Testing probabilistic seismic hazard estimates against accelerometric data in two countries: France and Turkey

Creative Commons License


GEOPHYSICAL JOURNAL INTERNATIONAL, vol.198, no.3, pp.1554-1571, 2014 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 198 Issue: 3
  • Publication Date: 2014
  • Doi Number: 10.1093/gji/ggu191
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus
  • Page Numbers: pp.1554-1571
  • Hacettepe University Affiliated: No


Probabilistic seismic hazard models (PSHM) are used for quantifying the seismic hazard at a site or a grid of sites. In this study, a methodology is proposed to compare the distribution of the expected number of sites with exceedance with the observed number considering an acceleration threshold at a set of recording sites. The method is applied to France and Turkey. The French accelerometric database is checked to produce a reliable accelerometric data set. In addition, we also used a synthetic data set inferred from an instrumental catalogue combined with a ground-motion prediction equation. The results show that the MEDD2002 and AFPS2006 PSH models overestimate the number of sites with exceedance for low acceleration levels (below 40 cm s(-2)) or short return periods (smaller than 50 yr for AFPS2006 and 475 yr for MEDD2002). For larger acceleration levels, there are few observations and none of the models is rejected. In Turkey, the SHARE hazard estimates can be tested against ground-motion levels of interest in earthquake engineering. As the completeness issue is crucial, the recorded data at each station is analysed to detect potential gaps in the recording. As most accelerometric stations are located on soil, accelerations at rock are estimated using a site-amplification model. Different minimum intersite distances and station configurations are considered. The observed numbers of sites with exceedance are well within the bounds of the predicted distribution for accelerations between 103 and 397 cm s(-2). For higher levels, both the observed number and the predicted percentile 2.5 are zero, and no conclusion can be drawn.