverside; Kinnari Atit, University of California, Riverside; Heather A. Ford, University of California, Riverside
54. Data-rich and societally-oriented geodesy curricular modules: design inputs and actual use patterns
    Beth Pratt-Sitaula, UNAVCO; Kristin O'Connell, Science Education Resource Center; Becca Walker, Mt San Antonio College; Bruce James Douglas, Indiana University; Benjamin Crosby, Idaho State University; Donna Charlevoix, UNAVCO
55. Status of Canada's Earthquake Early Warning Project
    Yuan Lu, Canadian Hazards Information Service of Natural Resources Canada; Henry Seywerd, Canadian Hazards Information Service of Natural Resources Canada; Stephen Crane, Canadian Hazards Information Service of Natural Resources Canada; Charles Blais, Canadian Hazards Information Service of Natural Resources Canada; Lisa Nykolaishen, Canadian Hazards Information Service of Natural Resources Canada; Lorne McKee, Canadian Hazards Information Service of Natural Resources Canada; John Adams, Canadian Hazards Information Service of Natural Resources Canada; Alison Bird, Canadian Hazards Information Service of Natural Resources Canada
56. NSF SAGE-Facility Begins Procurement of Rapid Response Instrumentation
    Justin Sweet, IRIS; Kent Anderson, IRIS; Anne Meltzer, Lehigh University; Bob Woodward, IRIS
     

Wednesday Poster Session (June 15, 2022, 4:15-5:45pm ET)

Listed by posterboard number

1. A Study in Opportunistic Underwater Acoustics: Exploring the Interdisciplinary Value in Community DAS Data
   Agatha Podrasky, Silixa LLC; David Podrasky, Silixa LLC; Noah Clayton, Silixa LLC; Thomas Coleman, Silixa LLC
2. Towards near-surface monitoring by distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) and traffic noise
   Rafal Czarny, The Pennsylvania State University; Tieyuan Zhu, The Pennsylvania State University
3. Toward near-surface characterization using Distributed Acoustic Sensing and ambient seismic noise in an urban area: Granada, Spain
   Yang Li, University of Michigan; Zack Spica, University of Michigan; Beatriz Gaite, National Geographic Institute of Spain; Sandra Ruiz-Barajas, National Geographic Institute of Spain
4. Preliminary Outcome Evaluation of a Surface DAS Array to Monitor Seismic Activity at the FORGE Geothermal Facility in April 2022
   Manuel Mendoza, University of Colorado Boulder; Anne F. Sheehan, University of Colorado Boulder; Ge Jin, Colorado School of Mines; Kris Pankow, University of Utah
5. Storm-induced signals are sensed by DAS fiber-optic sensors
   Junzhu Shen, The Pennsylvania State University; Tieyuan Zhu, The Pennsylvania State University
6. Detecting seismic phases from Tonga deep earthquakes using deep learning
   Songqiao Wei, Michigan State University; Ziyi Xi, Michigan State University; Fan Wang, Michigan State University; Nooshin Saloor, Michigan State University; Weiqiang Zhu, California Institute of Technology; Gregory C. Beroza, Stanford University
7. Supervised Deep Learning Models to Improve the Yellowstone Seismic Catalog
   Alysha Armstrong, University of Utah; Ben Baker, University of Utah; Keith Koper, University of Utah
8. Real-time Deep Earthquake Discriminator Using Radiated Energy flux features and Machine Learning Methods
   Louisa Barama, Georgia Institute of Technology; Andrew Newman, Georgia Institute of Technology
9. Using machine learning to improve earthquake catalogs for amphibious seismic networks: Application of EarthquakeTransformer to the Alaska Amphibious Community Seismic Experiment
   Grace Barcheck, Cornell University; Geoff Abers, Cornell University; Natalia Ruppert, University of Alaska, Fairbanks; Emily Roland, Western Washington University; Susan Schwartz, University of California, Santa Cruz
10. Detecting and locating aftershocks for the 2020 Mw 6.5 Stanley, Idaho earthquake using convolutional neural networks
    Bingxu Luo, The University of Texas at Dallas; Hejun Zhu, The University of Texas at Dallas; Jidong Yang, China University of Petroleum; Thorne Lay, University of California, Santa Cruz; Lingling Ye, Southern University of Science and Technology; Zhong Lu, Southern Methodist University; David Lumley, The University of Texas at Dallas
11. Systematic Detection of Microearthquakes During Several Moderate-Size Earthquake Sequences in Central and Eastern United States
    Zhigang Peng, Georgia Tech; Miguel Neves, Georgia Tech; Clara Daniels, Georgia Tech; Qiushi Zhai, Georgia Tech; Lindsay Chuang, Georgia Tech; Steve Jaume, College of Charleston
12. A New Pilot Magnetotelluric Study of the Axial Fault Region of the New Madrid Seismic Zone
    Kaushik Sarker, Center for Earthquake Research and Information (CERI), University of Memphis; Chris H. Cramer, CERI, University of Memphis; Charles A. Langston, CERI, University of Memphis
13. Normalizing flows for density estimation and uncertainty quantification in Earth data
    Peter Van Katwyk, Brown University; Karianne Bergen, Brown University
14. Investigating load-induced elastic Earth deformation using a homogeneous, non-gravitating half-space method and a homogeneous, gravitating, spherical method
    Ashlesha Khatiwada, University of Montana; Hilary Martens, University of Montana; Donald Argus, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
15. Hydrological loading deformation around Lake Mead, Nevada-Arizona, USA
    Esther Oyedele, Bowling Green State University; Yuning Fu, Bowling Green State University; Hilary Martens, University of Montana
16. Quantifying the Spatial Resolution Limitations and Optimal Network Distribution for GNSS Water Storage Estimates Inferred from Earth Surface Displacements
    Matthew Swarr, University of Montana; Hilary Martens, University of Montana
17. An Elastic Impact Model of High-Frequency Earthquake Radiation: Predictions and Observational Constraints
    Victor Tsai, Brown University; Greg Hirth, Brown University; Daniel T. Trugman, University of Nevada Reno; Shanna X. Chu, United States Geological Survey
18. Seismic Coda Correlation for Constraining Lunar Seismic Discontinuities
    Liwei Liu, Rice University; Alan Levander, Rice University
19. SIO/JPL NASA MEaSUREs Project Products and Visualization Tools
    Yehuda Bock, Scripps Institute of Oceanography (SIO); Angelyn Moore, JPL/Caltech; Donald Argus, JPL/Caltech; Peng Fang, SIO; Dorian; Golriz, SIO; Katherine Guns, SIO; Songnian Jiang, SIO; Alistair Knox, SIO; Zhen Liu, JPL/Caltech; Anne Sullivan, SIO
20. An assessment of low-cost GNSS equipment for high-precision geophysical geodesy
    Michael Floyd, MIT; Gareth Funning, University of California, Riverside
21. Interseismic fault loading in California's North Coast constrained by geodetic data
    Kathryn Materna, USGS; Jessica Murray, USGS Earthquake Science Center; Fred Pollitz, USGS Earthquake Science Center; Jason Patton, California Geological Survey
22. A dense geodetic block model of western continental United States deformation
    Eileen Evans, California State University, Northridge
23. Towards a uniform crustal thermal model of the continental US: a Monte Carlo approach
    Siyuan Sui, Stony Brook University; Weisen Shen, Stony Brook University; Oliver Boyd, USGS
24. Three-Dimensional dynamics of asthenospheric flow and plate motion in the Boso Triple Junction: Phase I model construction
    Jane Halfhill, University at Buffalo SUNY; Margarete Jadamec, University at Buffalo SUNY
25. From mega-thrusts to plate reorganizations: Bridging scales from local to global in forward and adjoint models
    Michael Gurnis, Caltech; Johann Rudi; Jiashun Hu; Georg Stadler
26. GEOPHYSICAL IMPLICATIONS OF IMPROVED DYNAMIC TOPOGRAPHY ESTIMATES USING ASPECT
    Karen Williams, Virginia Tech; D. Sarah Stamps; Jacqueline Austermann; Scott King; Emmanuel Njinju
27. P-wave attenuation tomography of the Tonga-Lau mantle wedge improved by a Bayesian Monte Carlo approach and independently constrained source spectra
    Yurong Zhang, Michigan State University; Joseph Byrnes, Northern Arizona University; S. Shawn Wei, Michigan State University; Dongdong Tian, Michigan State University; Fan Wang, Michigan State University; Maximiliano Bezada, University of Minnesota
28. Mantle structure and flow across the continent-ocean transition of eastern North America from a suite of seismic data types
    Brennan Brunsvik, University of California Santa Barbara; Zachary Eilon, University of California Santa Barbara; Colton Lynner, University of Delaware
29. A Global Veneer of Subducted Materials along the Earth's Core-Mantle Boundary
    Samantha Hansen, University of Alabama; Edward Garnero, Arizona State University; Mingming Li, Arizona State University; Sang-Heon Shim, Arizona State University; Sebastian Rost, The University of Leeds
30. Excitation of Earth's Inner Core Rotational Oscillation During 2001-2003 Captured by Earthquake Doublets
    Keith Koper, University of Utah; Guanning Pang, Cornell University
31. Regional Full Waveform Inversion with Source Encoding
    Congyue Cui, Princeton University; Jeroen Tromp; Etienne Bachmann; Daniel Peter
32. Nnodes: a workflow manager for full waveform inversion in large scale HPC clusters
    Congyue Cui, Princeton University; Jeroen Tromp; Lucas Sawade
33. Constructing a 3-D crustal velocity model for Oklahoma using full waveform inversion
    Shuo Zhang, The University of Texas at Dallas; Hejun Zhu, The University of Texas at Dallas
34. Seismic Imaging of the Ups and Downs of the North American Midcontinent
    Xiaotao Yang, Purdue University; Lijun Liu, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Andrea Stevens Goddard, Indiana University Bloomington
35. Wavelet Compression and Error Analyses on Processing in Wavelet Domain
    Abdul Hafiz Issah, Colorado School of Mines; Eileen R. Martin
36. Seismic Data Management and Processing with MsPASS
    Yinzhi Wang, Texas Advanced Computing Center; Gary Pavlis, Indiana University
37. Long memory: seismological evidence of lithospheric deformation 1 billion years ago.
    Vadim Levin, Rutgers University; Huaiyu Yuan, Macquarie University; Andrew Hynes, McGill University
38. Lithospheric structure above the Northern Appalachian Anomaly: Constraints from the NEST experiment
    Kimberly Espinal, Yale University; Maureen Long, Yale University; Vadim Levin, Rutgers University; Paul Karabinos, Williams College; Roberto Masis Arce, Rutgers University; Yantao Luo, Yale University
39. Monte-Carlo joint inversion of crustal architecture: incorporating local amplifications
    Hanxiao Wu, Stony Brook University; Weisen Shen, Stony Brook University; Fan-Chi Lin, University of Utah
40. Seismic constraints on lithospheric structure and behavior in the southwestern United States
    Eva Golos, Brown University; Brennan Brunsvik, University of California - Santa Barbara; Zachary Eilon, University of California - Santa Barbara; Karen M. Fischer, Brown University
41. Instantaneous stress state of the lithosphere of S. California: A synthesis of geophysical and compositional products of SCEC
    William Holt, Stony Brook University; Weisen Shen; Siyuan Sui; Lajhon Campbell; Ali Bahadori
42. Generalized Radon Transform Migration across the Indo-Burman Accretionary Margin
    Christopher Carchedi, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University; James Gaherty, Northern Arizona University; Stephane Rondenay University of Bergen, Norway; Rasheed Ajala, Lousiana State University; Patricia Persaud, Lousiana State University; Md. Samiul Alim, University of Dhaka, Bangladesh; Syed Humayun Akhter, Bangladesh Open University, Bangladesh; Eric Sandvol, University of Missouri - Columbia; Michael Steckler, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University
43. Resolving Lithospheric Structure beneath southern New England with Multiple Seismic Imaging Techniques
    Yantao Luo, Yale University; Maureen Long, Yale University; Stephane Rondenay, University of Bergen; Paul Karabinos, Williams Collegel; Yvette Kuiper, Colorado School of Mines
44. A Closer Look at the Offset in Crustal Thickness Beneath Northwestern Massachusetts
    Roberto Masis Arce, Rutgers University; Yantao Luo; Kimberly Espinal; Yiran Li; Vadim Levin; Maureen Long; Paul Karabinos
45. Effects of 3D velocity structure and Earth curvature on moment tensors from regional waveform modeling -- preliminary results for a case study in Iran
    Felix Rodriguez Cardozo, University of South Florida; Jochen Braunmiller, University of South Florida; Glenn Thompson, University of South Florida
46. Large Lithospheric Velocity Variations Across the Northern Canadian Cordillera Imaged by Ambient Noise Tomography
    Derek Schutt, Colorado State University; Robert W. Porritt, Sandia National Laboratory; Clement Esteve, McGill University; Jeremy Gosselin, University of Calgary; Richard C. Aster, Colorado State University; Pascal Audet, University of Ottawa; Andrew Schaeffer, National Resources Canada; Jeffrey T. Freymueller, Michigan State University; Joel F. Cubley, Yukon University
47. Variability in fractional changes in velocity structure (dv/v) using a repeating source and a small-aperture broadband posthole array
    Justin Wilgus, University of New Mexico; Adam Ringler, U.S. Geological Survey, Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory (ASL); Ryan Kirk Stairs, University of New Mexico; Robert Anthony, U.S. Geological Survey, ASL; Dave Wilson, U.S. Geological Survey, ASL; Brandon Schmandt, University of New Mexico
48. Regional Tomography targeting mantle plumes by waveform inversion: the case of La Reunion Island
    Mathurin Wamba, Princeton University; Jean-Paul Montagner, Universite de Paris/Institut de physique du globe de Paris; Barbara Romanowicz, Berkeley Seismological Laboratory and College de France
49. Subsurface Imaging of Kilauea using Nodal and Broadband Seismometers
    Jade Wight, University of Hawai'i, Manoa; Helen Janiszewski, University of Hawai'i, Manoa
50. Seismic Velocity Changes below the Great Sitkin Volcano in Central Aleutian Volcanic Arc Associated with Recent Eruptive Activities
    Cody Kupres, Purdue University; Xiaotao Yang, Purdue University
51. Relating Deformation and Gas Flux Using a Sealed System Model at Telica Volcano, Nicaragua
    Emilie Saucier, The Pennsylvania State University; Peter C. LaFemina, The Pennsylvania State University
52. Magmatic Processes in the Naibor Soito distributed field area, Tanzania constrained from satellite geodesy and seismicity
    Cristy Ho, The Pennsylvania State University; Christelle Wauthier, The Pennsylvania State University
53. Investigating Potential Melt Sources for the Magma-Poor Albertine-Rhino Graben of the East African Rift System Using 3D Geodynamic Modeling with ASPECT
    Asenath Kwagalakwe, Virginia Tech; D. Sarah Stamps, Virginia Tech; Emmanuel Njinju, Virginia Tech; Estella Atekwana, University of California, Davis; John Mary Kiberu, Makerere University (Uganda)
54. Advances of the DRIAR Project: Dry-Rifting In the Albertine-Rhino Graben, Uganda
    D. Sarah Stamps, Virginia Tech; Estella Atekwana, University of California, Davis; Eliot Atekwana, University of California, Davis; Suzan van der Lee, Northwestern University; Michael Taylor, University of Kansas; Andrew Katumwehe, Midwestern State University; Rob Evans, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution; Fred Tugume, Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, Uganda; John Mary Kiberu, Makerere University, Uganda; Stewart Fishwick, Leicester University, U.K.; Peter H. Barry, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution; Saemundur Halldorsson, University of Iceland, Iceland; Folarin Kolawole, Columbia University; Georg Rumpker, Goethe Universitat, Germany; Asenath Kwagalakwe, Virginia Tech; Daniel Mongovin, University of Kansas; Hillary Mwongyera, University of Kansas; Joy Fuluso, University of California, Davis; Albert Kabanda, Northwestern University; Ben Alonzo, Northwestern University; Esha Islam, Virginia Tech; Crystal Lee, Virginia Tech; Damiloa Ola, Midwestern State University; Patrick Boston, Midwestern State University
55. Surface deformation surrounding the 2021 M7.2 Haiti earthquake illuminated by InSAR observations
    Zoe Yin, Scripps Institution of Oceanography; Xioahua Xu, University of Texas at Austin; Jennifer S. Haase, Scripps Institution of Oceanography; David T. Sandwell, Scripps Institution of Oceanography
56. Monitoring coastal subsidence in Miami Beach using Sentinel-1 InSAR time series observation
    Anurag Sharma, Florida International University; Shimon Wdowinski, Florida International University