@article{ShebalinNarteauZecharetal.2014,
  author    = {Shebalin, Peter N. and Narteau, Clement and Zechar, Jeremy Douglas and Holschneider, Matthias},
  title     = {Combining earthquake forecasts using differential probability gains},
  series = {Earth, planets and space},
  volume    = {66},
  journal   = {Earth, planets and space},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Heidelberg},
  issn      = {1880-5981},
  doi       = {10.1186/1880-5981-66-37},
  pages     = {14},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {We describe an iterative method to combine seismicity forecasts. With this method, we produce the next generation of a starting forecast by incorporating predictive skill from one or more input forecasts. For a single iteration, we use the differential probability gain of an input forecast relative to the starting forecast. At each point in space and time, the rate in the next-generation forecast is the product of the starting rate and the local differential probability gain. The main advantage of this method is that it can produce high forecast rates using all types of numerical forecast models, even those that are not rate-based. Naturally, a limitation of this method is that the input forecast must have some information not already contained in the starting forecast. We illustrate this method using the Every Earthquake a Precursor According to Scale (EEPAS) and Early Aftershocks Statistics (EAST) models, which are currently being evaluated at the US testing center of the Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability. During a testing period from July 2009 to December 2011 (with 19 target earthquakes), the combined model we produce has better predictive performance - in terms of Molchan diagrams and likelihood - than the starting model (EEPAS) and the input model (EAST). Many of the target earthquakes occur in regions where the combined model has high forecast rates. Most importantly, the rates in these regions are substantially higher than if we had simply averaged the models.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{ShebalinNarteauHolschneideretal.2011,
  author    = {Shebalin, Peter and Narteau, Clement and Holschneider, Matthias and Schorlemmer, Danijel},
  title     = {Short-Term earthquake forecasting using early aftershock statistics},
  series = {Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America},
  volume    = {101},
  journal   = {Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Seismological Society of America},
  address   = {El Cerrito},
  issn      = {0037-1106},
  doi       = {10.1785/0120100119},
  pages     = {297 -- 312},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {We present an alarm-based earthquake forecast model that uses the early aftershock statistics (EAST). This model is based on the hypothesis that the time delay before the onset of the power-law aftershock decay rate decreases as the level of stress and the seismogenic potential increase. Here, we estimate this time delay from < t(g)>, the time constant of the Omori-Utsu law. To isolate space-time regions with a relative high level of stress, the single local variable of our forecast model is the E-a value, the ratio between the long-term and short-term estimations of < t(g)>. When and where the E-a value exceeds a given threshold (i.e., the c value is abnormally small), an alarm is issued, and an earthquake is expected to occur during the next time step. Retrospective tests show that the EAST model has better predictive power than a stationary reference model based on smoothed extrapolation of past seismicity. The official prospective test for California started on 1 July 2009 in the testing center of the Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability (CSEP). During the first nine months, 44 M >= 4 earthquakes occurred in the testing area. For this time period, the EAST model has better predictive power than the reference model at a 1\% level of significance. Because the EAST model has also a better predictive power than several time-varying clustering models tested in CSEP at a 1\% level of significance, we suggest that our successful prospective results are not due only to the space-time clustering of aftershocks.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{ShebalinNarteauHolschneider2012,
  author    = {Shebalin, Peter and Narteau, Clement and Holschneider, Matthias},
  title     = {From alarm-based to rate-based earthquake forecast models},
  series = {Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America},
  volume    = {102},
  journal   = {Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Seismological Society of America},
  address   = {Albany},
  issn      = {0037-1106},
  doi       = {10.1785/0120110126},
  pages     = {64 -- 72},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {We propose a conversion method from alarm-based to rate-based earthquake forecast models. A differential probability gain g(alarm)(ref) is the absolute value of the local slope of the Molchan trajectory that evaluates the performance of the alarm-based model with respect to the chosen reference model. We consider that this differential probability gain is constant over time. Its value at each point of the testing region depends only on the alarm function value. The rate-based model is the product of the event rate of the reference model at this point multiplied by the corresponding differential probability gain. Thus, we increase or decrease the initial rates of the reference model according to the additional amount of information contained in the alarm-based model. Here, we apply this method to the Early Aftershock STatistics (EAST) model, an alarm-based model in which early aftershocks are used to identify space-time regions with a higher level of stress and, consequently, a higher seismogenic potential. The resulting rate-based model shows similar performance to the original alarm-based model for all ranges of earthquake magnitude in both retrospective and prospective tests. This conversion method offers the opportunity to perform all the standard evaluation tests of the earthquake testing centers on alarm-based models. In addition, we infer that it can also be used to consecutively combine independent forecast models and, with small modifications, seismic hazard maps with short- and medium-term forecasts.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{LeMouelNarteauGreffLefftzetal.2006,
  author    = {Le Mouel, Jean-Louis and Narteau, Clement and Greff-Lefftz, Marianne and Holschneider, Matthias},
  title     = {Dissipation at the core-mantle boundary on a small-scale topography},
  issn      = {0148-0227},
  doi       = {10.1029/2005jb003846},
  year      = {2006},
  abstract  = {The parameters of the nutations are now known with a good accuracy, and the theory accounts for most of their values. Dissipative friction at the core-mantle boundary (CMB) and at the inner core boundary is an important ingredient of the theory. Up to now, viscous coupling at a smooth interface and electromagnetic coupling have been considered. In some cases they appear hardly strong enough to account for the observations. We advocate here that the CMB has a small- scale roughness and estimate the dissipation resulting from the interaction of the fluid core motion with this topography. We conclude that it might be significant},
  language  = {en}
}