Reply on “Implications of surface wave data measurement uncertainty on seismic ground response analysis”

Abstract

a b s t r a c tWe are thankful to Comina and Foti [1] ('The Discussers'), who showed their interest in our research and raised some issues on our paper on the "Implications of surface wave data measurement uncertainty on seismic ground response analysis". Their main concerns [1] are on the selection criteria that we adopted to select the equivalent profiles, requirement of multimodal inversion and the seismic response of those equivalent profiles. We have prepared here a detailed explanation on all the raised issues and it is shown that the variations in spectral parameters are not merely due to the so-called discrepancies raised by 'The Discussers'.

Site response implications associated with using non-unique Vs profiles from surface wave inversion in comparison with other commonly used methods of accounting for Vs uncertainty

“…However, as pointed out by Comina and Foti (2014) [20], the theoretical dispersion curves associated with many of the Vs profiles in the Jakka et al (2014a) [18] study fall outside of the uncertainty bounds of the experimental data at high frequencies, and do not follow the general trend/shape of the experimental data at low frequencies. Several follow up discussions have ensued between these differing schools of thought (e.g., Comina and Foti 2014 [20], Jakka et al 2014b [21], Boaga et al 2012 [22], Socco et al 2012 [23]). One particular point of debate is focused on what constitutes "equivalence" in terms of dispersion misfit when attempting to select appropriate candidate Vs profiles for use in site response.…”