Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (53) (remove)
Year of publication
Language
- English (53)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (53)
Keywords
- KiK-net (3)
- Aleatory variability (2)
- Earthquake hazards (2)
- Europe (2)
- Ground-motion prediction equations (2)
- Site effects (2)
- Amplification (1)
- Attenuation (1)
- Body waves (1)
- Crustal earthquakes (1)
- DIN EN 1998-1/NA (1)
- Earthquake (1)
- Earthquake ground motions (1)
- Earthquake source observations (1)
- Empirical site amplification functions (1)
- Epistemic uncertainty (1)
- European strong motion data (1)
- Expert judgment (1)
- Fuzzy logic (1)
- GMPE (1)
- GPS (1)
- Germany (1)
- Ground Motion Prediction Equation (1)
- Ground motion (1)
- Ground motion prediction equation (1)
- Ground-motion models (1)
- HVSR (1)
- Inverse Theory (1)
- Japan subduction zone (1)
- Kappa (1)
- Kinematics of crustal (1)
- Logic trees (1)
- Middle East (1)
- Mixed-effects regression (1)
- Model selection (1)
- Neural networks (1)
- Nonlinear site response (1)
- North America (1)
- Residual analysis (1)
- Seismic hazard (1)
- Seismic hazard assessment (1)
- Seismic load parameters (1)
- Seismicity (1)
- Seismicity and tectonic (1)
- Seismicity and tectonics (1)
- Single station sigma (1)
- Site amplification (1)
- Site classification (1)
- Site proxy (1)
- Site response (1)
- Site-condition proxies (1)
- Spectral clustering analysis (1)
- Statistical Methods (1)
- Stochastic model (1)
- Stress parameter (1)
- Strong-motion data (1)
- Style of faulting (1)
- Surface-to-borehole spectral ratios (1)
- Time-series analysis (1)
- Uncertainty (1)
- Variability (1)
- Wave propagation (1)
- earthquake (1)
- epistemic (1)
- ground motion (1)
- ground motion models (1)
- ground motion prediction equations (1)
- ground response analysis (1)
- ground-motion modelling (1)
- hybrid modelling (1)
- mantle deformation (1)
- precursor (1)
- random vibration (1)
- regionalisation (1)
- scenario (1)
- seismology (1)
- site amplification (1)
- site effects (1)
- stable craton (1)
- subduction (1)
- subduction interface (1)
- tectonics (1)
- theory (1)
- uncertainty (1)
Institute
- Institut für Geowissenschaften (53) (remove)
This study aims to identify the best-performing site characterization proxy alternative and complementary to the conventional 30 m average shear-wave velocity V-S30, as well as the optimal combination of proxies in characterizing linear site response. Investigated proxies include T-0 (site fundamental period obtained from earthquake horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratios), V-Sz (measured average shear-wave velocities to depth z, z = 5, 10, 20 and 30 m), Z(0.8) and Z(1.0) (measured site depths to layers having shear-wave velocity 0.8 and 1.0 km/s, respectively), as well as Z(x-infer) (inferred site depths from a regional velocity model, x = 0.8 and 1.0, 1.5 and 2.5 km/s). To evaluate the performance of a site proxy or a combination, a total of 1840 surface-borehole recordings is selected from KiK-net database. Site amplifications are derived using surface-to-borehole response-, Fourier- and cross-spectral ratio techniques and then are compared across approaches. Next, the efficacies of 7 single-proxies and 11 proxy-pairs are quantified based on the site-to-site standard deviation of amplification residuals of observation about prediction using the proxy or the pair. Our results show that T-0 is the best-performing single-proxy among T-0, Z(0.8), Z(1.0) and V-Sz. Meanwhile, T-0 is also the best-performing proxy among T-0, Z(0.8), Z(1.0) and Z(x-infer) complementary to V-S30 in accounting for the residual amplification after V-S30-correction. Besides, T-0 alone can capture most of the site effects and should be utilized as the primary site indicator. Though (T-0, V-S30) is the best-performing proxy pair among (V-S30, T-0), (V-S30, Z(0.8)), (V-S30, Z(1.0)), (V-S30, Z(x-infer)) and (T-0, V-Sz), it is only slightly better than (T-0, V-S20). Considering both efficacy and engineering utility, the combination of T-0 (primary) and V-S20 (secondary) is recommended. Further study is needed to test the performances of various proxies on sites in deep sedimentary basins.
The aim of this paper is to investigate the ability of various site-condition proxies (SCPs) to reduce ground-motion aleatory variability and evaluate how SCPs capture nonlinearity site effects. The SCPs used here are time-averaged shear-wave velocity in the top 30 m (V-S30), the topographical slope (slope), the fundamental resonance frequency (f(0)) and the depth beyond which V-s exceeds 800 m/s (H800). We considered first the performance of each SCP taken alone and then the combined performance of the 6 SCP pairs [V-S30-f(0)], [V-S30-H-800], [f(0)-slope], [H-800-slope], [V-S30-slope] and [f(0)-H-800]. This analysis is performed using a neural network approach including a random effect applied on a KiK-net subset for derivation of ground-motion prediction equations setting the relationship between various ground-motion parameters such as peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity and pseudo-spectral acceleration PSA (T), and Mw, RJB, focal depth and SCPs. While the choice of SCP is found to have almost no impact on the median groundmotion prediction, it does impact the level of aleatory uncertainty. VS30 is found to perform the best of single proxies at short periods (T < 0.6 s), while f(0) and H-800 perform better at longer periods; considering SCP pairs leads to significant improvements, with particular emphasis on [V-S30-H-800] and [f(0)-slope] pairs. The results also indicate significant nonlinearity on the site terms for soft sites and that the most relevant loading parameter for characterising nonlinear site response is the "stiff" spectral ordinate at the considered period.
Accelerometric data from the well-studied valley EUROSEISTEST are used to investigate ground motion uncertainty and variability. We define a simple local ground motion prediction equation (GMPE) and investigate changes in standard deviation (σ) and its components, the between-event variability (τ) and within-event variability (φ). Improving seismological metadata significantly reduces τ (30–50%), which in turn reduces the total σ. Improving site information reduces the systematic site-to-site variability, φ S2S (20–30%), in turn reducing φ, and ultimately, σ. Our values of standard deviations are lower than global values from literature, and closer to path-specific than site-specific values. However, our data have insufficient azimuthal coverage for single-path analysis. Certain stations have higher ground-motion variability, possibly due to topography, basin edge or downgoing wave effects. Sensitivity checks show that 3 recordings per event is a sufficient data selection criterion, however, one of the dataset’s advantages is the large number of recordings per station (9–90) that yields good site term estimates. We examine uncertainty components binning our data with magnitude from 0.01 to 2 s; at smaller magnitudes, τ decreases and φ SS increases, possibly due to κ and source-site trade-offs Finally, we investigate the alternative approach of computing φ SS using existing GMPEs instead of creating an ad hoc local GMPE. This is important where data are insufficient to create one, or when site-specific PSHA is performed. We show that global GMPEs may still capture φ SS , provided that: (1) the magnitude scaling errors are accommodated by the event terms; (2) there are no distance scaling errors (use of a regionally applicable model). Site terms (φ S2S ) computed by different global GMPEs (using different site-proxies) vary significantly, especially for hard-rock sites. This indicates that GMPEs may be poorly constrained where they are sometimes most needed, i.e., for hard rock.
The selection of earthquake focal mechanisms (FMs) for stress tensor inversion (STI) is commonly done on a spatial basis, that is, hypocentres. However, this selection approach may include data that are undesired, for example, by mixing events that are caused by different stress tensors when for the STI a single stress tensor is assumed. Due to the significant increase of FM data in the past decades, objective data-driven data selection is feasible, allowing more refined FM catalogues that avoid these issues and provide data weights for the STI routines. We present the application of angular classification with expectation-maximization (ACE) as a tool for data selection. ACE identifies clusters of FM without a priori information. The identified clusters can be used for the classification of the style-of-faulting and as weights of the FM data. We demonstrate that ACE effectively selects data that can be associated with a single stress tensor. Two application examples are given for weighted STI from South America. We use the resulting clusters and weights as a priori information for an STI for these regions and show that uncertainties of the stress tensor estimates are reduced significantly.
The Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe (SHARE) project, which began in June 2009, aims at establishing new standards for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment in the Euro-Mediterranean region. In this context, a logic tree for ground-motion prediction in Europe has been constructed. Ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs) and weights have been determined so that the logic tree captures epistemic uncertainty in ground-motion prediction for six different tectonic regimes in Europe. Here we present the strategy that we adopted to build such a logic tree. This strategy has the particularity of combining two complementary and independent approaches: expert judgment and data testing. A set of six experts was asked to weight pre-selected GMPEs while the ability of these GMPEs to predict available data was evaluated with the method of Scherbaum et al. (Bull Seismol Soc Am 99:3234-3247, 2009). Results of both approaches were taken into account to commonly select the smallest set of GMPEs to capture the uncertainty in ground-motion prediction in Europe. For stable continental regions, two models, both from eastern North America, have been selected for shields, and three GMPEs from active shallow crustal regions have been added for continental crust. For subduction zones, four models, all non-European, have been chosen. Finally, for active shallow crustal regions, we selected four models, each of them from a different host region but only two of them were kept for long periods. In most cases, a common agreement has been also reached for the weights. In case of divergence, a sensitivity analysis of the weights on the seismic hazard has been conducted, showing that once the GMPEs have been selected, the associated set of weights has a smaller influence on the hazard.
The basic seismic load parameters for the upcoming national design regulation for DIN EN 1998-1/NA result from the reassessment of the seismic hazard supported by the German Institution for Civil Engineering (DIBt). This 2016 version of the national seismic hazard assessment for Germany is based on a comprehensive involvement of all accessible uncertainties in models and parameters and includes the provision of a rational framework for integrating ranges of epistemic uncertainties and aleatory variabilities in a comprehensive and transparent way. The developed seismic hazard model incorporates significant improvements over previous versions. It is based on updated and extended databases, it includes robust methods to evolve sets of models representing epistemic uncertainties, and a selection of the latest generation of ground motion prediction equations. The new earthquake model is presented here, which consists of a logic tree with 4040 end branches and essential innovations employed for a realistic approach. The output specifications were designed according to the user oriented needs as suggested by two review teams supervising the entire project. Seismic load parameters, for rock conditions of nu(S30) = 800 m/s, are calculated for three hazard levels (10, 5 and 2% probability of occurrence or exceedance within 50 years) and delivered in the form of uniform hazard spectra, within the spectral period range 0.02-3 s, and seismic hazard maps for peak ground acceleration, spectral response accelerations and for macroseismic intensities. Results are supplied as the mean, the median and the 84th percentile. A broad analysis of resulting uncertainties of calculated seismic load parameters is included. The stability of the hazard maps with respect to previous versions and the cross-border comparison is emphasized.
We present the results of a consistency check performed over the flatfile extracted from the engineering strong motion (ESM) database. The flatfile includes 23,014 recordings from 2179 earthquakes in the magnitude range from 3.5 to 7.8 that occurred since the 1970s in Europe and Middle East, as presented in the companion article by Lanzano et al. (Bull Earthq Eng, 2018a). The consistency check is developed by analyzing different residual distributions obtained from ad-hoc ground motion prediction equations for the absolute spectral acceleration (SA), displacement and Fourier amplitude spectra (FAS). Only recordings from earthquakes shallower than 40 km are considered in the analysis. The between-event, between-station and event-and-station corrected residuals are computed by applying a mixed-effect regression. We identified those earthquakes, stations, and recordings showing the largest deviations from the GMPE median predictions, and also evaluated the statistical uncertainty on the median model to get insights on the applicable magnitude–distance ranges and the usable period (or frequency) range. We observed that robust median predictions are obtained up to 8 s for SA and up to 20 Hz for FAS, although median predictions for Mw ≥ 7 show significantly larger uncertainties with ‘bumps’ starting above 5 s for SA and below 0.3 Hz for FAS. The between-station variance dominates over the other residual variances, and the dependence of the between-station residuals on logarithm of Vs30 is well-described by a piece-wise linear function with period-dependent slopes and hinge velocity around 580 m/s. Finally, we compared the between-event residuals obtained by considering two different sources of moment magnitude. The results show that, at long periods, the between-event terms from the two regressions have a weak correlation and the overall between-event variability is dissimilar, highlighting the importance of magnitude source in the regression results.
The estimation of minimum-misfit stochastic models from empirical ground-motion prediction equations
(2006)
In areas of moderate to low seismic activity there is commonly a lack of recorded strong ground motion. As a consequence, the prediction of ground motion expected for hypothetical future earthquakes is often performed by employing empirical models from other regions. In this context, Campbell's hybrid empirical approach (Campbell, 2003, 2004) provides a methodological framework to adapt ground-motion prediction equations to arbitrary target regions by using response spectral host-to-target-region-conversion filters. For this purpose, the empirical ground-motion prediction equation has to be quantified in terms of a stochastic model. The problem we address here is how to do this in a systematic way and how to assess the corresponding uncertainties. For the determination of the model parameters we use a genetic algorithm search. The stochastic model spectra were calculated by using a speed-optimized version of SMSIM (Boore, 2000). For most of the empirical ground-motion models, we obtain sets of stochastic models that match the empirical models within the full magnitude and distance ranges of their generating data sets fairly well. The overall quality of fit and the resulting model parameter sets strongly depend on the particular choice of the distance metric used for the stochastic model. We suggest the use of the hypocentral distance metric for the stochastic Simulation of strong ground motion because it provides the lowest-misfit stochastic models for most empirical equations. This is in agreement with the results of two recent studies of hypocenter locations in finite-source models which indicate that hypocenters are often located close to regions of large slip (Mai et al., 2005; Manighetti et al., 2005). Because essentially all empirical ground-motion prediction equations contain data from different geographical regions, the model parameters corresponding to the lowest-misfit stochastic models cannot necessarily be expected to represent single, physically realizable host regions but to model the generating data sets in an average way. In addition, the differences between the lowest-misfit stochastic models and the empirical ground-motion prediction equation are strongly distance, magnitude, and frequency dependent, which, according to the laws of uncertainty propagation, will increase the variance of the corresponding hybrid empirical model predictions (Scherbaum et al., 2005). As a consequence, the selection of empirical ground-motion models for host-to-target-region conversions requires considerable judgment of the ground-motion analyst