NGA‐Subduction research program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article summarizes the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) Subduction (NGA‐Sub) project, a major research program to develop a database and ground motion models (GMMs) for subduction regions. A comprehensive database of subduction earthquakes recorded worldwide was developed. The database includes a total of 214,020 individual records from 1,880 subduction events, which is by far the largest database of all the NGA programs. As part of the NGA‐Sub program, four GMMs were developed. Three of them are global subduction GMMs with adjustment factors for up to seven worldwide regions: Alaska, Cascadia, Central America and Mexico, Japan, New Zealand, South America, and Taiwan. The fourth GMM is a new Japan‐specific model. The GMMs provide median predictions, and the associated aleatory variability, of RotD50 horizontal components of peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and 5%‐damped pseudo‐spectral acceleration (PSA) at oscillator periods ranging from 0.01 to 10 s. Three GMMs also quantified “within‐model” epistemic uncertainty of the median prediction, which is important in regions with sparse ground motion data, such as Cascadia. In addition, a damping scaling model was developed to scale the predicted 5%‐damped PSA of horizontal components to other damping ratios ranging from 0.5% to 30%. The NGA‐Sub flatfile, which was used for the development of the NGA‐Sub GMMs, and the NGA‐Sub GMMs coded on various software platforms, have been posted for public use.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.018 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".