@article{DouglasAkkarAmerietal.2014,
  author    = {Douglas, John and Akkar, Sinan and Ameri, Gabriele and Bard, Pierre-Yves and Bindi, Dino and Bommer, Julian J. and Bora, Sanjay Singh and Cotton, Fabrice and Derras, Boumediene and Hermkes, Marcel and Kuehn, Nicolas Martin and Luzi, Lucia and Massa, Marco and Pacor, Francesca and Riggelsen, Carsten and Sandikkaya, M. Abdullah and Scherbaum, Frank and Stafford, Peter J. and Traversa, Paola},
  title     = {Comparisons among the five ground-motion models developed using RESORCE for the prediction of response spectral accelerations due to earthquakes in Europe and the Middle East},
  series = {Bulletin of earthquake engineering : official publication of the European Association for Earthquake Engineering},
  volume    = {12},
  journal   = {Bulletin of earthquake engineering : official publication of the European Association for Earthquake Engineering},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Dordrecht},
  issn      = {1570-761X},
  doi       = {10.1007/s10518-013-9522-8},
  pages     = {341 -- 358},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {This article presents comparisons among the five ground-motion models described in other articles within this special issue, in terms of data selection criteria, characteristics of the models and predicted peak ground and response spectral accelerations. Comparisons are also made with predictions from the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) models to which the models presented here have similarities (e.g. a common master database has been used) but also differences (e.g. some models in this issue are nonparametric). As a result of the differing data selection criteria and derivation techniques the predicted median ground motions show considerable differences (up to a factor of two for certain scenarios), particularly for magnitudes and distances close to or beyond the range of the available observations. The predicted influence of style-of-faulting shows much variation among models whereas site amplification factors are more similar, with peak amplification at around 1s. These differences are greater than those among predictions from the NGA models. The models for aleatory variability (sigma), however, are similar and suggest that ground-motion variability from this region is slightly higher than that predicted by the NGA models, based primarily on data from California and Taiwan.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{RodriguezMarekRathjeBommeretal.2014,
  author    = {Rodriguez-Marek, A. and Rathje, E. M. and Bommer, Julian J. and Scherbaum, Frank and Stafford, P. J.},
  title     = {Application of single-station sigma and site-response characterization in a probabilistic Seismic-Hazard analysis for new uclear site},
  series = {Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America},
  volume    = {104},
  journal   = {Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Seismological Society of America},
  address   = {Albany},
  issn      = {0037-1106},
  doi       = {10.1785/0120130196},
  pages     = {1601 -- 1619},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {Aleatory variability in ground-motion prediction, represented by the standard deviation (sigma) of a ground-motion prediction equation, exerts a very strong influence on the results of probabilistic seismic-hazard analysis (PSHA). This is especially so at the low annual exceedance frequencies considered for nuclear facilities; in these cases, even small reductions in sigma can have a marked effect on the hazard estimates. Proper separation and quantification of aleatory variability and epistemic uncertainty can lead to defensible reductions in sigma. One such approach is the single-station sigma concept, which removes that part of sigma corresponding to repeatable site-specific effects. However, the site-to-site component must then be constrained by site-specific measurements or else modeled as epistemic uncertainty and incorporated into the modeling of site effects. The practical application of the single-station sigma concept, including the characterization of the dynamic properties of the site and the incorporation of site-response effects into the hazard calculations, is illustrated for a PSHA conducted at a rock site under consideration for the potential construction of a nuclear power plant.},
  language  = {en}
}