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

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (5) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Haddon, R. A. W. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

Comment on "Evaluation of Models for Earthquake Source Spectra in Eastern North America" by Gail M. Atkinson and David M. Boore

Geological Survey of Canada
1 Observatory Crescent
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0Y3

The first 300 words of the full text of this article appear below.

	Introduction

 
In their article, Atkinson and Boore (1998) (AB) attempt to evaluate a number of proposed source models for eastern North America (ENA) by comparing "predicted" ground motions for the source models against certain ground-motion data (as listed in their Table 1). The reliability of their conclusions evidently depends both on the reliability of their predicted ground motions and on the reliability of their assumed data. Although the extent to which the data used are representative of ground motions in ENA is also questionable, in this comment only the question of the reliability of AB's predicted ground motions and their conclusions concerning the source models they have considered will be discussed. The ground motions were calculated for all of the source models using the stochastic ground-motion model of Atkinson and Boore (1995). AB assert that this model "provides a sound [emphasis added] basis for a test of the implications of the source models." It will be shown that this assertion is unfounded because the model is inconsistent with basic seismological principles, resulting in errors of up to about an order of magnitude in ground-motion estimates. Their source-model evaluations and all of their main conclusions are therefore unfounded.

	General Comments on the Stochastic Method of AB

 
The stochastic method for wave-train synthesis is just one of many possible ways of generating a time series (or synthetic wave train) from an amplitude spectrum (for another see e.g., Haddon, 1996a). In order to generate any such time series, a time interval (or waveform envelope) over (or within) which the energy is to be distributed has to be assigned. The root mean square (rms) amplitudes of the time series are uniquely determined, for each frequency, by the spectrum and the assigned duration. No information about phase is involved. The stochastic method simply assumes that the phases of the . . . [Full Text of this Article]

	Inconsistency with the Principle of Conservation of Energy for Waves

 

	Credibility of AB's Q Model

 

	Implausibility of Assumptions Concerning AB's Attenuation and Duration Models

 

	Invalid Assumptions of AB Concerning Wave Excitation and Surface Transfer Effects

 

	Invalid Interpretation of Hybrid Rg + Lg Data

 

	Invalid Interpretation of Source Spectra and Corner Frequencies

 

	Conclusions

 

This article has been cited by other articles:

				Waveform Modeling of the 17 August 1999 Kola Peninsula Earthquake Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, August 1, 2003; 93(4): 1559 - 1572.

				Apparent Source Spectra for Earthquakes in the Charlevoix Seismic Zone: A Comparison of Direct and Empirical Green's Function Methods Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, December 1, 2001; 91(6): 1729 - 1740.