Comments on physical simulator models

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Task R1: Distribution of Slip in Surface Ruptures Glenn Biasi University of Nevada Reno 1Glenn Biasi University of Nevada Reno.
Advertisements

New Mapping of Creeping Faults Bartlett Springs Fault & northern Green Valley Fault
Smoothed Seismicity Rates Karen Felzer USGS. Decision points #1: Which smoothing algorithm to use? National Hazard Map smoothing method (Frankel, 1996)?
Progress Report: Hazard Map Generation with OpenSHA E-DECIDER IU Team.
16/9/2011UCERF3 / EQ Simulators Workshop RSQSim Jim Dieterich Keith Richards-Dinger UC Riverside Funding: USGS NEHRP SCEC.
16/9/2011UCERF3 / EQ Simulators Workshop Terry Tullis Steve Ward John RundleJim Dieterich Keith Richards-Dinger Fred Pollitz Generic Description of Earthquake.
The trouble with segmentation David D. Jackson, UCLA Yan Y. Kagan, UCLA Natanya Black, UCLA.
Earthquake Probabilities in the San Francisco Bay Region, 2002–2031 Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 2002 Chapters 1 & 2.
Assimilating Data into Earthquake Simulations Michael Sachs, J.B. Rundle, D.L. Turcotte University of California, Davis Andrea Donnellan Jet Propulsion.
Yan Y. Kagan Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA , EARTHQUAKE.
Ch 3: Characterization of the SFBR Earthquake Sources Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 2002.
Yan Y. Kagan Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA , EARTHQUAKE PREDICTABILITY.
Yan Y. Kagan Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA , Testing.
Earthquake Probabilities for the San Francisco Bay Region Working Group 2002: Chapter 6 Ved Lekic EQW, April 6, 2007 Working Group 2002: Chapter.
A New Approach To Paleoseismic Event Correlation Glenn Biasi and Ray Weldon University of Nevada Reno Acknowledgments: Tom Fumal, Kate Scharer, SCEC and.
Class 6b: Earthquakes. Earthquake basics Stress relief via crust movement 500,000 per year; 800 felt.
Yan Y. Kagan, David D. Jackson Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA ,
Testing Earthquake Forecasts David D. Jackson Yan Y. Kagan Yufang Rong.
Yan Y. Kagan Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA , Full.
1 Can We Predict Earthquakes? Can We Predict Earthquakes? Andrea Nemeth Advisor: Dr. Mark Schilling.
Yan Y. Kagan Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA , Global.
Yan Y. Kagan Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA , Rules of the Western.
Yan Y. Kagan Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA , Earthquake.
Learning objectives Understand the relationship of earthquakes to faulting Familiarization with earthquake & wave (energy) terminology Understand the.
The Empirical Model Karen Felzer USGS Pasadena. A low modern/historical seismicity rate has long been recognized in the San Francisco Bay Area Stein 1999.
If we build an ETAS model based primarily on information from smaller earthquakes, will it work for forecasting the larger (M≥6.5) potentially damaging.
Paleoseismic and Geologic Data for Earthquake Simulations Lisa B. Grant and Miryha M. Gould.
Data Assimilation and the Development of the Virtual_California Model Paul B. Rundle Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA Presented at the GEM/ACES Workshop,
FULL EARTH HIGH-RESOLUTION EARTHQUAKE FORECASTS Yan Y. Kagan and David D. Jackson Department of Earth and Space Sciences, University of California Los.
Comments on UCERF 3 Art Frankel USGS For Workshop on Use of UCERF3 in the National Seismic Hazard Maps Oct , 2012.
Updating Models of Earthquake Recurrence and Rupture Geometry of the Cascadia Subduction Zone for UCERF3 and the National Seismic Hazard Maps Art Frankel.
Key Considerations in Modeling of Earthquake Risk in Turkey
Intraplate Seismicity Finite element modeling. Introduction Spatial patterns (Fig. 1) –Randomly scattered (Australia) –Isolated “seismic zones” (CEUS)
National Seismic Hazard Maps and Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast 1.0 National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project (Golden, CO) California Geological.
Southern California Earthquake Center Triggering Models vs. Smoothed Seismicity PG = 1.35/eqk PG = 10/eqk Information gain per earthquake Reference forecast.
5 a day - Earthquakes Day How many seismic stations does it take to locate an earthquakes epicenter? 2. What is the name of the technique that we.
Karen Felzer & Emily Brodsky Testing Stress Shadows.
Some Properties of “aftershocks” Some properties of Aftershocks Dave Jackson UCLA Oct 25, 2011 UC BERKELEY.
16/9/2011UCERF3 / EQ Simulators Workshop ALLCAL Steven N. Ward University of California Santa Cruz.
Foreshocks, Aftershocks, and Characteristic Earthquakes or Reconciling the Agnew & Jones Model with the Reasenberg and Jones Model Andrew J. Michael.
California Project Seismicity in the oil and gas fields Tayeb A. Tafti University of Southern California July 2, 2013.
Yan Y. Kagan Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA , Evaluation.
GLOBAL EARTHQUAKE FORECASTS Yan Y. Kagan and David D. Jackson Department of Earth and Space Sciences, University of California Los Angeles Abstract We.
Yan Y. Kagan Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA ,
ETS - Science and Hazard the argument for close monitoring November 2008 John Vidale with input from Gomberg, Peng, Creager, Malone, Pratt, Houston, …
112/16/2010AGU Annual Fall Meeting - NG44a-08 Terry Tullis Michael Barall Steve Ward John Rundle Don Turcotte Louise Kellogg Burak Yikilmaz Eric Heien.
1 Ivan Wong Principal Seismologist/Vice President Seismic Hazards Group, URS Corporation Oakland, CA Uncertainties in Characterizing the Cascadia Subduction.
California Earthquake Rupture Model Satisfying Accepted Scaling Laws (SCEC 2010, 1-129) David Jackson, Yan Kagan and Qi Wang Department of Earth and Space.
Seismic Sources CEE 431/ESS465. Seismic Sources Identification Geologic evidence Field reconnaissance Trench logging Test pits, borings Airphoto interpretation.
Epistemic uncertainty in California-wide simulations of synthetic seismicity Fred Pollitz, USGS Menlo Park Acknowledgments: David Schwartz, Steve Ward.
2002/05/07ACES Workshop Spatio-temporal slip distribution around the Japanese Islands deduced from Geodetic Data Takeshi Sagiya Geographical Survey Institute.
Yan Y. Kagan Dept. Earth and Space Sciences, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA ,
Future Directions and Capabilities of Simulators Jim Dieterich
Yelena Kropivnitskaya, Kristy F. Tiampo,
3D earthquake and fault distribution in southern California
Some issues/limitations with current UCERF approach
Meeting Objectives Discuss proposed CISM structure and activities
Using MICE to verify simulation codes?
SAN ANDREAS FAULT San Francisco Bay Area North American plate
Faults and Earthquakes
Maximum Earthquake Size for Subduction Zones
RECENT SEISMIC MONITORING RESULTS FROM THE CENTRAL
Tohoku earthquake: A surprise?
R. Console, M. Murru, F. Catalli
VII. Earthquake Mitigation
Faults, Earthquakes, and Simulations
The Parkfield Experiment
Earthquake Machine, part 2
Chapter 5.2 Earthquakes and seismic waves
Presentation transcript:

Comments on physical simulator models David D. Jackson, UCLA

Forecast capabilities Statistical distributions of earthquakes on prespecified faults Magnitude frequency Temporal (recurrence) for initiation, participation, and combinations Spatial Paleoseismic rate, sigma, slip rate, displacement distribution

Off-fault earthquakes Not defined in phys sim models Contribute to stress, and presumably to earthquake probability, on faults Are counted in actual earthquake statistics (magnitude, temporal, spatial) but not in phys sim models Participate in clustering models as sources and receivers, but not in phys sim models

UCERF2 Assignment of historic earthquakes to faults

UCERF2 Assignment of instrumental earthquakes to faults

Summary, UCERF2 Earthquakes on faults total M>7 After 1931 Yes 15 7 11 no 8 2 1 maybe 23 6 Total 46 19

Limits to forecasting power Phys sim models are explicitly time-dependent (conditional on history), but history can’t be input or matched in simulations Can’t be tested because they could forecast only on-fault quakes, which are not defined. Paleoseis record is presumably recording on-fault quakes, but is not complete. ?Clustering studies show that small earthquakes are important in triggering, but phys sim models can include them only with massive calculations?. Models depend on Coulomb stress, which hasn’t yet demonstrated clear forecasting ability. But simulators could help make the case by setting up initial conditions.

Conditional Stopping Probability in 10km segment boundary according to WGCEP2008

Smoothed seismicity and faults

Stochastic earthquake simulation, 100 m=6.5+ events