The latest results from the EMME project presented during the launch event of the OpenQuake platform in Pavia on January 21, 2015.

2. Hazard Modelers: Laurentiu DANCIU, Karin SESETYAN and
Mine B. DEMIRCIOGLU,
Project Coordinators: Domenico GIARDINI and Mustafa ERDIK
EMME Consortium Condtributing to hazard components:
METU, SAU (TR), IIEES (IR), AUB (LB), YU (JO),
Upesh (PK), IJSU (GE), SCI (ARM), ANAS (AZ)
EMME-HAZ-2014: SEISMIC
HAZARD MODEL and RESULTS
for THE MIDDLE EAST REGION

3. SEISMIC HAZARD COMPONENTS
OUR MAJOR AIM WAS TO BUILD
A regional consensus model
Homogenized across national boundaries

4. Target

5. All steps of the seismic hazard
assessment have to be:
– Validated
– Benchmarked
– Reproducible
– Standardized
– Inter-Comparable
– Testable

6. EQ Catalog
Harmonized in terms of
Mw
Total: 27174 Events
Historical part (-1900)
Early and modern
instrumental (~2006)
Declustering Method:
Grunthal (1985)
After Declustering
10524 Events
18 Completeness Super-
Zones
Mw>=6.00
EMME14 Catalogue
Completeness Super-Zones

7. Two fully independent source zonation models:
– Area source model
• Active shallow and stable continental areal sources
• Subduction interface modeled as complex fault
• Deep areal sources
– All activity computed from seismicity
– Fault source and background seismicity model
• Fault sources in 3D
• Background seismicity
• Subduction interface modeled as complex fault
• Deep seismicity
– Fault activity computed from slip rates

8. Maximum Magnitude
Upper-bound magnitude to the earthquake recurrence (frequency-magnitude)
curve. Maximum Magnitude assessment (Super-Zones)
– Historical seismicity record
– Location uncertainties
– Analogies to tectonic regions
– Added increment (0.30)

9. Source Model Logic Tree

10. Area Source Model
Classical area source zones based on the tectonic findings and their
correlation and up-to-day seismicity
Derived from seismicity patterns
Ensure the zonation adequately reflect this pattern
Surface projection of identified active faults (capable of generating
earthquakes)

11. Subduction Interface
Deep Seismicity
Shallow Seismicity
Area
Source
Model
Three
Source Layers
224 shallow
10 Deep
6 Interface

12. Area Source Model
EMCA source model integration and harmonization
New tectonic regionalization: stable continental regions (yellow)

13. Source Characterization
Homogeneous, declustered catalogue
Completeness defined for 18 super zones
Maximum likelihood approach (Weichert 1984)
– Truncated Guttenberg-Richter Magnitude Frequency Distribution
• 10a – annual number of events of magnitude greater or equal to zero
• b-GR value
Truncated at each assigned maximum magnitude
For each source three magnitude-frequency-distributions were derived
A Matlab* toolbox was developed

14. • Shallow Sources: Activity
aGR Values
bGR Values

15. Deep Seismicity - Activity
aGR Values
bGR Values

16. Depth Distribution (three values and the
corresponding weights):
– Active shallow crust
– Nested Deep Seismicity
– Subduction Inslab
Focal Mechanisms
– Rake Angle values (Aki’s definition)
– Percentage weights
Ruptures Orientation
– Strike Angle (Azimuth)
– Dip Angle
Rupture Properties
– Upper and Lower Seismogenic Depth
Area Source
[Single Rupture]
Source Parameterization

17. PGA [g]
RP=475yrs

18. Source Model Logic Tree

19. Fault source model derived from the faults database collected within WP2
– Total number: 3397 fault segments, total Km: 91551km
EMME Faults Dataset

20. Fault Sources
Criteria to select “capable” or active faults to be used for hazard
assessment:
– Identified active faults [capable of earthquakes]: Northern Anatolian
Faults, Marmara Faults, Zagros Transform Faults
– At least 0.10mm/year (1m in 1000years - Neocene)
– Maximum magnitude equal to 6.00
– Fully parameterized:
• Geometry
• Slip-rates
– Confidence Classes:
• Class A: complete information provided by the compiler
• Class B: partial information provided by compiler
• Class C: limited information provided
• Class D: only top trace available

21. Deep Seismicity
Active Faults
Subduction Interface
Four
Source
Layers
Faults
10 Deep
9 Interface
Background
Seismicity
Fault Source
Model

22. Fault Source Model
• 15 km buffer zone around the surface projection of the fault sources
• M>=6.0 in the buffer zones assigned to fault sources
• M<6.0 in the buffer zones from smoothed seismicity
• Smoothed background seismicity outside the buffer zones

23. Fault Source Model
Slip rate
Fault length / aspect ratio
Maximum Magnitude
Anderson & Luco (1983) Recurrence Model 2
b-value from the completeness super zones

24. Subduction Interface

25. Subduction interface Earthquake Recurrence
– From seismicity (area source model)
– From slip rates (fault source model)

26. Source Parameterization
Depth Distribution
Focal Mechanisms
– Rake Angle values (Aki’s definition)
– Percentage weights
Ruptures Orientation: Strike and Dip Angles
Rupture Properties
– Upper and Lower Seismogenic Depth
Point Source
[Single Rupture]
Fault Top Trace
Focal Mechanisms
– Rake Angle values (Aki’s definition)
Ruptures Orientation: Strike and Dip Angles
Rupture Properties
– Upper and Lower Seismogenic Depth
Simple Fault

27. PGA [g]
RP=475yrs

28. Logic Tree

29. AS Model only 475 years

30. AS Model only 2475 years

31. FS Model only 475 years

32. FS Model only 2475 years

33. LOGIC TREE COMBINATION
COMBINED
MODEL
AS MODEL
FS MODEL

34. AS: 60%, FS: 40%, 475 years

35. AS: 60%, FS: 40%, 2475 years

36. Hazard Computed for Spectral ordinates
• PGA
• SA (T=0.1 s)
• SA (T=0.15 s)
• SA (T=0.2 s)
• SA (T=0.25 s)
• SA (T=0.3 s)
• SA (T=0.5 s)
• SA (T=0.75 s)
• SA (T=1.0 s)
• SA (T=2.0 s)

41. Summary
• Building a regional seismic hazard model is a collective effort
• Aim at generating the up-to-date , flexible and scalable database
that will permit continuous update, refinement, and analysis.
• Data will be parameterized and input into the database with a
specific format.

42. Thank you!

43. Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under:
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Please attribute to the GEM Foundation with a link to -
www.globalquakemodel.org