An evaluation of Eastern North American ground-motion models developed using the hybrid empirical method

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

Volumn 104, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 347-359

  Campbell, Kenneth W ^a  

^a EQECAT   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADJUSTMENT FACTORS; ALEATORY VARIABILITY; EASTERN NORTH AMERICA; EMPIRICAL APPROACH; GROUND-MOTION MODELS; GROUND-MOTION SIMULATION; SMALL-MAGNITUDE EARTHQUAKES; STRONG-MOTION DATA;

HAZARDS; IGNITION;

EARTHQUAKES;

EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; GROUND MOTION; SEISMIC HAZARD; STOCHASTICITY; STRONG MOTION;

NORTH AMERICA;

EID: 84893262668     PISSN: 00371106     EISSN: 19433573     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1785/0120120256     Document Type: Article

References (104)

1. Abrahamson, N. A., and W. J. Silva (1997). Empirical response spectral attenuation relations for shallow crustal earthquakes, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68, 94-127.
2. Abrahamson, N. A., and W. Silva (2001). "Empirical" attenuation relations for central and eastern U.S. hard and soft rock and deep soil site conditions, Abstract, Seismol. Res. Lett. 72, 282.
3. Abrahamson, N. A., and W. J. Silva (2008). Summary of the Abrahamson & Silva NGA ground-motion relations, Earthq. Spectra 24, 67-97.
4. Abrahamson, N., G. M. Atkinson, D. Boore, Y. Bozorgnia, K. Campbell, B. Chiou, I. M. Idriss, W. Silva, and R. Youngs (2008). Comparisons of the NGA ground-motion relations, Earthq. Spectra 24, 45-66.
5. Akkar, S., and J. J. Bommer (2010). Empirical equations for the prediction of PGA, PGV, and Spectral Accelerations in Europe, Seismol. Res. Lett. 81, 195-206.
6. Akkar, S., and Z. Çaǧnan (2010). A local ground-motion predictive model for Turkey, and its comparison with other regional and global groundmotion models, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 100, 2978-2995.
7. Al Atik, L., A. Kottke, N. Abrahamson, and J. Hollenback (2014). Kappa scaling of ground motion prediction equations using IRVT approach, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 104, no. 1, doi: 10.1785/0120120200.
8. Anderson, J. G., and S. E. Hough (1984). A model for the shape of the Fourier amplitude spectrum of acceleration at high frequencies, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 74, 1969-1993.
9. Arango, M. C., F. O. Strasser, J. J. Bommer, J. M. Cepeda, R. Boroschek, D. A. Hernandez, and H. Tavera (2012). An evaluation of the applicability of current ground-motion models to the South and Central American Subduction Zones, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 102, 143-168.
10. Atkinson, G. M. (2001). An alternative to stochastic ground-motion relations for use in seismic hazard analysis in eastern North America, Seismol. Res. Lett. 72, 299-306.
11. Atkinson, G. M. (2004). Empirical attenuation of ground motion spectral amplitudes in southeastern Canada and the northeastern United States, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, 1079-1095.
12. Atkinson, G. M. (2005). Ground motions for earthquakes in southwestern British Columbia and northwestern Washington: Crustal, in-slab, and offshore events, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95, 1027-1044.
13. 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.
14. Atkinson, G. M. (2010). Ground-motion prediction equations for Hawaii from a referenced empirical approach, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 101, 1304-1318.
15. Atkinson, G. M., and D. M. Boore (1998). Evaluation of models for earthquake source spectra in eastern North America, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 88, 917-934.
16. Atkinson, G. M., and D. M. Boore (2006). Earthquake ground-motion prediction equations for eastern North America, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96, 2181-2205.
17. Atkinson, G. M., and D. M. Boore (2007). Erratum to "Earthquake groundmotion prediction equations for eastern North America", Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97, 1032.
18. Atkinson, G. M., and D. M. Boore (2011). Modification to existing groundmotion prediction equations in light of new data, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 101, 1121-1135.
19. Atkinson, G. M., and S. Kaka (2007). Relationships between felt intensity and instrumental ground motions for earthquakes in the central United States and California, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97, 497-510.
20. Atkinson, G. M., and M. Morrison (2009). Regional variability in ground motion amplitudes along the west coast of North America, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, 2393-2409.
21. Atkinson, G. M., and D. Motazedian (2013). Ground-motion amplitudes for earthquakes in Puerto Rico, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 103, 1846-1859.
22. Atkinson, G. M., and W. Silva (2000). Stochastic modeling of California ground motions, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 90, 255-274.
23. Atkinson, G. M., and D. Wald (2007). Modified Mercalli intensity: A surprisingly good measure of ground motion, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 362-368.
24. Atkinson, G. M., K. Assatourians, D. M. Boore, K. Campbell, and D. Motazedian (2009). A guide to differences between stochastic point-source and stochastic finite source simulations, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, 3192-3201.
25. Beauval, C., H. Tasan, A. Laurendeau, E. Delavaud, F. Cotton, P. Guéguen, and N. Kühn (2012). On the testing of ground-motion prediction equations against small-magnitude data, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 102, 1994-2007.
26. Biro, Y., and Renault, P (2012). Importance and impact of host-to-target conversions for ground motion predictions equations in PSHA, Proc. Of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 24-28 September 2012, Lisbon, Portugal, Paper No. 1855, 10 pp.
27. Bommer, J. J., and F. Scherbaum (2008). The use and misuse of logictrees in probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, Earthq. Spectra 96, 1967-1977.
28. Bommer, J. J., J. Douglas, F. Scherbaum, F. Cotton, H. Bungum, and D. Fäh (2010). On the selection of ground-motion prediction equations for seismic hazard analysis, Seismol. Res. Lett. 81, 783-793.
29. Bommer, J. J., P. Stafford, J. Alarcon, and S. Akkar (2007). The influence of magnitude range on empirical ground-motion prediction, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97, 2152-2170.
30. Boore, D. M. (2003). Simulation of ground motion using the stochastic method, Pure Appl. Geophys. 160, 635-676.
31. Boore, D. M. (2005). SMSIM-Fortran programs for simulating ground motions from earthquakes: Version 2.3-A revision of OFR 96-80A, U.S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 00-509.
32. Boore, D. M. (2009). Comparing stochastic point-source and finite-source ground-motion simulations: SMSIM and EXSIM, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, 3202-3216.
33. Boore, D. M., and G. M. Atkinson (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, Earthq. Spectra 24, 99-138.
34. Boore, D. M., K. W. Campbell, and G. M. Atkinson (2010). Determination of stress parameters for eight well-recorded earthquakes in eastern North America, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 100, 1632-1645.
35. Bozorgnia, Y., and NGA-West Project Team (2013). The NGA-West2 research project, Earthq. Spectra, in press.
36. Brune, J. (1970). Tectonic stress and the spectra of seismic shear waves, J. Geophys. Res. 75, 4997-5009.
37. Brune, J. (1971). Correction: Tectonic stress and the spectra of seismic shear waves, J. Geophys. Res. 76, 5002.
38. Budnitz, R., G. Apostolakis, D. Boore, L. Cluff, K. Coppersmith, C. Cornell, and P. Morris (1997). Recommendations for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis: Guidance on Uncertainty and Use of Experts, NUREG/CR-6372, Vols. 1 and 2, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
39. Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC) (2009). NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures (FEMA P-750), 2009 edition, National Institute of Building Sciences, Washington, D.C.
40. Campbell, K. W. (1981). A ground model for the central United States based on near-source acceleration data, Proc. of the Conference on Earthquakes and Earthquake Engineering The Eastern United States, Knoxville, Tennessee, 14-16 September 1981, Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Vol. 1, 213-232.
41. Campbell, K. W. (1982). A preliminary methodology for regional zonation of peak ground acceleration, Proc. of the 3rd International Earthquake Microzonation Conference, University of Washington, Seattle, 28 June-1 July 1982, Vol. 1, 365-376.
42. Campbell, K. W. (1984). Near-source attenuation of strong ground motion for moderate to large earthquakes: An update and suggested application to the Wasatch Fault Zone of northcentral Utah, in Evaluation of Regional and Urban Earthquake Hazards and Risk in Utah, W. W. Hays and P. L. Gori (Editors), U.S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 84-763 483-499.
43. Campbell, K. W. (1986). An empirical estimate of near-source ground motion for a major, mb 6:8, earthquake in the eastern United States, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 76, 1-17.
44. Campbell, K. W. (1997). Empirical near-source attenuation relationships for horizontal and vertical components of peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and pseudo-absolute acceleration response spectra, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68, 154-179.
45. Campbell, K. W. (1999). Hybrid-empirical model for estimating strong ground motion in regions of few strong-motion records, IUGG XXII General Assembly, in IUGG 99 Birmingham Abstracts, Week B, 19-30 July 1999, Birmingham, U.K., Abstract No. ST3/W/46-B3, 180 pp.
46. Campbell, K. W. (2000). Predicting strong ground motion in Utah, in Assessment of Regional Earthquake Hazards and Risk along the Wasatch Front, Utah, P. L. Gori and W. W. Hays (Editors), U.S. Geol. Surv. Professional Paper 1500-L, L1-L31.
47. Campbell, K. W. (2000b). A new hybrid-empirical model for estimating strong ground motion: Application to eastern North America, Abstract, Seismol. Res. Lett. 71, 126.
48. Campbell, K. W. (2001). Hybrid empirical model for estimating strong ground motion in regions of limited strong-motion recordings, Proc. of the OECD/NEA Workshop on the Engineering Characterization of Seismic Input, 15-17 November 1999, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Nuclear Energy Agency Report NEA/CSNI/R(2000)2, Vol. 1, 315-332.
49. Campbell, K. W. (2002). Development of Semi-Empirical Attenuation Relationships for the CEUS, U.S. Geol. Surv. NEHRP Award No. 01HQGR0011, final report.
50. Campbell, K. W. (2003). Prediction of strong ground motion using the hybrid empirical method and its use in the development of groundmotion (attenuation) relations in eastern North America, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 93, 1012-1033.
51. Campbell, K. W. (2004). Erratum to "Prediction of strong ground motion using the hybrid empirical method and its use in the development of ground-motion (attenuation) relations in eastern North America", Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, 418.
52. Campbell, K. W. (2006). The hybrid empirical method and its use in predicting strong ground motion in Europe, Proc. of the 1st European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, 3-8 September 2006, Geneva, Switzerland, Paper No. 459, 10 pp.
53. Campbell, K. W. (2007). Validation and Update of Hybrid Empirical Ground Motion (Attenuation) Relations for the CEUS, U.S. Geol. Surv. NEHRP Award No. 05HQGR0032, final report.
54. Campbell, K. W. (2008a). Hybrid empirical ground motion model for PGA and 5% damped linear elastic response spectra from shallow crustal earthquakes in stable continental regions: Example for eastern North America, Proc. of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 12-17 October 2008, Beijing, China, Paper No. S03-001, 8 pp.
55. Campbell, K. W. (2008b). Comment on 'Empirical-stochastic groundmotion prediction for eastern North America' by Behrooz Tavakoli and Shahram Pezeshk, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, 2094-2097.
56. Campbell, K. W. (2009). Estimates of shear-wave Q and κ0 for unconsolidated and semiconsolidated sediments in eastern North America, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, 2365-2392.
57. Campbell, K. W. (2011). Ground motion simulation using the hybrid empirical method: Issues and insights, in Earthquake Data in Engineering Seismology, S. Akkar, P. Gülkan, and T. van Eck (Editors), Geotechnical, Geological, and Earthquake Engineering 14, Chapter 7, Springer, Berlin, 81-95.
58. Campbell, K. W., and Y. Bozorgnia (2003). Updated near-source ground motion (attenuation) relations for the horizontal and vertical components of peak ground acceleration and acceleration response spectra, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 93, 314-331.
59. Campbell, K. W., and Y. Bozorgnia (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 and 10.0 s, Earthq. Spectra 24, 139-171.
60. Cauzzi, C., and E. Faccioli (2008). Broadband (0.05 to 20 s) prediction of displacement response spectra based on worldwide digital records, J. Seismol. 12, 453-475.
61. Chapman, M. C., and R. W. Godbee (2013). Modeling geometrical spreading and the relative amplitudes of vertical and horizontal high frequency ground motions in eastern North America, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 102, 1957-1975.
62. Chiou, B. S.-J., and R. R. Youngs (2008). An NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra, Earthq. Spectra 24, 173-215.
63. Chiou, B., R. Youngs, N. Abrahamson, and K. Addo (2010). Ground-motion attenuation model for small-to-moderate shallow crustal earthquakes in California and its implications on regionalization of ground-motion prediction models, Earthq. Spectra 26, 907-926.
64. Cotton, F., G. Pousse, F. Bonilla, and F. Scherbaum (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.
65. Cotton, F., F. Scherbaum, J. J. Bommer, and H. Bungum (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.
66. Delavaud, E., F. Cotton, S. Akkar, F. Scherbaum, L. Danciu, C. Beauval, S. Drouet, J. Douglas, R. Basili, M. A. Sandikkaya, M. Segou, E. Faccioli, and N. Theodoulidis (2012). Toward a ground-motion logic tree for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment in Europe, J. Seismol. 16, 451-473.
67. Delavaud, E., F. Scherbaum, N. Kühn, and T. Allen (2012). Testing the global applicability of ground-motion prediction equations for active shallow crustal regions, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 102, 707-721.
68. Delavaud, E., F. Scherbaum, N. Kühn, and C. Riggelsen (2009). Information-theoretic selection of ground-motion prediction equations for seismic hazard analysis: An applicability study using California data, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, 3248-3263.
69. Di Alessandro, C., Y. Bozorgnia, N. A. Abrahamson, S. Akkar, and M. Erdik (2012). GEM-PEER global ground motion prediction equations project: An overview, Proc. of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 24-28 September 2012, Lisbon, Portugal, Paper No. 2437, 10 pp.
70. Douglas, J., H. Bungum, and F. Scherbaum (2006). Ground-motion prediction equations for southern Spain and southern Norway obtained using the composite model perspective, J. Earthq. Eng. 10, 33-72.
71. Drouet, S., F. Scherbaum, F. Cotton, and A. Souriau (2007). Selection and ranking of ground motion models for seismic hazard analysis in the Pyrenees, J. Seismol. 11, 87-100.
72. Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (1993). Methods and guidelines for estimating earthquake ground motion in eastern North America, in Guidelines for Determining Design Basis Ground Motion, EPRI Rept. TR-102293, Vol. 1, Palo Alto, California.
73. Electrical Power Research Institute (EPRI) (2004). CEUS Ground Motion Project Final Report, EPRI Rept. TR-1009684, Palo Alto, California.
74. Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (2006). Program on Technology Innovation: Truncation of the Lognormal Distribution and Value of the Standard Deviation for Ground Motion Models in the Central and Eastern United States, EPRI Rept. 1013105, Technical Update, Palo Alto, California.
75. Electrical Power Research Institute (EPRI) (2013). EPRI (2004, 2006) Ground-Motion Model (GMM) Review Project, EPRI Rept. 3002000717, Palo Alto, California.
76. Frankel, A., C. Mueller, T. Barnhard, D. Perkins, E. V. Leyendecker, N. Dickman, S. Hanson, and M. Hopper (1996). National seismichazard maps: Documentation June 1996, U.S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 96-532.
77. Idriss, I. M. (2008). An NGA empirical model for estimating the horizontal spectral values generated by shallow crustal earthquakes, Earthq. Spectra 24, 217-242.
78. Motazedian, D., and G. M. Atkinson (2005). Stochastic finite-faults modeling based on a dynamic corner frequency, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95, 995-1010.
79. Musson, R. M. W. (2009). Ground motion and probabilistic hazard, Bull. Earthq. Eng. 7, 575-589.
80. Nuttli, O. W., and R. B. Herrmann (1984). Ground motion in Mississippi Valley earthquakes, J. Tech. Topics in Civil Eng. 110, 54-69.
81. Petersen, M. D., A. D. Frankel, S. C. Harmsen, C. S. Mueller, K. M. Haller, R. L. Wheeler, R. L. Wesson, Y. Zeng, O. S. Boyd, D. M. Perkins, N. Luco, E. H. Field, C. J. Wills, and K. S. Rukstales (2008). Documentation for the 2008 update of the United States national seismic hazard maps, U.S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2008-1128, 61 pp.
82. Pezeshk, S., A. Zandieh, and B. Tavakoli (2011). Hybrid empirical ground motion prediction equations for eastern North America using NGA models and updated seismological parameters, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 101, 1859-1870.
83. Power, M., B. Chiou, N. Abrahamson, Y. Bozorgnia, T. Shantz, and C. Roblee (2008). An overview of the NGA project, Earthq. Spectra 24, 3-21.
84. Rathje, E. M., A. R. Kottke, and M. C. Ozbey (2005). Using inverse random vibration theory to develop input Fourier amplitude spectra for use in site response, Proc. of the 16th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering: TC4 Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering Satellite Conference, 12-16 September 2005, Osaka, Japan, 160-166.
85. Sadigh, K., C.-Y. Chang, J. A. Egan, F. I. Makdisi, and R. R. Youngs (1997). Attenuation relationships for shallow crustal earthquakes based on California strong motion data, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68, 180-189.
86. Savy, J. B., W. Foxall, N. Abrahamson, and D. Bernreuter (2002). Guidance for Performing Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis for a Nuclear Plant Site: Example Application to the Southeastern United States, NUREG/CR-6607, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
87. Scherbaum, F., and N. Kühn (2011). Logic tree branch weights and probabilities: Summing up to one is not enough, Earthq. Spectra 27, 1237-1251.
88. Scherbaum, F., J. J. Bommer, H. Bungum, F. Cotton, and N. A. Abrahamson (2005). Composite ground motion models and logic trees: Methodology, sensitivities, and uncertainties, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95, 1575-1593.
89. Scherbaum, F., F. Cotton, and P. Smit (2004). On the use of response spectral-reference data for the selection and ranking of ground-motion models for seismic-hazard analysis in regions of moderate seismicity: The case of rock motion, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, 2164-2185.
90. Scherbaum, F., E. Delavaud, and C. Riggelsen (2009). Model selection in seismic hazard analysis: An information-theoretic perspective, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, 3234-3247.
91. Scherbaum, F., N. M. Kühn, M. Ohrnberger, and A. Koehler (2010). Exploring the proximity of ground-motion models using high-dimensional visualization techniques, Earthq. Spectra 26, 1117-1138.
92. Scherbaum, F., S. Seif, and N. M. Kuehn (2011). On the relationship between Fourier and response spectra: Consequences for the adjustment of empirical ground-motion prediction equations for regional differences, American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting, 5-9 December 2011, San Francisco, California, Abstract No. S53B-2298.
93. Silva, W. J., N. Gregor, and R. Darragh (2002). Development of regional hard rock attenuation relations for central and eastern North America, Technical Report, Pacific Engineering and Analysis, El Cerrito, California.
94. Somerville, P., N. Collins, N. Abrahamson, R. Graves, and C. Saikia (2001). Ground Motion Attenuation Relations for the Central and Eastern United States, U.S. Geol. Surv. NEHRP Award No. 99HQGR0098, final report.
95. Stafford, P. J., F. O. Strasser, and J. J. Bommer (2008). An evaluation of the applicability of the NGA models to ground-motion prediction in the Euro-Mediterranean region, Bull. Earthq. Eng. 6, 149-177.
96. Stepp, J., I. Wong, J. Whitney, R. Quittmeyer, N. Abrahamson, G. Toro, R. Youngs, K. Coppersmith, J. Savy, T. Sullivan, and Yucca Mountain PSHA Project Members (2001). Probabilistic seismic hazard analyses for ground motions and fault displacement at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, Earthq. Spectra 17, 113-151.
97. Stewart, J. P., J. Douglas, M. Javanbarg, Y. Bozorgnia, N. A. Abrahamson, D. M. Boore, K. W. Campbell, E. Delavaud, M. Erdik, and P. J. Stafford (2013). Selection of ground motion prediction equations for the Global Earthquake Model, Earthq. Spectra, doi:10.1193/013013EQS017M.
98. Tavakoli, B., and S. Pezeshk (2005). Empirical-stochastic ground-motion prediction for eastern North America, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95, 2283-2296.
99. Tavakoli, B., and S. Pezeshk (2008). Reply to "Comment on 'Empiricalstochastic ground-motion prediction for Eastern North America' by Behrooz Tavakoli and Shahram Pezeshk" by Kenneth W. Campbell, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, 2098-2100.
100. Toro, G. R. (2002). Modification of the Toro et al. 1997 Attenuation Equations for Large Magnitudes and Short Distances, Risk Engineering, Inc., Boulder, Colorado.
101. Toro, G. R., N. A. Abrahamson, and J. F. Schneider (1997). Model of strong ground motions from earthquakes in central and eastern North America: Best estimates and uncertainties, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68, 41-57.
102. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2012). Practical Implementation Guidelines for SSHAC Level 3 and 4 Hazard Studies, NUREG-2117, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
103. Van Houtte, C., S. Drouet, and F. Cotton (2011). Analysis of the origins of κ (kappa) to compute hard rock to rock adjustment factors for GMPEs, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 101, 2926-2941.
104. Woessner, J., D. Giardini, and the SHARE Consortium (2012). Seismic hazard estimates for the Euro-Mediterranean region: A community-based probabilistic seismic hazard assessment, Proc. of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 24-28 September 2012, Lisbon, Portugal, Paper No. 4337.