Difference between revisions of "CyberShake Production Run"

From SCECpedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 7: Line 7:
  
 
# 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 ?
 +
*http://scec.usc.edu/scecpedia/CyberShake_Study_16.9
 
# 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 min Vs floor and Vp/Vs ration ?
 
# 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 19:25, 9 December 2016

Planning for the next CyberShake Production Run

Planned Production Run

Points to Finalize

  1. Are the current CCA06 3D velocity model and 1D velocity model ready for use ?
  1. Are the full N.SAF and S.SAF CVMs ready for use, including interfaces between CVMs ?
  1. Do the CyberShake meshes produced by UCVM match the expected CVM models including min Vs floor and Vp/Vs ration ?
  1. Do we include the N. SAF events for sites within 200km, and exclude N.SAF events for sites more than 200km away ?
  1. Does the current CyberShake software stack on Blue Waters and Titan produce results equivalent to the CyberShake Study 15.4 software stack ?

Related Entries