Difference between revisions of "CSEP 2.0 Developments"

From SCECpedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
Line 51: Line 51:
 
* comparison against csep1 simulations (use case for csep1 dataset)  
 
* comparison against csep1 simulations (use case for csep1 dataset)  
 
** need method for comparing rate based forecasts and fault-based simulation based forecasts
 
** need method for comparing rate based forecasts and fault-based simulation based forecasts
 +
 +
== Roadmap toward testing UCERF3 ==
 +
* describe specific steps required for testing UCERF3
 +
* essentially, previous sections written as actionable statements from previous section
 +
* include timeline
 +
 +
== Conclusion ==
 +
* wrap up proposal with brief paragraph reiterating main points

Latest revision as of 23:37, 28 June 2018

CSEP Working Group Home Page

Proposed software developments needed to test UCERF3 -- CSEP2.0 as a workflow

  • abstract goes here.
  • summary statement of proposal
  • clearly state proposed plans for putting ucerf3 under test
  • [under development until remainder of proposal is written]

Introduction

  • state reasons for transitioning from CSEP1 -> CSEP2
  • introduce technical/scientific challenges of testing UCERF3 etas
  • introduce the csep problem as a workflow
  • describe remaining software infrastructure
  • 'on-demand' prospective/retrospective experiments
Guiding Principals
  1. Controlled Environment
  2. Transparency
  3. Comparability
  4. Reproducibility

Testing the Next Generation of Earthquake Forecasts

  • cover technical/scientific challenges of testing UCERF3 etas
  • fault and stochastic event sets
  • potential models under forecast
  • make point that software developments are required to test CSEP2.0
    • software developments
    • first step to evaluation forecast is to compute forecasts

CSEP2.0 as a Workflow

  • proposed software and hardware to test CSEP2.0
  • describe tech used to achieve guiding principals
    • controlled environment -> containers
    • transparency -> web application (results viewer)
    • comparability -> (open sourced evaluations)
    • reproducibility -> containers and workflow
  • decoupling of forecasts and evaluations
  • proposal to open-source experiments to community
  • versioning of catalog data
  • introduce the minimum viable product to run Open-SHA from container in pegasus

Proposed scientific questions for testing new Forecasting models

  • do faults provide improved forecasting skill?
  • retrospective experiements for past earthquakes
    • el mayor cucupah
    • landers
    • napa valley
    • northridge (unknown fault... hinterlands)
  • simple versus complex models
  • comparison against csep1 simulations (use case for csep1 dataset)
    • need method for comparing rate based forecasts and fault-based simulation based forecasts

Roadmap toward testing UCERF3

  • describe specific steps required for testing UCERF3
  • essentially, previous sections written as actionable statements from previous section
  • include timeline

Conclusion

  • wrap up proposal with brief paragraph reiterating main points