Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models I: First-order results

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

Volumn 103, Issue 2 A, 2013, Pages 787-798

  Zechar, Douglas ^a,e   Schorlemmer, Danijel ^b   Werner, Maximilian J ^c   Gerstenberger, Matthew C ^d   Rhoades, David A ^d   Jordan, Thomas H ^e  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b GFZ GERMAN RESEARCH CENTRE FOR GEOSCIENCES   (Germany)

^c PRINCETON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d GNS SCIENCE   (New Zealand)

^e UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COLLABORATORIES; COMPARISON TEST; CONSISTENCY TESTS; EARTHQUAKE FORECASTING; EVALUATION METRICS; MAGNITUDE DISTRIBUTION; REGIONAL EARTHQUAKES; TIME INVARIANTS;

DATA PROCESSING; EXPERIMENTS; FORECASTING;

EARTHQUAKES;

AFTERSHOCK; DATA PROCESSING; EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE; EARTHQUAKE PREDICTION; MODELING; SEISMICITY;

CALIFORNIA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84875434123     PISSN: 00371106     EISSN: 19433573     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1785/0120120186     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Bird, P., and Z. Liu (2007). Seismic hazard inferred from tectonics: California, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 37-48.
2. Clements, R. A., F. P. Schoenberg, and D. Schorlemmer (2011). Residual analysis methods for space-time point processes with applications to earthquake forecast models in California, Ann. Appl. Stat. 5, no. 4, 2549-2571, doi: 10.1214/11-AOAS487.
3. Console, R., M. Murru, F. Catalli, and G. Falcone (2007). Real time forecasts through an earthquake clustering model constrained by the rate-andstate constitutive law; comparison with a purely stochastic ETAS model, Sesimol. Res. Lett. 78, 49-56.
4. Ebel, J. E., D. W. Chambers, A. L. Kafka, and J. A. Baglivo (2007). Non-Poissonian earthquake clustering and the hidden Markov model as bases for earthquake forecasting in California, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 57-65.
5. Eberhard, D. A. J., J. D. Zechar, and S. Wiemer (2012). A prospective earthquake forecast experiment in the western Pacific, Geophys. J. Int. 190, 1579-1592, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2012.05548.x.
6. Field, E. H. (2007). Overview on the working group for the development of Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models (RELM), Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 7-16.
7. Field, E. H., T. E. Dawson, K. R. Felzer, A. D. Frankel, V. Gupta, T. H. Jordan, T. Parsons, M. D. Petersen, R. S. Stein, R. J. Weldon II, and C. J. Wills (2009). Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 2 (UCERF 2), Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, 2053-2107, doi: 10.1785/0120080049.
8. Gerstenberger, M. C., and D. A. Rhoades (2010). New Zealand earthquake forecast testing centre, Pure Appl. Geophys. 167, 877-892.
9. Gretton, A., K. Borgwardt, M. Rasch, B. Schölkopf, and A. Smola (2012). A kernel two-sample test, J. Mach. Learn. Res. 13, 723-773.
10. Harte, D., and D. Vere-Jones (2005). The entropy score and its uses in earthquake forecasting, Pure Appl. Geophys. 162, 1229-1253.
11. Hauksson, E., J. Stock, K. Hutton, W. Yang, J. Antonio Vidal-Villegas, and H. Kanamori (2011). The 2010Mw 7.2 El Mayor-Cucapah earthquake sequence, Baja California, Mexico and southernmost California, USA: Active seismotectonics along the Mexican Pacific margin, Pure Appl. Geophys. 168, 1255-1277.
12. Helmstetter, A., Y. Y. Kagan, and D. D. Jackson (2006). Comparison of short-term and time-independent earthquake forecast models for southern California, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96, 90-106.
13. Helmstetter, A., Y. Y. Kagan, and D. D. Jackson (2007). High-resolution time-independent grid-based forecast for M ≤5 earthquakes in California, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 78-86.
14. Holliday, J. R., C. C. Chen, K. F. Tiampo, J. B. Rundle, D. L. Turcotte, and A. Donnellan (2007). A RELM earthquake forecast based on pattern informatics, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 87-93.
15. Jordan, T. H. (2006). Earthquake predictability, brick by brick, Seismol. Res. Lett. 77, 3-6.
16. Kagan, Y. Y., and D. D. Jackson (1995). New Seismic gap hypothesis-5 years after, J. Geophys. Res. 100, 3943-3959.
17. Kagan, Y. Y., D. D. Jackson, and Y. Rong (2007). A testable five-year forecast of moderate and large earthquakes in southern California based on smoothed seismicity, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 94-98.
18. Lee, Y.-T., D. L. Turcotte, J. R. Holliday, M. K. Sachs, J. B. Rundle, C.-C. Chen, and K. F. Tiampo (2011). Results of the Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models (RELM) test of earthquake forecasts in California, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108, 16,533-16,538.
19. Lombardi, A. M., and W. Marzocchi (2010). The assumption of Poisson seismic-rate variability in CSEP/RELM experiments, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 100, 2293-2300.
20. Marzocchi, W., and J. D. Zechar (2011). Earthquake forecasting and earthquake prediction: different approaches for obtaining the best model, Seismol. Res. Lett. 82, 442-448.
21. Marzocchi, W., J. D. Zechar, and T. H. Jordan (2012). Bayesian forecast evaluation and ensemble earthquake forecasting, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 102, no. 6, doi: 10.1785/0120110327.
22. Mignan, A., C. Jiang, J. D. Zechar, S. Wiemer, Z. Wu, and Z. Huang (2013). Completeness of the Mainland China earthquake catalog and implications for the setup of the China Earthquake Forecast Testing Center, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 103, doi: 10.1785/0120120052.
23. Molchan, G. (2012). On the testing of seismicity models, Acta Geophys. 60, 624-637, doi: 10.2478/s11600-011-0042-0.
24. Nanjo, K. Z., H. Tsuruoka, N. Hirata, and T. H. Jordan (2011). Overview of the first earthquake forecast testing experiment in Japan, Earth Planets Space 63, 159-169.
25. Petersen, M. D., T. Cao, K. W. Campbell, and A. D. Frankel (2007). Timeindependent and time-dependent seismic hazard assessment for the State of California: Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast Model 1.0, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 99-109.
26. Reasenberg, P. A. (1985). Second-order moment of central California seismicity, 1969-1982, J. Geophys. Res. 90, 5479-5495.
27. Rhoades, D. A., D. Schorlemmer, M. C. Gerstenberger, A. Christophersen, J. D. Zechar, and M. Imoto (2011). Efficient testing of earthquake forecasting models, Acta Geophys. 59, 728-747, doi: 10.2478/ s11600-011-0013-5.
28. Schorlemmer, D., and M. C. Gerstenberger (2007). RELM testing center, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 30-36.
29. Schorlemmer, D., A. Christophersen, A. Rovida, F. Mele, M. Stucchi, and W. Marzocchi (2010). Setting up an earthquake forecast experiment in Italy, Ann. Geophys. Italy 53, 1-9.
30. Schorlemmer, D., M. C. Gerstenberger, S. Wiemer, D. D. Jackson, and D. A. Rhoades (2007). Earthquake likelihood model testing, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 17-29.
31. Schorlemmer, D., J. D. Zechar, M. J. Werner, E. H. Field, D. D. Jackson, and T. H. Jordan (2010). First results of the Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models experiment, Pure Appl. Geophys. 167, 859-876, doi: 10.1007/s00024-010-0081-5.
32. Shen, Z.-K., D. D. Jackson, and Y. Y. Kagan (2007). Implications of geodetic strain rate for future earthquakes, with a five-year forecast of M 5 earthquakes in southern California, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 116-120.
33. Stein, R. S. (1989). Two hundred and fifty manuscripts before the mast: reflections of an outbound editor, Eos Trans. AGU 70, 729-731.
34. Székely, G. J., and M. L. Rizzo (2005). A new test for multivariate normality, J. Multivariate Anal. 93, 58-80.
35. Toda, S., and B. Enescu (2011). Rate/state Coulomb stress transfer model for the CSEP Japan seismicity forecast, Earth Planets Space 63, 171-185.
36. Ward, S. N. (2007). Methods for evaluating earthquake potential and likelihood in and around California, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 121-133.
37. Werner, M. J., and D. Sornette (2008). Magnitude uncertainties impact seismic rate estimates, forecasts and predictability experiments, J. Geophys. Res. 113, B08302, doi: 10.1029/2007JB005427.
38. Werner, M. J., A. Helmstetter, D. D. Jackson, and Y. Y. Kagan (2011). High-resolution long-term and short-term earthquake forecasts for California, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 101, 1630-1648.
39. Werner, M. J., J. D. Zechar, W. Marzocchi, and S. Wiemer (2010). Retrospective evaluation of the five-year and ten-year CSEP-Italy earthquake forecasts, Ann. Geophys. Italy 53, 11-30, doi: 10.4401/ag-4840.
40. Wessel, P., andW. H. F. Smith (1998). New, improved version of the Generic Mapping Tools released, Eos Trans. AGU 79, 579.
41. Wiemer, S., and D. Schorlemmer (2007). ALM: An asperity-based likelihood model for California, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 134-140.
42. Zechar, J. D., M. C. Gerstenberger, and D. A. Rhoades (2010). Likelihoodbased tests for evaluating space-rate-magnitude earthquake forecasts, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 100, 1184-1195, doi: 10.1785/0120090192.
43. Zechar, J. D., D. Schorlemmer, M. Liukis, J. Yu, F. Euchner, P. J. Maechling, and T. H. Jordan (2010). The Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability perspective on computational earthquake science, Concurrency Comput. Pract. Ex. 22, 1836-1847, doi: 10.1002/cpe.1519.
44. Zechar, J. D., and J. Zhuang (2012). Betting against the house and peer-to-peer gambling: A Monte Carlo view of earthquake forecasting, presented at 2012 General Assembly, ESC, Moscow, Russia, 19-24 August.