Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
FAQs
Introduction
Methods
Nga-East Database
Conclusions
References
All Topics
Earth Sciences
Geophysics

Comparing the CENA GMPEs Using NGA-East Ground-Motion Database

Profile image of Luke Philip OgwenoLuke Philip Ogweno

Seismological Research Letters

https://doi.org/10.1785/0220140045
visibility

…

description

17 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Online Material: Tables and figures of GMPE parameters, NGA-East database summary statistics, mean residuals, skew-ness and kurtosis, results from log-likelihood analysis, and ranking.

FAQs

sparkles

AI

What are the key differences in GMPE performance across different site classes?add

The study finds that GMPEs such as A08p, AB06p, and AB06+ excel in combined site classes, whereas AB95 outperforms others for rock sites.

How does the EDR method outperform LLH in GMPE ranking?add

The EDR methodology accounts for ground-motion uncertainty and biases, making it superior to LLH that primarily assesses likelihood without these considerations.

What statistical methods confirmed GMPEs' residuals are not normally distributed?add

The application of tests such as Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Lilliefors indicated non-normality in GMPEs’ residual distributions, highlighting positive skewness and leptokurtic tendencies.

Which GMPEs performed best at specific spectral periods according to the analysis?add

At shorter periods, A08p and AB95 performed well for rock sites, while EPRI4 and EPRI2 exhibited superior performance for deep soil sites at 2.0 seconds.

What variations exist in GMPE predictions due to geometrical spreading?add

Newer GMPEs utilize R^-1.3 for geometrical spreading under 70 km, resulting in generally lower ground-motion predictions than older models employing R^-1.0.

Related papers

THE ENGINEERING STRONG MOTION DATABASE (NERA-NA3)
Lucia Luzi, Rodolfo Puglia
View PDFchevron_right
Empirical equations for the prediction of PGA and pseudo spectral accelerations using Iranian strong-motion data
hamid zafarani

Journal of Seismology, 2017

A recently compiled, comprehensive, and good-quality strong-motion database of the Iranian earthquakes has been used to develop local empirical equations for the prediction of peak ground acceleration (PGA) and 5%-damped pseudospectral accelerations (PSA) up to 4.0 s. The equations account for style of faulting and four site classes and use the horizontal distance from the surface projection of the rupture plane as a distance measure. The model predicts the geometric mean of horizontal components and the vertical-to-horizontal ratio. A total of 1551 free-field acceleration time histories recorded at distances of up to 200 km from 200 shallow earthquakes (depth < 30 km) with moment magnitudes ranging from M w 4.0 to 7.3 are used to perform regression analysis using the random effects algorithm of Abrahamson and Youngs (Bull Seism Soc Am 82:505-510, 1992), which considers between-events as well as within-events errors. Due to the limited data used in the development of previous Iranian ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs) and strong trade-offs between different terms of GMPEs, it is likely that the previously determined models might have less precision on their coefficients in comparison to the current study. The richer database of the current study allows improving on prior works by considering additional variables that could not previously be adequately constrained. Here, a functional form used by Boore and Atkinson (Earthquake Spect 24:99-138, 2008) and Bindi et al. (Bull Seism Soc Am 9:1899-1920, 2011) has been adopted that allows accounting for the saturation of ground motions at close distances. A regression has been also performed for the V/H in order to retrieve vertical components by scaling horizontal spectra. In order to take into account epistemic uncertainty, the new model can be used along with other appropriate GMPEs through a logic tree framework for seismic hazard assessment in Iran and Middle East region.

View PDFchevron_right
Defining a consistent strategy to model ground-motion parameters for the GEM-PEER Global GMPEs project
K. Campbell, Carola Di Alessandro, Paul Somerville

2012

The project entitled Global Ground Motion Prediction Equations is funded by the Global Earthquake Model (GEM) Foundation and has the objective of recommending a harmonized suite of ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs) that can be used at the global and regional scales for seismic hazard analysis and loss estimation studies. As part of this project, Task 1a experts were commissioned to make recommendations on the critical aspects of seismological predictor parameters that are used by predictive model developers to estimate ground motions for different earthquake scenarios. It is hoped that these recommendations would lead to the optimum description of groundmotion models that can be used efficiently for reliable seismic hazard assessment studies.

View PDFchevron_right
D2.3 - Strong motion parameters of selected events (update the national database ITACA v1.1), revised GMPE
Maria D'Amico
View PDFchevron_right
An Improved Approach for Ground Motion Suite Selection and Modification for Use in Response History Analysis
Mahmoud Hachem

When selecting ground motions for use in response history analysis, design codes such as ASCE 7 and the IBC require that the average of the spectrum resultant, either the SRSS or the fault-normal component, of the selected suite of ground-motion pairs exceed a target design spectrum over a specified period range. Because the design spectrum used to select and modify the ground motions is based on the seismic-hazard characteristics of the site, it is important that the ground motions used in the simulation are modified such that these characteristics are preserved as much as possible. The simple method of amplitude-scaling the ground motions to meet the design code achieves this goal. However, there may be cases where the required amplification, or de-amplification, of the ground motion may vary significantly from the preferred scale factor of 1.0. Amplitude-scaling may also lead to average response spectra that vary significantly in shape from that of the design spectrum in certain period ranges. This may lead to undesirable outcomes such as unrealistic amplification of higher-mode response. The procedure proposed in this paper modifies the frequency content of the ground-motion suite to ensure that the average of the spectrum resultant closely matches the design spectrum at all periods. Because the matching is done at the spectrum-resultant-average level, the required modifications are small compared to the conventional method of spectrally matching every record. This process significantly reduces the higher-mode amplification effects frequently present in the usual amplitude scaling method. In addition to matching a target average spectrum, the procedure can also be extended to achieve a target spectral acceleration standard deviation versus period as well. The proposed approach also differs from so-called tight spectral matching, where both components of all record pairs are tightly spectrally matched to the design spectrum and the record characteristics and record-to-record variability are lost. In the proposed procedure the matching is done only at the level of the average spectrum, and so each ground-motion component still maintains its characteristic variation of spectral acceleration with period. The implementation of this methodology and its effects on design will be presented.

View PDFchevron_right
The web portal of the EUROSEISTEST strong ground motion database
Dimitrios Raptakis, Anastasios Anastasiadis

Bulletin of the Geological Society of Greece, 2016

Strong motion data that have been recorded during the 20-years of operation of the permanent network of EUROSEISTEST (Mygdonia basin, Northern Greece) have been homogenized and organized in an easily accessible, via the web, database. The EUROSEISTEST web portal and the application server running underneath are based solely on free and open source software (F/OSS; MySQL v5.5; RubyOnRails,SAC, Gnuplot and numerous GNU supporting utilities). Its interface allows the user to easily search strong motion data from approximately 200 events and 26 strong motion stations using event-related, record-related or station-related criteria. Further investigation of the data is possible in a graphical environment which includesplots of processed and unprocessed acceleration waveforms, velocity and displacement time histories, amplitude Fourier and response spectra and spectrograms. A great effort was directed toward the inclusion of accurate and most updated earthquake metadata, as well as a wealt...

View PDFchevron_right
NGA-West2 ground motion model for the average horizontal components of PGA, PGV, and 5% damped linear acceleration response spectra
Y. Bozorgnia
View PDFchevron_right
3D Rocking Motion: Blind Prediction Contest Results and Influence of Evaluation Metric on the Rankings
George Mylonakis

COMPDYN Proceedings, 2021

It has been claimed that numerical rocking motion models are not only inaccurate, but that all rocking structures behave unpredictably. This paper revisits the issue of rocking motion unpredictability and explores whether not the response to a single ground motion, but the statistics of the responses to an ensemble of ground motions is predictable. To this end, a 3D rocking podium structure was constructed and tested on a shake table. A blind prediction contest was organized, where the contestants were invited to predict the CDF of the time-maxima of the responses. There were 13 participant teams that used FEM, DEM and rigid body models. It was found that several teams were able to predict the CDF with a decent accuracy. Both FEM and DEM can perform well, depending on the input parameters. Hence, it can be concluded that 3D rocking motion is predictable in the statistical sense.

View PDFchevron_right
Investigating the Correlation between the Parameters of Ground Motion Intensity Measures for Iran's Data
M. Rezaeemanesh

Journal of Soft Computing in Civil Engineering, 2022

This paper presents a statistical correlation analysis of peak ground acceleration to peak ground velocity ratio (A/V) and other ground motion intensity measures (IMs) for Iran’s data. A/V is an important parameter that can significantly affect nonlinear structural responses. Findings from this study provide beneficial insights into selecting suitable parameters for characterizing earthquake ground motions. The studied database included 2053 strong ground motion records with the moment magnitude from 4.5 to 7.8 MW, rupture distance from 1 to 600 km, and average shear wave velocity from 155 to 1594 m/s. Correlation coefficients between A/V and several IMs were obtained for near-field and far-field records at three A/V levels, low A/V, middle A/V, and high A/V. Regression analyses for predicting A/V from the IMs were also conducted for near-field and far-field records. The results showed that the mean period (Tm) has the highest correlation with A/V at all A/V levels and for both far-field and near-field earthquakes compared to the other IMs. Therefore, this parameter can be employed for record selection as a frequency content-based parameter. Finally, current results showed that the accuracy of the Artificial Neural Network (ANN) models are more than the regression models for predicting A/V.

View PDFchevron_right
The role of errors and uncertainties, in strong ground motion parameters, in the achievements of the European Strong Motion database and databank
Alessandro Zini

2016

A methodology is proposed in order to process reliable and important analog records in such a way to obtain physical displacements in the strong-phase time interval. To test the reliability of such a methodology, strong motion recordings of ground acceleration, obtained from a SMA-1 analog accelerograph, and the one obtained by a digital instrument installed in the same pillar, were analyzed in the time domain. Displacements were obtained by double integration of the acceleration and therefore analyzed. The second part of this paper underlines some possible improvements in collecting, selecting and analyzing statistical data based on strong motion recordings. As an application the original Sabetta and Pugliese database for the ground motion prediction of PGA is investigated. First a databank extension due to new digital measurement events, marked by a bigger accuracy, was implemented. Secondly a better statistical way of dealing such spatial data in ground prediction relations, maki...

View PDFchevron_right

References (42)

  1. Abrahamson, N. A., and K. M. Shedlock (1997). Overview, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68, 9-23.
  2. Abrahamson, N. A., and W. J. Silva (1997). Empirical response spectral attenuation relations for shallow crustal earthquakes, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68, no. 1, 94-127.
  3. Al Noman, M. N. (2013). Ground motion modeling for eastern North America: An empirical approach with the NGA-East database, M.S. thesis, University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee, 54 pp.
  4. Atkinson,, G., and D. Boore (1995). New ground motion relations for eastern North America, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 85, 17-30.
  5. Atkinson, G., and D. Boore (2006). Earthquake ground motion predic- tion equations for eastern North America, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96, 2181-2205.
  6. Atkinson, G., and D. Boore (2011). Modifications to existing ground motion prediction equations in light of new data, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 101, 1121-1135.
  7. Atkinson, G. M. (2008). Ground motion prediction equations for eastern North America from a referenced empirical approach: Implications for epistemic uncertainty, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, 1304-1318.
  8. Beauval, C., F. Cotton, N. Abrahamson, N. Theodoulidis, E. Delavaud, L. Rodriguez, F. Scherbaum, and A. Haendel (2012). Regional differences in subduction ground motions, Proc. of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 24-28 September 2012.
  9. Beauval, C., H. Tasan, A. Laurendeau, E. Delavaud, F. Cotton, Ph. Gué- guen, and N. Kühn (2012). On the testing of ground-motion pre- diction equations against small magnitude data, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 102, no. 5, 1994-2007.
  10. Bindi, D., L. Luzi, F. Pacor, G. Franceschina, and R. R. Castro (2006). Ground-motion predictions from empirical attenuation relation- ships versus recorded data: The case of the 1997-1998 Umbria- Marche, central Italy, strong-motion data set, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 96, no. 3, 984-1002.
  11. Campbell, K. W. (1981). Near source attenuation of peak horizontal ac- celeration, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 71, no. 6, 2039-2070.
  12. Campbell, K. W. (2003). Prediction of strong ground motion using the hybrid empirical method and its use in the development of ground motion (attenuation) relations in eastern North America, Bull. Seis- mol. Soc. Am. 93, 1012-1033.
  13. Cramer, C. H., J. Kutliroff, and D. Dangkua (2009). Second year final report on a database of CEUS ground motions, cooperative agree- ment: 07CRAG0015-Mod1, U.S. Geol. Surv. Final Rept., 22 July 2009, CERI, 12 pp.
  14. Cramer, C. H., J. R. Kutliroff, and D. T. Dangkua (2010). A database of eastern North America ground motions for the Next Generation Attenuation East project, Proc. of the Ninth U.S. National and Tenth Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering: Reaching Beyond Borders, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 26-29 July 2010, Earth- quake Engineering Research Institute and Canadian Association for Earthquake Engineering, 10 pp.
  15. Cramer, C. H., J. R. Kutliroff, D. T. Dangkua, and M. N. Al-Noman (2013). Completing the NGA East ENA/SCR Ground Motion Da- tabase, Final Technical Report to PEER under Sub-agreement 7140, 5 April 2013, CERI, 18 pp.
  16. ▴ Figure 5. Ranking according to EDR technique (overall EDR, i.e., k × MDE). (a) All sites, (b) rock sites, (c) soil sites, and (d) deep soil sites. Ⓔ See also Figures S5-S16.
  17. Douglas, J. (2011). Ground-motion prediction equations 1964-2010, Final Rept. BRGM/RP-59356-FR, 444 pp. and 9 illustrations.
  18. Douglas, J., and P. Gehl (2008). Investigating strong ground-motion vari- ability using analysis of variance and two-way-fit plots, Bull. Earthq. Eng. 6, no. 3, 389-405.
  19. Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (2004). CEUS Ground Motion Project, Final Rept., 1009684, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, California.
  20. 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, http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1996/532/OFR-96-532_508.pdf (last assessed October 2014).
  21. Joshi, A., A. Kumar, C. Lomnitz, H. Castaños, and S. Akhtar (2012). Applicability of attenuation relations for regional studies, Geofísc. Int. 51, no. 4, 349-363.
  22. Joyner, W. B., and D. M. Boore (1981). Peak horizontal acceleration and velocity from strong motion records including records from the 1979 Imperial Valley, California, earthquake, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 71, no. 6, 2011-2038.
  23. Kaklamanos, J., and L. G. Baise (2011). Model validations and compar- isons of the Next Generation Attenuation of ground motions (NGA-West) project, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 101, no. 1, 160-175.
  24. Kale, Ö., and S. Akkar (2012). A method to determine the appropriate GMPEs for a selected seismic prone region, Proc. of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 24-28 September 2012.
  25. Kale, Ö., and S. Akkar (2013). A new procedure for selecting and ranking ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs): Euclidean distance- based ranking (EDR) method, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 103, no. 2A, 1069-1084.
  26. Kramer, S. (1996). Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
  27. Mousavi, M., A. Ansari, H. Zafarani, and A. Azarbakht (2012). Selection of ground motion prediction models for seismic hazard analysis in the Zagros region, Iran, J. Earthq. Eng. 16, 1184-1207.
  28. Ogweno, L. P. (2013). Model bias analysis using statistical methods with The NGA East ground motion database, M.S. thesis, University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee.
  29. Ornthammarath, T. (2013). A note on the strong ground motion re- corded during the M w 6.8 earthquake in Myanmar on 24 March 2011, Bull. Earthq. Eng. 11, no. 1, 241-254.
  30. Ornthammarath, T., J. Douglas, R. Sigbjörnsson, and C. G. Lai (2011). Assessment of ground motion variability and its effects on seismic hazard analysis: A case study for Iceland, Bull. Earthq. Eng. 9, no. 4, 931-953.
  31. 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, 61 pp.
  32. Pezeshk, S., A. Zandieh, and B. Tavakoli (2011). Hybrid empirical ground motion prediction equations for eastern North America using NGA models and updated seismological parameters, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 101, no. 4, 1859-1870, doi: 10.1785/0120100144.
  33. Scasserra, G., J. P. Stewart, P. Bazzurro, G. Lanzo, and F. Mollaioli (2009). A Comparison of NGA ground-motion prediction equations to Italian data, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, no. 5, 2961-2978.
  34. Scherbaum, F., F. Cotton, and P. Smit (2004). On the use of response spectral-reference data for the selection and ranking of ground- motion models for seismic-hazard analysis in regions of moderate seismicity: The case of rock motion, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, no. 6, 2164-2185.
  35. Scherbaum, F., E. Delavaud, and C. Riggelsen (2009). Model selection in seismic hazard analysis: An information-theoretic perspective, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, no. 6, 3234-3247.
  36. Shoja-Taheri, J., S. Naserieh, and G. Hadi (2010). A test of the applicabil- ity of NGA models to the strong ground-motion data in the Iranian plateau, J. Earthq. Eng. 14, 278-292.
  37. Silva, W., N. Gregor, and R. Darragh (2002). Development of regional hard rock attenuation relations for central and eastern North America, in Pacific Engineering and Analysis, El Cerrito, California, 57 pp.
  38. Somerville, P., N. Collins, N. Abrahamson, R. Graves, and C. Saikia (2001). Ground motion attenuation relations for central and eastern United States, U.S. Geol. Surv. Final Rept., 30 June 2001, URS Group, Inc., Pasadena, California, 36 pp., http://earthquake .usgs.gov/hazards/products/conterminous/2008/99HQGR0098.pdf (last accessed October 2014)
  39. Tavakoli, B., and S. Pezeshk (2005). Empirical-stochastic ground motion prediction equations for eastern North America, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95, no. 6, 2283-2296, doi: 10.1785/0120050030.
  40. Toro, G. R. (2002). Modification of the Toro et al., (1997) attenuation equations for large magnitudes and short distances, Risk Engineer- ing, Inc, http://www.ce.memphis.edu/7137/PDFs/attenuations/Toro_2001_ (modification_1997).pdf (last accessed October 2013).
  41. Toro, G. R., N. A. Abrahamson, and J. F. Schneider (1997). A model of strong ground motions from earthquakes in Central and Eastern North America: Best estimates and uncertainties, Seismol. Res. Lett. 68, no. 1, 41-57.
  42. Wald, D. J., and T. I. Allen (2007). Topographic slope as a proxy for seismic site conditions and amplification, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97, no. 5, 1379-1395.

Related papers

PEER Arizona Strong-Motion Database and GMPEs Evaluation
Robert Kayen

2014

This report summarizes the products and results of a study on the collection, processing, and analysis of earthquake ground-motions recorded in Arizona at several recording stations within 200 km from the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station in central Arizona. The recorded ground motion in Arizona were compiled and processed according to the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center's (PEER) record-processing standards. Shear-wave velocity profiles at ten recording stations were measured through the spectral analysis of surface wave dispersion technique. Additionally, "kappa" a measure of energy dissipation in the top 1 to 2 km of the crust, was estimated by three methodologies. The average κ 0 (kappa at zero-kilometer distance) was estimated from all sites as 0.033 sec. Finally, response spectra of the recorded ground motions in Arizona were compared with those predicted by the NGA-West2 ground motion prediction equations at large distances in Arizona. The comparison showed that overall the recorded 5% damped response spectral ordinates were over predicted by the NGA-West2 models by a range of 00.35 natural log units for events occurring in Central California, and by a range of 0.20.7 natural log units for events occurring in Southern California and the Gulf of California.

View PDFchevron_right
NGA-Sub ground motion database
Y. Bozorgnia

2018

Author(s): Kishida, T; Contreras, V; Bozorgnia, Y; Abrahamson, NA; Ahdi, SK; Ancheta, TD; Boore, DM; Campbell, KW; Chiou, BSJ; Darragh, RB; Gregor, N; Kuehn, N; Kwak, DY; Kwok, AO; Lin, P; Magistrale, H; Mazzoni, S; Muin, S; Midorikawa, S; Si, H; Silva, WJ; Stewart, J; Wooddell, KE; Youngs, RR | Abstract: This paper summarizes a ground-motion database developed for the NGA-Sub Project. The database consists of two- and three-component ground-motion recordings from selected earthquakes in subduction zones. The database also includes the supporting data such as source, path, and site metadata. The earthquakes are located in Japan, Taiwan, the Pacific Northwest region of North America, Alaska, Mexico, Central and South America, and New Zealand. The events in the database are classified as interface, intraslab, or outer-rise, and have magnitudes ranging from 4 to 9. The database includes more than 71,000 three-component recordings, most of which are from digital accelerograms. The datab...

View PDFchevron_right
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) TABLE OF FIGURES (Continued) With special thanks to: Users Manual for the PEER Ground Motion Database Web Application
Arturo Guadal
View PDFchevron_right
NGA Project Strong-Motion Database
Brian Chiou

Earthquake Spectra, 2008

A key component of the NGA research project was the development of a strong-motion database with improved quality and content that could be used for ground-motion research as well as for engineering practice. Development of the NGA database was executed through the Lifelines program of the PEER Center with contributions from several research organizations and many individuals in the engineering and seismological communities. Currently, the data set consists of 3551 publicly available multi-component records from 173 shallow crustal earthquakes, ranging in magnitude from 4.2 to 7.9. Each acceleration time series has been corrected and filtered, and pseudo absolute spectral acceleration at multiple damping levels has been computed for each of the 3 components of the acceleration time series. The lowest limit of usable spectral frequency was determined based on the type of filter and the filter corner frequency. For NGA model development, the two horizontal acceleration components were further rotated to form the orientationindependent measure of horizontal ground motion (GMRotI50). In addition to the ground-motion parameters, a large and comprehensive list of metadata characterizing the recording conditions of each record was also developed. NGA data have been systematically checked and reviewed by experts and NGA developers.

View PDFchevron_right
Evaluation of Gmpes for Vrancea Intermediate-Depth Seismic Source
Alexandru Aldea

This study focuses on a new evaluation of the applicability of four ground motion prediction models recommended within the SHARE project (Delavaud et al. 2012) for Vrancea subcrustal seismic source. The investigation is performed on a database which consists of over 300 strong ground motions recorded in Romania, Bulgaria and Moldova during ten Vrancea subcrustal earthquakes. This strong ground motion database was assembled for the BIGSEES national research project (http://infp.infp.ro/bigsees/default.htm). Besides the four GMPEs from the SHARE project, a new state-of-the-art ground motion prediction model (Vacareanu et al. 2014) is also tested. This study is a continuation of a previous one with the same topic (Vacareanu et al. 2013). The testing procedure employed in this study uses several goodness-of-fit measures recommended in several studies (e.g. Scherbaum et al. 2004; Scherbaum et al. 2009; Kale and Akkar 2013). Besides the computation of the goodness-of-fit measures (overall and for each spectral period of the model), the inter-event and intraevent residuals are evaluated (Scassera et al. 2009), as well. The results obtained in this study will be incorporated in the future probabilistic seismic hazard assessment of Romania, leading thus to an improved quantification of the seismic hazard levels.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Geophysics
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved