Exploring the proximity of ground-motion models using high-dimensional visualization techniques

Earthquake Spectra

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 1117-1138

  Scherbaum, Frank ^a   Kuehn, Nicolas M ^a   Ohrnberger, Matthias ^a   Koehler, Andreas ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF POTSDAM   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HAZARDS; INFORMATION SYSTEMS; MAPPING; SCALES (WEIGHING INSTRUMENTS); UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; VISUALIZATION;

EPISTEMIC UNCERTAINTIES; GROUND MOTION CHARACTERISTICS; GROUND MOTION MODEL; INFORMATION VISUALIZATION; SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS; SELF-ORGANIZING MAPPING; TWO-DIMENSIONAL MAP; VISUALIZATION TECHNIQUE;

COMPUTER CIRCUITS;

EID: 79251520988     PISSN: 87552930     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1193/1.3478697     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Abrahamson, N. A., and Silva, W. J., 1997. Empirical response spectral attenuation relations for shallow crustal earthquakes, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68, 94-127.
2. Abrahamson, N. A., and Silva, W. J., 2008. Summary of the Abrahamson & Silva NGA groundmotion relations, Earthquake Spectra 24, 67-97.
3. Akkar, S., and Bommer, J. J., 2007. Prediction of elastic displacement response spectra in Europe and the Middle East, Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 36, 1275-1301.
4. Ambraseys, N., Douglas, J., Sarma, S. K., and Smit, P., 2005. Equations for the estimation of strong ground motions from shallow crustal earthquakes using data from Europe and Middle East: Horizontal peak ground acceleration and spectral acceleration, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 3, 1-53. (Pubitemid 40550640)
5. Atkinson, G. M., and Boore, D. M., 2006. Earthquake ground-motion prediction equations for eastern North America, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97, 2181-2205.
6. Atkinson, G. M., 2008. Ground-motion prediction equations for eastern North America from a referenced empirical approach: Implications for epistemic uncertainty, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, 1304-1318.
7. Beyer, K., and Bommer, J. J., 2006. Relationships between median values and between aleatory variabilities for Different Definitions of the Horizontal Component of Motion, 10.1785/0120050210, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96, 1512-1522 c7 c7a c7b
8. -, Erratum 2007, 97, 1769.
9. Bommer, J. J., Scherbaum, F., Bungum, H., Cotton, F., Sabetta, F., and Abrahamson, N. A., 2005. On the use of logic trees for ground-motion prediction equations in seismic-hazard analysis, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95, 377-389.
10. Bommer, J. J., and Scherbaum, F., 2008. The use and misuse of logic trees in probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, Earthquake Spectra 24, 997-1009.
11. Bommer, J. J., Douglas, J., Scherbaum, F., Cotton, F., Bungum, H., and Fäh, D., 2010. On the selection of ground-motion prediction equations for seismic hazard analysis, Seismol. Res. Lett., under review.
12. Boore, D. M., and Atkinson, G. M., 2008. Ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods between 0.01 s and 10.0 s, Earthquake Spectra 24, 99-138.
13. Campbell, K. W., and Bozorgnia, Y., 2008. NGA ground motion model for the geometric mean horizontal component of PGA, PGV, PGD, and 5%-damped linear elastic response spectra for periods ranging from 0.01 to 10 s, Earthquake Spectra 24, 139-171.
14. Chiou, B. S. J., and Youngs, R. R., 2008. An NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra, Earthquake Spectra 24, 173-215.
15. Cotton, F., Scherbaum, F., Bommer, J. J., and Bungum, H., 2006. Criteria for selecting and adjusting ground-motion models for specific target regions: Application to Central Europe and rock sites, J. Seismol. 10, 137-156.
16. Cotton, F., Pousse, G., Bonilla, F., and Scherbaum, F., 2008. On the discrepancy of recent European ground-motion observations and predictions from empirical models: Analysis of KiK-net accelerometric data and point-sources stochastic simulations, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, 2244-2261.
17. Cover, T. M., and Thomas, J. A., 2006. Elements of Information Theory, Second Edition, Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 542 pp.
18. Douglas, J., 2004. Ground motion estimation equations 1964-2003, reissue of ESEE Report 01-1: A Comprehensive Worldwide Summary of Strong-Motion Attenuation Relationships for Peak Ground Acceleration and Spectral Ordinates (1969 to 2000), with corrections and additions, London Empirical College of Science, Technology, and Medicine.
19. Douglas, J., 2006. Errata of and additions to Ground motion estimation equations 1964-2003, Intermediary report RP-54603-FR, Orleans, France.
20. Douglas, J., 2008. Further errata of and additions to Ground motion estimation equations 1964-2003, Orleans, France.
21. Floyd, R. W., 1962. Algorithm 97: Shortest path, Commun. ACM 5, 345.
22. Idriss, I. M., 2008. An NGA empirical model for estimating the horizontal spectral values generated by shallow crustal earthquakes, Earthquake Spectra 24, 217-242.
23. Kahnemann, D., Slovic, P., and Tversky, A., 1982. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, Cambridge University Press, New York, 544 pp.
24. Kalkan, E., and Gülkan, P., 2004. Site-dependent spectra derived from ground motion records in Turkey, Earthquake Spectra 20, 1111-1138.
25. Koehler, A., Ohrnberger, M., and Scherbaum, F., 2009. Unsupervised feature selection and general pattern discovery using Self-Organizing Maps for gaining insights into the nature of seismic wavefields, Comput. Geosci., DOI:10.1016/j.cageo.2009.02.004
26. Koehler, A., Ohrnberger, M., and Scherbaum, F., 2010. Unsupervised pattern recognition in continuous seismic wavefield records using self-organizing maps, Geophys. J. Int., in press, DOI:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2010. 04709.x.
27. Kohonen, T., 2001. Self-Organizing Maps, Springer Verlag, New York.
28. Kulkarni, R. B., Youngs, R. R., and Coppersmith, K. J., 1984. Assessment of confidence intervals for results of seismic hazard analysis, paper read at the 8th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, CA.
29. McVerry, G. H., Zhao, J. X., Abrahamson, N. A., and Somerville, P. G., 2006. New Zealand acceleration response spectrum attenuation relations for crustal and subduction zone earthquakes, Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 39, 1-58.
30. Musson, R. M. W., 2009. Ground motion and probabilistic hazard, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 7, 575-589.
31. Pankow, K. L., and Pechmann, J. C., 2004. The SEA99 ground-motion predictive relations for extensional tectonic regimes: revisions and a new peak ground velocity relation, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, 341-348.
32. Pankow, K. L., and Pechmann, J. C., 2006. Erratum: The SEA99 ground-motion predictive relations for extensional tectonic regimes: Revisions and a new peak ground velocity relation, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96, 364.
33. Sammon, J. W., 1969. A nonlinear mapping for data structure analysis, IEEE Trans. Comput. C-18, 401-409.
34. Scherbaum, F., Cotton, F., and Smit, P., 2004a. On the use of response spectral-reference data for the selection of ground-motion models for seismic hazard analysis: the case of rock motion, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, 2164-2185.
35. Scherbaum, F., Schmedes, J., and Cotton, F., 2004b. On the conversion of source-to-site distance measures for extended earthquake source models, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, 1053-1069.
36. Scherbaum, F., Bommer, J. J., Bungum, H., Cotton, F., and Abrahamson, N. A., 2005. Composite ground-motion models and logic trees: Methodology, sensitivities, and uncertainties, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95, 1575-1593.
37. Scherbaum, F., Delavaud, E., and Riggelsen, C., 2009. Model delection in deismic hazard analysis: An information-theoretic perspective, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, 3234-3247.
38. Schwartz, B., 2004. The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less, Harper Perennial, New York, 304 pp.
39. Spitzer, M., 1999. The Mind within the Net: Models of Learning, Thinking, and Acting, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 375 pp.
40. Stafford, P. J., Strasser, F. O., and Bommer, J. J., 2008. An evaluation of the applicability of the NGA models to ground-motion prediction in the Euro-Mediterranean region, Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 6, 149-177.
41. Stevens, S. S., 1947. On the theory of scales of measurement, Science 103, 677-680.
42. Toro, G. R., Abrahamson, N. A., and Schneider, J. F., 1997. Model of strong ground motions from earthquakes in central and eastern North America: Best estimates and uncertainties, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68, 41-57.
43. Toro, G. R., (Toro et al.) 2002. Modification of the Toro et al. (1997) Attenuation Equations for Large Magnitudes and Short Distances, 1-10.
44. Toro, G. R., 2006. The effects of ground-motion uncertainty on seismic hazard results: Examples and approximate results, poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the Seismological Society of America, San Francisco, CA.
45. Zhao, J. X., Zhang, J., Asano, A., Ohno, Y., Oouchi, T., Takahashi, T., Ogawa, H., Irikura, K., Thio, H. K., Somerville, P. G., Fukushima, Y., and Fukushima, Y., 2006. Attenuation relations of strong ground motion in Japan using site classification based on predominant period, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96, 898-913.