Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · 70189908

Uncertainty, variability, and earthquake physics in ground‐motion prediction equations

Abstract

Residuals between ground‐motion data and ground‐motion prediction equations (GMPEs) can be decomposed into terms representing earthquake source, path, and site effects. These terms can be cast in terms of repeatable (epistemic) residuals and the random (aleatory) components. Identifying the repeatable residuals leads to a GMPE with reduced uncertainty for a specific source, site, or path location, which in turn can yield a lower hazard level at small probabilities of exceedance. We illustrate a schematic framework for this residual partitioning with a dataset from the ANZA network, which straddles the central San Jacinto fault in southern California. The dataset consists of more than 3200 1.15≤ M ≤3 earthquakes and their peak ground accelerations (PGAs), recorded at close distances ( R ≤20 km). We construct a small‐magnitude GMPE for these PGA data, incorporating V S 30 site conditions and geometrical spreading. Identification and removal of the repeatable source, path, and site terms yield an overall reduction in the standard deviation from 0.97 (in ln units) to 0.44, for a nonergodic assumption, that is, for a single‐source location, single site, and single path. We give examples of relationships between independent seismological observables and the repeatable terms. We find a correlation between location‐based source terms and stress drops in the San Jacinto fault zone region; an explanation of the site term as a function of kappa, the near‐site attenuation parameter; and a suggestion that the path component can be related directly to elastic structure. These correlations allow the repeatable source location, site, and path terms to be determined a priori using independent geophysical relationships. Those terms could be incorporated into location‐specific GMPEs for more accurate and precise ground‐motion prediction.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Annemarie S. Baltay, Thomas C. Hanks, Norm A. Abrahamson. 2017-05-30. Uncertainty, variability, and earthquake physics in ground‐motion prediction equations. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120160164

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗