GMSV Simulation Datasets - Revision history

Maechlin: /* Simulation Data Sets Discussed during Workshop */

2018-02-06T23:50:41Z

Simulation Data Sets Discussed during Workshop

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:50, 6 February 2018
Line 9:		Line 9:
	##Hayward		##Hayward
	##No. San Andreas		##No. San Andreas
	# ~~FZ Used~~ Part A validation events		# Broadband Platform Part A validation events
	## Part A validation events		## Part A validation events
	#CS Data		#CS Data

Maechlin at 23:46, 6 February 2018

2018-02-06T23:46:33Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-Data sets for upcoming SCEC/GMSV meeting:
+== Simulation Data Sets Discussed during Workshop==
 *[https://www.scec.org/workshops/2018/gmsv SCEC/GMSV Workshop Agenda]
 == GMSV group with data last March 2017 ==
@@ Line 11: / Line 27: @@
 *[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/bbp/BBP_Feb2017_Plots/ Feb 2017 Plots]
-== Discussion of Data Sets ==
+== Other possible Data Sets of Interest ==
 #A student working with GB used data on shock.  It has curve and disaggregation data, but no seismograms. The student used files on disk and copied over the specific seismograms he was interested in.  He ran his own queries, and even ran the disaggregation scripts himself, to figure out which seismograms he wanted.  This group was interested in a subset of CyberShake sites: ALP, HLL, LADT, LGB, LPER, MRVY, P1, PBWL, PDE, s351, SVD, WNGC, and SBSM.
 #CyberShake seismogram data, we have:
@@ Line 26: / Line 33: @@
 ##Study 15.12 - Study 15.4 + 10 Hz stochastic
 ##Study 17.3-  1 Hz Central CA
 == Related Entries ==
 *[[CME_Project]]
 *[[GMSV]]

Maechlin: /* Discussion of Data Sets */

2018-02-01T16:56:12Z

Discussion of Data Sets

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:56, 1 February 2018
Line 22:		Line 22:
	#A student working with FZ has been using the CyberShake results. Also, the GMSV group has used the BBP Part A & B results.		#A student working with FZ has been using the CyberShake results. Also, the GMSV group has used the BBP Part A & B results.
	#A student working with GB used data on shock. It has curve and disaggregation data, but no seismograms. The student used files on disk and copied over the specific seismograms he was interested in. He ran his own queries, and even ran the disaggregation scripts himself, to figure out which seismograms he wanted. This group was interested in a subset of CyberShake sites: ALP, HLL, LADT, LGB, LPER, MRVY, P1, PBWL, PDE, s351, SVD, WNGC, and SBSM.		#A student working with GB used data on shock. It has curve and disaggregation data, but no seismograms. The student used files on disk and copied over the specific seismograms he was interested in. He ran his own queries, and even ran the disaggregation scripts himself, to figure out which seismograms he wanted. This group was interested in a subset of CyberShake sites: ALP, HLL, LADT, LGB, LPER, MRVY, P1, PBWL, PDE, s351, SVD, WNGC, and SBSM.
			#CyberShake seismogram data, we have:
			##Study 15.4 - 1 Hz Southern CA
			##Study 15.12 - Study 15.4 + 10 Hz stochastic
			##Study 17.3- 1 Hz Central CA

	== Related Entries ==		== Related Entries ==
	*[[CME_Project]]		*[[CME_Project]]
	*[[GMSV]]		*[[GMSV]]

Maechlin: /* Discussion of Data Sets */

2018-02-01T16:44:03Z

Discussion of Data Sets

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:44, 1 February 2018
Line 15:		Line 15:
	#Several LA region sites were selected, CyberShake ruptures identified, and then run in BBP.		#Several LA region sites were selected, CyberShake ruptures identified, and then run in BBP.
	#Specific simulations that were run for GMSV on the BBP. RWG designed the rupture descriptions and they were run by SCEC, including:		#Specific simulations that were run for GMSV on the BBP. RWG designed the rupture descriptions and they were run by SCEC, including:
	**Elysian Park		##Elysian Park
	**So. San Andreas		##So. San Andreas
	**San Jacinto		##San Jacinto
	**Hayward		##Hayward
	**No. San Andreas		##No. San Andreas
	#A student working with FZ has been using the CyberShake results. Also, the GMSV group has used the BBP Part A & B results.		#A student working with FZ has been using the CyberShake results. Also, the GMSV group has used the BBP Part A & B results.
	#A student working with GB used data on shock. It has curve and disaggregation data, but no seismograms. The student used files on disk and copied over the specific seismograms he was interested in. He ran his own queries, and even ran the disaggregation scripts himself, to figure out which seismograms he wanted. This group was interested in a subset of CyberShake sites: ALP, HLL, LADT, LGB, LPER, MRVY, P1, PBWL, PDE, s351, SVD, WNGC, and SBSM.		#A student working with GB used data on shock. It has curve and disaggregation data, but no seismograms. The student used files on disk and copied over the specific seismograms he was interested in. He ran his own queries, and even ran the disaggregation scripts himself, to figure out which seismograms he wanted. This group was interested in a subset of CyberShake sites: ALP, HLL, LADT, LGB, LPER, MRVY, P1, PBWL, PDE, s351, SVD, WNGC, and SBSM.

Maechlin: /* Discussion of Data Sets */

2018-02-01T16:43:30Z

Discussion of Data Sets

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:43, 1 February 2018
Line 13:		Line 13:
	== Discussion of Data Sets ==		== Discussion of Data Sets ==
	Several data sets under discussion include:		Several data sets under discussion include:
	*Several LA region sites were selected, CyberShake ruptures identified, and then run in BBP.		#Several LA region sites were selected, CyberShake ruptures identified, and then run in BBP.
	*Specific simulations that were run for GMSV on the BBP. RWG designed the rupture descriptions and they were run by SCEC, including:		#Specific simulations that were run for GMSV on the BBP. RWG designed the rupture descriptions and they were run by SCEC, including:
	**Elysian Park		**Elysian Park
	**So. San Andreas		**So. San Andreas
Line 20:		Line 20:
	**Hayward		**Hayward
	**No. San Andreas		**No. San Andreas
	*A student working with FZ has been using the CyberShake results. Also, the GMSV group has used the BBP Part A & B results.		#A student working with FZ has been using the CyberShake results. Also, the GMSV group has used the BBP Part A & B results.
			#A student working with GB used data on shock. It has curve and disaggregation data, but no seismograms. The student used files on disk and copied over the specific seismograms he was interested in. He ran his own queries, and even ran the disaggregation scripts himself, to figure out which seismograms he wanted. This group was interested in a subset of CyberShake sites: ALP, HLL, LADT, LGB, LPER, MRVY, P1, PBWL, PDE, s351, SVD, WNGC, and SBSM.

	== Related Entries ==		== Related Entries ==
	*[[CME_Project]]		*[[CME_Project]]
	*[[GMSV]]		*[[GMSV]]

Maechlin: /* Full validation set of simulations (Parts A & B) */

2018-02-01T00:10:11Z

Full validation set of simulations (Parts A & B)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:10, 1 February 2018
Line 8:		Line 8:

	== Full validation set of simulations (Parts A & B) ==		== Full validation set of simulations (Parts A & B) ==
			Results from BBP running Part A (comparison to GMPE) and Part B (comparison to historic events).
	*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/bbp/BBP_Feb2017_Plots/ Feb 2017 Plots]		*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/bbp/BBP_Feb2017_Plots/ Feb 2017 Plots]

Maechlin: /* Discussion of Data Sets */

2018-02-01T00:09:22Z

Discussion of Data Sets

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:09, 1 February 2018
Line 13:		Line 13:
	Several data sets under discussion include:		Several data sets under discussion include:
	*Several LA region sites were selected, CyberShake ruptures identified, and then run in BBP.		*Several LA region sites were selected, CyberShake ruptures identified, and then run in BBP.
	*Specific simulations that were run for GMSV on the BBP. RWG designed the rupture descriptions		*Specific simulations that were run for GMSV on the BBP. RWG designed the rupture descriptions and they were run by SCEC, including:
	and they were run by SCEC~~. The scenarios are~~:
	**Elysian Park		**Elysian Park
	**So. San Andreas		**So. San Andreas

Maechlin: /* Discussion of Data Sets */

2018-02-01T00:08:50Z

Discussion of Data Sets

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:08, 1 February 2018
Line 11:		Line 11:

	== Discussion of Data Sets ==		== Discussion of Data Sets ==
	# Several LA region sites were selected, CyberShake ruptures identified, and then run in BBP.		Several data sets under discussion include:
			*Several LA region sites were selected, CyberShake ruptures identified, and then run in BBP.
	~~#There are some specific~~ simulations that were run for GMSV on the BBP. RWG designed the rupture descriptions		*Specific simulations that were run for GMSV on the BBP. RWG designed the rupture descriptions
	and they were run by SCEC. The scenarios are:		and they were run by SCEC. The scenarios are:
	*Elysian Park		**Elysian Park
	*So. San Andreas		**So. San Andreas
	*San Jacinto		**San Jacinto
	*Hayward		**Hayward
	*No. San Andreas		**No. San Andreas
			*A student working with FZ has been using the CyberShake results. Also, the GMSV group has used the BBP Part A & B results.
	~~#In addition, a~~ student working with FZ has been using the CyberShake results. Also, the GMSV group has used the BBP Part A & B results.

	== Related Entries ==		== Related Entries ==
	*[[CME_Project]]		*[[CME_Project]]
	*[[GMSV]]		*[[GMSV]]

Maechlin: /* Discussion of Data Sets */

2018-02-01T00:07:45Z

Discussion of Data Sets

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:07, 1 February 2018
Line 11:		Line 11:

	== Discussion of Data Sets ==		== Discussion of Data Sets ==
	There are some specific simulations that were run for GMSV on the BBP. RWG designed the rupture descriptions		# Several LA region sites were selected, CyberShake ruptures identified, and then run in BBP.

			#There are some specific simulations that were run for GMSV on the BBP. RWG designed the rupture descriptions
	and they were run by SCEC. The scenarios are:		and they were run by SCEC. The scenarios are:
	*Elysian Park		*Elysian Park
Line 19:		Line 21:
	*No. San Andreas		*No. San Andreas

	In addition, a student working with FZ has been using the CyberShake results. Also, the GMSV group has used the BBP Part A & B results.		#In addition, a student working with FZ has been using the CyberShake results. Also, the GMSV group has used the BBP Part A & B results.

	== Related Entries ==		== Related Entries ==
	*[[CME_Project]]		*[[CME_Project]]
	*[[GMSV]]		*[[GMSV]]

Maechlin at 00:06, 1 February 2018

2018-02-01T00:06:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:06, 1 February 2018
Line 9:		Line 9:
	== Full validation set of simulations (Parts A & B) ==		== Full validation set of simulations (Parts A & B) ==
	*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/bbp/BBP_Feb2017_Plots/ Feb 2017 Plots]		*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/bbp/BBP_Feb2017_Plots/ Feb 2017 Plots]

			== Discussion of Data Sets ==
			There are some specific simulations that were run for GMSV on the BBP. RWG designed the rupture descriptions
			and they were run by SCEC. The scenarios are:
			*Elysian Park
			*So. San Andreas
			*San Jacinto
			*Hayward
			*No. San Andreas

			In addition, a student working with FZ has been using the CyberShake results. Also, the GMSV group has used the BBP Part A & B results.

	== Related Entries ==		== Related Entries ==
	*[[CME_Project]]		*[[CME_Project]]
	*[[GMSV]]		*[[GMSV]]