000010117 001__ 10117
000010117 005__ 20141205154145.0
000010117 04107 $$aeng
000010117 046__ $$k2008-10-12
000010117 100__ $$aGrandori, Giuseppe
000010117 24500 $$aCharacteristic Earthquake Magnitude: Mathematical Versus Empirical Models

000010117 24630 $$n14.$$pProceedings of the 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering
000010117 260__ $$b
000010117 506__ $$arestricted
000010117 520__ $$2eng$$aIn the literature concerning the characteristic hypothesis, one basic question is widely discussed: is it possible to justify (by statistical tests) favouring the characteristic magnitude model for the interpretation of available catalogues? No generally accepted answer has been given now a days. In a previous paper (Grandori et al., 2008) we analyzed a different question, perhaps more useful from the engineering point of view: is it possible to judge (on the basis of statistical tests) which one of two competing magnitude models is more reliable (all other things being equal) for the evaluation of a specific hazard quantity at a given site? In that paper we described a method which can give an answer to this question, and we studied the controversy surrounding the comparison between “characteristic-type” magnitude models and the classic doubly truncated exponential model. We found that in many cases a characteristic magnitude model is more reliable than the exponential model. In the present paper we recall the main features of the method and we apply it to the comparison between a mathematical model FM and an empirical (non parametric) distribution F*. The aim is to find an empirical F* which is more reliable than FM, thanks to the substantial reduction of possible errors due to the use of a wrong model FM. We do not give a general method for the construction of such F*, nor we maintain that it exists in all cases. We simply show how, in a study case, we found the way to construct a very satisfactory F*.

000010117 540__ $$aText je chráněný podle autorského zákona č. 121/2000 Sb.
000010117 653__ $$aMagnitude distribution, credibility of the model, comparison between competing models.

000010117 7112_ $$a14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering$$cBejing (CN)$$d2008-10-12 / 2008-10-17$$gWCEE15
000010117 720__ $$aGrandori, Giuseppe$$iGuagenti, Elisa$$iPetrini, Lorenza
000010117 8560_ $$ffischerc@itam.cas.cz
000010117 8564_ $$s94260$$uhttps://invenio.itam.cas.cz/record/10117/files/07-0065.pdf$$yOriginal version of the author's contribution as presented on CD, Paper ID: 07-0065.
000010117 962__ $$r9324
000010117 980__ $$aPAPER