Efficient testing of earthquake forecasting models

• Autorzy: Rhoades D.A. , Schorlemmer D. , Gerstenberger M.C. , Christophersen A. , Zechar J.D. , Imoto M.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Computationally efficient alternatives are proposed to the likelihood- based tests employed by the Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability for assessing the performance of earthquake likelihood models in the earthquake forecast testing centers. For the conditional L-test, which tests the consistency of the earthquake catalogue with a model, an exact test using convolutions of distributions is available when the number of earthquakes in the test period is small, and the central limit theorem provides an approximate test when the number of earthquakes is large. Similar methods are available for the R-test, which compares the likelihoods of two competing models. However, the R-test, like the N-test and L-test, is fundamentally a test of consistency of data with a model. We propose an alternative test, based on the classical paired t-test, to more directly compare the likelihoods of two models. Although approximate and predicated on a normality assumption, this new T-test is not computer-intensive, is easier to interpret than the R-test, and becomes increasingly dependable as the number of earthquakes increases.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

statistical seismology; earthquake forecasting; earthquake likelihood models

• Wydawca: Instytut Geofizyki PAN ; Springer
• Czasopismo: Acta Geophysica
• Rocznik: 2011
• Tom: Vol. 59, no. 4
• Strony: 728--747
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 29 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Rhoades D.A.

autor

Schorlemmer D.

autor

Gerstenberger M.C.

autor

Christophersen A.

autor

Zechar J.D.

autor

Imoto M.

• GNS Science, New Zealand,

Bibliografia

• Daley, D.J., and D. Vere-Jones (2003), An Introduction to the Theory of Point Processes, Volume 1: Elementary Theory and Methods, 2nd ed., Springer, New York, 469 pp.
• Ebel, J.E., D.W. Chambers, A.L. Kafka, and J.A. Baglivo (2007), Non-Poissonian earthquake clustering and the hidden Markov model as bases for earthquake forecasting in California, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 1, 57-65.
• Fisz, M. (1963), Probability Theory and Mathematical Statistics, 3rd ed., Wiley, New York, 667 pp.
• Gerstenberger, M.C., and D.A. Rhoades (2010), New Zealand earthquake forecast testing centre, Pure Appl. Geophys. 167, 8-9, 877-892.
• Gerstenberger, M.C., D.A. Rhoades, M.W. Stirling, R. Brownrigg, and A. Christophersen (2009), Continued development of the New Zealand earthquake forecast testing centre, GNS Science Consultancy Report 2009/182, GNS Science, Lower Hutt.
• Harte, D., and D. Vere-Jones (2005), The entropy score and its uses in earthquake forecasting, Pure Appl. Geophys. 162, 6-7, 1229-1253.
• Helmstetter, A., Y.Y. Kagan, and D.D. Jackson (2007), High-resolution time independent grid-based forecast for M ≥ 5 earthquakes in California, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 1, 78-86.
• Holliday, J.R., C. Chen, K.F. Tiampo, J.B. Rundle, D.L. Turcotte, and A. Donnellan (2007), A RELM earthquake forecast based on pattern informatics, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 1, 87-93.
• Imoto, M., and N. Hurukawa (2006), Assessing potential seismic activity in Vrancea, Romania, using a stress-release model, Earth Planets Space 58. 1511-1514.
• Imoto, M., and D.A. Rhoades (2010), Seismicity models of moderate earthquakes in Kanto, Japan utilizing multiple predictive parameters, Pure Appl. Geophys. 167, 6-7, 831-843.
• Imoto, M., D.A. Rhoades, H. Fujiwara, and N. Yamamoto (2011), Conventional N-, L-, and R-tests of earthquake forecasting models without simulated catalogs, Earth Planets Space 63, 275-287.
• Jackson, D.D., and Y.Y. Kagan (1999), Testable earthquake forecasts for 1999, Seismol. Res. Lett. 70, 4, 393-403.
• Jordan, T.H. (2006), Earthquake predictability, brick by brick, Seismol. Res. Lett. 77, 1, 3-6.
• Kagan, Y.Y. (1973), Statistical methods in the study of seismic processes, Bull. Int. Statist. Inst. 45, 437-453.
• Kagan, Y.Y. (2010), Statistical distributions of earthquake numbers: consequence of branching process, Geophys. J. Int. 180, 3, 1313-1328.
• Kagan, Y.Y., D.D. Jackson, and Y. Rong (2007), A testable five-year forecast of moderate and large earthquakes in southern California based on smoothed seismicity, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 1, 94-98.
• Rhoades, D.A., and F.F. Evison (2004), Long-rang earthquake forecasting with every earthquake a precursor according to scale, Pure Appl. Geophys. 161, 1, 47-72.
• Schorlemmer, D., and M.C. Gerstenberger (2007), RELM Testing Center, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 1, 30-36.
• Schorlemmer, D., M.C. Gerstenberger, S. Wiemer, D.D. Jackson, and D.A. Rhoades (2007), Earthquake likelihood model testing, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 1, 17-29.
• Schorlemmer, D., J.D. Zechar, M.J. Werner, E.H. Field, D.D. Jackson, T.H. Jordan, and the RELM Working Group (2010), First results of the Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models experiment, Pure Appl. Geophys. 167, 8-9, 859-876.
• Shen, Z.K., D.D. Jackson, and Y.Y. Kagan (2007), Implications of geodetic strain rate for future earthquakes, with a five-year forecast of M5 earthquakes in southern California, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 1, 116-120.
• Siegel, S. (1956), Non-Parametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, McGraw-Hill, New York.
• Stirling, M.W., G.H. McVerry, and K.R. Berryman (2002), A new seismic hazard model for New Zealand, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 92, 5, 1878-1903.
• Vere-Jones, D. (1970), Stochastic models for earthquake occurrence, J. Roy. Stat. Soc. Ser. B (Methodological) 32, 1-62.
• Ward, S.N. (2007), Methods for evaluating earthquake potential and likelihood in and around California, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 1, 121-133.
• Werner, M.J., J.D. Zechar, W. Marzocchi, S. Wiemer, and the CSEP-Italy Working Group (2010), Retrospective evaluation of the five-year and ten-year CSEP-Italy earthquake forecasts, Ann. Geophys. 53, 3, 11-30.
• Wiemer, S., and D. Schorlemmer (2007), ALM: An asperity-based likelihood model for California, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78, 1, 134-140.
• Zechar, J.D., M.C. Gerstenberger, and D.A. Rhoades (2010a), Likelihood-based tests for evaluating space-rate-magnitude earthquake forecasts, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 100, 3, 1184-1195.
• Zechar, J.D., D. Schorlemmer, M. Liukis, J. Yu, F. Euchner, P.J. Maechling, and T.H. Jordan (2010b), The Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability perspective on computational earthquake science, Concurr. Comp. – Pract. Exp. 22, 12, 1836-1847.