On the selection of GMPEs for Vrancea subcrustal seismic source

Vǎcǎreanu, Radu; Pavel, Florin; Aldea, A.

doi:10.1007/s10518-013-9515-7

Cited by 22 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If the event terms can be accurately calculated, it is of course valid to separately evaluate the between-event sigma and the GMM with the event term removed. In fact, this approach has been used by quite a few workers (Bindi et al, 2006;Scasserra et al, 2009;Bradley, 2010;Shoja-Taheri et al, 2010;Uchiyama and Midorikawa, 2011;Vacareanu et al, 2013;Azarbakht et al, 2014;Van Houtte, 2016). There are two complications for this approach.…”

Section: Multivariate Logarithmic Scorementioning

confidence: 99%

“…For out-of-sample analysis (i.e., evaluation using a dataset other than the one for the model development), the GMM under evaluation almost always does not fit, and so this estimation loses its rigorous meaning. Mean Residual The event term for an earthquake was taken as the mean residual (e.g., Scasserra et al, 2009;Shoja-Taheri et al, 2010, their equations 1-4; Uchiyama and Midorikawa, 2011, their equations 1-2; Vacareanu et al, 2013), probably by assuming that the zero-mean leftover residuals will cancel out each other through the summation. This estimation is actually identical to equation (B1) for large N i .…”

Section: B2mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Empirical Evaluation of Hierarchical Ground‐Motion Models: Score Uncertainty and Model Weighting

Mak

Clements

Schorlemmer

2017

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using a score to generalize the model performance into one numeric value has been one of the most popular approaches to empirically evaluate groundmotion models (GMMs). This approach has an advantage of simplifying model comparison. We study the effects of data correlation and score variability on the evaluation of GMMs. Most modern GMMs are hierarchical, in which ground motions from the same earthquake are modeled as correlated. We demonstrate, with examples, that incorrect results could occur if such hierarchical GMMs are evaluated by a score that does not duly address the data correlation. We propose to use the multivariate logarithmic score, a natural extension of the widely used univariate logarithmic score (referred to as LLH in the seismological literature), to correctly score hierarchical GMMs. The score variability affects the interpretation of model ranking. We demonstrate that the cluster bootstrap is a better bootstrap strategy, compared with other strategies proposed in the literature, to study the score variability. The bootstrap allows computing two useful quantities: the distinctness index that indicates if two models are truly different given the score variability and the frequency weight, a data-driven weighting scheme that represents the frequentist's interpretation of the weight of a logic-tree branch. The frequency weight has a direct link to the current practice of using multiple GMMs in a probabilistic seismic hazard assessment.Electronic Supplement: Python script to compute the multivariate logarithmic score for a hierarchical lognormal ground-motion model.

show abstract

Section: Multivariate Logarithmic Scorementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: B2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Empirical Evaluation of Hierarchical Ground‐Motion Models: Score Uncertainty and Model Weighting

Mak

Clements

Schorlemmer

2017

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These four ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs) are: Youngs et al (1997) A previous testing of the four models was performed in (Vacareanu et al 2013b) using a strong ground motion database of 109 recordings. The grading of the candidate GMPEs was performed using the goodness-of-fit parameters given by Scherbaum et al (2004Scherbaum et al ( , 2009) and Delavaud et al (2012).…”

Section: Selection Of Gmpesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The study of Vacareanu et al (2013b) grades the four ground motion prediction models recommended within the SHARE research project (Delavaud et al 2012) using a strong ground motion database of 109 recordings from Vrancea subcrustal earthquakes and using the goodness-of-fit parameters given in Scherbaum et al (2004Scherbaum et al ( , 2009 and Delavaud et al (2012). The results show that the Youngs et al (1997) GMPE fits the best with the available strong ground motion database.…”

Section: Evaluation Of the Gmpesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for Romania

Vǎcǎreanu

Aldea

Lungu

et al. 2015

Earthquakes and Their Impact on Society

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regional variation of spectral parameters for seismic design from broadband probabilistic seismic hazard analysis

Weatherill

Danciu²

2018

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe characterisation of the seismic hazard input is a critical element of any seismic design code, not only in terms of the absolute levels of ground motion considered but also of the shape of the design spectrum. In the case of Europe, future revisions of the seismic design provisions, both at a national and a pan‐European level, may implement considerable modifications to the existing provisions in light of recent seismic hazard models, such as the 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model. Constraint of the shape of the long‐period design spectrum from seismic hazard estimates on such a scale has not been possible, however, owing to the limited spectral period range of existing ground motion models. Building upon recent developments in ground motion modelling, the 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model is adapted here with a new ground motion logic tree to provide a broadband Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis for rock sites across a spectral period range from 0.05 seconds to 10.0 seconds. The resulting uniform hazard spectra (UHS) are compared against existing results for European and broadband Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis and against a proposed formulation of a generalised design spectrum in which controlling parameters can be optimised to best fit the uniform hazard spectra in order to demonstrate their variability on a European scale. Significant variations in the controlling parameters of the design spectrum are seen both across and within stable and active regions. These trends can help guide recalibrations of the code spectra in future revisions to seismic design codes, particularly for the longer‐period displacement spectrum.

show abstract

On the selection of GMPEs for Vrancea subcrustal seismic source

Cited by 22 publications

References 22 publications

Empirical Evaluation of Hierarchical Ground‐Motion Models: Score Uncertainty and Model Weighting

Empirical Evaluation of Hierarchical Ground‐Motion Models: Score Uncertainty and Model Weighting

Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for Romania

Regional variation of spectral parameters for seismic design from broadband probabilistic seismic hazard analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About