Difference between revisions of "GMSV Simulation Datasets"
From SCECpedia
Jump to navigationJump to search| (6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Data | + | == Simulation Data Sets Discussed during Workshop== |
| + | |||
| + | #CS17.3 Study | ||
| + | ##Several LA region sites were selected, CyberShake ruptures identified, and then run in BBP. | ||
| + | ##Specific simulations that were run for GMSV on the BBP. RWG designed the rupture descriptions and they were run by SCEC, including: | ||
| + | ##Elysian Park | ||
| + | ##So. San Andreas | ||
| + | ##San Jacinto | ||
| + | ##Hayward | ||
| + | ##No. San Andreas | ||
| + | # Broadband Platform Part A validation events | ||
| + | ## Part A validation events | ||
| + | #CS Data | ||
| + | ## 10Hz CyberShake data | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Workshop Agenda == | ||
*[https://www.scec.org/workshops/2018/gmsv SCEC/GMSV Workshop Agenda] | *[https://www.scec.org/workshops/2018/gmsv SCEC/GMSV Workshop Agenda] | ||
| + | |||
== GMSV group with data last March 2017 == | == GMSV group with data last March 2017 == | ||
| Line 8: | Line 24: | ||
== Full validation set of simulations (Parts A & B) == | == Full validation set of simulations (Parts A & B) == | ||
| + | Results from BBP running Part A (comparison to GMPE) and Part B (comparison to historic events). | ||
*[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/bbp/BBP_Feb2017_Plots/ Feb 2017 Plots] | *[http://hypocenter.usc.edu/bbp/BBP_Feb2017_Plots/ Feb 2017 Plots] | ||
| − | == | + | == Other possible Data Sets of Interest == |
| − | + | #A student working with GB used data on shock. It has curve and disaggregation data, but no seismograms. The student used files on disk and copied over the specific seismograms he was interested in. He ran his own queries, and even ran the disaggregation scripts himself, to figure out which seismograms he wanted. This group was interested in a subset of CyberShake sites: ALP, HLL, LADT, LGB, LPER, MRVY, P1, PBWL, PDE, s351, SVD, WNGC, and SBSM. | |
| − | + | #CyberShake seismogram data, we have: | |
| − | + | ##Study 15.4 - 1 Hz Southern CA | |
| − | + | ##Study 15.12 - Study 15.4 + 10 Hz stochastic | |
| − | + | ##Study 17.3- 1 Hz Central CA | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
== Related Entries == | == Related Entries == | ||
*[[CME_Project]] | *[[CME_Project]] | ||
*[[GMSV]] | *[[GMSV]] | ||
Latest revision as of 23:50, 6 February 2018
Contents
Simulation Data Sets Discussed during Workshop
- CS17.3 Study
- Several LA region sites were selected, CyberShake ruptures identified, and then run in BBP.
- Specific simulations that were run for GMSV on the BBP. RWG designed the rupture descriptions and they were run by SCEC, including:
- Elysian Park
- So. San Andreas
- San Jacinto
- Hayward
- No. San Andreas
- Broadband Platform Part A validation events
- Part A validation events
- CS Data
- 10Hz CyberShake data
Workshop Agenda
GMSV group with data last March 2017
This includes Part-A data for Landers, Loma Prieta, Northridge, and North Palm Springs for all methods. Additionally, there's data for some Larger Magnitude events, like Elysian Park, Hayward, North and South San Andreas, and San Jacinto.
Full validation set of simulations (Parts A & B)
Results from BBP running Part A (comparison to GMPE) and Part B (comparison to historic events).
Other possible Data Sets of Interest
- A student working with GB used data on shock. It has curve and disaggregation data, but no seismograms. The student used files on disk and copied over the specific seismograms he was interested in. He ran his own queries, and even ran the disaggregation scripts himself, to figure out which seismograms he wanted. This group was interested in a subset of CyberShake sites: ALP, HLL, LADT, LGB, LPER, MRVY, P1, PBWL, PDE, s351, SVD, WNGC, and SBSM.
- CyberShake seismogram data, we have:
- Study 15.4 - 1 Hz Southern CA
- Study 15.12 - Study 15.4 + 10 Hz stochastic
- Study 17.3- 1 Hz Central CA
