SCECpedia - User contributions [en]

CISM Evaluation Metrics

2017-03-27T21:20:01Z

Keithrd: /* List of Metrics */

= List of Metrics =

List of metrics/regression tests for all catalogs as a way to compare them, ensure that RSQSim is behaving the same on different machines, and to compare/validate results from updated versions of RSQSim:

* Magnitude-Frequency distribution
** Whole-system
*** [http://opensha.usc.edu/ftp/kmilner/ucerf3/2013_05_10-ucerf3p3-production-10runs/fss_mfd_plots/2013_05_10-ucerf3p3-production-10runs_COMPOUND_SOL_MFD_RELM_TESTING_Region.pdf UCERF3 example]: Gray is off fault and on fault sub-seismogenic, Blue is on fault supra-seismogenic, Red is total. These are nucleation MFDs (as opposed to participation)
** Region- and fault-specific (for more complex models)
*** [http://opensha.usc.edu/ftp/kmilner/ucerf3/2013_05_10-ucerf3p3-production-10runs/parent_sect_mfds/participation_cumulative/ UCERF3 fault participation MFD examples]
* Inter-event time and distance distributions
* Scaling relations
** Magnitude-area
** Slip-area
** Stress drop - magnitude
* Rupture speed
* Single (first large?) event characteristics
* Recurrence time distributions for event sets of interest
* Rupture jumping
* COVs of large events

== RSQSim notes ==
* Most of these are already in plotEqs(), one of the RSQSim post-processing functions that Keith includes with RSQSim, but we probably want to do regional tests that focus on particular sites or faults as well.
* We should create a new function or package of them, similar to plotEqs() that does all the tests and reports/plots the results.

Additional tests and ways of comparing RSQSim catalogs, to both simulated and real data:

* We also want some measure of the divergence of these catalogs when small changes are made to the parameters, as well as the number of cores the simulations are run on.
** Lyapunov exponent
* Set up a reference rupture set or catalog.
* Compare regional RSQSim MFD’s to UCERF3’s on-fault MFD’s.

CISM Evaluation Metrics

2017-03-15T21:56:58Z

Keithrd: /* List of Metrics */

= List of Metrics =

List of metrics/regression tests for all catalogs as a way to compare them, ensure that RSQSim is behaving the same on different machines, and to compare/validate results from updated versions of RSQSim:

* Magnitude-Frequency distribution
** Whole-system
*** [http://opensha.usc.edu/ftp/kmilner/ucerf3/2013_05_10-ucerf3p3-production-10runs/fss_mfd_plots/2013_05_10-ucerf3p3-production-10runs_COMPOUND_SOL_MFD_RELM_TESTING_Region.pdf UCERF3 example]: Gray is off fault and on fault sub-seismogenic, Blue is on fault supra-seismogenic, Red is total. These are nucleation MFDs (as opposed to participation)
** Region- and fault-specific (for more complex models)
*** [http://opensha.usc.edu/ftp/kmilner/ucerf3/2013_05_10-ucerf3p3-production-10runs/parent_sect_mfds/participation_cumulative/ UCERF3 fault participation MFD examples]
* Inter-event time and distance distributions
* Scaling relations
** Magnitude-area
** Slip-area
** Stress drop - magnitude
* Rupture speed
* Single (first large?) event characteristics
* Recurrence time distributions for event sets of interest
* Rupture jumping

== RSQSim notes ==
* Most of these are already in plotEqs(), one of the RSQSim post-processing functions that Keith includes with RSQSim, but we probably want to do regional tests that focus on particular sites or faults as well.
* We should create a new function or package of them, similar to plotEqs() that does all the tests and reports/plots the results.

Additional tests and ways of comparing RSQSim catalogs, to both simulated and real data:

* We also want some measure of the divergence of these catalogs when small changes are made to the parameters, as well as the number of cores the simulations are run on.
** Lyapunov exponent
* Set up a reference rupture set or catalog.
* Compare regional RSQSim MFD’s to UCERF3’s on-fault MFD’s.

CISM Evaluation Metrics

2017-03-15T21:56:44Z

Keithrd: /* List of Metrics */

= List of Metrics =

List of metrics/regression tests for all catalogs as a way to compare them, ensure that RSQSim is behaving the same on different machines, and to compare/validate results from updated versions of RSQSim:

* Magnitude-Frequency distribution
** Whole-system
*** [http://opensha.usc.edu/ftp/kmilner/ucerf3/2013_05_10-ucerf3p3-production-10runs/fss_mfd_plots/2013_05_10-ucerf3p3-production-10runs_COMPOUND_SOL_MFD_RELM_TESTING_Region.pdf UCERF3 example]: Gray is off fault and on fault sub-seismogenic, Blue is on fault supra-seismogenic, Red is total. These are nucleation MFDs (as opposed to participation)
** Region- and fault-specific (for more complex models)
*** [http://opensha.usc.edu/ftp/kmilner/ucerf3/2013_05_10-ucerf3p3-production-10runs/parent_sect_mfds/participation_cumulative/ UCERF3 fault participation MFD examples]
* Inter-event time and distance distributions
* Scaling relations
** Magnitude-area
** Slip-area
** Stress drop - magnitude
* Rupture speed
* Single (first large?) event characterstics
* Recurrence time distributions for event sets of interest
* Rupture jumping

== RSQSim notes ==
* Most of these are already in plotEqs(), one of the RSQSim post-processing functions that Keith includes with RSQSim, but we probably want to do regional tests that focus on particular sites or faults as well.
* We should create a new function or package of them, similar to plotEqs() that does all the tests and reports/plots the results.

Additional tests and ways of comparing RSQSim catalogs, to both simulated and real data:

* We also want some measure of the divergence of these catalogs when small changes are made to the parameters, as well as the number of cores the simulations are run on.
** Lyapunov exponent
* Set up a reference rupture set or catalog.
* Compare regional RSQSim MFD’s to UCERF3’s on-fault MFD’s.

CISM Evaluation Metrics

2017-03-15T21:53:48Z

Keithrd:

= List of Metrics =

List of metrics/regression tests for all catalogs as a way to compare them, ensure that RSQSim is behaving the same on different machines, and to compare/validate results from updated versions of RSQSim:

* Magnitude-Frequency distribution
** Whole-system
*** [http://opensha.usc.edu/ftp/kmilner/ucerf3/2013_05_10-ucerf3p3-production-10runs/fss_mfd_plots/2013_05_10-ucerf3p3-production-10runs_COMPOUND_SOL_MFD_RELM_TESTING_Region.pdf UCERF3 example]: Gray is off fault and on fault sub-seismogenic, Blue is on fault supra-seismogenic, Red is total. These are nucleation MFDs (as opposed to participation)
** Region- and fault-specific (for more complex models)
*** [http://opensha.usc.edu/ftp/kmilner/ucerf3/2013_05_10-ucerf3p3-production-10runs/parent_sect_mfds/participation_cumulative/ UCERF3 fault participation MFD examples]
* Inter-event time and distance distributions
* Scaling relations
** Magnitude-area
** Slip-area
** Stress drop - magnitude
* Rupture speed
* Recurrence time distributions for event sets of interest
* Rupture jumping

== RSQSim notes ==
* Most of these are already in plotEqs(), one of the RSQSim post-processing functions that Keith includes with RSQSim, but we probably want to do regional tests that focus on particular sites or faults as well.
* We should create a new function or package of them, similar to plotEqs() that does all the tests and reports/plots the results.

Additional tests and ways of comparing RSQSim catalogs, to both simulated and real data:

* We also want some measure of the divergence of these catalogs when small changes are made to the parameters, as well as the number of cores the simulations are run on.
** Lyapunov exponent
* Set up a reference rupture set or catalog.
* Compare regional RSQSim MFD’s to UCERF3’s on-fault MFD’s.