ALBERT

All Library Books, journals and Electronic Records Telegrafenberg

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • Earthquake source observations; Statistical seismology  (2)
  • Wiley-Blackwell  (2)
  • American Association for the Advancement of Science
  • Springer
  • 2010-2014  (2)
  • 2005-2009
  • 1980-1984
  • 1960-1964
  • 1925-1929
  • 2013  (2)
  • 1
    Publication Date: 2017-04-04
    Description: Until a decade ago, regression analyses for conversions between different types of magnitude were using only the ordinary least squares method,which assumes that the independent variable is error free, or the simple orthogonal regression method,which assumes equal uncertainties for the two variables. The recent literature became aware of the inadequacy of such approaches and proposes the use of general orthogonal regression methods that account for different uncertainties of the two regression variables. Under the common assumption that only the variance ratio η between the dependent and independent variables is known, we compared three of such general orthogonal regression methods that have been applied to magnitude conversions: the chi-square regression, the general orthogonal regression, and the weighted total least squares. Although their formulations might appear quite different, we show that, under appropriate conditions, they all compute almost exactly the same regression coefficients and very similar (albeit slightly different) formal uncertainties. The latter are in most cases smaller than those estimated by bootstrap simulation but the amount of the deviation depends on the data set and on the assumed variance ratio.
    Description: European Union project SHARE (Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe) within the ambit of Task 3.1‘European Earthquake Database’.
    Description: Published
    Description: 1135-1151
    Description: JCR Journal
    Description: restricted
    Keywords: Earthquake source observations; Statistical seismology ; 04. Solid Earth::04.06. Seismology::04.06.06. Surveys, measurements, and monitoring
    Repository Name: Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV)
    Type: article
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Publication Date: 2017-04-04
    Description: With the goal of constructing a homogeneous data set of moment magnitudes (Mw) to be used for seismic hazard assessment, we compared Mw estimates from moment tensor catalogues available online. We found an apparent scaling disagreement between Mw estimates from the National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) of the US Geological Survey and from the Global Centroid Moment Tensor (GCMT) project. We suspect that this is the effect of an underestimation ofMw 〉 7.0 (M0 〉 4.0 × 1019 Nm) computed by NEIC owing to the limitations of their computational approach. We also found an apparent scaling disagreement between GCMT and two regional moment tensor catalogues provided by the ‘Eidgen¨ossische Technische Hochschule Z¨urich’ (ETHZ) and by the European–Mediterranean Regional Centroid Moment Tensor (RCMT) project of the Italian ‘Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia’ (INGV). This is probably the effect of the overestimation of Mw 〈 5.5 (M0 〈 2.2 × 1017 Nm), up to year 2002, and of Mw 〈 5.0 (M0 〈 4.0 × 1016 Nm), since year 2003, owing to the physical limitations of the standard CMT inversion method used by GCMT for the earthquakes of relatively low magnitude. If the discrepant data are excluded from the comparisons, the scaling disagreements become insignificant in all cases. We observed instead small absolute offsets (≤0.1 units) for NEIC and ETHZ catalogues with respect to GCMT whereas there is an almost perfect correspondence between RCMT and GCMT. Finally, we found a clear underestimation of about 0.2 units of Mw magnitudes computed at the INGV using the time-domain moment tensor (TDMT) method with respect to those reported by GCMT and RCMT. According to our results, we suggest appropriate offset corrections to be applied to Mw estimates from NEIC, ETHZ and TDMT catalogues before merging their data with GCMT and RCMT catalogues. We suggest as well to discard the probably discrepant data from NEIC and GCMT if other Mw estimates from different sources are available for the same earthquakes. We also estimate approximately the average uncertainty of individual Mw estimates to be about 0.07 magnitude units for the GCMT, NEIC, RCMT and ETHZ catalogues and about 0.13 for the TDMT catalogue.
    Description: European Union research project SHARE (Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe), within the ambit of Task 3.1 ‘European Earthquake Database’
    Description: Published
    Description: 1733-1745
    Description: JCR Journal
    Description: restricted
    Keywords: Earthquake source observations; Statistical seismology ; 05. General::05.01. Computational geophysics::05.01.04. Statistical analysis
    Repository Name: Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV)
    Type: article
    Location Call Number Expected Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...