CSEP Minutes 06-27-2018 - Revision history

Wsavran: /* Minutes */

2018-07-05T18:03:28Z

Minutes

Wsavran: /* Minutes */

2018-06-27T20:28:09Z

Minutes

Wsavran: /* Minutes */

2018-06-27T20:23:30Z

Minutes

Wsavran: Created page with "CSEP Working Group Home Page

'''Participants''': M. Werner, D. Rhoades, and W. Savran == Minutes == * extract daily rates for each forecast a..."

2018-06-27T20:11:19Z

Created page with "CSEP Working Group Home Page<br><br> '''Participants''': M. Werner, D. Rhoades, and W. Savran == Minutes == * extract daily rates for each forecast a..."

New page

[[CSEP_Working_Group|CSEP Working Group Home Page]]<br><br>

'''Participants''': M. Werner, D. Rhoades, and W. Savran

== Minutes ==
* extract daily rates for each forecast and plot to verify intregity (first step)
* verify where W, T and R tests are not counted for entire time period
* decipher the timestamp on the evaluation file
* how does the system put together the cumulative tests
* are there cumulative analogs for each evaluation?
* curated csep1.0 data might be needed to compare against csep2.0 forecasts
* verification exercises:
** overlapping window: ETAS extract first month of forecasts and observed catalogs and evaluations
*** RELM tests (N, L, CL, M, S)
** start at the beginning of time to verify cumulative tests
** write scripts for this
* scripts to extract evaluation results
* journal for publishing geoscience data (https://www.earth-system-science-data.net/)
* check existence of the catalog data
** we would need to flag evaluations where catalog could not be downloaded

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:03, 5 July 2018
Line 24:		Line 24:
	** ucerf3 most advanced		** ucerf3 most advanced
	** WGSEP88 report model (D. Jackson paper in the SRL issue; good example for assessing fault based source model)		** WGSEP88 report model (D. Jackson paper in the SRL issue; good example for assessing fault based source model)
		+
		+	'''Action Items'''
		+
		+	Bill:
		+	* provide data set to verify forecasts by extracting the daily-rates for each forecast.
		+	* provide secondary data set to verify evaluations, which consists of forecasts and observations needed and the evaluations to compare against.
		+	* double check run-time estimates for CSEP1 reprocessing estimates.
		+	* generate list of days where observations are missing

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:28, 27 June 2018
Line 23:		Line 23:
	** new zealand has the issue of faults		** new zealand has the issue of faults
	** ucerf3 most advanced		** ucerf3 most advanced
		+	** WGSEP88 report model (D. Jackson paper in the SRL issue; good example for assessing fault based source model)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:23, 27 June 2018
Line 19:		Line 19:
	* check existence of the catalog data		* check existence of the catalog data
	** we would need to flag evaluations where catalog could not be downloaded		** we would need to flag evaluations where catalog could not be downloaded
		+	* competition for fault-based forecasts?
		+	** some hazard models have the notion of seismic regions
		+	** new zealand has the issue of faults
		+	** ucerf3 most advanced

CSEP Minutes 06-27-2018 - Revision history

Wsavran: /* Minutes */

Wsavran: /* Minutes */

Wsavran: /* Minutes */

Wsavran: Created page with "CSEP Working Group Home Page '''Participants''': M. Werner, D. Rhoades, and W. Savran == Minutes == * extract daily rates for each forecast a..."

Wsavran: Created page with "CSEP Working Group Home Page

'''Participants''': M. Werner, D. Rhoades, and W. Savran == Minutes == * extract daily rates for each forecast a..."