Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America; September 2006; v. 96; no. 4B; p. S397-S409; DOI: 10.1785/0120050821
© 2006 Seismological Society of America
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jackson, D. D.
Right arrow Articles by Kagan, Y. Y.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

The 2004 Parkfield Earthquake, the 1985 Prediction, and Characteristic Earthquakes: Lessons for the Future

D. D. Jackson1 and Y. Y. Kagan1

1 Department of Earth and Space Sciences
University of California
Los Angeles, California 90095-1567
djackson{at}ucla.edu
ykagan{at}ucla.edu

The 1985 prediction of a characteristic magnitude 6 Parkfield earthquake was unsuccessful, since no significant event occurred in the 95% time window (1985–1993) anywhere near Parkfield. The magnitude 6 earthquake near Parkfield in 2004 failed to satisfy the prediction not just because it was late; it also differed in character from the 1985 prediction and was expectable according to a simple null hypothesis. Furthermore, the prediction was too vague in several important respects to meet the accepted definition of an earthquake prediction. An event occurring by chance and meeting the general description of the predicted one was reasonably probable. The original characteristic earthquake model has failed in comprehensive tests, yet it is still widely used. Modified versions employed in recent official seismic hazard calculations allow for interactions between segments and uncertainties in the parameters. With more adjustable parameters, the modified versions are harder to falsify. The characteristic model as applied at Parkfield and elsewhere rests largely on selected data that may be biased because they were taken out of context. We discuss implications of the 2004 event for earthquake prediction, the characteristic earthquake hypothesis, and earthquake occurrence in general.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Seismological Research LettersHome page
E. H. Field
Overview of the Working Group for the Development of Regional Earthquake Likelihood Models (RELM)
Seismological Research Letters, January 1, 2007; 78(1): 7 - 16.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Seismological Research LettersHome page
Y. Y. Kagan, D. D. Jackson, and Y. Rong
A Testable Five-Year Forecast of Moderate and Large Earthquakes in Southern California Based on Smoothed Seismicity
Seismological Research Letters, January 1, 2007; 78(1): 94 - 98.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaHome page
R. A. Harris and J R. Arrowsmith
Introduction to the Special Issue on the 2004 Parkfield Earthquake and the Parkfield Earthquake Prediction Experiment
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, September 1, 2006; 96(4B): S1 - S10.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2006 by the Seismological Society of America.