From 0f3960e77e65a47687d95aa3e0f7ce5c238a8233 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jason Altekruse <jaltekruse@usgs.gov>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2022 15:03:47 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] following receipt of corrected Figure 4, clarify handling of
the average empirical adjustment factor
---
.../nshmp/gmm/PezeshkEtAl_2018.java | 20 +++++--------------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/main/java/gov/usgs/earthquake/nshmp/gmm/PezeshkEtAl_2018.java b/src/main/java/gov/usgs/earthquake/nshmp/gmm/PezeshkEtAl_2018.java
index 5c62030e..8220873d 100644
--- a/src/main/java/gov/usgs/earthquake/nshmp/gmm/PezeshkEtAl_2018.java
+++ b/src/main/java/gov/usgs/earthquake/nshmp/gmm/PezeshkEtAl_2018.java
@@ -34,14 +34,8 @@ import gov.usgs.earthquake.nshmp.tree.LogicTree;
* The prediction of GMIMs for site conditions other than Vs30 = 3000 m/s and k0
* = 0.006s requires the use of appropriate site-amplification factors.
*
- * Note: it appears as if an "average empirical calibration factor of 0.32" (p.
- * 2287, in log10 space) should be included in the value of coefficient c1 in
- * Table 4 for the PZCT-2ES model but is not. This factor is added here in the
- * Coefficients for the empirical-scaling model in order to match the response
- * spectra in Figures 3 and 4.
- *
- * - Table 4, should C10 at 3 sec be negative? There are other coefs that look
- * like they may have the wrong sign
+ * Note: Figure 5 in the paper is incorrect. Pezeshk sent a corrected figure
+ * that is used to validate the PZCT18-2ES model.
*
* <p><b>Note:</b> Direct instantiation of {@code GroundMotionModel}s is
* prohibited. Use {@link Gmm#instance(Imt)} to retrieve an instance for a
@@ -101,16 +95,12 @@ public abstract class PezeshkEtAl_2018 implements GroundMotionModel {
Map<String, Double> coeffs_sigma = cc_sigma.get(imt);
/*
- * An "average empirical calibration factor" of 0.32 (log10-space)
- * discussed on p. 2287 apparently did not make it into coefficient c1 in
- * Table 5 (PZCT18_2ES), but is included in Table 4 (PZCT18_1SS).
- * **clarification from Pezeshk pending, we are taking Table 5 c1 value as
- * correct and Figure 4 is incorrect.
+ * Pezeshk confirmed that the "average empirical calibration factor" of
+ * 0.32 (log10-space), discussed on p. 2287, is included in coefficient c1
+ * in Table 5 (PZCT18_2ES) and sent a corrected Figure 4 for validation.
*/
- // double c1delta = (model == Model.PZCT18_2ES) ? -0.32 : 0.0;
// median model coefficients
- // c1 = coeffs.get("c1") + c1delta;
c1 = coeffs.get("c1");
c2 = coeffs.get("c2");
c3 = coeffs.get("c3");
--
GitLab