Difference between revisions of "CyberShake Production Run"
From SCECpedia
Jump to navigationJump to search| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
*http://scec.usc.edu/scecpedia/CyberShake_Study_16.9 (min Vs, min Vp, min Rho, vp/vs > 1.45) | *http://scec.usc.edu/scecpedia/CyberShake_Study_16.9 (min Vs, min Vp, min Rho, vp/vs > 1.45) | ||
(4) Do we include the N. SAF events for sites within 200km, and exclude N.SAF events for sites more than 200km away ? | (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 ? | (5) 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 19:31, 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 ?
(2) Are the full N.SAF and S.SAF CVMs ready for use, including interfaces between CVMs ?
(3) 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)
(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 ?
