Difference between revisions of "CyberShake Production Run"
From SCECpedia
Jump to navigationJump to search (Created page with "Planning for the next CyberShake Production Run == Planned Production Run == *CyberShake Study 16.11 == Points to Finalize == # Is the current CCA06 velocity model read...") |
|||
| (11 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Planning for the next CyberShake Production Run | + | '''Planning for the next CyberShake Production Run''' |
== Planned Production Run == | == Planned Production Run == | ||
| − | *[[CyberShake Study 16. | + | *[[CyberShake Study 16.9]] |
== Points to Finalize == | == Points to Finalize == | ||
| − | + | (1) Are the current [[CCA]]06 3D velocity model and 1D velocity model ready for use ? | |
| − | + | *http://scec.usc.edu/scecpedia/CyberShake_Study_16.9 | |
| − | + | (2) Do the CyberShake meshes produced by UCVM match the expected CVM models including min Vs floor and Vp/Vs ration ? | |
| − | + | *http://scec.usc.edu/scecpedia/CyberShake_Study_16.9 (min Vs, min Vp, min Rho, vp/vs > 1.45) | |
| − | + | (3) Are the full N.SAF and S.SAF CVMs ready for use, including interfaces between CVMs ? | |
| − | + | *http://scec.usc.edu/scecpedia/CyberShake_Study_16.9 | |
| + | (4) Do we include the N. SAF events for sites within 200km, and exclude N.SAF events for sites more than 200km away ? | ||
| + | * http://scec.usc.edu/scecpedia/CCA_N_SAF_Test | ||
| + | (5) Does the current CyberShake software stack on Blue Waters and Titan produce results equivalent to the [[CyberShake Study 15.4]] software stack ? | ||
| + | * Re-run S4.26 using current software stack for one site hazard curve. | ||
== Related Entries == | == Related Entries == | ||
*[[CyberShake]] | *[[CyberShake]] | ||
*[[CME Project]] | *[[CME Project]] | ||
Latest revision as of 22:05, 14 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 ?
(2) Do the CyberShake meshes produced by UCVM match the expected CVM models including min Vs floor and Vp/Vs ration ?
- http://scec.usc.edu/scecpedia/CyberShake_Study_16.9 (min Vs, min Vp, min Rho, vp/vs > 1.45)
(3) Are the full N.SAF and S.SAF CVMs ready for use, including interfaces between CVMs ?
(4) Do we include the N. SAF events for sites within 200km, and exclude N.SAF events for sites more than 200km away ?
(5) Does the current CyberShake software stack on Blue Waters and Titan produce results equivalent to the CyberShake Study 15.4 software stack ?
- Re-run S4.26 using current software stack for one site hazard curve.
