INGV data lifecycle management system performances during Mw 6.0 2016 Amatrice Earthquake Sequence

At 01:36:32 UTC on August 24, 2016 an earthquake of magnitude 6.0 occurred in Central Italy, affecting many small towns and municipalities in the Lazio, Umbria, Marche and Abruzzo regions. The event caused severe damages, many victims and 299 fatalities. Only 21 seconds after the beginning of the earthquake, the first automatic location of this earthquake was available and stored in our earthquakes database. The first magnitude estimate followed 68 seconds after the origin time. Few seconds later the INGV seismologists on duty in accordance to the agreed protocols provided the first alert to the Italian Civil Protection Department (Dipartimento di Protezione Civile, DPC) and thereby triggered the seismic emergency protocol. Subsequently, they elaborated the data in order to produce the first manually reviewed hypocenter, which was published on the Institute’s website at 01:53:18 UTC. The sequence following this mainshock generated thousands of earthquakes in the epicentral area, which the INGV automated localization system processed and detected along with the usual seismic activity in the rest of the Italian territory. In this paper we analyze the behavior of the automated system and of the data lifecycle management procedures in such extraordinary conditions. In particular we want to measure the capability of the system to manage the huge data flow, in terms of frequency and size of seismic events and its ability to remain fairly responsive and accurate in accomplishing its duty in the expected time. This will help us to identify potential problems and to suggest necessary improvements to better serve the INGV mission for Civil Protection.

Bono, A. (2008). SisPick! 2.0 Sistema interattivo per l’interpretazione di segnali sismici, Rapporti tecnici INGV, Johnson, C. E., A. Bitten- binder, B. Bogaert, L. Dietz, and W. Kohler (1995). Earthworm: A flexible approach to seismic network processing, Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS) Newsletter 14, 1–4 Enescu, B., J. Mori, and M. Miyazawa, (2007), Quantifying early after-shock activity of the 2004 mid-Niigata Prefecture earthquake (Mw6.6), J. Geophys. Res., 112, B04310, doi:10.1029/2006JB004629.
Wiemer, S., and M. Wyss (2000). Minimum magnitude of complete reporting in earthquake catalogs: Examples from Alaska, the western United States, and Japan, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 90, 859–869, doi:10.1785/ 0119990114.
Mazza S., Basili A., Bono A., Lauciani V., Mandiello A., Marcocci C., Mele F., Pintore S., Quintiliani M., Scognamiglio L. and Selvaggi G. (2009). AIDA – Seismic data acquisition, processing, storage and distribution at the National Earthquake Center, INGV, Annals of Geophysics (2012), Vol. 55, No. 4.
Mele et Al., (2016) ISIDe working group (2016) version 1.0, DOI: 10.13127/ISIDe
Danijel Schorlemmer, Adrian Wyss, Silvio Maraini, Stefan Wiemer, and Manfred Baer: QuakeML - An XML schema for seismology, ORFEUS Newsletter, volume 6, no 2, October 2004 (HTML)
SC3 http://www.seiscomp3.org
Wiemer, S. (2001). A software package to analyze seismicity: ZMAP. Seismological Research Letters, 72(3), 373-382.