CyberShake Production Run: Difference between revisions
From SCECpedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
# Are the current [[CCA]]06 3D velocity model and 1D velocity model ready for use ? | # Are the current [[CCA]]06 3D velocity model and 1D velocity model ready for use ? | ||
# Are the full N.SAF and S.SAF CVMs ready for use, including interfaces between CVMs ? | # Are the full N.SAF and S.SAF CVMs ready for use, including interfaces between CVMs ? | ||
# Do the CyberShake meshes produced by UCVM match the expected CVM models including ? | # Do the CyberShake meshes produced by UCVM match the expected CVM models including min Vs floor and Vp/Vs ration ? | ||
# Do we include the N. SAF events for sites within 200km, and exclude N.SAF events for sites more than 200km away ? | # Do we include the N. SAF events for sites within 200km, and exclude N.SAF events for sites more than 200km away ? | ||
# Does the current CyberShake software stack on Blue Waters and Titan produce results equivalent to the [[CyberShake Study 15.4]] software stack ? | # Does the current CyberShake software stack on Blue Waters and Titan produce results equivalent to the [[CyberShake Study 15.4]] software stack ? | ||
Revision as of 07:00, 7 December 2016
Planning for the next CyberShake Production Run
Planned Production Run
Points to Finalize
- Are the current CCA06 3D velocity model and 1D velocity model ready for use ?
- Are the full N.SAF and S.SAF CVMs ready for use, including interfaces between CVMs ?
- Do the CyberShake meshes produced by UCVM match the expected CVM models including min Vs floor and Vp/Vs ration ?
- Do we include the N. SAF events for sites within 200km, and exclude N.SAF events for sites more than 200km away ?
- Does the current CyberShake software stack on Blue Waters and Titan produce results equivalent to the CyberShake Study 15.4 software stack ?
