On the Use of Response Spectral-Reference Data for the Selection and Ranking of Ground-Motion Models for Seismic-Hazard Analysis in Regions of Moderate Seismicity: The Case of Rock Motion

279 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The Influence of Magnitude Range on Empirical Ground-Motion Prediction (2007, background): “…become very large, which is important because one of the major advantages of equations for extended magnitude ranges is that they could be used in conjunction with smallmagnitude recordings to test the applicability of the equation to a given region following the method of Scherbaum et al. (2004).”
A simple ground‐motion prediction model for cumulative absolute velocity and model validation (2013, methodology): “Furthermore, we define a metric LH from model residuals [21] as follows:”
Selection of Ground Motion Prediction Equations for the Global Earthquake Model (2015, methodology): “…three general methods of relatively rigorous model-data comparisons present in the collected literature are: (1) the maximum-likelihood approach of Scherbaum et al. (2004) and its extension to normalized within- and between-event residuals distributions by Stafford et al. (2008), which is…”
The Estimation of Minimum-Misfit Stochastic Models from Empirical Ground-Motion Prediction Equations (2006, methodology): “Subsequently, for each of these reference distance values, all other distance metrics of interest were calculated, again using the conversion relations of Scherbaum et al. (2004b).”