USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70034478

Repeatable source, site, and path effects on the standard deviation for empirical ground-motion prediction models

Abstract

In this study, we quantify the reduction in the standard deviation for empirical ground-motion prediction models by removing ergodic assumption.We partition the modeling error (residual) into five components, three of which represent the repeatable source-location-specific, site-specific, and path-specific deviations from the population mean. A variance estimation procedure of these error components is developed for use with a set of recordings from earthquakes not heavily clustered in space.With most source locations and propagation paths sampled only once, we opt to exploit the spatial correlation of residuals to estimate the variances associated with the path-specific and the source-location-specific deviations. The estimation procedure is applied to ground-motion amplitudes from 64 shallow earthquakes in Taiwan recorded at 285 sites with at least 10 recordings per site. The estimated variance components are used to quantify the reduction in aleatory variability that can be used in hazard analysis for a single site and for a single path. For peak ground acceleration and spectral accelerations at periods of 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 1.0, and 3.0 s, we find that the singlesite standard deviations are 9%-14% smaller than the total standard deviation, whereas the single-path standard deviations are 39%-47% smaller.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P.-S. Lin, B. Chiou, N. Abrahamson, M. Walling, C.-T. Lee, C.-T. Cheng. 2011-09-26. Repeatable source, site, and path effects on the standard deviation for empirical ground-motion prediction models. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120090312

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗