CSEP Minutes 05-09-2018
Participants: W. Savran; A. Michael; A. Strader; D. Jackson; D. Rhoades; J. Gilchrist; M. Werner; P. Maechiling; T. Jordan
Minutes
- Need clarification and examples for simulation based testing methods. Some issues of doing these is storing long catalogs, so there are some computations challenges associated with dealing with these large files.
- USGS rolling out some software to separate the spatial kernel from the temporal kernel in a space-time ETAS model. Would save on the amount of simulations required to generate large (~Mw 7.0 eq simulations). Outputs would be hazard be rate and hazard maps, but stochastic event sets could be buried.
- Tests should be directed towards interesting/useful scientific questions: comparing UCERF3-ETAS to non-fault ETAS... should include Bruce and Ned about discussions on these types of tests.
- Previous idea was to use pseudo-likelihood scores derived from stochastic event sets using Poisson likelihoods. There could be some concern with power and severity of these tests. Could be a worthwhile exercise with some simple examples to make clear.
- Some example catalogs from physics-based simulations would be useful as well, and how could RSQ-Sim be conditioned on certain sequences and events. How can RSQSim be involved in the association problem?
- W/r/t to UCERF3-ETAS how can we associate the ruptures of real-events to faults/subsections in UCERF3. This is challenged by there being no authoritative data set for fault slip.
