<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>Jessie K. Saunders</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Jessica R. Murray</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Jeffrey J. McGuire</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Maren Bose</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Sumant Jha</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Deborah Smith</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>S. N. Dybing</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Carl W. Ulberg</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Jacob Alexander Crummey</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Stephen Crane</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Richard Allen</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Robert Michael deGroot</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>Angela I. Lux</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2026</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;The 5 December 2024 &lt;i&gt;M&lt;/i&gt;&lt;sub&gt;w&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;7.0 Offshore Cape Mendocino earthquake was a challenging test of the U.S. West Coast ShakeAlert earthquake early warning system due to its offshore epicenter and limited near‐source station coverage. We analyzed real‐time performance of all components of the ShakeAlert system, including the seismic algorithms (earthquake point‐source integrated code [EPIC] and Finite‐fault rupture Detector [FinDer]), the geodetic algorithm (Geodetic First Approximation of Size and Time–peak ground displacement [GFAST‐PGD]), and network telemetry during the event. EPIC created the first solution for this earthquake 15&amp;nbsp;s after origin time with an initial magnitude estimate of&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;strong&gt;M&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;5.6 and location error of 10&amp;nbsp;km from the Advanced National Seismic System epicenter. An early spurious trigger from station CE.89101 fortuitously maintained location accuracy and, correspondingly, magnitude accuracy. FinDer contributed its first solution at 18&amp;nbsp;s with a location estimate closer to the seismic network and produced two distinct rupture geometries, leading to minor fluctuations in estimated intensity contours. GFAST‐PGD did not meet alerting thresholds but otherwise performed as expected. Network latencies were &amp;lt;2&amp;nbsp;s for most stations, supporting the rapid detection of this earthquake by the system. Roughly five million alerts were delivered to cell phone devices in California and Oregon during this event. This was also the first instance of a school district‐wide ShakeAlert‐powered system being activated. Comparisons to recorded seismograms demonstrate that the maximum warning times before potentially damaging shaking (intensity 6+) were in the range of 5–55&amp;nbsp;s. Although the ShakeAlert system provided accurate solutions and useful alert delivery, this earthquake raised awareness of potential issues within the system, including the need for improved offshore location estimates, a combination of solutions from ShakeAlert servers, and handling of spurious triggers.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1785/0120250232</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>Seismological Society of America</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>ShakeAlert Earthquake Early Warning System performance during the Mw 7.0 offshore Cape Mendocino earthquake</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>