Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, version 3 (UCERF3) -The time-independent model

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America

Volumn 104, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 1122-1180

  Field, Edward H ^a   Arrowsmith, Ramon J ^b   Biasi, Glenn P ^c   Bird, Peter ^d   Dawson, Timothy E ^e   Felzer, Karen R ^f   Jackson, David D ^d   Johnson, Kaj M ^g   Jordan, Thomas H ^h   Madden, Christopher ⁱ   Michael, Andrew J ^e   Milner, Kevin R ^h   Page, Morgan T ^f   Parsons, Tom ^e   Powers, Peter M ^a   Shaw, Bruce E ^j   Thatcher, Wayne R ^k   Weldon II, Ray J ^l   Zeng, Yuehua ^a  

^a DENVER FEDERAL CENTER   (United States)

^b ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^e CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY   (United States)

^f U S GEOLOGICAL SURVEY   (United States)

^g INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

ⁱ OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^j Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences   (United States)

^k U S GEOLOGICAL SURVEY   (United States)

^l UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DEFORMATION; FAULT SLIPS; FORECASTING; INVERSE PROBLEMS; SIMULATED ANNEALING; SUPERCOMPUTERS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

DEFORMATION MODELS; EARTHQUAKE RUPTURE; EPISTEMIC UNCERTAINTIES; FAULT SEGMENTATION; MAGNITUDE-FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION; SCALING RELATIONSHIPS; SIMULATED ANNEALING ALGORITHMS; TESTING HYPOTHESIS;

EARTHQUAKES;

DEFORMATION; EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE; EARTHQUAKE RUPTURE; FAULT SLIP; FORECASTING METHOD; FREQUENCY-MAGNITUDE DISTRIBUTION; GEODETIC DATUM; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; INVERSE PROBLEM; SLIP RATE;

CALIFORNIA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84903736969     PISSN: 00371106     EISSN: 19433573     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1785/0120130164     Document Type: Article

References (112)

1. Algermissen, S. T., D. M. Perkins, P. C. Thenhaus, S. L. Hanson, and B. L. Bender (1982). Probabilistic estimates of maximum acceleration and velocity in rock in the contiguous United States, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 82-1033.
2. Anderson, G., B. Aagaard, and K. Hudnut (2003). Fault interactions and large complex earthquakes in the Los Angeles area, Science 203, 1946-1949, doi: 10. 1126/science. 1090747.
3. Andrews, D. J., and E. Schwerer (2000). Probability of rupture of multiple fault segments, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 90, 1498-1506.
4. Biasi, G. P. (2013). Appendix H: Maximum likelihood recurrence intervals for California paleoseismic sites, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-H, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-H.
5. Biasi, G. P., and R. J. Weldon (2009). San Andreas fault rupture scenarios from multiple paleoseismic records: Stringing pearls, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, 471-498, doi: 10. 1785/0120080287.
6. Biasi, G. P., T. Parsons, R. J. Weldon II, and T. E. Dawson (2013). Appendix J: Fault-to-fault rupture probabilities, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-J, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-J.
7. Biasi, G. P., R. J. Weldon II, and T. E. Dawson (2013). Appendix F: Distribution of slip in ruptures, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-F, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-F.
8. Bird, P. (2009). Long-term fault slip rates, distributed deformation rates, and forecast of seismicity in the western United States from joint fitting of community geologic, geodetic, and stress direction data sets, J. Geophys. Res. 114, no. B11403, doi: 10. 1029/2009JB006317.
9. Black, N. M., and D. D. Jackson (2008). Probability of multifault rupture, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, 3017-3024, doi: 10. 1785/0120070271.
10. Box, G. E. P. (1979). Robustness in the strategy of scientific model building, in Robustness in Statistics, R. L. Launer and G. N. Wilkinson (Editors), Academic Press, New York.
11. Brune, J. N., A. Anooshehpoor, M. D. Purvance, and R. J. Brune (2006). Band of precariously balanced rocks between the Elsinore and San Jacinto, California, fault zones: Constraints on ground motion for large earthquakes, Geology 34, 137-140.
12. Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC) (2009). NEHRP Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Building and Other Structures, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Publication Number P-750, http://www. fema. gov/media-library/assets/documents/18152/(last accessed January 2014).
13. Cornell, C. A. (1968). Engineering seismic risk analysis, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 58, 1583-1606.
14. Cua, G., M. Fischer, T. Heaton, and S. Wiemer (2009). Real-time performance of the Virtual Seismologist earthquake early warning algorithm in southern California, Seismol. Res. Lett. 80, 740-747, doi: 10. 1785/gssrl. 80. 5. 740.
15. Dawson, T. E. (2013). Appendix A: Updates to the California reference fault parameter database: UCERF3 fault models 3. 1 and 3. 2, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-A, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-A.
16. Dawson, T. E., and R. J. Weldon II (2013). Appendix B: Geologic slip-rate data and geologic deformation model, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-B, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-B.
17. Dieterich, J. H., and K. B. Richards-Dinger (2010). Earthquake recurrence in simulated fault systems, Pure Appl. Geophys. 167, 1087-1184.
18. Duan, B. C., and D. D. Oglesby (2006). Heterogeneous fault stresses from previous earthquakes and the effect on dynamics of parallel strike-slip faults, J. Geophys. Res. 111, no. B0, 5309-5324.
19. Felzer, K. R. (2007). Calculating California seismicity rates, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2007-1437-I.
20. Felzer, K. R. (2013a). Appendix K: The UCERF3 earthquake catalog, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-K, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-K.
21. Felzer, K. R. (2013b). Appendix L: Estimate of the Seismicity Rate and Magnitude-Frequency Distribution in California from 1850 to 2011, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-L, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-L.
22. Felzer, K. R. (2013c). Appendix M: Adaptive smoothed seismicity model, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-M, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-M.
23. Felzer, K. R. (2013d). Appendix Q: The empirical model, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-Q, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-Q.
24. Felzer, K. R., R. E. Abercrombie, and G. Ekström (2004). A common origin for aftershocks, foreshocks, and multiplets, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, 88-99.
25. Field, E. H. (2007). Overview of theWorking Group for the Development of Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models (RELM), Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 7-16.
26. Field, E. H. (2012). Aftershock statistics constitute the strongest evidence for elastic relaxation in large earthquakes-Take 2, (abstract), Annual Meeting of the Seismological Society of America, San Diego, California, 17-19 April 2012.
27. Field, E. H., and M. T. Page (2011). Estimating earthquake-rupture rates on a fault or fault system, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 101, 79-92, doi: 10. 1785/0120100004.
28. Field, E. H., G. P. Biasi, P. Bird, T. E. Dawson, K. R. Felzer, D. D. Jackson, K. M. Johnson, T. H. Jordan, C. Madden, A. J. Michael, K. R. Milner, M. T. Page, T. Parsons, P. M. Powers, B. E. Shaw, W. R. Thatcher, R. J. Weldon II, and Y. Zeng (2013). Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, version 3 (UCERF3)-The time-independent model, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165, and California Geol. Surv. Spec. Rept. 228, http://pubs. usgs. gov/of/2013/1165/(last accessed January 2014).
29. 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.
30. Field, E. H., T. H. Jordan, and C. A. Cornell (2003). OpenSHA: A developing community-modeling environment for seismic hazard analysis, Seismol. Res. Lett. 74, 406-419.
31. Finzi, Y., and S. Langer (2012). Damage in step-overs may enable large cascading earthquakes, J. Geophys. Res. 39, LI6303.
32. Frankel, A. (1995). Mapping seismic hazard in the central and eastern United States, Seismol. Res. Lett. 66, 8-21.
33. Frankel, A. D., and M. D. Petersen (2013). Appendix P: Models of earthquake recurrence and down-dip edge of rupture for the Cascadia subduction zone, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-P, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-P.
34. Frankel, A., C. Mueller, T. Barnhard, D. Perkins, E. Leyendecker, N. Dickman, S. Hanson, and M. Hopper (1996). National Seismic-Hazard Maps: Documentation June 1996, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 96-532.
35. Frankel, A. D., M. D. Petersen, C. S. Mueller, K. M. Haller, R. L. Wheeler, E. V. Leyendecker, R. L. Wesson, S. C. Harmsen, C. H. Cramer, D. M. Perkins, and K. S. Rukstales (2002). Documentation for the 2002 up-date of the National Seismic Hazard Map, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2002-420.
36. Gardner, J. K., and L. Knopoff (1974). Is the sequence of earthquakes in southern California with aftershocks removed Poissonian? Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 64, 1363-1367.
37. Granville, V., M. Krivanek, and J.-P. Rasson (1994). Simulated annealing: A proof of convergence, IEEE Trans. Patt. Anal. Machine Intell. 16, 652-656, doi: 10. 1109/34. 295910.
38. Hammond, W. C., G. Blewitt, and C. Kreemer (2011). Block modeling of crustal deformation of the northern Walker Lane and Basin and Range from GPS velocities, J. Geophys. Res. 166, no. B04402, doi: 10. 1029/2010JB007817.
39. Hanks, T. C., andW. H. Bakun (2008). M-log A observations of recent large earthquakes, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, 490.
40. Harris, R. A., and S. M. Day (1993). Dynamics of fault interaction-parallel strike-slip faults, J. Geophys. Res. 98, 4461-4472.
41. Harris, R. A., R. J. Archuleta, and S. M. Day (1991). Fault steps and the dynamic rupture process: 2-D numerical simulations of a spontaneously propagating shear fracture, Geophys. Res. Lett. 18, 893-896.
42. Hauksson, E., J. Stock, K. Hutton, Y. Wenzheng, J. A. Vidal-Villegas, and H. Kanamori (2011). The 2010 Mw 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, doi: 10. 1007/s00024-010-0209-7.
43. Hecker, S., N. A. Abrahamson, and K. E. Wooddell (2013). Variability of displacement at a point: Implications for earthquake-size distribution and rupture hazard on faults, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 103, 651-674, doi: 10. 1785/0120120159.
44. Helmstetter, A., Y. Y. Kagan, and D. D. Jackson (2007). High-resolution time-independent grid-based forecast forM ≥5 earthquakes in California, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 78-86.
45. Holmes, R. R., Jr., L. M. Jones, J. C. Eidenshink, J. W. Godt, S. H. Kirby, J. J. Love, C. A. Neal, N. G. Plant, M. L. Plunkett, C. S. Weaver, A. Wein, and S. C. Perry (2013). U. S. Geological Survey natural hazards science strategy-Promoting the safety, security, and economic wellbeing of the nation, U. S. Geol. Surv. Circular 1383-F, 79 pp.
46. Jenny, S., S. Goes, D. Giardini, and H.-G. Kahle (2004). Earthquake recurrence parameters from seismic and geodetic strain rates in the eastern Mediterranean, Geophys. J. Int. 157, 1331-1347, doi: 10. 1111/j. 1365-246X. 2004. 02261. x.
47. Johnson, K. M., and J. Fukuda (2010). New methods for estimating the spatial distribution of locked asperities and stress-driven interseismic creep on faults with application to the San Francisco Bay area, California, J. Geophys. Res. 115, no. B12408, doi: 10. 1029/2010JB007703.
48. Jordan, T. H., Y.-T. Chen, P. Gasparini, R. Madariaga, I. Main, W. Marzocchi, G. Papadopoulos, G. Sobolev, K. Yamaoka, and J. Zschau (2011). Operational earthquake forecasting: State of knowledge and guidelines for implementation, final report of the International Commission on Earthquake Forecasting for Civil Protection, Ann. Geophys. 54, no. 4, 315-391, doi: 10. 4401/ag-5350.
49. Kagan, Y. Y. (2002a). Seismic moment distribution revisited: I, Statistical Results, Geophys. J. Int. 148, 520-541.
50. Kagan, Y. Y. (2002b). Seismic moment distribution revisited: II, Moment conservation principle, Geophys. J. Int. 149, 731-754.
51. Kagan, Y. Y., and D. D. Jackson (2013). Tohoku earthquake: A surprise? Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 103, 1181-1194.
52. Kagan, Y. Y., D. D. Jackson, and R. J. Geller (2012). Characteristic earthquake model, 1884-2011, RIP, Seismol. Res. Lett. 83, 951-953, doi: 10. 1785/0220120107.
53. Kaiser, A., C. Holden, J. Beavan, D. Beetham, R. Benites, A. Celentano, D. Collett, J. Cousins, M. Cubrinovski, G. Dellow, P. Denys, E. Fielding, B. Fry, M. Gerstenberger, R. Landgridge, C. Massey, M. Motagh, N. Pondard, G. McVerry, J. Ristau, M. Stirling, J. Thomas, S. R. Uma, and J. Zhao (2012). The Mw 6. 2 Christchurch earthquake of February 2011: Preliminary report, New Zeal. J. Geol. Geophys. 55, 67-90, doi: 10. 1080/00288306. 2011. 641182.
54. Knuepfer, P. L. K. (1989). Implications of the characteristics of the endpoints of historical surface fault ruptures for the nature of fault segmentation, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 89-315, 193-228.
55. Lawson, C. L., and D. J. Hanson (1974). Solving Least Squares Problems, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
56. Lettis, W., J. Bachhuber, R. Witter, C. Brankman, C. E. Randolph, A. Barka, W. D. Page, and A. Kaya (2002). Influence of releasing step-overs on surface fault rupture and fault segmentation: Examples from the 17 August 1999 Izmit earthquake on the North Anatolian fault, Turkey, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 92, 19-42.
57. Luco, N., B. R. Ellingwood, R. O. Hamburger, J. D. Hooper, J. K. Kimball, and C. Kircher (2007). Risk-targeted versus current seismic design maps for the conterminous United States, SEAOC 2007 Convention Proc., Structural Engineers Association of California, Lake Tahoe, California, 26-29 September 2007.
58. Machette, M., K. Haller, and L. Wald (2004). Quaternary Fault and Fold Database for the nation, USGS Fact Sheet FS2004-3033, 2 pp.
59. Madden, C., D. E. Haddad, J. B. Salisbury, O. Zielke, J. R. Arrowsmith, R. J. Weldon II, and J. Colunga (2013). Appendix R: Compilation of slip in the last event data and analysis of last event, repeated slip, and average displacement for recent and prehistoric ruptures, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-R, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-R.
60. Masson, F., J. Chéry, D. Hatzfeld, J. Martinod, P. Vernant, F. Tavakoli, and M. Ghafory-Ashtiani (2005). Seismic versus aseismic deformation in Iran inferred from earthquakes and geodetic data, Geophys. J. Int. 160, 217-226, doi: 10. 1111/j. 1365-246X. 2004. 02465. x.
61. McCaffrey, R. (2002). Crustal block rotations and plate coupling, in Plate Boundary Zones, Geodynamics Series, S. Stein and J. Freymueller (Editors), Vol. 30, American Geophysical Union, Washington, D. C., 101-122.
62. McCaffrey, R. (2005). Block kinematics of the Pacific/North America plate boundary in the southwestern United States from inversion of GPS, seismological, and geologic data, J. Geophys. Res. 110, no. B07401, doi: 10. 1029/2004JB003307.
63. Meng, L., J.-P. Ampuero, J. Stock, Z. Duputel, Y. Luo, and V. C. Tsai (2012). Earthquake in a maze: Compressional rupture branching during the 2012 Mw 8. 6 Sumatra earthquake, Science 337, 724-726, doi: 10. 1126/science. 1224030.
64. Milner, K. R., M. T. Page, E. H. Field, T. Parsons, G. P. Biasi, and B. E. Shaw (2013c). Appendix T: Defining the inversion rupture set via plausibility filters, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-T, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-T.
65. National Research Council (2011). Hamilton, R. M., R. A. Andrews, R. A. Bauer, J. A. Bullock, S. E. Chang, W. T. Holmes, L. A. Johnson, T. H. Jordan, G. A. Kreps, S. P. Nishenko, A. Z. Rose, L. T. Tobin, and A. S. Whittaker, National Earthquake Resilience: Research, Implementation, and Outreach, National Research Council, National Academies Press, Washington, D. C., 198 pp.
66. Noda, H., and N. Lapusta (2013). Stable creeping fault segments can become destructive as a result of dynamic weakening, Nature 493, 518-521, doi: 10. 1038/nature11703.
67. Ogata, Y. (1988). Statistical models of point occurrences and residual analysis for point processes, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 83, 9-27.
68. Page, M. T., D. Alderson, and J. Doyle (2011). The magnitude distribution of earthquakes near southern California faults, J. Geophys. Res. 116, no. B12309, doi: 10. 1029/2010JB007933.
69. Page, M. T., E. H. Field, K. R. Milner, and P. M. Powers (2013). Appendix N: Grand inversion implementation and testing, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-N, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-N.
70. Page, M. T., E. H. Field, K. R. Milner, and P. M. Powers (2014). The UCERF3 grand inversion: Solving for the long-term rate of ruptures in a fault system, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 104, doi: 10. 1785/0120130180.
71. Pancha, A., J. G. Anderson, and C. Kreemer (2006). Comparison of seismic and geodetic scalar moment rates across the Basin and Range Province, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96, 11-32, doi: 10. 1785/0120040166.
72. Parsons, T., and E. L. Geist (2009). Is there basis for preferring characteristic earthquakes over Gutenberg-Richter distributions on individual faults in probabilistic earthquake forecasting? Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, 2012-2019, doi: 10. 1785/0120080069.
73. Parsons, T., K. M. Johnson, P. Bird, J. M. Bormann, T. E. Dawson, E. H. Field, W. C. Hammond, T. A. Herring, R. McCaffrey, Z.-K. Shen, W. R. Thatcher, R. J. Weldon II, and Y. Zeng (2013). Appendix C: Deformation models for UCERF3. 3, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-C, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-C.
74. 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.
75. 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.
76. Petersen, M. D., C. S. Mueller, A. Frankel, and Y. Zeng (2007). Spatial seismicity rates and maximum magnitudes for background earthquakes, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2007-1437-J.
77. Plesch, A., J. Shaw, C. Benson, W. Bryant, S. Carena, M. Cooke, J. Dolan, G. Fuis, E. Gath, L. Grant, E. Hauksson, T. Jordan, M. Kamerling, M. Legg, S. Lindvall, H. Magistrale, C. Nicholson, N. Niemi, M. Oskin, S. Perry, G. Planansky, T. Rockwell, P. Shearer, C. Sorlien, M. Suss, J. Suppe, J. Treiman, and R. Yeats (2007). Community fault model (CFM) for southern California, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97, 1793-1802, doi: 10. 1785/0120050211.
78. Porter, K. A., E. H. Field, and K. Milner (2012). Trimming the UCERF2 hazard logic tree, Seismol. Res. Lett. 83, 815-828, doi: 10. 1785/0220120012.
79. Powers, P. M., and E. H. Field (2013). Appendix O: Gridded seismicity sources, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-O, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-O.
80. Reasenberg, P. A., T. C. Hanks, and W. H. Bakun (2003). An empirical model for earthquake probabilities in the San Francisco Bay region, California 2002-2031, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 93, 1-13.
81. Reid, H. F. (1911). The elastic-rebound theory of earthquakes, Univ. Calif. Pub. Bull. Dept. Geol. Sci. 6, 413-444.
82. Rontogianni, S. (2008). Comparison of geodetic and seismic strain rates in Greece by using a uniform processing approach to campaign GPS measurements over the interval 1994-2000, J. Geodyn. doi: 10. 1016/j. jog. 2010. 04. 008.
83. Rundle, P. B., J. B. Rundle, K. F. Tiampo, A. Donnellan, and D. L. Turcotte (2006). Virtual California: Fault model, frictional parameters, applications, Pure Appl. Geophys. 163, no. 9, 1819-1846.
84. Savage, J. C., and M. Lisowski (1993). Inferred depth of creep on the Hayward fault, central California, J. Geophys. Res. 98, no. B1, 787-793.
85. 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.
86. Segall, P., and D. D. Pollard (1980). Mechanics of discontinuous faults, J. Geophys. Res. 85, 4337-4350.
87. Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee (1997). Recommendations for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis: Guidance on Uncertainty and Use of Experts, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, U. S. Dept. of Energy, Electric Power Research Institute; NUREG/CR-6372, UCRLID-122160, Vol. 1/2. (Also a review of the document by National Academy Press, Washington, D. C., 73 pp.).
88. Shaw, B. E. (2009). Constant stress drop from small to great earthquakes in magnitude-area scaling, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, 871, doi: 10. 1785/0120080006.
89. Shaw, B. E. (2013a). Earthquake surface slip-length data is fit by constant stress drop and is useful for seismic hazard analysis, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 103, 876, doi: 10. 1785/0120110258.
90. Shaw, B. E. (2013b). Appendix E: Evaluation of magnitude-scaling relationships and depth of rupture: Recommendation for UCERF3, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-E, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-E.
91. Shaw, B. E., and J. H. Dieterich (2007). Probabilities for jumping fault segment stepovers, Geophys. Res. Lett. 34, L01307, doi: 10. 1029/2006GL027980.
92. Tullis, T. E., K. Richards-Dinger, M. Barall, J. H. Dieterich, E. H. Field, E. M. Heien, L. H. Kellogg, F. F. Pollitz, J. B. Rundle, M. K. Sachs, D. L. Turcotte, S. N. Ward, and M. B. Yikilmaz (2012). A comparison among observations and earthquake simulator results for the allcal2 California fault model, Seismol. Res. Lett. 83, 994-1006.
93. van Stiphout, T., S. Wiemer, andW. Marzocchi (2010). Are short-term evacuations warranted? Case of the 2009 L'Aquila earthquake, Geophys. Res. Lett. 37, doi: 10. 1029/2009gl042352.
94. Wald, D. J., B. C. Worden, K. Lin, and K. Pankow (2005). ShakeMap manual: technical manual, user's guide, and software guide, U. S. Geol. Surv. Tech. Methods 12-A1, 132 pp.
95. Ward, S. N. (1998). On the consistency of earthquake moment release and space geodetic strain rates: Europe, Geophys. J. Int. 135, 1011-1018, doi: 10. 1046/j. 1365-246X. 1998. t01-2-00658. x.
96. Ward, S. N. (2000). San Francisco Bay area earthquake simulations: A step toward a standard physical earthquake model, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 90, 370-386.
97. Weichert, D. H. (1980). Estimation of the earthquake recurrence parameters for unequal observation periods for different magnitudes, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 70, 1337-1346.
98. Weldon, R. J., II, and G. P. Biasi (2013). Appendix I: Probability of detection of ground rupture at paleoseismic sites, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-I, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-I.
99. Weldon, R. J., II, G. P. Biasi, C. J. Wills, and T. E. Dawson (2007). Overview of the southern San Andreas fault model; Appendix E in the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, version 2 (UCERF 2), U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2007-1437-E, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 203-E.
100. Weldon, R. J., II, T. E. Dawson, and C. Madden (2013). Appendix G: Paleoseismic sites recurrence database, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-G, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-G.
101. Weldon, R. J., II, D. A. Schmidt, L. J. Austin, E. M. Weldon, and T. E. Dawson (2013). Appendix D: Compilation of creep rate data for California faults and calculation of moment reduction due to creep, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2013-1165-D, and California Geol. Surv. Special Rept. 228-D.
102. Wells, D. (2013). Updated empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture area, rupture length, and surface displacement (abstract), Seismol. Res. Lett. 84, 309.
103. Wells, D. L., and K. J. Coppersmith (1994). New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area and surface displacement, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 84, 974-1002.
104. Wesnousky, S. G. (2006). Predicting the endpoints of earthquake fuptures, Nature 444, 358-360, doi: 10. 1038/nature05275.
105. Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP) (1988). Probabilities of large earthquakes occurring in California on the San Andreas fault, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 88-398, 62 pp.
106. Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP) (1990). Probabilities of large earthquakes in the San Francisco Bay region, California, U. S. Geol. Surv. Circ. 1053, 51 pp.
107. Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP) (1995). Seismic hazards in southern California: probable earthquakes, 1994-2024, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 85, 379-439.
108. Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP) (2003). Earthquake probabilities in the San Francisco Bay region: 2002-2031, U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2003-214.
109. Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP) (2007). The Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 2 (UCERF 2), U. S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rept. 2007-1437.
110. 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 perspectives on computational earth science, Concurrency Computat. Pract. Exper. 22, 1836-1847, doi: 10. 1002/cpe. 1519.
111. Zechar, J. D., D. Schorlemmer, M. J. Werner, M. C. Gerstenberger, D. A. Rhoades, and T. H. Jordan (2013). Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models I: First-order results, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 103, 787-798.
112. Zeng, Y., and Z.-K. Shen (2014). Fault network modeling of crustal deformation in California constrained using GPS and geologic observations, Tectonophysics 612/613, 1-17, doi: 10. 1016/j. tecto. 2013. 11. 030.