On the Testing of Ground‐Motion Prediction Equations against Small‐Magnitude Data
On the Testing of Ground‐Motion Prediction Equations against Small‐Magnitude Data
复制标题
基于小震级数据的地震动预测方程检验
DOI：
10.1785/0120110271
复制
发表时间：
2012
影响因子：
3
通讯作者：
N. Kuehn
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. Beauval;Hilal Tasan;A. Laurendeau;E. Delavaud;F. Cotton;Philippe Gu'eguen;N. Kuehn
摘要 地面运动预测方程（GMPE）在概率地震灾害研究中对于估计震源产生的地面运动至关重要。在低地震活动区，加速度网络的生命周期内仅存在弱运动，并且为概率研究选择的方程通常是根据外国数据建立的模型。尽管大多数 GMPE 已开发为 5 级及以上，但低震区概率研究中常用的最小震级较小。分解表明，在工程利益的重现期，小于 5 的震级可能会导致危险。本文介绍了当前国际和国家概率项目中选择的几个 GMPE 针对法国记录的弱运动的测试（191 个记录，源点距离长达 300 公里，3.8≤ M w ≤4.5）。该方法基于 Scherbaum 等人提出的对数似然值。 （2009）。在整个频率范围内的最佳拟合模型（大约 2.5≤LLH≤3.5）是 Cauzzi 和 Faccioli (2008)、Akkar 和 Bommer (2010) 以及 Abrahamson 和 Silva (2008) 模型。没有强调地面运动的显着区域变化，并且震级缩放可能是控制地面运动幅度的主要因素。此外，我们利用丰富的日本数据集对随机选择的低幅度子集进行测试，并确认包含约 190 个观测值的数据集（与法国数据集大小相同）足以获得稳定的 LLH 估计。此外，我们还针对日本数据集中的较大震级 (5-7) 进行了测试。模型的排名进行了部分修改，表明某些模型存在震级缩放效应，并表明从低震级范围外推到较高震级范围获得的测试结果并不简单。
Abstract Ground‐motion prediction equations (GMPE) are essential in probabilistic seismic hazard studies for estimating the ground motions generated by the seismic sources. In low‐seismicity regions, only weak motions are available during the lifetime of accelerometric networks, and the equations selected for the probabilistic studies are usually models established from foreign data. Although most GMPEs have been developed for magnitudes 5 and above, the minimum magnitude often used in probabilistic studies in low‐seismicity regions is smaller. Disaggregations have shown that, at return periods of engineering interest, magnitudes less than 5 may be contributing to the hazard. This paper presents the testing of several GMPEs selected in current international and national probabilistic projects against weak motions recorded in France (191 recordings with source–site distances up to 300 km, 3.8≤ M w ≤4.5). The method is based on the log‐likelihood value proposed by Scherbaum et al. (2009). The best‐fitting models (approximately 2.5≤LLH≤3.5) over the whole frequency range are the Cauzzi and Faccioli (2008), Akkar and Bommer (2010), and Abrahamson and Silva (2008) models. No significant regional variation of ground motions is highlighted, and the magnitude scaling could be the predominant factor in the control of ground‐motion amplitudes. Furthermore, we take advantage of a rich Japanese dataset to run tests on randomly selected low‐magnitude subsets, and confirm that a dataset of ∼190 observations, the same size as the French dataset, is large enough to obtain stable LLH estimates. Additionally we perform the tests against larger magnitudes (5–7) from the Japanese dataset. The ranking of models is partially modified, indicating a magnitude scaling effect for some of the models, and showing that extrapolating testing results obtained from low‐magnitude ranges to higher magnitude ranges is not straightforward.