HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) References Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by SAVAGE, J. C. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

Criticism of some forecasts of the national earthquake prediction evaluation council

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, MS/977, 345 MIDDLEFIELD ROAD, MENLO PARK, CALIFORNIA 94025

Abstract

The Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities has assigned probabilities for rupture in the interval from 1988 to 2018 to various segments of the San Andreas fault on the basis of the lognormal distribution of recurrence times of characteristic earthquakes postulated by Nishenko and Buland (1987). I question the validity of those probabilities on the basis of three separate arguments: (1) The distributions of recurrence times of the four, best-observed, characteristic-earthquake sequences are each only marginally consistent with the Nishenko - Buland Iognormal distribution. (2) The range of possible 30-year conditional probabilities for many of the fault segments is so great due to uncertainty in the average recurrence time for that segment that the assigned probability is virtually meaningless. (3) The 1988 forecasts not subject to the foregoing objection are those in which there is a low probability of an earthquake in the near future (e.g., only a 5 per cent chance of rupture of the North Coast segment before the year 2049 and of the Carrizo segment before the year 2018). The same reasoning would assign only a 5 per cent chance of rupture before mid-1993 to the southern Santa Cruz Mountains segment, the segment that failed in October 1989. Finally, the forecast of the next Parkfield earthquake (95 per cent probability before 1993.0) by Bakun and Lindh (1985) depends upon an ad hoc explanation of the out-of-sequence 1934 earthquake. A less-contrived forecast would have assigned a conditional probability of about 60 ± 20 per cent to the 1985.0 to 1993.0 interval and 30 ± 15 per cent to the 1990.0 to 1993.0 interval.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. H. Field A Summary of Previous Working Groups on California Earthquake Probabilities Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, August 1, 2007; 97(4): 1033 - 1053. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Yakovlev, D. L. Turcotte, J. B. Rundle, and P. B. Rundle Simulation-Based Distributions of Earthquake Recurrence Times on the San Andreas Fault System Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, December 1, 2006; 96(6): 1995 - 2007. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. R. Sykes and W. Menke Repeat Times of Large Earthquakes: Implications for Earthquake Mechanics and Long-Term Prediction Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, October 1, 2006; 96(5): 1569 - 1596. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. J. Lienkaemper, B. Baker, and F. S. McFarland Surface Slip Associated with the 2004 Parkfield, California, Earthquake Measured on Alinement Arrays Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, September 1, 2006; 96(4B): S239 - S249. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Variability of Near-Term Probability for the Next Great Earthquake on the Cascadia Subduction Zone Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, October 1, 2004; 94(5): 1954 - 1959.

				Paleoseismic Event Dating and the Conditional Probability of Large Earthquakes on the Southern San Andreas Fault, California Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, October 1, 2002; 92(7): 2761 - 2781.

				The Earthquake Potential of the New Madrid Seismic Zone Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, August 1, 2002; 92(6): 2080 - 2089.

				1857 Slip on the San Andreas Fault Southeast of Cholame, California Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, December 1, 2001; 91(6): 1659 - 1672.

				T. Parsons, S. Toda, R. S. Stein, A. Barka, and J. H. Dieterich Heightened Odds of Large Earthquakes Near Istanbul: An Interaction-Based Probability Calculation Science, April 28, 2000; 288(5466): 661 - 665. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				A Time-Dependent Probabilistic Seismic-Hazard Model for California Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, February 1, 2000; 90(1): 1 - 21.

				Working Group on California Earthquake Probabiliti Seismic hazards in Southern California: Probable earthquakes, 1994 to 2024 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, April 1, 1995; 85(2): 379 - 439. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. C. Savage Empirical earthquake probabilities from observed recurrence intervals Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, February 1, 1994; 84(1): 219 - 221. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. C. SAVAGE The Parkfield prediction fallacy Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, February 1, 1993; 83(1): 1 - 6. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. C. HANKS and H. KRAWINKLER The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake and its effects: Introduction to the special issue Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, October 1, 1991; 81(5): 1415 - 1423. [PDF]