1-20 OF 245 RESULTS FOR

UCERF3

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?
Close Modal
Sort by
Journal Article
Published: 25 April 2018
Seismological Research Letters (2018) 89 (4): 1410-1419.
...Yuehua Zeng ABSTRACTThe Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast v.3 (UCERF3) model (Field et al., 2014) considers epistemic uncertainty in fault‐slip rate via the inclusion of multiple rate models based on geologic and/or geodetic data. However, these slip rates are commonly clustered about...
FIGURES | View All (7)
Journal Article
Published: 13 February 2018
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2018) 108 (2): 729-741.
...Morgan T. Page; Nicholas J. van der Elst AbstractEpidemic‐type aftershock sequence (ETAS) catalogs generated from the third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3) model are unique in that they are the first to combine a complex, fault‐based long‐term forecast with short‐term...
FIGURES | View All (10)
Journal Article
Published: 12 July 2017
Seismological Research Letters (2017) 88 (5): 1259-1267.
... into the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 3 (UCERF3). UCERF3 is the first model to provide self‐consistent rupture probabilities over forecasting intervals from less than an hour to more than a century, and it is the first capable of evaluating the short‐term hazards that result from...
FIGURES | View All (5)
Journal Article
Published: 28 February 2017
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2017) 107 (3): 1049-1081.
... for the Third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3), with the goal being to represent aftershocks, induced seismicity, and otherwise triggered events as a potential basis for operational earthquake forecasting (OEF). Specifically, we add an epidemic‐type aftershock sequence (ETAS) component...
FIGURES | View All (27)
Journal Article
Published: 10 March 2015
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2015) 105 (2A): 511-543.
... AbstractThe 2014 Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP 2014) presents time‐dependent earthquake probabilities for the third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3). Building on the UCERF3 time‐independent model published previously, renewal models are utilized...
FIGURES | View All (19)
Journal Article
Published: 03 June 2014
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2014) 104 (3): 1181-1204.
...Morgan T. Page; Edward H. Field; Kevin R. Milner; Peter M. Powers AbstractWe present implementation details, testing, and results from a new inversion‐based methodology, known colloquially as the “grand inversion,” developed for the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3). We...
FIGURES | View All (23)
Journal Article
Published: 01 June 2014
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2014) 104 (3): 1122-1180.
.... Weldon, II; Yuehua Zeng AbstractThe 2014 Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP14) present the time‐independent component of the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 3 (UCERF3), which provides authoritative estimates of the magnitude, location, and time‐averaged...
FIGURES | View All (41)
Journal Article
Published: 01 September 2015
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2015) 105 (5): 2538-2554.
... to the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast Version 3 (UCERF3), net earthquake rates agree within 4% at m≥5.8 and at m≥7.0. The spatial distribution of UCERF3 epicentroids most resembles GEAR1 after UCERF3 is smoothed with a 30 km kernel. Because UCERF3 has been constructed to derive useful information...
FIGURES | View All (9)
Journal Article
Published: 24 July 2018
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2018) 108 (5A): 2493-2520.
...‐specific behavioral and geometric observations. These models (prescribed segmentation) produced single and multisegment ruptures for use in earthquake probability and regional ground‐motion estimates. The 2013 Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 3 (UCERF3), relaxed segmentation through...
FIGURES | View All (10)
Journal Article
Published: 10 October 2017
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2017) 107 (6): 2597-2612.
... California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, version 3 (UCERF3) and the 2008 U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Map Project model. Faults slip beneath a predefined locking depth, except for a few segments where shallow creep is allowed. The slip rates are estimated using a least‐squares inversion...
FIGURES | View All (16)
Journal Article
Published: 15 March 2016
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2016) 106 (2): 766-784.
... Earthquake Rupture Forecast Version 3 (UCERF3) fault geometries. New GPS velocity and geologic slip‐rate data were compiled by the UCERF3 deformation working group. The result of least‐squares inversion shows that the San Andreas fault slips at 19–22  mm/yr along Santa Cruz to the North Coast, 25–28  mm/yr...
FIGURES | View All (15)
Image
Slip‐rate misfits for <b>UCERF3</b>, the UCERF2 mapped solution, and <b>UCERF3</b> branch...
Published: 03 June 2014
Figure 15. Slip‐rate misfits for UCERF3, the UCERF2 mapped solution, and UCERF3 branch averages for each deformation model (see Parsons et al. , 2013 for deformation model details). Note that these plots show ratios of the model slip rates to the target, thus deformation models with very small
Image
California‐wide  MFD s for the UCERF2 and mean <b>UCERF3</b> models. The <b>UCERF3</b> mo...
Published: 03 June 2014
Figure 17. California‐wide MFD s for the UCERF2 and mean UCERF3 models. The UCERF3 model does not have a overprediction around M  6.5–7 (the bulge) that was present in UCERF2. Note that above M  7.8 the inversion target MFD only specifies an upper bound.
Image
UCERF2 to <b>UCERF3</b> ratios. (a) Ratio of the average <b>UCERF3</b> to UCERF2  Off‐Fau...
Published: 01 June 2014
Figure 27. UCERF2 to UCERF3 ratios. (a) Ratio of the average UCERF3 to UCERF2 Off‐Fault Spatial Seis PDF , equal to 0.5(U2 sm +U3 sm )/U2 sm , in which U2 sm is the UCERF2 smoothed seismicity map (Fig.  14a ) and U3 sm is the UCERF3 smoothed seismicity map (Fig.  14b ). This ratio does
Image
UCERF2 to <b>UCERF3</b> ratios. (a) Ratio of the average <b>UCERF3</b> to UCERF2  Off‐Fau...
Published: 01 June 2014
Figure 27. UCERF2 to UCERF3 ratios. (a) Ratio of the average UCERF3 to UCERF2 Off‐Fault Spatial Seis PDF , equal to 0.5(U2 sm +U3 sm )/U2 sm , in which U2 sm is the UCERF2 smoothed seismicity map (Fig.  14a ) and U3 sm is the UCERF3 smoothed seismicity map (Fig.  14b ). This ratio does
Journal Article
Published: 03 October 2018
Seismological Research Letters (2018) 89 (6): 2337-2346.
... Forecast (UCERF3) and its presumed successor, UCERF4, is used as a basis for discussion. Virtually all of the issues and possible improvements discussed are nevertheless general and should therefore be applicable to other regions as well. Two common themes are a need for better epistemic uncertainty...
FIGURES
Journal Article
Published: 18 April 2018
Seismological Research Letters (2018) 89 (4): 1420-1434.
... developed the third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast epidemic‐type aftershock sequence (UCERF3‐ETAS) model. We find that the inclusion of faults only makes a difference for hazard and risk metrics that are dominated by large‐event likelihoods. We also show how the ShakeMap of a mainshock...
FIGURES | View All (11)
Journal Article
Published: 10 November 2015
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America (2015) 105 (6): 3189-3195.
... Forecast (UCERF) 2 and its update, UCERF3, depict slip on these major range-front normal faults as extending well into the caldera, with significant normal slip on overlapping, subparallel segments separated by ∼10  km. This depiction is countered by (1) geologic evidence that normal faulting within...
FIGURES
Image
Rupture length histograms for <b>UCERF3</b>, fault model version 3.1 (FM3.1). (a) ...
Published: 24 July 2018
Figure 3. Rupture length histograms for UCERF3, fault model version 3.1 (FM3.1). (a) The distribution of 253,706 individual rupture lengths developed as input for the UCERF3 grand inversion. Equal weight is assigned to each rupture as opposed to postinversion rupture rates. (b) The total
Image
Rupture participation maps from <b>UCERF3</b> ( Field  et al. , 2013 ). (a–f) illu...
Published: 24 July 2018
Figure 4. Rupture participation maps from UCERF3 ( Field et al. , 2013 ). (a–f) illustrate the range of fault lengths, rupture complexity and alternate paths, and rupture rates that UCERF3 models for each parent fault section (dark rectangles) in FM3.1. Faults shown in gray are not connected