Journals / Sigma Mühendislik ve Fen Bilimleri Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 2

THE EARTHQUAKE RISK ANALYSIS BASED ON COPULA MODELS FOR TURKEY

Pages
187–200
Publication Date
2017-06-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It is seen that the probabilities of earthquakes occurrence for GR and copula models are almost identical, whereas the return periods based on copula models is more realistic than GR approach.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to explore the dependence structure between magnitude and frequency for Turkey earthquake data.
📊
Key Findings & Data:An application is given to illustrate that the copulas can be used as alternatives to the GR model.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It is seen that the probabilities of earthquakes occurrence for GR and copula models are almost identical, whereas the return periods based on copula models is more realistic than GR approach.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Earthquake · magnitude-frequency · Gutenberg-Richter

Abstract

This study aims to explore the dependence structure between magnitude and frequency for Turkey earthquake data. In the literature, the Gutenberg Richter (GR) model based on lineer regression is often used to determine this dependence. The dependence structure is evaluated using copula models in this study. Copulas are useful statistical tool for modeling the dependence structure so it does not require assumptions such as linearity and normality. Therefore, as well as GR model, various copula functions are used to determine the magnitude-frequency relationship of earthquakes. An application is given to illustrate that the copulas can be used as alternatives to the GR model. The best copula models are selected by goodness of fit tests. Additionally, the probabilities of earthquake occurrence and the bivariate return periods are estimated for these selected copula models. It is seen that the probabilities of earthquakes occurrence for GR and copula models are almost identical, whereas the return periods based on copula models is more realistic than GR approach.

🔖

Cite This Article

KARA, E. K. (2017). THE EARTHQUAKE RISK ANALYSIS BASED ON COPULA MODELS FOR TURKEY. Sigma Mühendislik ve Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 2, 187–200. https://ajindex.com/articles/418972

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Gutenberg, B. and Richter, C.F., (1954) Seismicity of the Earth and Related Phenomena. Second Printed, Princeton University Press, Princeton
  2. Nelsen R.B., (2006) An Introduction to Copulas (second ed), Springer, New York
  3. Yücemen M.S., Akkaya A., (1995) Stochastic models for the estimation of seismic hazard and their comparison, In: Proceedings of the 3rd Earthquake Engineering Conference, İstanbul, Turkey, pp. 466–477
  4. Altınok Y., Kolçak D., (1999) An application of the semi-Markov model for earthquake occurrences in North Anatolia, Turkey. J Balkan Geophys Soc 2: 90–99
  5. Kasap R., Gürlen Ü., (2003) Obtaining the return period of earthquake magnitudes: as an example Marmara Region. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi 4: 157–166 (article in Turkish with English abstract)
  6. Sayıl N., Osmanşahin İ., (2005) Investigation of seismicity of the Marmara Region. In: Proceedings of the Earthquake Symposium, 23–25 March 2005, Kocaeli, Turkey, pp. 1417– 1426
  7. Çobanoğlu İ., Bozdağ Ş., Dinçer İ., Erol H., (2006) Statistical approaches to estimating the recurrence of earthquakes in the Eastern Mediterranean Region. İstanbul Üniv Müh Fak Yerbilimleri Dergisi 19: 91–100
  8. Kahraman S., Baran T., Saatçi İ.A., and Şalk M., (2008) The Effect of Regional Borders when Using the Gutenberg-Richter Model, Case Study: Western Anatolia, Pure Appl. Geophys., 165, 331-347
  9. Firuzan E., (2008) Statistical Earthquake Frequency Analysis for Western Anatolia, Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences, 17, 741-762
  10. Çobanoğlu I. and Alkaya D., (2011) Seismic risk analysis of Denizli (Southwest Turkey) region using different statistical models. International Journal of Physical Sciences, 6(11), 2662-2670
  11. Bayrak Y., and Bayrak E., (2012) An evaluation of earthquake hazard potential for different regions in Western Anatolia using the historical and instrumental earthquake data. Pure and applied geophysics, 169(10), 1859-1873
  12. Ünal S., Çelebioğlu S., Özmen B., (2014) Seismic hazard assessment of Turkey by statistical approaches, Turkish J Earth Sci, 23, pp.350-360
  13. Pınar R., Akçığ Z., Demirel F., (1989) The investigation of Western Anatolia seismicity by the Markov method. Jeofizik 3: 56–66 (article in Turkish with English abstract)
  14. Ulutaş E., Özer F.M., (2000) Seismic hazard estimation of Çukurova Region by using Markov model. Jeofizik 14: 103–112 (article in Turkish with English abstract)
  15. Ünal S., Çelebioğlu S., Özmen., B., (2014) Seismic hazard