Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
![First thumbnail for: <span class="search-highlight">NeoKinema</span> De...]()
![Second thumbnail for: <span class="search-highlight">NeoKinema</span> De...]()
![Third thumbnail for: <span class="search-highlight">NeoKinema</span> De...]()
![(a) Comparison of fault‐slip rates between this study and NeoKinema NSHM2014 model version 3.2. (The largest discrepancy, 1 vs. 14 mm/yr, is from the Eureka Peak fault, located in the eastern Transverse ranges and south of the Pinto Mountain fault.) (b) Fault offset rate ratios. R = rate (this study)/rate (NSHM2014): R < 0.25, purple; 0.25 < R < 0.5, blue; 0.5 < R < 2, green; 2 < R < 4, yellow; 4 < R < 8, orange; 8 < R, red. The color version of this figure is available only in the electronic edition.]()
![First thumbnail for: Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models II: Informat...]()
![Second thumbnail for: Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models II: Informat...]()
![Third thumbnail for: Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models II: Informat...]()
![Same as in Figure 1, for RELM mainshock + aftershock forecasts: (a) Bird-Neokinema; (b) Ebel-Aftershock; (c) Helmstetter-Aftershock; (d) Kagan-Aftershock; and (e) Shen-Aftershock.]()
![Finite‐element grid for western United States and boundary conditions for the NeoKinema model. Boundaries marked as “free*” are not completely free because local velocities are still required to closely match those of local GPS benchmarks. The color version of this figure is available only in the electronic edition.]()
![Conversion of cell expectation to multiplier for conjugate models defined for the whole of California in two‐model hybrids with the Helmstetter et al. HKJ as the baseline model. For each conjugate model, the upper frame shows the multiplier exp(a+f2[λ2(j,·)]), and the lower frame shows the cumulative distribution of summed spatial expectations λ2(j,·). For the Neokinema and pattern informatics (PI) models, the optimal multipliers for southern California only are also shown. The color version of this figure is available only in the electronic edition.]()
![Map of earthquake rates, RTR, in the best three‐model hybrids for (a) the whole of California: a hybrid of Helmstetter et al. HKJ, Bird and Liu Neokinema, and Holliday et al.PI; and (b) southern California: a hybrid of Helmstetter et al. HKJ, Shen et al. geodetic, and Holliday et al.PI. In the reference model, one earthquake per year is expected to exceed any magnitude m in an area of 10m km2. The color version of this figure is available only in the electronic edition.]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![First thumbnail for: Western U.S. Deformation Models for the 2023 Updat...]()
![Second thumbnail for: Western U.S. Deformation Models for the 2023 Updat...]()
![Third thumbnail for: Western U.S. Deformation Models for the 2023 Updat...]()
![The various off‐fault spatial seismicity probability density functions (SpatialPDF) used in UCERF3 for setting gridded seismicity (referred to as the Off‐Fault Spatial Seis PDF logic‐tree branch in Fig. 3). Values in each map sum to unity. (a) The UCERF2 smoothed seismicity model. (b) The UCERF3 smoothed seismicity model of Felzer (2013c, Appendix M), which has a higher resolution, adaptive smoothing kernel. (c) Spatial PDF implied by the average of the off‐fault moment rate maps from Appendix C (Parsons et al., 2013), which includes the ABM, NeoKinema, and Zeng deformation models and averages over maps for both Fault Models 3.1 and 3.2.]()
![First thumbnail for: Seismic Hazard Inferred from Tectonics: California]()
![Second thumbnail for: Seismic Hazard Inferred from Tectonics: California]()
![Third thumbnail for: Seismic Hazard Inferred from Tectonics: California]()
![Common logarithm of forecast long-term seismicity (in epicenters per square meter per second, including aftershocks) in the California region for threshold magnitude. 5.663, according to the SHIFT model. Seismicity in California and surrounding regions (with short-wavelength structure) is based on kinematics from NeoKinema model GCN2004084, as described in the text. Deep-sea seismicity and southern Arizona seismicity are based on strain rates from Shells model Earth5-013. The spatial integral of the forecast rate is equivalent to 63 earthquakes per 25.75 years in the depth range 0∼70 km. (To convert seismicity from earthquakes/m2/s to earthquakes/km2/year, add 13.5 to the values along the scale. To convert to earthquakes/(100 km)2/century, add 19.5.)]()
![First thumbnail for: Are Regionally Calibrated Seismicity Models More I...]()
![Second thumbnail for: Are Regionally Calibrated Seismicity Models More I...]()
![Third thumbnail for: Are Regionally Calibrated Seismicity Models More I...]()
![]()
![First thumbnail for: Likelihood-Based Tests for Evaluating Space–Rate–M...]()
![Second thumbnail for: Likelihood-Based Tests for Evaluating Space–Rate–M...]()
![Third thumbnail for: Likelihood-Based Tests for Evaluating Space–Rate–M...]()
![First thumbnail for: 2014 Update to the National Seismic Hazard Model i...]()
![Second thumbnail for: 2014 Update to the National Seismic Hazard Model i...]()
![Third thumbnail for: 2014 Update to the National Seismic Hazard Model i...]()
1-20 OF 61 RESULTS FOR
NeoKinema
Results shown limited to content with bounding coordinates.
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
1
Journal Article
NeoKinema Deformation Model for the 2023 Update to the U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model Available to Purchase
Journal: Seismological Research Letters
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 14 September 2022
Seismological Research Letters (2022) 93 (6): 3037–3052.
...Zheng‐Kang Shen; Peter Bird Abstract We develop a crustal deformation model of the western conterminous United States for the 2023 update of the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM). The kinematic finite‐element code NeoKinema is used to describe crustal deformation, including long‐term slip...
FIGURES
Includes: Supplemental Content
Image
(a) Comparison of fault‐slip rates between this study and NeoKinema NSHM201... Available to Purchase
in NeoKinema Deformation Model for the 2023 Update to the U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model
> Seismological Research Letters
Published: 14 September 2022
Figure 9. (a) Comparison of fault‐slip rates between this study and NeoKinema NSHM2014 model version 3.2. (The largest discrepancy, 1 vs. 14 mm/yr, is from the Eureka Peak fault, located in the eastern Transverse ranges and south of the Pinto Mountain fault.) (b) Fault offset rate ratios. R
Journal Article
Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models II: Information Gains of Multiplicative Hybrids Available to Purchase
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 30 September 2014
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2014) 104 (6): 3072–3083.
... model and an overall normalizing constant are fitted to optimize the hybrid model. Many two‐model hybrids have an appreciable information gain (log probability gain) per earthquake relative to the best individual model. For the whole of California, the Bird and Liu (2007) Neokinema and Holliday et al...
FIGURES
Image
Same as in Figure 1 , for RELM mainshock + aftershock forecasts: (a) Bird-... Available to Purchase
in Likelihood-Based Tests for Evaluating Space–Rate–Magnitude Earthquake Forecasts
> Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
Published: 01 June 2010
Figure 2. Same as in Figure 1 , for RELM mainshock + aftershock forecasts: (a) Bird-Neokinema; (b) Ebel-Aftershock; (c) Helmstetter-Aftershock; (d) Kagan-Aftershock; and (e) Shen-Aftershock.
Image
Finite‐element grid for western United States and boundary conditions for t... Available to Purchase
in NeoKinema Deformation Model for the 2023 Update to the U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model
> Seismological Research Letters
Published: 14 September 2022
Figure 3. Finite‐element grid for western United States and boundary conditions for the NeoKinema model. Boundaries marked as “free*” are not completely free because local velocities are still required to closely match those of local GPS benchmarks. The color version of this figure is available
Image
![Conversion of cell expectation to multiplier for conjugate models defined for the whole of California in two‐model hybrids with the Helmstetter et al. HKJ as the baseline model. For each conjugate model, the upper frame shows the multiplier exp(a+f2[λ2(j,·)]), and the lower frame shows the cumulative distribution of summed spatial expectations λ2(j,·). For the Neokinema and pattern informatics (PI) models, the optimal multipliers for southern California only are also shown. The color version of this figure is available only in the electronic edition.](https://gsw.silverchair-cdn.com/gsw/Content_public/Journal/bssa/104/6/10.1785_0120140035/3/s_3072fig2.jpeg?Expires=2147483647&Signature=Tqyz8rYVSOu6ajHJX3VIM5-~uyMXBM6fEB-6GFBalb9QeHOu7P5ygcxhE-o5bKZKnokW8ouv13lNDc4ozCZCgZt3xC93jD70xI5oGqYhcfHAwJXsE65t2z1a1SsnNo4G2OKoJD5Mo6YUOfqhsBFenk9l2nMrHyFNcSarN-g1RT3WaRHJnGuLursj85Ek2dl98iVqW99Dbv1H-UMof4ZKOFFdzlgxgw05pbW4dKosTrjsSgtWjS9Eps5qinoVzOjWTsxB06t3r0WrvjGg733xruTADsWlI26yf4BlQRJrCFIkHn6U-U0yDcY3ruBNc5hJhoVBlFRu3VHwEB866HENVg__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIE5G5CRDK6RD3PGA)
Conversion of cell expectation to multiplier for conjugate models defined f... Available to Purchase
in Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models II: Information Gains of Multiplicative Hybrids
> Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
Published: 30 September 2014
,·)]), and the lower frame shows the cumulative distribution of summed spatial expectations λ 2 ( j ,·). For the Neokinema and pattern informatics ( PI ) models, the optimal multipliers for southern California only are also shown. The color version of this figure is available only in the electronic edition.
Image
Map of earthquake rates, RTR , in the best three‐model hybrids for (a) the... Available to Purchase
in Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models II: Information Gains of Multiplicative Hybrids
> Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
Published: 30 September 2014
Figure 8. Map of earthquake rates, RTR , in the best three‐model hybrids for (a) the whole of California: a hybrid of Helmstetter et al. HKJ, Bird and Liu Neokinema, and Holliday et al. PI ; and (b) southern California: a hybrid of Helmstetter et al. HKJ, Shen et al. geodetic
Image
Expected Rates in Forecast Overlap Regions for RELM Mainshock + Aftershock ... Available to Purchase
in Likelihood-Based Tests for Evaluating Space–Rate–Magnitude Earthquake Forecasts
> Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
Published: 01 June 2010
Table 4 Expected Rates in Forecast Overlap Regions for RELM Mainshock + Aftershock Forecasts * Λ 2 Λ 1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. Bird-NeoKinema 17.335 27.921 15.741 15.714 2. Ebel-Aftershock 36.362 36.362 19.946 20.323 3. Helmstetter-Aftershock
Image
Expected Rates in Forecast Overlap Regions for RELM Mainshock + Aftershock ... Available to Purchase
in Likelihood-Based Tests for Evaluating Space–Rate–Magnitude Earthquake Forecasts
> Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
Published: 01 June 2010
Table 4 Expected Rates in Forecast Overlap Regions for RELM Mainshock + Aftershock Forecasts * Λ 2 Λ 1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. Bird-NeoKinema 17.335 27.921 15.741 15.714 2. Ebel-Aftershock 36.362 36.362 19.946 20.323 3. Helmstetter-Aftershock
Image
Expected Rates in Forecast Overlap Regions for RELM Mainshock + Aftershock ... Available to Purchase
in Likelihood-Based Tests for Evaluating Space–Rate–Magnitude Earthquake Forecasts
> Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
Published: 01 June 2010
Table 4 Expected Rates in Forecast Overlap Regions for RELM Mainshock + Aftershock Forecasts * Λ 2 Λ 1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. Bird-NeoKinema 17.335 27.921 15.741 15.714 2. Ebel-Aftershock 36.362 36.362 19.946 20.323 3. Helmstetter-Aftershock
Image
Expected Rates in Forecast Overlap Regions for RELM Mainshock + Aftershock ... Available to Purchase
in Likelihood-Based Tests for Evaluating Space–Rate–Magnitude Earthquake Forecasts
> Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
Published: 01 June 2010
Table 4 Expected Rates in Forecast Overlap Regions for RELM Mainshock + Aftershock Forecasts * Λ 2 Λ 1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. Bird-NeoKinema 17.335 27.921 15.741 15.714 2. Ebel-Aftershock 36.362 36.362 19.946 20.323 3. Helmstetter-Aftershock
Image
Expected Rates in Forecast Overlap Regions for RELM Mainshock + Aftershock ... Available to Purchase
in Likelihood-Based Tests for Evaluating Space–Rate–Magnitude Earthquake Forecasts
> Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
Published: 01 June 2010
Table 4 Expected Rates in Forecast Overlap Regions for RELM Mainshock + Aftershock Forecasts * Λ 2 Λ 1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. Bird-NeoKinema 17.335 27.921 15.741 15.714 2. Ebel-Aftershock 36.362 36.362 19.946 20.323 3. Helmstetter-Aftershock
Journal Article
Western U.S. Deformation Models for the 2023 Update to the U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model Available to Purchase
Journal: Seismological Research Letters
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 19 September 2022
Seismological Research Letters (2022) 93 (6): 3068–3086.
... interseismic deformation; (2) the deep‐dislocation‐driven fault‐based model, which employs dislocations below the locking depth of NSHM faults; (3) Neokinema, which uses both the GPS data and crustal stress information to constrain long‐term fault slip rates on NSHM faults; and (4) the block model, which...
FIGURES
Includes: Supplemental Content
Image
The various off‐fault spatial seismicity probability density functions ( Sp... Available to Purchase
in Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 3 (UCERF3)—The Time‐Independent Model
> Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
Published: 01 June 2014
. (b) The UCERF3 smoothed seismicity model of Felzer (2013c , Appendix M), which has a higher resolution, adaptive smoothing kernel. (c) Spatial PDF implied by the average of the off‐fault moment rate maps from Appendix C ( Parsons et al. , 2013 ), which includes the ABM, NeoKinema, and Zeng
Journal Article
Seismic Hazard Inferred from Tectonics: California Available to Purchase
Journal: Seismological Research Letters
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 01 January 2007
Seismological Research Letters (2007) 78 (1): 37–48.
... to other forecasts) and, if so, how? A simple answer is provided by our definition of “long-term” as 10 4 ∼10 6 years (see ftp://element.ess.ucla.edu/NeoKinema/Appendix-Algorithm_of_NeoKinema.pdf ). Therefore, a SHIFT forecast can be evaluated in any region (however small) by a 10,000-year test. A more...
FIGURES
Image
Common logarithm of forecast long-term seismicity (in epicenters per square... Available to Purchase
Published: 01 January 2007
) is based on kinematics from NeoKinema model GCN2004084, as described in the text. Deep-sea seismicity and southern Arizona seismicity are based on strain rates from Shells model Earth5-013. The spatial integral of the forecast rate is equivalent to 63 earthquakes per 25.75 years in the depth range 0∼70 km
Journal Article
Are Regionally Calibrated Seismicity Models More Informative than Global Models? Insights from California, New Zealand, and Italy Open Access
Journal: The Seismic Record
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 06 April 2023
The Seismic Record (2023) 3 (2): 86–95.
...., NZHM), spatial variations in the Gutenberg–Richter b ‐value (e.g., Asperity Likelihood Model [ALM], HALM, and ALM‐IT), tectonic zonations (e.g., MPS04‐AFTER), and kinematic models of surface velocities (e.g., NEOKINEMA). In Table 1 and Figure 1 , we provide a brief description of the main features...
FIGURES
Includes: Supplemental Content
Image
Variables that can be trimmed from the logic tree and set to a deterministi... Available to Purchase
in Trimming the UCERF3-TD logic tree: Model order reduction for an earthquake rupture forecast considering loss exceedance
> Earthquake Spectra
Published: 01 February 2025
Tapered Deformation Model Geologic Neokinema ZengBB Scaling Relationship ELL B SQL ELL B SQL ELL B SQL ELL B SQL Spatial Seismicity PDF UCERF2 UCERF3 UCERF2 UCERF3 Ground Motion Model ASK2014 Added Epist Uncertainty EAL: expected annualized loss; COV
Journal Article
Likelihood-Based Tests for Evaluating Space–Rate–Magnitude Earthquake Forecasts Available to Purchase
Publisher: Seismological Society of America
Published: 01 June 2010
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2010) 100 (3): 1184–1195.
...Figure 2. Same as in Figure 1 , for RELM mainshock + aftershock forecasts: (a) Bird-Neokinema; (b) Ebel-Aftershock; (c) Helmstetter-Aftershock; (d) Kagan-Aftershock; and (e) Shen-Aftershock. ...
FIGURES
Includes: Supplemental Content
Journal Article
2014 Update to the National Seismic Hazard Model in California Available to Purchase
Journal: Earthquake Spectra
Publisher: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
Published: 01 December 2015
Earthquake Spectra (2015) 31 (1_suppl): S177–S200.
... to geologic data to estimate fault-slip rates. In order to estimate slip rates from geodetic data, UCERF3 considers three kinematically consistent models: “NeoKinema,” “Zeng,” and an average block model, hereafter referred to as “AveBlockMod” (Parsons et al. 2013). These models weight geologic and geodetic...
FIGURES
1
