The Variability of Ground-Motion Prediction Models and Its Components
By L. Atik, N. Abrahamson, J. Bommer, Frank Scherbaum, F. Cotton, N. Kuehn. 2010
628 citations recorded by the source corpus.
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2bf2fe5afff5c0c9f5c9f908d70bedf31e52f50f
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
Citations in the corpus
- Repeatable Source, Site, and Path Effects on the Standard Deviation for Empirical Ground-Motion Prediction Models (2011, methodology): “To facilitate comparisons between the results from this study and the previous studies, Table 7 shows how the notation used in this study is related to the notation used in previous studies, with the last column showing the notation proposed by Al Atik et al. (2010).”
- Update of the Chiou and Youngs NGA Model for the Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra (2014, methodology): “The current symbology for components of variability (Al Atik et al. 2010) uses the symbol τ for the between-event component and the symbol ϕ for the within-event component, with the symbol σ used for total aleatory variability, such that σ2 ¼ τ2 þ ϕ2.”
- NGA-West2 Equations for Predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% Damped PSA for Shallow Crustal Earthquakes (2014, background): “…the ϕ terms are similar, the τ terms have increased notably relative to BA08 for T < 0.2 s and decreased for T > 1.0 s. Reductions from the tabulated ϕ values can be made if site response (and potentially path effects) are evaluated on a site-specific basis (Atkinson 2006, Al Atik et al. 2010).”
- Simultaneous quantification of epistemic and aleatory uncertainty in GMPEs using Gaussian process regression (2014, background): “(2) Usually, the noise term is decomposed into between-event variability and within-event variability, reflecting that records from the same event are not independent (Al-Atik et al. 2010).”