On the Testing of Ground--Motion Prediction Equations against Small--Magnitude Data

TL;DR

This study evaluates the performance of ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs) against small-magnitude data from France and Japan, revealing the importance of magnitude scaling and regional effects in seismic hazard assessments.

Contribution

It provides a systematic testing framework for GMPEs using weak motion data and highlights the influence of magnitude scaling on model performance across regions.

Findings

Best models are Cauzzi and Faccioli, Akkar and Bommer, Abrahamson and Silva.

No significant regional variation in ground motions was found.

Magnitude scaling significantly affects model performance and extrapolation.

Abstract

Ground-motion prediction equations (GMPE) are essential in probabilistic seismic hazard studies for estimating the ground motions generated by the seismic sources. In low seismicity regions, only weak motions are available in the lifetime of accelerometric networks, and the equations selected for the probabilistic studies are usually models established from foreign data. Although most ground-motion prediction equations have been developed for magnitudes 5 and above, the minimum magnitude often used in probabilistic studies in low seismicity regions is smaller. Desaggregations have shown that, at return periods of engineering interest, magnitudes lower than 5 can be contributing to the hazard. This paper presents the testing of several GMPEs selected in current international and national probabilistic projects against weak motions recorded in France (191 recordings with source-site distances up to 300km, 3.8\leqMw\leq4.5). The method is based on the loglikelihood value proposed by Scherbaum et al. (2009). The best fitting models (approximately 2.5\leqLLH\leq3.5) over the whole frequency range are the Cauzzi and Faccioli (2008), Akkar and Bommer (2010) and Abrahamson and Silva (2008) models. No significant regional variation of ground motions is highlighted, and the magnitude scaling could be predominant in the control of ground-motion amplitudes. Furthermore, we take advantage of a rich Japanese dataset to run tests on randomly selected low-magnitude subsets, and check that a dataset of ~190 observations, same size as the French dataset, is large enough to obtain stable LLH estimates. Additionally we perform the tests against larger magnitudes (5-7) from the Japanese dataset. The ranking of models is partially modified, indicating a magnitude scaling effect for some of the models, and showing that extrapolating testing results obtained from low magnitude ranges to higher magnitude ranges is not straightforward.