NSHM23 Hazard Maps
Table Of Contents
- PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
- Mean and median hazard maps, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
- Bounds, spread, and COV, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
- PGA (g), 2% in 50 year Logic Tree Comparisons
- Deformation Model, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
- Scaling Relationship, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
- Supra-Seismogenic b-value, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
- Paleoseismic Data Uncertainties, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
- Segmentation Model, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
- Regional Seismicity Rate, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
- Seismicity Declustering Algorithm, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
- Seismicity Smoothing Kernel, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
- Off Fault Mmax, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
- PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
- Mean and median hazard maps, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
- Bounds, spread, and COV, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
- PGA (g), 10% in 50 year Logic Tree Comparisons
- Deformation Model, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
- Scaling Relationship, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
- Supra-Seismogenic b-value, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
- Paleoseismic Data Uncertainties, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
- Segmentation Model, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
- Regional Seismicity Rate, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
- Seismicity Declustering Algorithm, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
- Seismicity Smoothing Kernel, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
- Off Fault Mmax, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
- 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
- Mean and median hazard maps, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
- Bounds, spread, and COV, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
- 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year Logic Tree Comparisons
- Deformation Model, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
- Scaling Relationship, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
- Supra-Seismogenic b-value, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
- Paleoseismic Data Uncertainties, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
- Segmentation Model, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
- Regional Seismicity Rate, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
- Seismicity Declustering Algorithm, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
- Seismicity Smoothing Kernel, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
- Off Fault Mmax, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
- 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
- Mean and median hazard maps, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
- Bounds, spread, and COV, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
- 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year Logic Tree Comparisons
- Deformation Model, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
- Scaling Relationship, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
- Supra-Seismogenic b-value, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
- Paleoseismic Data Uncertainties, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
- Segmentation Model, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
- Regional Seismicity Rate, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
- Seismicity Declustering Algorithm, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
- Seismicity Smoothing Kernel, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
- Off Fault Mmax, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
Download Mean Hazard CSV: pga_TWO_IN_50.csv
Mean and median hazard maps, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
Weighted-Average | Weighted-Median |
|---|---|
 |  |
Branched-average hazard can be dominated by outlier branches. The map below on the left shows the percentile at which the mean map lies within the full hazard distribution. Areas far from the 50-th percentile here are likely outlier-dominated and may show up in percentile comparison maps, even if mean hazard differences are minimal. Keep this in mind when evaluating the influence of individual logic tree branches by this metric. The right map show the ratio of mean to median hazard.
Note: The mean map here is computed directly from mean hazard curves, but the median map is taken as the median value of hazard maps across all branches (rather than first calculating median curves at each location), which might bias this comparison.
| Mean Map Percentile | Mean vs Median |
|---|---|
 |  |
Bounds, spread, and COV, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
The maps below show the range of values across all logic tree branches, the ratio of the maximum to minimum value, and the coefficient of variation (std. dev. / mean). Note that the minimum and maximum maps are not a result for any single logic tree branch, but rather the smallest or largest value encountered at each location across all logic tree branches.
Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|
 |  |
Log10 (Max/Min) | COV |
 |  |
PGA (g), 2% in 50 year Logic Tree Comparisons
This section shows how hazard changes across branch choices at each level of the logic tree. The summary figures below show mean hazard on the left, and then ratios & differences between the mean map considering subsets of the model holding each branch choice constant, and the overall mean map.
| Combined Summary Maps |
|---|
 |
 |
Deformation Model, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 5 choices at the Deformation Model branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TWO_IN_50_DM.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 11.69%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs Geologic | Vs Evans | Vs Pollitz | Vs Shen-Bird | Vs Zeng |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geologic | Mean: -0.71%, Mean Abs: 2.92% | Mean: -3.06%, Mean Abs: 14.95% | Mean: 0.06%, Mean Abs: 8.72% | Mean: -0.46%, Mean Abs: 4.76% | Mean: 0.38%, Mean Abs: 4.24% | |
| Evans | Mean: 11.34%, Mean Abs: 21.21% | Mean: 13.12%, Mean Abs: 22.60% | Mean: 11.36%, Mean Abs: 20.94% | Mean: 12.55%, Mean Abs: 23.66% | Mean: 12.69%, Mean Abs: 22.28% | |
| Pollitz | Mean: 0.87%, Mean Abs: 8.12% | Mean: 2.54%, Mean Abs: 10.14% | Mean: -1.60%, Mean Abs: 16.01% | Mean: 1.57%, Mean Abs: 10.81% | Mean: 1.73%, Mean Abs: 8.18% | |
| Shen-Bird | Mean: -0.04%, Mean Abs: 3.15% | Mean: 1.01%, Mean Abs: 4.62% | Mean: -2.29%, Mean Abs: 15.69% | Mean: 0.71%, Mean Abs: 9.48% | Mean: 0.90%, Mean Abs: 4.70% | |
| Zeng | Mean: -0.63%, Mean Abs: 2.71% | Mean: 0.76%, Mean Abs: 4.60% | Mean: -2.97%, Mean Abs: 15.04% | Mean: -0.14%, Mean Abs: 7.36% | Mean: -0.27%, Mean Abs: 4.99% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geologic |  |  |  |  |
| Evans |  |  |  |  |
| Pollitz |  |  |  |  |
| Shen-Bird |  |  |  |  |
| Zeng |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs Geologic | Vs Evans | Vs Pollitz | Vs Shen-Bird | Vs Zeng |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geologic |  |  |  |  | |
| Evans |  |  |  |  | |
| Pollitz |  |  |  |  | |
| Shen-Bird |  |  |  |  | |
| Zeng |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| Geologic | Evans | Pollitz | Shen-Bird | Zeng |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
Scaling Relationship, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 6 choices at the Scaling Relationship branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TWO_IN_50_Scale.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 3.14%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs LogA+4.3 | Vs LogA+4.2 | Vs LogA+4.1 | Vs WdthLmtd | Vs LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | Vs WdthLmtd, CSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LogA+4.3 | Mean: -1.61%, Mean Abs: 3.46% | Mean: -0.86%, Mean Abs: 2.33% | Mean: -1.28%, Mean Abs: 5.16% | Mean: -2.56%, Mean Abs: 4.05% | Mean: -2.51%, Mean Abs: 5.67% | Mean: -1.67%, Mean Abs: 3.25% | |
| LogA+4.2 | Mean: -0.83%, Mean Abs: 1.25% | Mean: 1.01%, Mean Abs: 2.46% | Mean: -0.57%, Mean Abs: 2.95% | Mean: -1.83%, Mean Abs: 2.16% | Mean: -1.83%, Mean Abs: 3.60% | Mean: -0.89%, Mean Abs: 1.41% | |
| LogA+4.1 | Mean: -0.15%, Mean Abs: 1.92% | Mean: 1.99%, Mean Abs: 5.72% | Mean: 0.79%, Mean Abs: 3.11% | Mean: -1.23%, Mean Abs: 2.78% | Mean: -1.29%, Mean Abs: 1.78% | Mean: -0.21%, Mean Abs: 2.42% | |
| WdthLmtd | Mean: 1.18%, Mean Abs: 1.65% | Mean: 3.38%, Mean Abs: 4.84% | Mean: 2.17%, Mean Abs: 2.49% | Mean: 1.38%, Mean Abs: 2.85% | Mean: 0.05%, Mean Abs: 2.62% | Mean: 1.13%, Mean Abs: 2.12% | |
| LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | Mean: 1.20%, Mean Abs: 2.55% | Mean: 3.44%, Mean Abs: 6.48% | Mean: 2.18%, Mean Abs: 3.91% | Mean: 1.36%, Mean Abs: 1.82% | Mean: 0.08%, Mean Abs: 2.64% | Mean: 1.15%, Mean Abs: 3.09% | |
| WdthLmtd, CSD | Mean: 0.09%, Mean Abs: 1.05% | Mean: 2.11%, Mean Abs: 3.66% | Mean: 0.99%, Mean Abs: 1.51% | Mean: 0.31%, Mean Abs: 2.40% | Mean: -0.97%, Mean Abs: 2.00% | Mean: -0.98%, Mean Abs: 2.97% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LogA+4.3 |  |  |  |  |
| LogA+4.2 |  |  |  |  |
| LogA+4.1 |  |  |  |  |
| WdthLmtd |  |  |  |  |
| LogA+4.2, SqrtLen |  |  |  |  |
| WdthLmtd, CSD |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs LogA+4.3 | Vs LogA+4.2 | Vs LogA+4.1 | Vs WdthLmtd | Vs LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | Vs WdthLmtd, CSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LogA+4.3 |  |  |  |  |  | |
| LogA+4.2 |  |  |  |  |  | |
| LogA+4.1 |  |  |  |  |  | |
| WdthLmtd |  |  |  |  |  | |
| LogA+4.2, SqrtLen |  |  |  |  |  | |
| WdthLmtd, CSD |  |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| LogA+4.3 | LogA+4.2 | LogA+4.1 | WdthLmtd | LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | WdthLmtd, CSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |  |
Supra-Seismogenic b-value, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 5 choices at the Supra-Seismogenic b-value branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TWO_IN_50_SupraB.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 4.26%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs b=0.0 | Vs b=0.25 | Vs b=0.5 | Vs b=0.75 | Vs b=1.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| b=0.0 | Mean: 2.65%, Mean Abs: 3.79% | Mean: 0.91%, Mean Abs: 1.63% | Mean: 2.14%, Mean Abs: 3.29% | Mean: 4.14%, Mean Abs: 5.74% | Mean: 6.89%, Mean Abs: 8.93% | |
| b=0.25 | Mean: 1.69%, Mean Abs: 2.17% | Mean: -0.87%, Mean Abs: 1.63% | Mean: 1.19%, Mean Abs: 1.66% | Mean: 3.14%, Mean Abs: 4.08% | Mean: 5.83%, Mean Abs: 7.25% | |
| b=0.5 | Mean: 0.50%, Mean Abs: 0.55% | Mean: -1.99%, Mean Abs: 3.24% | Mean: -1.15%, Mean Abs: 1.64% | Mean: 1.91%, Mean Abs: 2.40% | Mean: 4.52%, Mean Abs: 5.52% | |
| b=0.75 | Mean: -1.35%, Mean Abs: 1.86% | Mean: -3.72%, Mean Abs: 5.51% | Mean: -2.93%, Mean Abs: 3.95% | Mean: -1.83%, Mean Abs: 2.35% | Mean: 2.52%, Mean Abs: 3.05% | |
| b=1.0 | Mean: -3.69%, Mean Abs: 4.76% | Mean: -5.92%, Mean Abs: 8.32% | Mean: -5.19%, Mean Abs: 6.80% | Mean: -4.15%, Mean Abs: 5.24% | Mean: -2.41%, Mean Abs: 2.96% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| b=0.0 |  |  |  |  |
| b=0.25 |  |  |  |  |
| b=0.5 |  |  |  |  |
| b=0.75 |  |  |  |  |
| b=1.0 |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs b=0.0 | Vs b=0.25 | Vs b=0.5 | Vs b=0.75 | Vs b=1.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| b=0.0 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=0.25 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=0.5 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=0.75 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=1.0 |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| b=0.0 | b=0.25 | b=0.5 | b=0.75 | b=1.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
Paleoseismic Data Uncertainties, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Paleoseismic Data Uncertainties branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TWO_IN_50_PaleoUncert.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 0.82%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs EvenFit | Vs OverFit | Vs UnderFit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EvenFit | Mean: 0.08%, Mean Abs: 0.11% | Mean: 0.67%, Mean Abs: 0.73% | Mean: -0.39%, Mean Abs: 0.51% | |
| OverFit | Mean: -0.58%, Mean Abs: 0.64% | Mean: -0.66%, Mean Abs: 0.72% | Mean: -1.05%, Mean Abs: 1.21% | |
| UnderFit | Mean: 0.49%, Mean Abs: 0.57% | Mean: 0.40%, Mean Abs: 0.51% | Mean: 1.08%, Mean Abs: 1.22% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EvenFit |  |  |  |  |
| OverFit |  |  |  |  |
| UnderFit |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs EvenFit | Vs OverFit | Vs UnderFit |
|---|---|---|---|
| EvenFit |  |  | |
| OverFit |  |  | |
| UnderFit |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| EvenFit | OverFit | UnderFit |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
Segmentation Model, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 5 choices at the Segmentation Model branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TWO_IN_50_SegModel.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 5.36%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs None | Vs LowSeg | Vs MidSeg | Vs HighSeg | Vs Classic |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| None | Mean: 2.32%, Mean Abs: 3.86% | Mean: 1.22%, Mean Abs: 2.04% | Mean: 1.85%, Mean Abs: 3.08% | Mean: 3.00%, Mean Abs: 4.80% | Mean: 7.97%, Mean Abs: 12.09% | |
| LowSeg | Mean: 1.05%, Mean Abs: 1.90% | Mean: -1.16%, Mean Abs: 2.03% | Mean: 0.60%, Mean Abs: 1.07% | Mean: 1.70%, Mean Abs: 2.82% | Mean: 6.52%, Mean Abs: 10.13% | |
| MidSeg | Mean: 0.44%, Mean Abs: 0.92% | Mean: -1.70%, Mean Abs: 3.06% | Mean: -0.58%, Mean Abs: 1.07% | Mean: 1.07%, Mean Abs: 1.76% | Mean: 5.80%, Mean Abs: 9.10% | |
| HighSeg | Mean: -0.60%, Mean Abs: 1.07% | Mean: -2.65%, Mean Abs: 4.74% | Mean: -1.57%, Mean Abs: 2.81% | Mean: -1.02%, Mean Abs: 1.76% | Mean: 4.58%, Mean Abs: 7.41% | |
| Classic | Mean: -4.32%, Mean Abs: 7.93% | Mean: -6.01%, Mean Abs: 11.50% | Mean: -5.08%, Mean Abs: 9.78% | Mean: -4.63%, Mean Abs: 8.84% | Mean: -3.77%, Mean Abs: 7.27% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| None |  |  |  |  |
| LowSeg |  |  |  |  |
| MidSeg |  |  |  |  |
| HighSeg |  |  |  |  |
| Classic |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs None | Vs LowSeg | Vs MidSeg | Vs HighSeg | Vs Classic |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| None |  |  |  |  | |
| LowSeg |  |  |  |  | |
| MidSeg |  |  |  |  | |
| HighSeg |  |  |  |  | |
| Classic |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| None | LowSeg | MidSeg | HighSeg | Classic |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
Regional Seismicity Rate, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Regional Seismicity Rate branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TWO_IN_50_SeisRate.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 19.79%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs PrefSeis | Vs LowSeis | Vs HighSeis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PrefSeis | Mean: -0.72%, Mean Abs: 0.72% | Mean: 15.53%, Mean Abs: 15.53% | Mean: -13.78%, Mean Abs: 13.78% | |
| LowSeis | Mean: -13.67%, Mean Abs: 13.67% | Mean: -13.06%, Mean Abs: 13.06% | Mean: -24.72%, Mean Abs: 24.72% | |
| HighSeis | Mean: 15.62%, Mean Abs: 15.62% | Mean: 16.48%, Mean Abs: 16.48% | Mean: 35.15%, Mean Abs: 35.15% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PrefSeis |  |  |  |  |
| LowSeis |  |  |  |  |
| HighSeis |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs PrefSeis | Vs LowSeis | Vs HighSeis |
|---|---|---|---|
| PrefSeis |  |  | |
| LowSeis |  |  | |
| HighSeis |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| PrefSeis | LowSeis | HighSeis |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
Seismicity Declustering Algorithm, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Seismicity Declustering Algorithm branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TWO_IN_50_SeisDecluster.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 12.45%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs GK | Vs NN | Vs Reas |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GK | Mean: 4.95%, Mean Abs: 5.67% | Mean: 6.84%, Mean Abs: 8.09% | Mean: 16.84%, Mean Abs: 18.62% | |
| NN | Mean: -1.34%, Mean Abs: 3.79% | Mean: -5.70%, Mean Abs: 7.09% | Mean: 9.95%, Mean Abs: 14.04% | |
| Reas | Mean: -8.68%, Mean Abs: 10.63% | Mean: -12.51%, Mean Abs: 14.91% | Mean: -6.77%, Mean Abs: 11.94% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GK |  |  |  |  |
| NN |  |  |  |  |
| Reas |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs GK | Vs NN | Vs Reas |
|---|---|---|---|
| GK |  |  | |
| NN |  |  | |
| Reas |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| GK | NN | Reas |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
Seismicity Smoothing Kernel, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 2 choices at the Seismicity Smoothing Kernel branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TWO_IN_50_SeisSmooth.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 25.12%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs Adaptive | Vs Fixed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adaptive | Mean: -0.72%, Mean Abs: 9.35% | Mean: 6.47%, Mean Abs: 25.56% | |
| Fixed | Mean: 0.20%, Mean Abs: 12.88% | Mean: 6.58%, Mean Abs: 24.67% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adaptive |  |  |  |  |
| Fixed |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs Adaptive | Vs Fixed |
|---|---|---|
| Adaptive |  | |
| Fixed |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| Adaptive | Fixed |
|---|---|
 |  |
 |  |
Off Fault Mmax, PGA (g), 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Off Fault Mmax branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TWO_IN_50_MmaxOff.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 4.33%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs MMax7.3 | Vs MMax7.6 | Vs MMax7.9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMax7.3 | Mean: -3.02%, Mean Abs: 3.02% | Mean: -2.95%, Mean Abs: 2.96% | Mean: -6.19%, Mean Abs: 6.19% | |
| MMax7.6 | Mean: -0.07%, Mean Abs: 0.08% | Mean: 3.08%, Mean Abs: 3.08% | Mean: -3.38%, Mean Abs: 3.38% | |
| MMax7.9 | Mean: 3.48%, Mean Abs: 3.48% | Mean: 6.79%, Mean Abs: 6.79% | Mean: 3.55%, Mean Abs: 3.55% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMax7.3 |  |  |  |  |
| MMax7.6 |  |  |  |  |
| MMax7.9 |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs MMax7.3 | Vs MMax7.6 | Vs MMax7.9 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMax7.3 |  |  | |
| MMax7.6 |  |  | |
| MMax7.9 |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| MMax7.3 | MMax7.6 | MMax7.9 |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
Download Mean Hazard CSV: pga_TEN_IN_50.csv
Mean and median hazard maps, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
Weighted-Average | Weighted-Median |
|---|---|
 |  |
Branched-average hazard can be dominated by outlier branches. The map below on the left shows the percentile at which the mean map lies within the full hazard distribution. Areas far from the 50-th percentile here are likely outlier-dominated and may show up in percentile comparison maps, even if mean hazard differences are minimal. Keep this in mind when evaluating the influence of individual logic tree branches by this metric. The right map show the ratio of mean to median hazard.
Note: The mean map here is computed directly from mean hazard curves, but the median map is taken as the median value of hazard maps across all branches (rather than first calculating median curves at each location), which might bias this comparison.
| Mean Map Percentile | Mean vs Median |
|---|---|
 |  |
Bounds, spread, and COV, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
The maps below show the range of values across all logic tree branches, the ratio of the maximum to minimum value, and the coefficient of variation (std. dev. / mean). Note that the minimum and maximum maps are not a result for any single logic tree branch, but rather the smallest or largest value encountered at each location across all logic tree branches.
Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|
 |  |
Log10 (Max/Min) | COV |
 |  |
PGA (g), 10% in 50 year Logic Tree Comparisons
This section shows how hazard changes across branch choices at each level of the logic tree. The summary figures below show mean hazard on the left, and then ratios & differences between the mean map considering subsets of the model holding each branch choice constant, and the overall mean map.
| Combined Summary Maps |
|---|
 |
 |
Deformation Model, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 5 choices at the Deformation Model branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TEN_IN_50_DM.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 12.12%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs Geologic | Vs Evans | Vs Pollitz | Vs Shen-Bird | Vs Zeng |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geologic | Mean: -0.57%, Mean Abs: 2.76% | Mean: -7.39%, Mean Abs: 16.44% | Mean: -0.93%, Mean Abs: 8.92% | Mean: -0.27%, Mean Abs: 4.36% | Mean: 0.41%, Mean Abs: 4.33% | |
| Evans | Mean: 15.75%, Mean Abs: 22.94% | Mean: 16.92%, Mean Abs: 24.21% | Mean: 14.43%, Mean Abs: 22.21% | Mean: 16.57%, Mean Abs: 24.53% | Mean: 17.12%, Mean Abs: 24.35% | |
| Pollitz | Mean: 1.76%, Mean Abs: 8.36% | Mean: 2.75%, Mean Abs: 10.05% | Mean: -5.79%, Mean Abs: 16.27% | Mean: 2.39%, Mean Abs: 10.98% | Mean: 2.63%, Mean Abs: 8.13% | |
| Shen-Bird | Mean: -0.19%, Mean Abs: 2.90% | Mean: 0.57%, Mean Abs: 4.23% | Mean: -7.08%, Mean Abs: 16.50% | Mean: -0.50%, Mean Abs: 9.78% | Mean: 0.73%, Mean Abs: 4.62% | |
| Zeng | Mean: -0.74%, Mean Abs: 2.65% | Mean: 0.13%, Mean Abs: 4.35% | Mean: -7.56%, Mean Abs: 16.33% | Mean: -1.29%, Mean Abs: 7.09% | Mean: -0.39%, Mean Abs: 4.76% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geologic |  |  |  |  |
| Evans |  |  |  |  |
| Pollitz |  |  |  |  |
| Shen-Bird |  |  |  |  |
| Zeng |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs Geologic | Vs Evans | Vs Pollitz | Vs Shen-Bird | Vs Zeng |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geologic |  |  |  |  | |
| Evans |  |  |  |  | |
| Pollitz |  |  |  |  | |
| Shen-Bird |  |  |  |  | |
| Zeng |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| Geologic | Evans | Pollitz | Shen-Bird | Zeng |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
Scaling Relationship, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 6 choices at the Scaling Relationship branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TEN_IN_50_Scale.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 3.18%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs LogA+4.3 | Vs LogA+4.2 | Vs LogA+4.1 | Vs WdthLmtd | Vs LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | Vs WdthLmtd, CSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LogA+4.3 | Mean: -1.78%, Mean Abs: 3.38% | Mean: -0.97%, Mean Abs: 2.23% | Mean: -1.45%, Mean Abs: 4.96% | Mean: -2.79%, Mean Abs: 4.18% | Mean: -3.15%, Mean Abs: 5.59% | Mean: -1.66%, Mean Abs: 3.23% | |
| LogA+4.2 | Mean: -0.88%, Mean Abs: 1.26% | Mean: 1.05%, Mean Abs: 2.38% | Mean: -0.62%, Mean Abs: 2.84% | Mean: -1.94%, Mean Abs: 2.40% | Mean: -2.35%, Mean Abs: 3.62% | Mean: -0.76%, Mean Abs: 1.51% | |
| LogA+4.1 | Mean: -0.18%, Mean Abs: 1.92% | Mean: 2.02%, Mean Abs: 5.45% | Mean: 0.79%, Mean Abs: 2.96% | Mean: -1.29%, Mean Abs: 2.85% | Mean: -1.75%, Mean Abs: 2.32% | Mean: -0.04%, Mean Abs: 2.43% | |
| WdthLmtd | Mean: 1.19%, Mean Abs: 1.70% | Mean: 3.40%, Mean Abs: 4.83% | Mean: 2.19%, Mean Abs: 2.65% | Mean: 1.42%, Mean Abs: 2.89% | Mean: -0.39%, Mean Abs: 2.46% | Mean: 1.33%, Mean Abs: 2.28% | |
| LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | Mean: 1.65%, Mean Abs: 2.60% | Mean: 3.92%, Mean Abs: 6.35% | Mean: 2.66%, Mean Abs: 3.91% | Mean: 1.84%, Mean Abs: 2.37% | Mean: 0.49%, Mean Abs: 2.50% | Mean: 1.80%, Mean Abs: 3.25% | |
| WdthLmtd, CSD | Mean: -0.10%, Mean Abs: 1.10% | Mean: 1.96%, Mean Abs: 3.58% | Mean: 0.83%, Mean Abs: 1.57% | Mean: 0.14%, Mean Abs: 2.40% | Mean: -1.20%, Mean Abs: 2.18% | Mean: -1.61%, Mean Abs: 3.09% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LogA+4.3 |  |  |  |  |
| LogA+4.2 |  |  |  |  |
| LogA+4.1 |  |  |  |  |
| WdthLmtd |  |  |  |  |
| LogA+4.2, SqrtLen |  |  |  |  |
| WdthLmtd, CSD |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs LogA+4.3 | Vs LogA+4.2 | Vs LogA+4.1 | Vs WdthLmtd | Vs LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | Vs WdthLmtd, CSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LogA+4.3 |  |  |  |  |  | |
| LogA+4.2 |  |  |  |  |  | |
| LogA+4.1 |  |  |  |  |  | |
| WdthLmtd |  |  |  |  |  | |
| LogA+4.2, SqrtLen |  |  |  |  |  | |
| WdthLmtd, CSD |  |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| LogA+4.3 | LogA+4.2 | LogA+4.1 | WdthLmtd | LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | WdthLmtd, CSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |  |
Supra-Seismogenic b-value, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 5 choices at the Supra-Seismogenic b-value branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TEN_IN_50_SupraB.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 4.72%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs b=0.0 | Vs b=0.25 | Vs b=0.5 | Vs b=0.75 | Vs b=1.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| b=0.0 | Mean: 2.94%, Mean Abs: 4.13% | Mean: 0.96%, Mean Abs: 1.73% | Mean: 2.28%, Mean Abs: 3.52% | Mean: 4.56%, Mean Abs: 6.24% | Mean: 7.77%, Mean Abs: 9.92% | |
| b=0.25 | Mean: 1.94%, Mean Abs: 2.43% | Mean: -0.94%, Mean Abs: 1.73% | Mean: 1.29%, Mean Abs: 1.79% | Mean: 3.52%, Mean Abs: 4.50% | Mean: 6.66%, Mean Abs: 8.15% | |
| b=0.5 | Mean: 0.64%, Mean Abs: 0.70% | Mean: -2.17%, Mean Abs: 3.48% | Mean: -1.29%, Mean Abs: 1.80% | Mean: 2.18%, Mean Abs: 2.68% | Mean: 5.24%, Mean Abs: 6.28% | |
| b=0.75 | Mean: -1.49%, Mean Abs: 2.02% | Mean: -4.13%, Mean Abs: 5.97% | Mean: -3.32%, Mean Abs: 4.36% | Mean: -2.11%, Mean Abs: 2.63% | Mean: 2.98%, Mean Abs: 3.54% | |
| b=1.0 | Mean: -4.24%, Mean Abs: 5.35% | Mean: -6.68%, Mean Abs: 9.13% | Mean: -5.95%, Mean Abs: 7.59% | Mean: -4.83%, Mean Abs: 5.94% | Mean: -2.88%, Mean Abs: 3.46% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| b=0.0 |  |  |  |  |
| b=0.25 |  |  |  |  |
| b=0.5 |  |  |  |  |
| b=0.75 |  |  |  |  |
| b=1.0 |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs b=0.0 | Vs b=0.25 | Vs b=0.5 | Vs b=0.75 | Vs b=1.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| b=0.0 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=0.25 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=0.5 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=0.75 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=1.0 |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| b=0.0 | b=0.25 | b=0.5 | b=0.75 | b=1.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
Paleoseismic Data Uncertainties, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Paleoseismic Data Uncertainties branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TEN_IN_50_PaleoUncert.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 1.02%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs EvenFit | Vs OverFit | Vs UnderFit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EvenFit | Mean: 0.11%, Mean Abs: 0.14% | Mean: 0.77%, Mean Abs: 0.87% | Mean: -0.41%, Mean Abs: 0.68% | |
| OverFit | Mean: -0.66%, Mean Abs: 0.79% | Mean: -0.77%, Mean Abs: 0.87% | Mean: -1.17%, Mean Abs: 1.53% | |
| UnderFit | Mean: 0.54%, Mean Abs: 0.73% | Mean: 0.43%, Mean Abs: 0.67% | Mean: 1.21%, Mean Abs: 1.52% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EvenFit |  |  |  |  |
| OverFit |  |  |  |  |
| UnderFit |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs EvenFit | Vs OverFit | Vs UnderFit |
|---|---|---|---|
| EvenFit |  |  | |
| OverFit |  |  | |
| UnderFit |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| EvenFit | OverFit | UnderFit |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
Segmentation Model, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 5 choices at the Segmentation Model branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TEN_IN_50_SegModel.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 5.68%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs None | Vs LowSeg | Vs MidSeg | Vs HighSeg | Vs Classic |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| None | Mean: 2.26%, Mean Abs: 3.91% | Mean: 1.20%, Mean Abs: 1.98% | Mean: 1.80%, Mean Abs: 3.04% | Mean: 2.87%, Mean Abs: 4.78% | Mean: 8.01%, Mean Abs: 12.94% | |
| LowSeg | Mean: 1.03%, Mean Abs: 2.03% | Mean: -1.16%, Mean Abs: 1.97% | Mean: 0.58%, Mean Abs: 1.09% | Mean: 1.62%, Mean Abs: 2.88% | Mean: 6.60%, Mean Abs: 11.03% | |
| MidSeg | Mean: 0.46%, Mean Abs: 1.01% | Mean: -1.70%, Mean Abs: 3.01% | Mean: -0.58%, Mean Abs: 1.10% | Mean: 1.03%, Mean Abs: 1.81% | Mean: 5.91%, Mean Abs: 9.98% | |
| HighSeg | Mean: -0.56%, Mean Abs: 0.98% | Mean: -2.62%, Mean Abs: 4.70% | Mean: -1.55%, Mean Abs: 2.89% | Mean: -1.01%, Mean Abs: 1.82% | Mean: 4.72%, Mean Abs: 8.23% | |
| Classic | Mean: -4.32%, Mean Abs: 8.64% | Mean: -5.92%, Mean Abs: 12.17% | Mean: -5.04%, Mean Abs: 10.56% | Mean: -4.62%, Mean Abs: 9.62% | Mean: -3.83%, Mean Abs: 8.04% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| None |  |  |  |  |
| LowSeg |  |  |  |  |
| MidSeg |  |  |  |  |
| HighSeg |  |  |  |  |
| Classic |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs None | Vs LowSeg | Vs MidSeg | Vs HighSeg | Vs Classic |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| None |  |  |  |  | |
| LowSeg |  |  |  |  | |
| MidSeg |  |  |  |  | |
| HighSeg |  |  |  |  | |
| Classic |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| None | LowSeg | MidSeg | HighSeg | Classic |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
Regional Seismicity Rate, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Regional Seismicity Rate branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TEN_IN_50_SeisRate.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 23.81%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs PrefSeis | Vs LowSeis | Vs HighSeis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PrefSeis | Mean: -0.78%, Mean Abs: 0.78% | Mean: 18.89%, Mean Abs: 18.89% | Mean: -16.33%, Mean Abs: 16.33% | |
| LowSeis | Mean: -16.25%, Mean Abs: 16.25% | Mean: -15.62%, Mean Abs: 15.62% | Mean: -28.67%, Mean Abs: 28.67% | |
| HighSeis | Mean: 19.21%, Mean Abs: 19.21% | Mean: 20.19%, Mean Abs: 20.19% | Mean: 43.31%, Mean Abs: 43.31% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PrefSeis |  |  |  |  |
| LowSeis |  |  |  |  |
| HighSeis |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs PrefSeis | Vs LowSeis | Vs HighSeis |
|---|---|---|---|
| PrefSeis |  |  | |
| LowSeis |  |  | |
| HighSeis |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| PrefSeis | LowSeis | HighSeis |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
Seismicity Declustering Algorithm, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Seismicity Declustering Algorithm branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TEN_IN_50_SeisDecluster.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 14.39%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs GK | Vs NN | Vs Reas |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GK | Mean: 6.94%, Mean Abs: 7.87% | Mean: 9.30%, Mean Abs: 10.46% | Mean: 17.26%, Mean Abs: 20.05% | |
| NN | Mean: -1.62%, Mean Abs: 5.05% | Mean: -7.66%, Mean Abs: 8.95% | Mean: 8.32%, Mean Abs: 14.16% | |
| Reas | Mean: -9.86%, Mean Abs: 13.00% | Mean: -14.29%, Mean Abs: 18.24% | Mean: -6.93%, Mean Abs: 14.61% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GK |  |  |  |  |
| NN |  |  |  |  |
| Reas |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs GK | Vs NN | Vs Reas |
|---|---|---|---|
| GK |  |  | |
| NN |  |  | |
| Reas |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| GK | NN | Reas |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
Seismicity Smoothing Kernel, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 2 choices at the Seismicity Smoothing Kernel branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TEN_IN_50_SeisSmooth.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 20.91%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs Adaptive | Vs Fixed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adaptive | Mean: -2.83%, Mean Abs: 9.46% | Mean: -1.49%, Mean Abs: 21.35% | |
| Fixed | Mean: 7.83%, Mean Abs: 16.86% | Mean: 6.66%, Mean Abs: 20.46% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adaptive |  |  |  |  |
| Fixed |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs Adaptive | Vs Fixed |
|---|---|---|
| Adaptive |  | |
| Fixed |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| Adaptive | Fixed |
|---|---|
 |  |
 |  |
Off Fault Mmax, PGA (g), 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Off Fault Mmax branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: pga_TEN_IN_50_MmaxOff.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 3.76%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs MMax7.3 | Vs MMax7.6 | Vs MMax7.9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMax7.3 | Mean: -2.70%, Mean Abs: 2.72% | Mean: -2.67%, Mean Abs: 2.70% | Mean: -5.40%, Mean Abs: 5.42% | |
| MMax7.6 | Mean: -0.03%, Mean Abs: 0.04% | Mean: 2.78%, Mean Abs: 2.80% | Mean: -2.83%, Mean Abs: 2.83% | |
| MMax7.9 | Mean: 2.91%, Mean Abs: 2.92% | Mean: 5.83%, Mean Abs: 5.85% | Mean: 2.94%, Mean Abs: 2.94% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMax7.3 |  |  |  |  |
| MMax7.6 |  |  |  |  |
| MMax7.9 |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs MMax7.3 | Vs MMax7.6 | Vs MMax7.9 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMax7.3 |  |  | |
| MMax7.6 |  |  | |
| MMax7.9 |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| MMax7.3 | MMax7.6 | MMax7.9 |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
Download Mean Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TWO_IN_50.csv
Mean and median hazard maps, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
Weighted-Average | Weighted-Median |
|---|---|
 |  |
Branched-average hazard can be dominated by outlier branches. The map below on the left shows the percentile at which the mean map lies within the full hazard distribution. Areas far from the 50-th percentile here are likely outlier-dominated and may show up in percentile comparison maps, even if mean hazard differences are minimal. Keep this in mind when evaluating the influence of individual logic tree branches by this metric. The right map show the ratio of mean to median hazard.
Note: The mean map here is computed directly from mean hazard curves, but the median map is taken as the median value of hazard maps across all branches (rather than first calculating median curves at each location), which might bias this comparison.
| Mean Map Percentile | Mean vs Median |
|---|---|
 |  |
Bounds, spread, and COV, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
The maps below show the range of values across all logic tree branches, the ratio of the maximum to minimum value, and the coefficient of variation (std. dev. / mean). Note that the minimum and maximum maps are not a result for any single logic tree branch, but rather the smallest or largest value encountered at each location across all logic tree branches.
Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|
 |  |
Log10 (Max/Min) | COV |
 |  |
1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year Logic Tree Comparisons
This section shows how hazard changes across branch choices at each level of the logic tree. The summary figures below show mean hazard on the left, and then ratios & differences between the mean map considering subsets of the model holding each branch choice constant, and the overall mean map.
| Combined Summary Maps |
|---|
 |
 |
Deformation Model, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 5 choices at the Deformation Model branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TWO_IN_50_DM.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 12.98%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs Geologic | Vs Evans | Vs Pollitz | Vs Shen-Bird | Vs Zeng |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geologic | Mean: -0.32%, Mean Abs: 3.66% | Mean: -3.66%, Mean Abs: 16.40% | Mean: 1.15%, Mean Abs: 10.83% | Mean: 0.08%, Mean Abs: 5.47% | Mean: 0.96%, Mean Abs: 6.20% | |
| Evans | Mean: 11.34%, Mean Abs: 21.44% | Mean: 12.42%, Mean Abs: 22.41% | Mean: 12.50%, Mean Abs: 23.04% | Mean: 12.23%, Mean Abs: 22.88% | Mean: 12.93%, Mean Abs: 23.34% | |
| Pollitz | Mean: 0.25%, Mean Abs: 9.14% | Mean: 1.37%, Mean Abs: 11.59% | Mean: -2.99%, Mean Abs: 18.30% | Mean: 1.00%, Mean Abs: 12.14% | Mean: 1.19%, Mean Abs: 8.80% | |
| Shen-Bird | Mean: -0.17%, Mean Abs: 3.69% | Mean: 0.52%, Mean Abs: 5.33% | Mean: -3.44%, Mean Abs: 16.67% | Mean: 1.28%, Mean Abs: 11.44% | Mean: 1.00%, Mean Abs: 6.39% | |
| Zeng | Mean: -0.77%, Mean Abs: 3.74% | Mean: 0.21%, Mean Abs: 6.39% | Mean: -3.91%, Mean Abs: 17.15% | Mean: 0.28%, Mean Abs: 8.24% | Mean: -0.24%, Mean Abs: 6.61% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geologic |  |  |  |  |
| Evans |  |  |  |  |
| Pollitz |  |  |  |  |
| Shen-Bird |  |  |  |  |
| Zeng |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs Geologic | Vs Evans | Vs Pollitz | Vs Shen-Bird | Vs Zeng |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geologic |  |  |  |  | |
| Evans |  |  |  |  | |
| Pollitz |  |  |  |  | |
| Shen-Bird |  |  |  |  | |
| Zeng |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| Geologic | Evans | Pollitz | Shen-Bird | Zeng |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
Scaling Relationship, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 6 choices at the Scaling Relationship branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TWO_IN_50_Scale.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 3.63%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs LogA+4.3 | Vs LogA+4.2 | Vs LogA+4.1 | Vs WdthLmtd | Vs LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | Vs WdthLmtd, CSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LogA+4.3 | Mean: -0.88%, Mean Abs: 3.24% | Mean: -0.10%, Mean Abs: 2.39% | Mean: 0.56%, Mean Abs: 5.42% | Mean: -1.24%, Mean Abs: 3.19% | Mean: -2.96%, Mean Abs: 6.22% | Mean: -0.68%, Mean Abs: 3.33% | |
| LogA+4.2 | Mean: -0.82%, Mean Abs: 1.12% | Mean: 0.21%, Mean Abs: 2.44% | Mean: 0.54%, Mean Abs: 3.09% | Mean: -1.18%, Mean Abs: 1.75% | Mean: -2.99%, Mean Abs: 4.58% | Mean: -0.60%, Mean Abs: 1.77% | |
| LogA+4.1 | Mean: -1.26%, Mean Abs: 2.53% | Mean: -0.05%, Mean Abs: 5.61% | Mean: -0.39%, Mean Abs: 3.12% | Mean: -1.63%, Mean Abs: 3.40% | Mean: -3.53%, Mean Abs: 3.91% | Mean: -1.03%, Mean Abs: 3.20% | |
| WdthLmtd | Mean: 0.44%, Mean Abs: 1.54% | Mean: 1.58%, Mean Abs: 3.48% | Mean: 1.31%, Mean Abs: 1.86% | Mean: 1.80%, Mean Abs: 3.47% | Mean: -1.80%, Mean Abs: 4.07% | Mean: 0.67%, Mean Abs: 2.36% | |
| LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | Mean: 2.46%, Mean Abs: 3.74% | Mean: 3.76%, Mean Abs: 6.85% | Mean: 3.39%, Mean Abs: 4.93% | Mean: 3.78%, Mean Abs: 4.14% | Mean: 2.09%, Mean Abs: 4.26% | Mean: 2.73%, Mean Abs: 4.70% | |
| WdthLmtd, CSD | Mean: -0.17%, Mean Abs: 1.68% | Mean: 0.93%, Mean Abs: 3.51% | Mean: 0.68%, Mean Abs: 1.81% | Mean: 1.19%, Mean Abs: 3.23% | Mean: -0.54%, Mean Abs: 2.31% | Mean: -2.36%, Mean Abs: 4.41% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LogA+4.3 |  |  |  |  |
| LogA+4.2 |  |  |  |  |
| LogA+4.1 |  |  |  |  |
| WdthLmtd |  |  |  |  |
| LogA+4.2, SqrtLen |  |  |  |  |
| WdthLmtd, CSD |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs LogA+4.3 | Vs LogA+4.2 | Vs LogA+4.1 | Vs WdthLmtd | Vs LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | Vs WdthLmtd, CSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LogA+4.3 |  |  |  |  |  | |
| LogA+4.2 |  |  |  |  |  | |
| LogA+4.1 |  |  |  |  |  | |
| WdthLmtd |  |  |  |  |  | |
| LogA+4.2, SqrtLen |  |  |  |  |  | |
| WdthLmtd, CSD |  |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| LogA+4.3 | LogA+4.2 | LogA+4.1 | WdthLmtd | LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | WdthLmtd, CSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |  |
Supra-Seismogenic b-value, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 5 choices at the Supra-Seismogenic b-value branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TWO_IN_50_SupraB.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 5.21%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs b=0.0 | Vs b=0.25 | Vs b=0.5 | Vs b=0.75 | Vs b=1.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| b=0.0 | Mean: 3.93%, Mean Abs: 4.64% | Mean: 1.47%, Mean Abs: 1.96% | Mean: 3.36%, Mean Abs: 4.13% | Mean: 6.26%, Mean Abs: 7.25% | Mean: 9.85%, Mean Abs: 11.08% | |
| b=0.25 | Mean: 2.39%, Mean Abs: 2.66% | Mean: -1.42%, Mean Abs: 1.92% | Mean: 1.84%, Mean Abs: 2.14% | Mean: 4.66%, Mean Abs: 5.22% | Mean: 8.16%, Mean Abs: 8.98% | |
| b=0.5 | Mean: 0.54%, Mean Abs: 0.57% | Mean: -3.15%, Mean Abs: 3.96% | Mean: -1.78%, Mean Abs: 2.09% | Mean: 2.74%, Mean Abs: 3.02% | Mean: 6.14%, Mean Abs: 6.69% | |
| b=0.75 | Mean: -2.11%, Mean Abs: 2.42% | Mean: -5.63%, Mean Abs: 6.72% | Mean: -4.33%, Mean Abs: 4.93% | Mean: -2.63%, Mean Abs: 2.91% | Mean: 3.25%, Mean Abs: 3.55% | |
| b=1.0 | Mean: -5.09%, Mean Abs: 5.71% | Mean: -8.43%, Mean Abs: 9.84% | Mean: -7.21%, Mean Abs: 8.12% | Mean: -5.59%, Mean Abs: 6.19% | Mean: -3.09%, Mean Abs: 3.40% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| b=0.0 |  |  |  |  |
| b=0.25 |  |  |  |  |
| b=0.5 |  |  |  |  |
| b=0.75 |  |  |  |  |
| b=1.0 |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs b=0.0 | Vs b=0.25 | Vs b=0.5 | Vs b=0.75 | Vs b=1.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| b=0.0 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=0.25 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=0.5 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=0.75 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=1.0 |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| b=0.0 | b=0.25 | b=0.5 | b=0.75 | b=1.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
Paleoseismic Data Uncertainties, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Paleoseismic Data Uncertainties branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TWO_IN_50_PaleoUncert.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 1.17%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs EvenFit | Vs OverFit | Vs UnderFit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EvenFit | Mean: 0.09%, Mean Abs: 0.15% | Mean: 0.97%, Mean Abs: 1.01% | Mean: -0.67%, Mean Abs: 0.76% | |
| OverFit | Mean: -0.87%, Mean Abs: 0.91% | Mean: -0.95%, Mean Abs: 1.00% | Mean: -1.61%, Mean Abs: 1.73% | |
| UnderFit | Mean: 0.77%, Mean Abs: 0.83% | Mean: 0.68%, Mean Abs: 0.76% | Mean: 1.66%, Mean Abs: 1.76% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EvenFit |  |  |  |  |
| OverFit |  |  |  |  |
| UnderFit |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs EvenFit | Vs OverFit | Vs UnderFit |
|---|---|---|---|
| EvenFit |  |  | |
| OverFit |  |  | |
| UnderFit |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| EvenFit | OverFit | UnderFit |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
Segmentation Model, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 5 choices at the Segmentation Model branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TWO_IN_50_SegModel.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 7.02%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs None | Vs LowSeg | Vs MidSeg | Vs HighSeg | Vs Classic |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| None | Mean: 4.76%, Mean Abs: 5.58% | Mean: 2.71%, Mean Abs: 3.14% | Mean: 4.03%, Mean Abs: 4.70% | Mean: 6.28%, Mean Abs: 7.28% | Mean: 14.02%, Mean Abs: 16.48% | |
| LowSeg | Mean: 1.95%, Mean Abs: 2.49% | Mean: -2.59%, Mean Abs: 3.04% | Mean: 1.26%, Mean Abs: 1.55% | Mean: 3.41%, Mean Abs: 4.12% | Mean: 10.84%, Mean Abs: 13.18% | |
| MidSeg | Mean: 0.68%, Mean Abs: 1.00% | Mean: -3.76%, Mean Abs: 4.49% | Mean: -1.22%, Mean Abs: 1.53% | Mean: 2.11%, Mean Abs: 2.55% | Mean: 9.37%, Mean Abs: 11.55% | |
| HighSeg | Mean: -1.38%, Mean Abs: 1.66% | Mean: -5.65%, Mean Abs: 6.79% | Mean: -3.20%, Mean Abs: 3.97% | Mean: -2.03%, Mean Abs: 2.49% | Mean: 7.00%, Mean Abs: 8.93% | |
| Classic | Mean: -7.24%, Mean Abs: 9.51% | Mean: -11.02%, Mean Abs: 14.15% | Mean: -8.81%, Mean Abs: 11.71% | Mean: -7.78%, Mean Abs: 10.42% | Mean: -5.99%, Mean Abs: 8.28% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| None |  |  |  |  |
| LowSeg |  |  |  |  |
| MidSeg |  |  |  |  |
| HighSeg |  |  |  |  |
| Classic |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs None | Vs LowSeg | Vs MidSeg | Vs HighSeg | Vs Classic |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| None |  |  |  |  | |
| LowSeg |  |  |  |  | |
| MidSeg |  |  |  |  | |
| HighSeg |  |  |  |  | |
| Classic |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| None | LowSeg | MidSeg | HighSeg | Classic |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
Regional Seismicity Rate, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Regional Seismicity Rate branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TWO_IN_50_SeisRate.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 24.75%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs PrefSeis | Vs LowSeis | Vs HighSeis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PrefSeis | Mean: -1.12%, Mean Abs: 1.12% | Mean: 19.74%, Mean Abs: 19.74% | Mean: -16.69%, Mean Abs: 16.69% | |
| LowSeis | Mean: -16.49%, Mean Abs: 16.49% | Mean: -15.60%, Mean Abs: 15.60% | Mean: -29.03%, Mean Abs: 29.03% | |
| HighSeis | Mean: 19.67%, Mean Abs: 19.67% | Mean: 21.09%, Mean Abs: 21.09% | Mean: 46.35%, Mean Abs: 46.35% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PrefSeis |  |  |  |  |
| LowSeis |  |  |  |  |
| HighSeis |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs PrefSeis | Vs LowSeis | Vs HighSeis |
|---|---|---|---|
| PrefSeis |  |  | |
| LowSeis |  |  | |
| HighSeis |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| PrefSeis | LowSeis | HighSeis |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
Seismicity Declustering Algorithm, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Seismicity Declustering Algorithm branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TWO_IN_50_SeisDecluster.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 8.08%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs GK | Vs NN | Vs Reas |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GK | Mean: 3.23%, Mean Abs: 3.74% | Mean: 4.40%, Mean Abs: 5.02% | Mean: 10.48%, Mean Abs: 12.16% | |
| NN | Mean: -0.97%, Mean Abs: 2.40% | Mean: -3.93%, Mean Abs: 4.60% | Mean: 5.95%, Mean Abs: 9.11% | |
| Reas | Mean: -5.21%, Mean Abs: 6.95% | Mean: -7.83%, Mean Abs: 9.93% | Mean: -3.96%, Mean Abs: 7.69% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GK |  |  |  |  |
| NN |  |  |  |  |
| Reas |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs GK | Vs NN | Vs Reas |
|---|---|---|---|
| GK |  |  | |
| NN |  |  | |
| Reas |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| GK | NN | Reas |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
Seismicity Smoothing Kernel, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 2 choices at the Seismicity Smoothing Kernel branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TWO_IN_50_SeisSmooth.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 12.28%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs Adaptive | Vs Fixed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adaptive | Mean: -0.54%, Mean Abs: 4.46% | Mean: 2.17%, Mean Abs: 12.19% | |
| Fixed | Mean: 0.49%, Mean Abs: 6.44% | Mean: 3.58%, Mean Abs: 12.36% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adaptive |  |  |  |  |
| Fixed |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs Adaptive | Vs Fixed |
|---|---|---|
| Adaptive |  | |
| Fixed |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| Adaptive | Fixed |
|---|---|
 |  |
 |  |
Off Fault Mmax, 1.0s SA, 2% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Off Fault Mmax branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TWO_IN_50_MmaxOff.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 8.81%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs MMax7.3 | Vs MMax7.6 | Vs MMax7.9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMax7.3 | Mean: -6.15%, Mean Abs: 6.15% | Mean: -6.03%, Mean Abs: 6.03% | Mean: -12.07%, Mean Abs: 12.07% | |
| MMax7.6 | Mean: -0.14%, Mean Abs: 0.15% | Mean: 6.57%, Mean Abs: 6.57% | Mean: -6.57%, Mean Abs: 6.57% | |
| MMax7.9 | Mean: 7.05%, Mean Abs: 7.05% | Mean: 14.42%, Mean Abs: 14.42% | Mean: 7.20%, Mean Abs: 7.20% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMax7.3 |  |  |  |  |
| MMax7.6 |  |  |  |  |
| MMax7.9 |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs MMax7.3 | Vs MMax7.6 | Vs MMax7.9 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMax7.3 |  |  | |
| MMax7.6 |  |  | |
| MMax7.9 |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| MMax7.3 | MMax7.6 | MMax7.9 |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
Download Mean Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TEN_IN_50.csv
Mean and median hazard maps, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
Weighted-Average | Weighted-Median |
|---|---|
 |  |
Branched-average hazard can be dominated by outlier branches. The map below on the left shows the percentile at which the mean map lies within the full hazard distribution. Areas far from the 50-th percentile here are likely outlier-dominated and may show up in percentile comparison maps, even if mean hazard differences are minimal. Keep this in mind when evaluating the influence of individual logic tree branches by this metric. The right map show the ratio of mean to median hazard.
Note: The mean map here is computed directly from mean hazard curves, but the median map is taken as the median value of hazard maps across all branches (rather than first calculating median curves at each location), which might bias this comparison.
| Mean Map Percentile | Mean vs Median |
|---|---|
 |  |
Bounds, spread, and COV, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
The maps below show the range of values across all logic tree branches, the ratio of the maximum to minimum value, and the coefficient of variation (std. dev. / mean). Note that the minimum and maximum maps are not a result for any single logic tree branch, but rather the smallest or largest value encountered at each location across all logic tree branches.
Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|
 |  |
Log10 (Max/Min) | COV |
 |  |
1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year Logic Tree Comparisons
This section shows how hazard changes across branch choices at each level of the logic tree. The summary figures below show mean hazard on the left, and then ratios & differences between the mean map considering subsets of the model holding each branch choice constant, and the overall mean map.
| Combined Summary Maps |
|---|
 |
 |
Deformation Model, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 5 choices at the Deformation Model branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TEN_IN_50_DM.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 13.51%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs Geologic | Vs Evans | Vs Pollitz | Vs Shen-Bird | Vs Zeng |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geologic | Mean: 0.08%, Mean Abs: 3.68% | Mean: -8.64%, Mean Abs: 17.96% | Mean: -0.15%, Mean Abs: 11.17% | Mean: 1.50%, Mean Abs: 5.43% | Mean: 1.28%, Mean Abs: 6.75% | |
| Evans | Mean: 15.99%, Mean Abs: 22.73% | Mean: 16.33%, Mean Abs: 23.87% | Mean: 15.06%, Mean Abs: 22.83% | Mean: 17.97%, Mean Abs: 25.00% | Mean: 17.62%, Mean Abs: 24.62% | |
| Pollitz | Mean: 1.81%, Mean Abs: 9.44% | Mean: 2.41%, Mean Abs: 12.28% | Mean: -7.36%, Mean Abs: 17.72% | Mean: 3.70%, Mean Abs: 13.11% | Mean: 2.61%, Mean Abs: 8.19% | |
| Shen-Bird | Mean: -1.24%, Mean Abs: 3.93% | Mean: -1.07%, Mean Abs: 5.18% | Mean: -9.85%, Mean Abs: 18.29% | Mean: -1.47%, Mean Abs: 11.85% | Mean: -0.13%, Mean Abs: 6.95% | |
| Zeng | Mean: -0.74%, Mean Abs: 3.88% | Mean: -0.33%, Mean Abs: 6.74% | Mean: -9.28%, Mean Abs: 17.80% | Mean: -1.48%, Mean Abs: 7.35% | Mean: 0.84%, Mean Abs: 7.23% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geologic |  |  |  |  |
| Evans |  |  |  |  |
| Pollitz |  |  |  |  |
| Shen-Bird |  |  |  |  |
| Zeng |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs Geologic | Vs Evans | Vs Pollitz | Vs Shen-Bird | Vs Zeng |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Geologic |  |  |  |  | |
| Evans |  |  |  |  | |
| Pollitz |  |  |  |  | |
| Shen-Bird |  |  |  |  | |
| Zeng |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| Geologic | Evans | Pollitz | Shen-Bird | Zeng |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
Scaling Relationship, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 6 choices at the Scaling Relationship branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TEN_IN_50_Scale.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 4.06%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs LogA+4.3 | Vs LogA+4.2 | Vs LogA+4.1 | Vs WdthLmtd | Vs LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | Vs WdthLmtd, CSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LogA+4.3 | Mean: -1.77%, Mean Abs: 3.53% | Mean: -0.78%, Mean Abs: 2.50% | Mean: -0.63%, Mean Abs: 5.32% | Mean: -1.87%, Mean Abs: 3.65% | Mean: -5.21%, Mean Abs: 7.21% | Mean: -0.96%, Mean Abs: 3.79% | |
| LogA+4.2 | Mean: -1.04%, Mean Abs: 1.30% | Mean: 0.90%, Mean Abs: 2.64% | Mean: 0.03%, Mean Abs: 2.94% | Mean: -1.15%, Mean Abs: 1.86% | Mean: -4.61%, Mean Abs: 5.51% | Mean: -0.21%, Mean Abs: 2.12% | |
| LogA+4.1 | Mean: -1.00%, Mean Abs: 2.45% | Mean: 1.17%, Mean Abs: 5.72% | Mean: 0.10%, Mean Abs: 3.03% | Mean: -1.11%, Mean Abs: 2.99% | Mean: -4.67%, Mean Abs: 5.04% | Mean: -0.15%, Mean Abs: 3.19% | |
| WdthLmtd | Mean: 0.16%, Mean Abs: 1.43% | Mean: 2.24%, Mean Abs: 4.03% | Mean: 1.25%, Mean Abs: 1.97% | Mean: 1.22%, Mean Abs: 2.99% | Mean: -3.51%, Mean Abs: 4.62% | Mean: 1.01%, Mean Abs: 2.63% | |
| LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | Mean: 3.99%, Mean Abs: 4.69% | Mean: 6.33%, Mean Abs: 8.31% | Mean: 5.17%, Mean Abs: 6.08% | Mean: 5.03%, Mean Abs: 5.38% | Mean: 3.86%, Mean Abs: 4.96% | Mean: 4.95%, Mean Abs: 6.09% | |
| WdthLmtd, CSD | Mean: -0.76%, Mean Abs: 2.12% | Mean: 1.25%, Mean Abs: 4.04% | Mean: 0.30%, Mean Abs: 2.15% | Mean: 0.29%, Mean Abs: 3.13% | Mean: -0.88%, Mean Abs: 2.57% | Mean: -4.33%, Mean Abs: 5.48% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LogA+4.3 |  |  |  |  |
| LogA+4.2 |  |  |  |  |
| LogA+4.1 |  |  |  |  |
| WdthLmtd |  |  |  |  |
| LogA+4.2, SqrtLen |  |  |  |  |
| WdthLmtd, CSD |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs LogA+4.3 | Vs LogA+4.2 | Vs LogA+4.1 | Vs WdthLmtd | Vs LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | Vs WdthLmtd, CSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LogA+4.3 |  |  |  |  |  | |
| LogA+4.2 |  |  |  |  |  | |
| LogA+4.1 |  |  |  |  |  | |
| WdthLmtd |  |  |  |  |  | |
| LogA+4.2, SqrtLen |  |  |  |  |  | |
| WdthLmtd, CSD |  |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| LogA+4.3 | LogA+4.2 | LogA+4.1 | WdthLmtd | LogA+4.2, SqrtLen | WdthLmtd, CSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |  |
Supra-Seismogenic b-value, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 5 choices at the Supra-Seismogenic b-value branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TEN_IN_50_SupraB.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 5.47%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs b=0.0 | Vs b=0.25 | Vs b=0.5 | Vs b=0.75 | Vs b=1.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| b=0.0 | Mean: 3.73%, Mean Abs: 4.81% | Mean: 1.23%, Mean Abs: 1.98% | Mean: 2.95%, Mean Abs: 4.12% | Mean: 5.86%, Mean Abs: 7.37% | Mean: 9.77%, Mean Abs: 11.60% | |
| b=0.25 | Mean: 2.44%, Mean Abs: 2.83% | Mean: -1.20%, Mean Abs: 1.98% | Mean: 1.68%, Mean Abs: 2.14% | Mean: 4.51%, Mean Abs: 5.35% | Mean: 8.32%, Mean Abs: 9.51% | |
| b=0.5 | Mean: 0.74%, Mean Abs: 0.76% | Mean: -2.80%, Mean Abs: 4.05% | Mean: -1.66%, Mean Abs: 2.14% | Mean: 2.76%, Mean Abs: 3.15% | Mean: 6.46%, Mean Abs: 7.23% | |
| b=0.75 | Mean: -1.96%, Mean Abs: 2.43% | Mean: -5.30%, Mean Abs: 6.95% | Mean: -4.24%, Mean Abs: 5.13% | Mean: -2.67%, Mean Abs: 3.08% | Mean: 3.56%, Mean Abs: 3.95% | |
| b=1.0 | Mean: -5.24%, Mean Abs: 6.11% | Mean: -8.33%, Mean Abs: 10.40% | Mean: -7.37%, Mean Abs: 8.67% | Mean: -5.91%, Mean Abs: 6.73% | Mean: -3.42%, Mean Abs: 3.83% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| b=0.0 |  |  |  |  |
| b=0.25 |  |  |  |  |
| b=0.5 |  |  |  |  |
| b=0.75 |  |  |  |  |
| b=1.0 |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs b=0.0 | Vs b=0.25 | Vs b=0.5 | Vs b=0.75 | Vs b=1.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| b=0.0 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=0.25 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=0.5 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=0.75 |  |  |  |  | |
| b=1.0 |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| b=0.0 | b=0.25 | b=0.5 | b=0.75 | b=1.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
Paleoseismic Data Uncertainties, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Paleoseismic Data Uncertainties branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TEN_IN_50_PaleoUncert.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 1.35%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs EvenFit | Vs OverFit | Vs UnderFit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EvenFit | Mean: 0.13%, Mean Abs: 0.17% | Mean: 1.06%, Mean Abs: 1.13% | Mean: -0.62%, Mean Abs: 0.92% | |
| OverFit | Mean: -0.92%, Mean Abs: 1.04% | Mean: -1.05%, Mean Abs: 1.12% | Mean: -1.66%, Mean Abs: 2.01% | |
| UnderFit | Mean: 0.77%, Mean Abs: 0.97% | Mean: 0.64%, Mean Abs: 0.91% | Mean: 1.71%, Mean Abs: 2.01% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EvenFit |  |  |  |  |
| OverFit |  |  |  |  |
| UnderFit |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs EvenFit | Vs OverFit | Vs UnderFit |
|---|---|---|---|
| EvenFit |  |  | |
| OverFit |  |  | |
| UnderFit |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| EvenFit | OverFit | UnderFit |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
Segmentation Model, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 5 choices at the Segmentation Model branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TEN_IN_50_SegModel.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 6.99%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs None | Vs LowSeg | Vs MidSeg | Vs HighSeg | Vs Classic |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| None | Mean: 3.64%, Mean Abs: 5.30% | Mean: 2.03%, Mean Abs: 2.78% | Mean: 2.99%, Mean Abs: 4.25% | Mean: 4.72%, Mean Abs: 6.69% | Mean: 11.65%, Mean Abs: 16.17% | |
| LowSeg | Mean: 1.54%, Mean Abs: 2.56% | Mean: -1.97%, Mean Abs: 2.75% | Mean: 0.92%, Mean Abs: 1.49% | Mean: 2.57%, Mean Abs: 3.90% | Mean: 9.22%, Mean Abs: 13.29% | |
| MidSeg | Mean: 0.60%, Mean Abs: 1.13% | Mean: -2.83%, Mean Abs: 4.18% | Mean: -0.92%, Mean Abs: 1.51% | Mean: 1.60%, Mean Abs: 2.40% | Mean: 8.11%, Mean Abs: 11.78% | |
| HighSeg | Mean: -0.97%, Mean Abs: 1.40% | Mean: -4.24%, Mean Abs: 6.43% | Mean: -2.41%, Mean Abs: 3.85% | Mean: -1.54%, Mean Abs: 2.38% | Mean: 6.26%, Mean Abs: 9.37% | |
| Classic | Mean: -6.13%, Mean Abs: 9.94% | Mean: -8.81%, Mean Abs: 14.56% | Mean: -7.25%, Mean Abs: 12.28% | Mean: -6.54%, Mean Abs: 10.99% | Mean: -5.29%, Mean Abs: 8.93% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| None |  |  |  |  |
| LowSeg |  |  |  |  |
| MidSeg |  |  |  |  |
| HighSeg |  |  |  |  |
| Classic |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs None | Vs LowSeg | Vs MidSeg | Vs HighSeg | Vs Classic |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| None |  |  |  |  | |
| LowSeg |  |  |  |  | |
| MidSeg |  |  |  |  | |
| HighSeg |  |  |  |  | |
| Classic |  |  |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| None | LowSeg | MidSeg | HighSeg | Classic |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
Regional Seismicity Rate, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Regional Seismicity Rate branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TEN_IN_50_SeisRate.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 25.82%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs PrefSeis | Vs LowSeis | Vs HighSeis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PrefSeis | Mean: -1.06%, Mean Abs: 1.06% | Mean: 19.95%, Mean Abs: 19.95% | Mean: -17.85%, Mean Abs: 17.85% | |
| LowSeis | Mean: -17.03%, Mean Abs: 17.03% | Mean: -16.19%, Mean Abs: 16.19% | Mean: -30.17%, Mean Abs: 30.17% | |
| HighSeis | Mean: 21.46%, Mean Abs: 21.46% | Mean: 22.80%, Mean Abs: 22.80% | Mean: 48.14%, Mean Abs: 48.14% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PrefSeis |  |  |  |  |
| LowSeis |  |  |  |  |
| HighSeis |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs PrefSeis | Vs LowSeis | Vs HighSeis |
|---|---|---|---|
| PrefSeis |  |  | |
| LowSeis |  |  | |
| HighSeis |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| PrefSeis | LowSeis | HighSeis |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
Seismicity Declustering Algorithm, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Seismicity Declustering Algorithm branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TEN_IN_50_SeisDecluster.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 9.02%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs GK | Vs NN | Vs Reas |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GK | Mean: 4.53%, Mean Abs: 5.14% | Mean: 5.54%, Mean Abs: 6.21% | Mean: 9.41%, Mean Abs: 11.77% | |
| NN | Mean: -0.79%, Mean Abs: 3.30% | Mean: -4.94%, Mean Abs: 5.66% | Mean: 4.23%, Mean Abs: 8.54% | |
| Reas | Mean: -6.31%, Mean Abs: 8.77% | Mean: -9.25%, Mean Abs: 12.18% | Mean: -4.67%, Mean Abs: 9.80% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GK |  |  |  |  |
| NN |  |  |  |  |
| Reas |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs GK | Vs NN | Vs Reas |
|---|---|---|---|
| GK |  |  | |
| NN |  |  | |
| Reas |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| GK | NN | Reas |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
Seismicity Smoothing Kernel, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 2 choices at the Seismicity Smoothing Kernel branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TEN_IN_50_SeisSmooth.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 10.14%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs Adaptive | Vs Fixed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adaptive | Mean: -1.77%, Mean Abs: 5.27% | Mean: -1.31%, Mean Abs: 11.13% | |
| Fixed | Mean: 5.03%, Mean Abs: 9.89% | Mean: 1.59%, Mean Abs: 9.12% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adaptive |  |  |  |  |
| Fixed |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs Adaptive | Vs Fixed |
|---|---|---|
| Adaptive |  | |
| Fixed |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| Adaptive | Fixed |
|---|---|
 |  |
 |  |
Off Fault Mmax, 1.0s SA, 10% in 50 year
This section shows how mean hazard varies accross 3 choices at the Off Fault Mmax branch level.
Download Choice Hazard CSV: 1.0s_TEN_IN_50_MmaxOff.csv
The table below gives summary statistics for the spatial average difference and average absolute difference of hazard between mean hazard maps for each individual branch choices. In other words, it gives the expected difference (or absolute difference) between two models if you picked a location at random. Values are listed between each pair of branch choices, and also between that choice and the overall mean map in the first column.
The overall average absolute difference between the map for any choice to each other choice, a decent summary measure of how much hazard varies due to this branch choice, is: 5.99%
| Choice | Vs Mean | Vs MMax7.3 | Vs MMax7.6 | Vs MMax7.9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMax7.3 | Mean: -4.37%, Mean Abs: 4.39% | Mean: -4.36%, Mean Abs: 4.38% | Mean: -8.41%, Mean Abs: 8.43% | |
| MMax7.6 | Mean: -0.01%, Mean Abs: 0.07% | Mean: 4.64%, Mean Abs: 4.66% | Mean: -4.32%, Mean Abs: 4.32% | |
| MMax7.9 | Mean: 4.59%, Mean Abs: 4.59% | Mean: 9.55%, Mean Abs: 9.57% | Mean: 4.60%, Mean Abs: 4.60% |
The map table below shows how the mean map for each branch choice compares to the overall mean map, expressed as % change (first column) and difference (second column). The third column, 'Choice Percentile in Full Dist', shows at what percentile the map for that branch choice lies within the full distribution, and the fourth column, 'Choice Percentile in Dist Without', shows the same but for the distribution of all other branches (without this choice included).
Note that these percentile comparisons can be outlier dominated, in which case even if a choice is near the overall mean hazard it may still lie far from the 50th percentile (see 'Mean Map Percentile' above to better understand outlier dominated regions).
| Choice Mean vs Full Mean, % Change | Choice Mean - Full Mean | Choice Percentile in Full Dist | Choice Percentile in Dist Without | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMax7.3 |  |  |  |  |
| MMax7.6 |  |  |  |  |
| MMax7.9 |  |  |  |  |
The table below gives % change maps between each option, head-to-head.
| Choice | Vs MMax7.3 | Vs MMax7.6 | Vs MMax7.9 |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMax7.3 |  |  | |
| MMax7.6 |  |  | |
| MMax7.9 |  |  |
The table below shows how much the mean hazard map would change if each branch were eliminated. This differs from the above comparisons in that it also reflects the weight assigned to each branch. The sign is now flipped such that blue and green areas indicate areas where hazard is higher due to inclusion of the listed listed choice, and would go down were that choice eliminated.
| MMax7.3 | MMax7.6 | MMax7.9 |
|---|---|---|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |