Geology topics

Behzad Hassani

Publications and source records attributed to Behzad Hassani.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2024

Are the horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratios of earthquakes and microtremors the same?

We consider the similarities and differences between earthquake and microtremor horizontal‐to‐vertical spectral ratios (eHVSR and mHVSR, respectively) using a dataset of 161 sites in southern California. Quantitative comparisons are made in terms of the eHVSR and mHVSR lognormal median curves, as well as the frequencies and amplitudes associated with the fundamental‐ and higher‐mode resonances where present. The results show only 58% of the eHVSR–mHVSR pairs agree in terms of their median curve and only 25% of the eHVSR–mHVSR pairs agree in terms of shared resonances, which increases to 68% if flat HVSRs are considered equivalent. Furthermore, while the shared resonances match very well in terms of frequency (root mean square error, RMSE, <0.11 Hz), the amplitudes of those resonances do not agree (RMSE >1.6). These findings demonstrate that while eHVSR and mHVSR agree at some sites, they are not equivalent at all sites. To investigate if the agreement between eHVSR and mHVSR could be related to features of the microtremor data, earthquake recordings, and/or the site conditions, three machine learning (ML) models at varying levels of interpretability are presented. The ML models—which include multivariate logistic regression, gradient‐boosted trees, and support vector machines—show only partial success at using site‐specific data to predict whether eHVSR and mHVSR will likely agree in terms of their median curve (accuracy of 78%) and number of resonances (accuracy of 84%). Therefore, we conclude that while eHVSR and mHVSR can be quite similar in terms of resonant frequencies at some sites, they are not identical at all sites. Furthermore, preliminary evidence shows that the agreement of eHVSR and mHVSR can be predicted a priori given features of the microtremor measurements, earthquake recordings, and site conditions, although a larger dataset will be necessary for developing a robust predictive model.

California↗

USGS2022

Comparisons of the NGA-Subduction ground motion models

In this article, ground-motion models (GMMs) for subduction earthquakes recently developed as part of the Next Generation Attenuation-Subduction (NGA-Sub) project are compared. The four models presented in this comparison study are documented in their respective articles submitted along with this article. Each of these four models is based on the analysis of the large NGA-Sub database. Three of the four current models are developed for a global version as well as separate regionalized models. The fourth model was developed based on earthquakes only from Japan, and as such is applicable only for Japan. As part of this comparison study, a general discussion on the parameterization of the four models and the regionalization of the three models is provided. The specific strengths and or weaknesses or the technical decisions and justifications of any one model are not part of this comparison. A selected suite of deterministic attenuation curves and spectra are presented for the models along with a selected suite of currently used subduction models. A limited number of comparisons are presented in this article with a larger number of comparisons and the digital values provided in the electronic attachment. In addition to these scenario calculation comparisons, the results from a standard probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) for two sites located in the Pacific Northwest Region in the state of Washington are presented. These calculations highlight the potential impact of using the new GMMs. Based on the comparisons presented here, a general understanding of these new GMMs can be obtained with the expectation that the implementation of a specific seismic hazard study should incorporate similar and additional comparisons and sensitivity studies pertinent to the site of interest.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2021

NGA-subduction global ground motion models with regional adjustment factors

We develop semi-empirical ground motion models (GMMs) for peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and 5%-damped pseudo-spectral accelerations for periods from 0.01 to 10 s, for the median orientation-independent horizontal component of subduction earthquake ground motion. The GMMs are applicable to interface and intraslab subduction earthquakes in Japan, Taiwan, Mexico, Central America, South America, Alaska, the Aleutian Islands, and Cascadia. The GMMs are developed using a combination of data inspection, data regression with respect to physics-informed functions, ground-motion simulations, and geometrical constraints for certain model components. The GMMs capture observed differences in source and path effects for interface and intraslab events, conditioned on moment magnitude, rupture distance, and hypocentral depth. Site effect and aleatory variability models are shared between event types. Regionalized GMM components include the model constant (that controls ground motion amplitude), anelastic attenuation, magnitude-scaling break point, linear site response, and sediment depth terms. We develop models for the aleatory between-event variability ( τ ) "> ( τ ) , within-event variability ( ϕ ) "> ( ϕ ) , single-station within-event variability ( ϕ SS ) "> ( ϕ SS ) , and site-to-site variability ( ϕ S 2 S ) "> ( ϕ S 2 S ) . Ergodic analyses should use the median GMM and aleatory variability computed using the between-event and within-event variability models. An analysis incorporating non-ergodic site response should use the median GMM at the reference shear-wave velocity condition, a site-specific site response model, and aleatory variability computed using the between-event and single-station within-event variability models. Epistemic uncertainty in the median model is represented by standard deviations on the regional model constants, which facilitates scaled-backbone representations of model uncertainty in hazard analyses.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS2019

Comparison of site dominant frequency from earthquake and microseismic data in California

An important predictive variable for site amplification is the site dominant frequency ( ⁠ƒ d ⁠ ). At seismic monitoring stations, ƒ d can be calculated from the peak of the horizontal‐to‐vertical spectral ratios (HVSRs) obtained from earthquake recordings (eHVSR). For other sites, ƒ d can be estimated from microseismic (mHVSR) observations. We compare the ƒ d values derived from eHVSR (5% damped response spectra from the Next Generation Attenuation‐West2 [NGA‐West2] database; Ancheta et al. , 2014 ) with those derived from mHVSR (Fourier spectra from Yong et al. , 2013 ) for seismic stations in California. We show that the logarithm of eHVSR ƒ d scales linearly with the logarithm of mHVSR ƒ d ⁠ , with a standard deviation of 0.14log 10 units for mHVSR ƒ d larger than 0.2 Hz. The relationship holds for microseismic surveys at distances up to 300 m away from the seismic stations. The results of this study have beneficial implications for the characterization of site response in modern ground‐motion models as well as in building codes.

California↗