Difference between revisions of "Forecast Data"
From SCECpedia
Jump to navigationJump to search| Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
*[https://molssi.org/ Software Institute] | *[https://molssi.org/ Software Institute] | ||
*[https://www.nsf.gov/geo/geo-ci/index.jsp NSF Geoscience opportunities] | *[https://www.nsf.gov/geo/geo-ci/index.jsp NSF Geoscience opportunities] | ||
| + | *[https://www.tulane.edu/~sanelson/Natural_Disasters/introduction.htm Geohazard Overview] | ||
==Forecast User Base Estimates == | ==Forecast User Base Estimates == | ||
Revision as of 17:15, 8 December 2020
Links to existing SCEC Forecast Data Distribution Methods:
Contents
Forecast Data Descriptions
Forecast Data Listings
ETAS Simulation Data:
UCERF Project Data:
CSEP Project Data:
Ground Motion Simulation Project Data:
- High-F Results
- UGMS User Community
- Engineer Oriented Data Distribution Site
- GIS-based interface to Hazard Maps
Event Response Data:
Data Sharing Methods
- Predictability Workshop Report
- USGS Fundamental Practices
- DOE ECP IDEAS Talks
- DOE Containers for Software Reproduciblity Webinar
Related Projects
- Deriva Project
- WholeTale Project
- Geohazard Projects
- Mid-scale Research Infrastructure - 1
- forecasts.php?clicked=title Trustworthy Forecast Project
- Software Institute
- NSF Geoscience opportunities
- Geohazard Overview
Forecast User Base Estimates
- We have these estimates of the user base for products that come out of CISM and CSEP. And how those numbers are documented. UCERF3-ETAS: 5-10 people currently look at raw simulation results. If we create a full operational system, it would potentially have broad user base, but it's currently in a research mode and only shared with interested and sophisticated users.
- UCERF3+ Inversions: The inversion results will be looked at by the core WGCEP team and shared with the scientific review panel, so probably 5-10 diving in and looking at detailed results, ~30 looking at summary plots. The New Zealand team would likely be interested in these capabilities as well, which could double the user base.RSQSim: Likely always a small group, <10 looking at RSQSim results and downstream products (ground motion simulations)
- With the RISE experiment gearing up and many new modelers looking to get their models tested, and assuming that UCERF3/4 goes under prospective testing I expect between 20-30 people will be interested in looking at individual forecast and evaluation results. An additional ~10 would be interested in looking at aggregate results, such as the cumulative tests (ie., types of results that could be a publication figure), but I don’t have a good handle on those numbers. Like with the UCERF3 results, the potential user base would probably increase depending on the availability of the data products and simulations results.
