Ranking and developing ground‐motion models for Southeastern Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The southern East African Rift System (EARS) is an early‐stage continental rift with a deep seismogenic zone. It is associated with a low‐to‐moderate seismic hazard, but due to its short and sparse instrumental record, there is a lack of ground‐motion studies in the region. Instead, seismic hazard assessments have commonly relied on a combination of active crustal and stable continental ground‐motion models (GMMs) from other regions without accounting for the unusual geological setting of this region and evaluating their suitability. Here, we use a newly compiled southern EARS ground‐motion database to compare six active crustal GMMs and four stable continental GMMs. We find that the active crustal GMMs tend to underestimate the ground‐motion intensities observed, while the stable continental GMMs overestimate them. This is particularly pronounced in the high‐frequency intensity measures (>5 Hz). We also use the referenced empirical approach and develop a new region‐specific GMM for southern EARS. Both the ranked GMMs and our new GMM result in large residual variabilities, highlighting the need for local geotechnical information to better constrain site conditions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".