Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (15)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (15)
Language
- English (15)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (15)
Keywords
- Ground-motion prediction equations (2)
- Aleatory variability (1)
- Attenuation (1)
- Crustal earthquakes (1)
- Epistemic uncertainty (1)
- Europe (1)
- Expert judgment (1)
- Ground-motion models (1)
- Kappa (1)
- Logic trees (1)
Institute
One of the major challenges in engineering seismology is the reliable prediction of site-specific ground motion for particular earthquakes, observed at specific distances. For larger events, a special problem arises, at short distances, with the source-to-site distance measure, because distance metrics based on a point-source model are no longer appropriate. As a consequence, different attenuation relations differ in the distance metric that they use. In addition to being a source of confusion, this causes problems to quantitatively compare or combine different ground- motion models; for example, in the context of Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment, in cases where ground-motion models with different distance metrics occupy neighboring branches of a logic tree. In such a situation, very crude assumptions about source sizes and orientations often have to be used to be able to derive an estimate of the particular metric required. Even if this solves the problem of providing a number to put into the attenuation relation, a serious problem remains. When converting distance measures, the corresponding uncertainties map onto the estimated ground motions according to the laws of error propagation. To make matters worse, conversion of distance metrics can cause the uncertainties of the adapted ground-motion model to become magnitude and distance dependent, even if they are not in the original relation. To be able to treat this problem quantitatively, the variability increase caused by the distance metric conversion has to be quantified. For this purpose, we have used well established scaling laws to determine explicit distance conversion relations using regression analysis on simulated data. We demonstrate that, for all practical purposes, most popular distance metrics can be related to the Joyner-Boore distance using models based on gamma distributions to express the shape of some "residual function." The functional forms are magnitude and distance dependent and are expressed as polynomials. We compare the performance of these relations with manually derived individual distance estimates for the Landers, the Imperial Valley, and the Chi-Chi earthquakes
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
The use of ground-motion-prediction equations to estimate ground shaking has become a very popular approach for seismic-hazard assessment, especially in the framework of a logic-tree approach. Owing to the large number of existing published ground-motion models, however, the selection and ranking of appropriate models for a particular target area often pose serious practical problems. Here we show how observed around-motion records can help to guide this process in a systematic and comprehensible way. A key element in this context is a new, likelihood based, goodness-of-fit measure that has the property not only to quantify the model fit but also to measure in some degree how well the underlying statistical model assumptions are met. By design, this measure naturally scales between 0 and 1, with a value of 0.5 for a situation in which the model perfectly matches the sample distribution both in terms of mean and standard deviation. We have used it in combination with other goodness-of-fit measures to derive a simple classification scheme to quantify how well a candidate ground-rnotion-prediction equation models a particular set of observed-response spectra. This scheme is demonstrated to perform well in recognizing a number of popular ground-motion models from their rock-site- recording, subsets. This indicates its potential for aiding the assignment of logic-tree weights in a consistent and reproducible way. We have applied our scheme to the border region of France, Germany, and Switzerland where the M-w 4.8 St. Die earthquake of 22 February 2003 in eastern France recently provided a small set of observed-response spectra. These records are best modeled by the ground-motion-prediction equation of Berge-Thierry et al. (2003), which is based on the analysis of predominantly European data. The fact that the Swiss model of Bay et al. (2003) is not able to model the observed records in an acceptable way may indicate general problems arising from the use of weak-motion data for strong-motion prediction
Composite ground-motion models and logic trees: Methodology, sensitivities, and uncertainties
(2005)
Logic trees have become a popular tool in seismic hazard studies. Commonly, the models corresponding to the end branches of the complete logic tree in a probabalistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) are treated separately until the final calculation of the set of hazard curves. This comes at the price that information regarding sensitivities and uncertainties in the ground-motion sections of the logic tree are only obtainable after disaggregation. Furthermore, from this end-branch model perspective even the designers of the logic tree cannot directly tell what ground-motion scenarios most likely would result from their logic trees for a given earthquake at a particular distance, nor how uncertain these scenarios might be or how they would be affected by the choices of the hazard analyst. On the other hand, all this information is already implicitly present in the logic tree. Therefore, with the ground-motion perspective that we propose in the present article, we treat the ground-motion sections of a complete logic tree for seismic hazard as a single composite model representing the complete state-of-knowledge-and-belief of a particular analyst on ground motion in a particular target region. We implement this view by resampling the ground-motion models represented in the ground-motion sections of the logic tree by Monte Carlo simulation (separately for the median values and the sigma values) and then recombining the sets of simulated values in proportion to their logic-tree branch weights. The quantiles of this resampled composite model provide the hazard analyst and the decision maker with a simple, clear, and quantitative representation of the overall physical meaning of the ground-motion section of a logic tree and the accompanying epistemic uncertainty. Quantiles of the composite model also provide an easy way to analyze the sensitivities and uncertainties related to a given logic-tree model. We illustrate this for a composite ground- motion model for central Europe. Further potential fields of applications are seen wherever individual best estimates of ground motion have to be derived from a set of candidate models, for example, for hazard rnaps, sensitivity studies, or for modeling scenario earthquakes
The PEGASOS project was a major international seismic hazard study, one of the largest ever conducted anywhere in the world, to assess seismic hazard at four nuclear power plant sites in Switzerland. Before the report of this project has become publicly available, a paper attacking both methodology and results has appeared. Since the general scientific readership may have difficulty in assessing this attack in the absence of the report being attacked, we supply a response in the present paper. The bulk of the attack, besides some misconceived arguments about the role of uncertainties in seismic hazard analysis, is carried by some exercises that purport to be validation exercises. In practice, they are no such thing; they are merely independent sets of hazard calculations based on varying assumptions and procedures, often rather questionable, which come up with various different answers which have no particular significance. (C) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved
Seismic-hazard assessment is of great importance within the field of engineering seismology. Nowadays, it is common practice to define future seismic demands using probabilistic seismic-hazard analysis (PSHA). Often it is neither obvious nor transparent how PSHA responds to changes in its inputs. In addition, PSHA relies on many uncertain inputs. Sensitivity analysis (SA) is concerned with the assessment and quantification of how changes in the model inputs affect the model response and how input uncertainties influence the distribution of the model response. Sensitivity studies are challenging primarily for computational reasons; hence, the development of efficient methods is of major importance. Powerful local (deterministic) methods widely used in other fields can make SA feasible, even for complex models with a large number of inputs; for example, automatic/algorithmic differentiation (AD)-based adjoint methods. Recently developed derivative-based global sensitivity measures can combine the advantages of such local SA methods with efficient sampling strategies facilitating quantitative global sensitivity analysis (GSA) for complex models. In our study, we propose and implement exactly this combination. It allows an upper bounding of the sensitivities involved in PSHA globally and, therefore, an identification of the noninfluential and the most important uncertain inputs. To the best of our knowledge, it is the first time that derivative-based GSA measures are combined with AD in practice. In addition, we show that first-order uncertainty propagation using the delta method can give satisfactory approximations of global sensitivity measures and allow a rough characterization of the model output distribution in the case of PSHA. An illustrative example is shown for the suggested derivative-based GSA of a PSHA that uses stochastic ground-motion simulations.
In this article, we address the question of how observed ground-motion data can most effectively be modeled for engineering seismological purposes. Toward this goal, we use a data-driven method, based on a deep-learning autoencoder with a variable number of nodes in the bottleneck layer, to determine how many parameters are needed to reconstruct synthetic and observed ground-motion data in terms of their median values and scatter. The reconstruction error as a function of the number of nodes in the bottleneck is used as an indicator of the underlying dimensionality of ground-motion data, that is, the minimum number of predictor variables needed in a ground-motion model. Two synthetic and one observed datasets are studied to prove the performance of the proposed method. We find that mapping ground-motion data to a 2D manifold primarily captures magnitude and distance information and is suited for an approximate data reconstruction. The data reconstruction improves with an increasing number of bottleneck nodes of up to three and four, but it saturates if more nodes are added to the bottleneck.
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.
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.
We have analyzed the recently developed pan-European strong motion database, RESORCE-2012: spectral parameters, such as stress drop (stress parameter, Delta sigma), anelastic attenuation (Q), near surface attenuation (kappa(0)) and site amplification have been estimated from observed strong motion recordings. The selected dataset exhibits a bilinear distance-dependent Q model with average kappa(0) value 0.0308 s. Strong regional variations in inelastic attenuation were also observed: frequency-independent Q(0) of 1462 and 601 were estimated for Turkish and Italian data respectively. Due to the strong coupling between Q and kappa(0), the regional variations in Q have strong impact on the estimation of near surface attenuation kappa(0). kappa(0) was estimated as 0.0457 and 0.0261 s for Turkey and Italy respectively. Furthermore, a detailed analysis of the variability in estimated kappa(0) revealed significant within-station variability. The linear site amplification factors were constrained from residual analysis at each station and site-class type. Using the regional Q(0) model and a site-class specific kappa(0), seismic moments (M-0) and source corner frequencies f (c) were estimated from the site corrected empirical Fourier spectra. Delta sigma did not exhibit magnitude dependence. The median Delta sigma value was obtained as 5.75 and 5.65 MPa from inverted and database magnitudes respectively. A comparison of response spectra from the stochastic model (derived herein) with that from (regional) ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs) suggests that the presented seismological parameters can be used to represent the corresponding seismological attributes of the regional GMPEs in a host-to-target adjustment framework. The analysis presented herein can be considered as an update of that undertaken for the previous Euro-Mediterranean strong motion database presented by Edwards and Fah (Geophys J Int 194(2):1190-1202, 2013a).