+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Evaluation of ground-motion modeling techniques for use in global ShakeMap; a critique of instrumental ground-motion prediction equations, peak ground motion to macroseismic intensity conversions,; and macroseismic intensity predictions in different tectonic settings



Evaluation of ground-motion modeling techniques for use in global ShakeMap; a critique of instrumental ground-motion prediction equations, peak ground motion to macroseismic intensity conversions,; and macroseismic intensity predictions in different tectonic settings



U. S. Geological Survey: 114



Regional differences in ground-motion attenuation have long been thought to add uncertainty in the prediction of ground motion. However, a growing body of evidence suggests that regional differences in ground-motion attenuation may not be as significant as previously thought and that the key differences between regions may be a consequence of limitations in ground-motion datasets over incomplete magnitude and distance ranges. Undoubtedly, regional differences in attenuation can exist owing to differences in crustal structure and tectonic setting, and these can contribute to differences in ground-motion attenuation at larger source-receiver distances. Herein, we examine the use of a variety of techniques for the prediction of several ground-motion metrics (peak ground acceleration and velocity, response spectral ordinates, and macroseismic intensity) and compare them against a global dataset of instrumental ground-motion recordings and intensity assignments. The primary goal of this study is to determine whether existing ground-motion prediction techniques are applicable for use in the U.S. Geological Survey's Global ShakeMap and Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response (PAGER). We seek the most appropriate ground-motion predictive technique, or techniques, for each of the tectonic regimes considered: shallow active crust, subduction zone, and stable continental region.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 037047185

Download citation: RISBibTeXText


Related references

Best practices for using macroseismic intensity and ground motion to intensity conversion equations for hazard and loss models. Seismological Research Letters 81.2, 2010

NGA ground motion prediction equations for the vertical component of peak and spectral ground motion parameters. Seismological Research Letters 79(2): 340-341, 2008

Dependence of strong ground motion on magnitude-distance, site geology and macroseismic intensity for shallow earthquakes in Greece; I, Peak horizontal acceleration, velocity and displacement. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 11(7): 387-402, 1992

Consistency of ground-motion predictions from the past four decades: peak ground velocity and displacement, Arias intensity and relative significant duration. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 10(5): 1339-1356, 2012

Ground motion prediction in Beirut: a multi-step procedure coupling empirical Greens functions, ground motion prediction equations and instrumental transfer functions. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 14(12): 3317-3341, 2016

Linking ground motion measurements and macroseismic observations in France a case study based on accelerometric and macroseismic databases. Journal of Seismology 17(2): 313-333, 2013

A ground motion prediction equation for JMA instrumental seismic intensity for shallow crustal earthquakes in active tectonic regimes. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 40.4, 2011

Dependence of strong ground motion on magnitude-distance, site geology and macroseismic intensity for shallow earthquakes in Greece: II, horizontal pseudovelocity. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 13(5): 317-343, 1994

Relationship between Peak Ground Acceleration, Peak Ground Velocity, and Macroseismic Intensity in Western China. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 109(1): 284-297, 2019

A short note on ground-motion recordings from the M 79 Wenchuan, China, earthquake and ground-motion prediction equations in the central and Eastern United States. Seismological Research Letters 82.5, 2011

Tuning of stochastic ground motion models for compatibility with ground motion prediction equations. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics 45(6): 893-912, 2016

Ground Motion to Intensity Conversion Equations (GMICEs): A Global Relationship and Evaluation of Regional Dependency. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 105(3): 1476-1490, 2015

A Bayesian ground motion model for estimating the covariance structure of ground motion intensity parameters. Seismological Research Letters 81.2, 2010

Earthquake ground motion estimation using strong-motion records; a review of equations for the estimation of peak ground acceleration and response spectral ordinates. Earth-Science Reviews 61(1-2): 43-104, 2003

A revised ground-motion and intensity interpolation scheme for ShakeMap. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 100.6, 2010