论文部分内容阅读
日本地震调查研究推进总部(HERP)使用1498～2007年日本烈度的记录数据绘制出地震最大烈度图,并用于对概率地震危险性图(PSHM)进行检验。假定为泊松分布(50年10%),将历史烈度图与475年重现期的可能最大烈度危险图进行了比较。我们注意三种情况:所有的地震情况、只包括俯冲带地震的情况和不包括俯冲带地震的所有地震的情况。俯冲带上的大逆冲型地震造成了沿太平洋海岸一侧的高烈度带,而内陆地壳型地震造成高烈度是在整个日本零散分布的。对于所有地震的情况以及俯冲带地震的情况,过去500年记录的最大烈度图和源于概率地震危险性图的500年重现期的最大预测烈度图非常相似。然而对第三种情况,即只包括陆地地壳地震时,其相关性很弱。如果我们只考虑面积的大小,而不是具体位置,对于所有三种情况来说,在日本气象厅(JMA)烈度大于4时,记录烈度图和概率地震危险性图(用最大地震的情况下)有高度的相关性。从统计上来说,日本目前的危险性图似乎与过去的烈度分布相一致。即使危险性图可能强烈依赖于概率地震危险性图的不确定性模型参数,但可以被认为是比较合适的危险性图。
Japan Earthquake Research Propulsion Headquarters (HERP) mapped the maximum intensity map using the Japanese intensity data from 1498 to 2007 and used it to test the PSHM. Assuming a Poisson distribution (50% for 10 years), the historical intensity map is compared with the possible maximum intensity hazard map for the 475-year recurrence period. We note three cases: all the earthquakes, including only subduction zone earthquakes and not including subduction zone earthquakes of all earthquakes. High thrust belts on the subduction zone have created high intensity along the Pacific coast, while inland crustal earthquakes have been intensively scattered throughout Japan. For all earthquakes and for subduction zone earthquakes, the maximum intensity map recorded over the past 500 years is very similar to the maximum predicted intensity map for the 500-year recurrence period derived from a probabilistic seismic hazard map. However, for the third case, that is, only the terrestrial crustal earthquake is included, the correlation is weak. If we consider only the size of the area, not the specific location, for all three cases, intensity maps and probability seismic hazard maps are recorded (with the maximum earthquake) at a JMA intensity greater than 4, Highly relevant. Statistically, Japan’s current hazard map seems to be consistent with the past intensity distribution. Even though the hazard map may strongly rely on the uncertainty model parameters of a probabilistic seismic hazard map, it can be considered as a more appropriate hazard map.