Abstract
A sparse data set consisting of 33 local strong-motion recordings from earthquakes with magnitudes between 4.0 and 7.1 and distances between 8 and 190 km is used to develop an initial non-ergodic ground-motion model for the Georgia Republic for spectral acceleration at T = 0.2 s. The non-ergodic adjustments capture the local differences in the linear site effects and linear path effects. The non-ergodic GMMs have reduced aleatory variability along with shifts (increases or decreases) to the median ground motion for a given site/source pair. For sites in central Georgia, there is some local data to constrain the shift in the median ground motion from the base ergodic GMM. For sites far from the available local ground-motion data, such as the Enguri dam site, there is larger epistemic uncertainty in the shifts to median. In this case, the reduced aleatory variability will be offset by the larger epistemic uncertainty. Although there is large uncertainty, the advantage of using the non-ergodic approach in regions with sparse local ground-motion data is that the large epistemic uncertainty range is properly quantified and it shows the potential change to the hazard that can be expected as local ground-motion data are collected.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anderson JG, Brune JN (1999) Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis without the ergodic assumption. Seismol Res Lett 70(1):19–28
Bommer JJ, Abrahamson NA (2006) Why do modern probabilistic seismic-hazard analyses often lead to increased hazard estimates? Bull Seismol Soc Am 96(6):1967–1977
Rodriguez-Marek A (2013) A model for single-station standard deviation using data from various tectonic regions. Bull Seismol Soc Am 103:3149–3163
Abrahamson NA, Silva WJ, Kamai R (2014) Summary of the ASK14 ground motion relation for active crustal regions. Earthquake Spectra 30(3):1025–1055
Boore DM, Stewart JP, Seyhan E, Atkinson GM (2014) NGA-West2 equations for predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% damped PSA for shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra 30(3):1057–1085
Campbell KW, Bozorgnia Y (2014) NGA-West2 ground motion model for the average horizontal components of PGA, PGV, and 5% damped linear acceleration response spectra. Earthquake Spectra 30(3):1087–1115
Chiou BSJ, Youngs RR (2014) Update of the chiou and youngs NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra. Earthquake Spectra 30(3):1117–1153
Kotha SR, Bindi S, Cotton F (2016) Partially non-ergodic region specific GMPE for Europe and Middle-East. Bull Earthq Eng 14(4):1245–1263
Anderson JG, Uchiyama Y (2011) A methodology to improve ground-motion prediction equations by including path corrections. Bull Seismol Soc Am 101(4):1822–1846
Dawood H, Rodriguez-Marek A (2013) A method for including path effects in ground-motion prediction equations: an example using the Mw 9.0 Tohoku earthquake aftershocks. Bull Seismol Soc Am 103(2B):1360–1372
Kuehn NM, Abrahamson NA, Walling MA (2019) Incorporating nonergodic path effects into the NGA-West2 ground-motion prediction equations. Bull Seismol Soc Am 109(2):575–585
Landwehr N, Kuehn NM, Scheffer T, Abrahamson NA (2016) A nonergodic ground-motion model for California with spatially varying coefficients. Bull Seismol Soc Am 106(6):2574–2583
Kuehn NM, Abrahamson NA (2020) Spatial correlations of ground motion for non-ergodic seismic hazard analysis. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 49(1):4–23
Abrahamson NA, Kuehn NM, Walling MA, Landwehr N (2019) Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis in california using nonergodic ground motion models. Bull Seismol Soc Am 109(4):1235–1249
Rasmussen CE, Williams CKI (2006) Gaussian processes for machine learning. MIT Press, Cambridge
Abrahamson NA, Youngs RR (1992) A stable algorithm for regression analysis using the random effects model. Bull Seismol Soc Am 82(1):505–510
Al-Atik L, Youngs RR (2014) Epistemic uncertainty for NGA-West2 models. Earthquake Spectra 30(3):1301–1318
Acknowledgements
The ground motion data from the Georgia Republic were provided by Nino Tsereteli. The non-ergodic attenuation plots for California were generated by Katie Wooddell. This work benefited from discussions with the members of the PEER/UCLA/SCEC Non-Ergodic Working Group.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature B.V.
About this paper
Cite this paper
Abrahamson, N., Kuehn, N. (2021). Non-ergodic Ground-Motion Models for Crustal Earthquakes in Georgia. In: Bonali, F.L., Pasquaré Mariotto, F., Tsereteli, N. (eds) Building Knowledge for Geohazard Assessment and Management in the Caucasus and other Orogenic Regions. NATO Science for Peace and Security Series C: Environmental Security. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-2046-3_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-2046-3_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-024-2045-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-024-2046-3
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)