4.5 Article

Prospective Evaluation of Global Earthquake Forecast Models: 2 Yrs of Observations Provide Preliminary Support for Merging Smoothed Seismicity with Geodetic Strain Rates

期刊

SEISMOLOGICAL RESEARCH LETTERS
卷 89, 期 4, 页码 1262-1271

出版社

SEISMOLOGICAL SOC AMER
DOI: 10.1785/0220180051

关键词

-

资金

  1. Global Earthquake Model (GEM) foundation
  2. King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) [URF/1/2160-01-01]
  3. Directorate For Geosciences
  4. Division Of Earth Sciences [1600087] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The global earthquake activity rate (GEAR1) seismicity model uses an optimized combination of geodetic strain rates, hypotheses about converting strain rates to seismicity rates from plate tectonics, and earthquake-catalog data to estimate global M-w >= 5.767 shallow (<= 70 km) seismicity rates. It comprises two parent models: a strain rate-based model and a smoothed-seismicity based model. The GEAR1 model was retrospectively evaluated and calibrated using earthquake data from 2005 to 2012, resulting in a preferred log-linear multiplicative combination of the parent forecasts. Since 1 October 2015, the GEAR1 model has undergone prospective evaluation within the Collab-oratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability (CSEP) testing center, forecasting M-w >= 5.95 seismicity. We present initial prospective forecast test results for the GEAR1 model, its tectonic and seismicity components, and for the first iteration of the strain-rate-based model, during the 1 October 2015-7 September 2017 period. During the evaluation period, observed earthquakes are consistent with the GEAR1 forecast and comparative test results likewise support that GEAR1 is more informative than either of its components alone. Based on a combination of retrospective and prospective testing, the tectonic forecasts do not effectively anticipate observed spatial earthquake distribution, largely due to overlocalization of the model with respect to observed earthquake distributions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据