Abstract
The New Zealand Earthquake Forecast Testing Centre is being established as one of several similar regional testing centres under the umbrella of the Collaboratory for the Study of Earthquake Predictability (CSEP). The Centre aims to encourage the development of testable models of time-varying earthquake occurrence in the New Zealand region, and to conduct verifiable prospective tests of their performance over a period of five or more years. The test region, data-collection region and requirements for testing are described herein. Models must specify in advance the expected number of earthquakes with epicentral depths h ≤ 40 km in bins of time, magnitude and location within the test region. Short-term models will be tested using 24-h time bins at magnitude M ≥ 4. Intermediate-term models and long-term models will be tested at M ≥ 5 using 3-month, 6-month and 5-year bins, respectively. The tests applied will be the same as at other CSEP testing centres: the so-called N test of the total number of earthquakes expected over the test period; the L test of the likelihood of the earthquake catalogue under the model; and the R test of the ratio of the likelihoods under alternative models. Four long-term, three intermediate-term and two short-term models have been installed to date in the testing centre, with tests of these models commencing on the New Zealand earthquake catalogue from the beginning of 2008. Submission of models is open to researchers worldwide. New models can be submitted at any time. The New Zealand testing centre makes extensive use of software produced by the CSEP testing centre in California. It is envisaged that, in time, the scope of the testing centre will be expanded to include new testing methods and differently-specified models, nonetheless that the New Zealand testing centre will develop in parallel with other regional testing centres through the CSEP international collaborative process.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, H., and Webb, T. (1994), New Zealand seismicity—Patterns revealed by the upgraded National-Seismograph-Network, N. Z. J. Geol. Geophys. 37, 477–493.
Console, R., and Murru, M. (2001), A simple and testable model for earthquake clustering. J. Geophys. Res. 106, 8699–8711.
Console, R., Murru, M., and Lombardi, A. M. (2003), Refining earthquake clustering models, J. Geophys. Res. 108, 2468, doi:10.1029/2002JB002130.
Console, R., Rhoades, D. A., Murru, M., Evison, F. F., Papadimitriou, E. E., and Karakostas, V. G. (2006), Comparative performance of time-invariant, long-range and short-range forecasting models on the earthquake catalogue of Greece, J. Geophys. Res. 111, B09304, doi:10.1029/2005JB004113.
Evison, F. F., and Rhoades, D. A. (2002), Precursory scale increase and long-term seismogenesis in California and Northern Mexico, Ann. Geophys. 45, 479–495.
Evison, F. F., and Rhoades, D. A. (2004), Demarcation and scaling of long-term seismogenesis, Pure Appl. Geophys. 161, 21–45.
Field, E. H. (2007), Overview of the Working Group for the Development of Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models (RELM), Seismol. Res. Lett. 78(1), 7–16.
Gerstenberger, M. (2003), Earthquake Clustering and Time-dependent Probabilisitic Seismic Hazard Analysis for California, Dissertation submitted to the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology for the degree of Doctor of Science, Zürich.
Gerstenberger, M., Wiemer, S., Jones, L. M., and Reasenberg, P. A. (2005), Real-time forecasts of tomorrow’s earthquakes in California, Nature 435, 328–331.
Gutenberg, B., and Richter, C. F., (1944), Frequency of earthquakes in California, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 34, 185–188.
Harte, D., Feng-Dong, L., Vreede, M., Vere-Jones, D., Wang, Q. (2007), Quantifying the M8 algorithm: model, forecast, and evaluation, New Zealand, J. Geol. Geophys. 50, 117–130.
Jackson, D. D., and Kagan, Y. Y. (1999), Testable Earthquake Forecasts for 1999, Seismol. Res. Lett. 70(4), 393–403.
Jordan, T. H. (2006), Earthquake predictability, brick by brick, Seismol. Res. Lett. 77(1), 3–6.
Keilis-Borok, V.I., and Kossobokov, V.G. (1990), Premonitory activation of earthquake flow: algorithm M8, Phys. Earth. Planet. Inter. 61, 73–83.
Ogata, Y. (1988), Statistical models for earthquake occurrences and residual analysis for point processes, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 83, 9–27.
Ogata, Y. (1989), Statistical models for standard seismicity and detection of anomalies by residual analysis, Tectonophysics 169, 159–174.
Ogata, Y. (1998), Space-time point process models for earthquake occurrence, Ann. Inst. Stat. Math. 50, 379–402.
Reasenberg, P. A. (1985), Second-order moment of central California seismicity, 1969–1982, J. Geophys. Res. 90, 5479–5496.
Reasenberg, P. A., and Jones, L. M. (1989), Earthquake hazard after a mainshock in California, Science 243, 1173–1176.
Rhoades, D. A. (2007), Application of the EEPAS model to forecasting earthquakes of moderate magnitude in Southern California, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78(1), 110–115.
Rhoades, D. A., and Evison, F. F. (2004), Long-range earthquake forecasting with every earthquake a precursor according to scale, Pure Appl. Geophys. 161, 47–71.
Rhoades, D. A., and Evison, F. F. (2005), Test of the EEPAS forecasting model on the Japan earthquake catalogue, Pure Appl Geophys. 162, 1271–1290.
Rhoades, D. A., and Evison, F. F. (2006), The EEPAS forecasting model and the probability of moderate-to-large earthquakes in the Kanto region, Central Japan, Tectonophysics 417, 119–130.
Rhoades, D., and Gerstenberger, M. (2009), Mixture models for improved short-term earthquake forecasting, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99, 636–646, doi:10.1785/0120080063.
Robinson, R., and Benites, R. (1996), Synthetic Seismicity Models for the Wellington Region, New Zealand: Implications for the Temporal Distribution of Large Events, J. Geophys. Res. 101, 27833–27845.
Schorlemmer, D., and Gerstenberger, M. C. (2007), RELM Testing Center, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78(1), 30–36.
Schorlemmer, D., Gerstenberger, M. C, Wiemer, S., Jackson, D. D., and Rhoades, D. A. (2007), Earthquake likelihood model testing, Seismol. Res. Lett. 78(1), 17–29.
Stern, T. A., Stratford, W. R., and Salmon, M. L. (2006), Subduction evolution and mantle dynamics at a continental margin: Central North Island, New Zealand, Rev. Geophys. 44, RG4002, doi:10.1029/2005RG000171.
Stirling, M. W., McVerry, G. H., and Berryman, K. R. (2002), A new seismic hazard model for New Zealand, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 92, 1878–1903.
Wessel, P., and Smith, W. H. F. (1995), New version of the generic mapping tools released, EOS Trans. Am. Geophys. U. 76, 329.
Acknowledgements
This work was funded by the EQC Research Foundation under project number 06/510, and by the Southern California Earthquake Center. SCEC is funded by NSF Cooperative Agreement EAR-0106924 and USGS Cooperative Agreement 02HQAG0008. The SCEC contribution number for this paper is 1240. Software developed by the California CSEP Earthquake Forecast Testing Center has been extensively used in setting up the New Zealand testing centre. Appreciation is extended to R. Brownrigg for the implementation of the M 8 model. C. Holden, M. Stirling, E. Smith and an anonymous reviewer have provided helpful reviews of the manuscript. Some plots were produced using the Generic Mapping Tools package (Wessel and Smith, 1995).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gerstenberger, M.C., Rhoades, D.A. New Zealand Earthquake Forecast Testing Centre. Pure Appl. Geophys. 167, 877–892 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-010-0082-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-010-0082-4