Generalized inversion techniques (GITs) have become popular for determining seismological parameters (e.g., source, attenuation, and site response), particularly in low-to-moder-ate seismicity regions. Indeed, GITs can potentially provide reliable site-response estimates when a minimum number of recordings is available, as well as valuable information about source parameters and regional attenuation characteristics. Significant advances have been made on GITs in which different approaches and hypotheses were investigated, such as the application of “nonparametric” and “parametric” inversion schemes. In this context, several scientific questions have arisen that depend on the final scope of the GITs: What is the optimal inversion strategy for a given dataset configuration? What is the impact of the different choices, assumptions, and implementations on the reliability of the results? Is it possible to quantify the associated epistemic uncertainties? Here, we have considered and compared...
GITEC: A Generalized Inversion Technique Benchmark
Klin P.;
2022-01-01
Abstract
Generalized inversion techniques (GITs) have become popular for determining seismological parameters (e.g., source, attenuation, and site response), particularly in low-to-moder-ate seismicity regions. Indeed, GITs can potentially provide reliable site-response estimates when a minimum number of recordings is available, as well as valuable information about source parameters and regional attenuation characteristics. Significant advances have been made on GITs in which different approaches and hypotheses were investigated, such as the application of “nonparametric” and “parametric” inversion schemes. In this context, several scientific questions have arisen that depend on the final scope of the GITs: What is the optimal inversion strategy for a given dataset configuration? What is the impact of the different choices, assumptions, and implementations on the reliability of the results? Is it possible to quantify the associated epistemic uncertainties? Here, we have considered and compared...File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
bssa-2021242..pdf
non disponibili
Tipologia:
Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza:
Copyright dell'editore
Dimensione
12.68 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
12.68 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.