We develop a ground motion prediction equation (GMPE) for estimating horizontal ground motion amplitudes caused by crustal earthquakes, based on an integrated data set that includes strong motion recordings mainly from Taiwan earthquakes and only from large magnitude earthquakes in the NGA-West2 database. This GMPE is developed for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis study, which is introduced as a part of Taiwan Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee Level 3 projects. The functional form developed by Chiou and Youngs was carefully studied to determine the key modeling parameters needed to regress against ground motion in the target region. Using this functional form, the GMPE achieves considerable improvement over previously developed Taiwan GMPEs. In particular, the use of a high-order function in magnitude scaling enables representation of the saturation effects of large earthquakes. Moreover, consideration of focal mechanisms, depth effects, and dip effects are used to correct the magnitude scaling; consideration of nonlinear site amplification is conditioned on VS30 and reference ground motion on rock; and consideration of basin depth effect is a function of Z1.0 in correlation with VS30. In addition, ground motion data used in this study are not only expanded by more than three times as many earthquakes and records compared with a previous Taiwan model but also provide the metadata of these records that were not available or were previously incomplete. In this study, we compare the proposed model with the NGA-West2 models and discuss the regional difference in ground motion in terms of spectral shape, magnitude scaling, distance scaling, depth scaling, style of faulting, and site effects. We provide median and single standard deviations of peak ground acceleration and 5% damped pseudospectral acceleration response ordinates of the orientation-independent average horizontal component of ground motion (RotD50) for the spectral period of 0.01–10 s.
AbrahamsonNASilvaWJ (2008) Summary of the Abrahamson & Silva NGA ground-motion relations. Earthquake Spectra24(1): 67–97.
2.
AbrahamsonNAYoungsRR (1992) A stable algorithm for regression analyses using the random effects model. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America82(1): 505–510.
3.
AbrahamsonNASilvaWJKamaiR (2014) Summary of the ASK14 ground motion relation for active crustal regions. Earthquake Spectra30(3): 1025–1055.
4.
AkkarSBommerJJ (2010) Empirical equations for the prediction of PGA, PGV, and spectral accelerations in Europe, the Mediterranean region, and the Middle East. Seismological Research Letters81(2): 195–206.
5.
AkkarSSandıkkayaMABommerJJ (2014) Empirical ground-motion models for point- and extended-source crustal earthquake scenarios in Europe and the Middle East. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering12(1): 359–387.
6.
Al AtikLAbrahamsonNBommerJJScherbaumFCottonFKuehnN (2010) The variability of ground-motion prediction models and its components. Seismological Research Letters81(5): 794–801.
AndoMTuYKumagaiHYamanakaYLinCH (2012) Very low frequency earthquakes along the Ryukyu subduction zone. Geophysical Research Letters39: L04303.
9.
BindiDMassaMLuziLAmeriGPacorFPugliaRAuglieraP (2014) Pan-European ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5 %-damped PSA at spectral periods up to 3.0 s using the RESORCE dataset. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering12(1): 391–430.
10.
BindiDPacorFLuziLPugliaRMassaMAmeriGPaolucciR (2011) Ground motion prediction equations derived from the Italian strong motion database. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering9(6): 1899–1920.
11.
BommerJJDouglasJScherbaumFCottonFBungumHFähD (2010) On the selection of ground-motion prediction equations for seismic hazard analysis. Seismological Research Letters81(5): 783–793.
12.
BommerJJScherbaumFBungumHCottonFSabettaFAbrahamsonN (2005) On the use of logic trees for ground-motion prediction equations in seismic-hazard analysis. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America95(2): 377–389.
13.
BooreDM (2010) Orientation-independent, nongeometric-mean measures of seismic intensity from two horizontal components of motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America100(4): 1830–1835.
14.
BooreDMAtkinsonGM (2008) Ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods between 0.01 s and 10.0 s. Earthquake Spectra24(1): 99–138.
15.
BooreDMStewartJPSeyhanEAtkinsonGM (2014) NGA-West2 equations for predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% damped PSA for shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra30(3): 1057–1085.
16.
CampbellKWBozorgniaY (2008) NGA ground motion model for the geometric mean horizontal component of PGA, PGV, PGD and 5% damped linear elastic response spectra for periods ranging from 0.01 to 10 s. Earthquake Spectra24(1): 139–171.
17.
CampbellKWBozorgniaY (2014) NGA-West2 ground motion model for the average horizontal components of PGA, PGV, and 5% damped linear acceleration response spectra. Earthquake Spectra30(3): 1087–1115.
18.
ChaoSHChiouBHsuCCLinPS (2020) A horizontal ground-motion model for crustal and subduction earthquakes in Taiwan. Earthquake Spectra. Epub ahead of print 13March2020. DOI: 10.1177/8755293019891711.
19.
ChengCTLinPSHsiehPSShaoKSYenYTLeeSJLeeCT (2012) Research on Taiwan’s next generation attenuation relationships for ground motion. Report R-GT-12-031203. Taipei: Sinotech Engineering Consultants, Inc. (in Chinese).
20.
ChiouBSJYoungsRR (2008) An NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra. Earthquake Spectra24(1): 173–215.
21.
ChiouBSJYoungsRR (2014) Update of the Chiou and Youngs NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra. Earthquake Spectra30(3): 1117–1153.
22.
GeoPentech (2015) Southwestern United States ground motion characterization SSHAC level 3. Technical Report Rev. 2, March2015. Irvine, CA: GeoPentech.
23.
IdrissIM (2008) An NGA empirical model for estimating the horizontal spectral values generated by shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra24(1): 217–242.
24.
IdrissIM (2014) An NGA-West2 empirical model for estimating the horizontal spectral values generated by shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra30(3): 1155–1177.
25.
KaleOAkkarS (2013) A new procedure for selecting and ranking ground-motion prediction equations (GMPEs): The Euclidean distance-based ranking (EDR) method. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America102(2A): 1069–1084.
26.
KuoCHChenCTLinCMWenKLHuangJYChangSC (2016) S-wave velocity structure and site effect parameters derived from microtremor arrays in the Western Plain of Taiwan. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences128: 27–41.
27.
KuoCHLinCMChangSCWenKLHsiehHH (2017) Site database for Taiwan strong motion stations. NCREE Report, No. NCREE-17-004, p. 80. Taipei: National Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering.
28.
KuoCHWenKLHsiehHHLinCMChangTMKuoKW (2012) Site classification and Vs30 estimation of free-field TSMIP stations using the logging data of EGDT. Engineering Geology129–130: 68–75.
29.
KwokOLAStewartJPKwakDYSunPL (2018) Taiwan-specific model for VS30 prediction considering between-proxy correlations. Earthquake Spectra34(4): 1973–1993.
30.
LinCMKuoCHHuangJYHsiehHHSiCCWenKL (2017) Shallow shear-wave velocity structures of TSMIP stations in Taiwan. NCREE Report, No. NCREE-17-005. Taipei: National Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering.
31.
LinPSAbrahamsonNWallingMLeeCTChiouBChengC (2011a) Repeatable source, site, and path effects on the standard deviation for empirical ground-motion prediction models. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America101: 2281–2295.
32.
LinPSLeeCTChengCTSungCH (2011b) Response spectral attenuation relations for shallow crustal earthquakes in Taiwan. Engineering Geology121(3–4): 150–164.
33.
LiuKSHsiePSTsaiYB (2005) Attenuation relationships of peak ground acceleration and velocity for crustal earthquakes in Taiwan. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America95: 1045–1058.
34.
LiuKSShinTCTsaiYB (1999) A free field strong motion network in Taiwan: TSMIP. Terrestrial Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences10(2): 377–396.
35.
NCREE (National Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering) (2015) Reevaluation of probabilistic seismic hazard of nuclear facilities in Taiwan using SSHAC level 3 methodology. NCREE Report. Available at: http://sshac.ncree.org.tw
36.
PhungVBLohCHChaoSHAbrahamsonN (2018) Analysis of epistemic uncertainty associated with GMPEs and their weight within the logic tree for PSHA: Application to Taiwan. Terrestrial Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences29: 611–633.
37.
Rodriguez-MarekAMontalvaGACottonFBonillaF (2011) Analysis of single-station standard deviation using the KiK-net data. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America101(3): 1242–1258.
38.
Rodriguez-MarekACottonFAbrahamsonNAAkkarSAl AtikLEdwardsBMontalvaGADawoodHM (2013) A model for single-site standard deviation using data from various tectonic regions, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America103, 3149 –3163.
39.
Rodriguez-MarekARathjeEMBommerJJScherbaumFStaffordPJ (2014) Application of single-site sigma and site-response characterization in a probabilistic seismichazard analysis for a new nuclear site, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America104, 1601–1619.
40.
ScherbaumFCottonFSmitP (2004) On the use of response spectral-reference data for the selection and ranking of ground-motion models for seismic-hazard analysis in regions of moderate seismicity: The case of rock motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America94(6): 2164–2185.
41.
ScherbaumFDelavaudERiggelsenC (2009) Model selection in seismic hazard analysis: An information-theoretic perspective. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America99(6): 3234–3247.
42.
SenXXWuRY (1996) Great Taiwan Earthquake: The 1935 Central Taiwan Earthquake Disaster Report. 1st ed. Taipei: Liu Yuan, p. 203 (in Chinese).
43.
SenoTSteinSGrippAE (1993) A model for the motion of the Philippine Sea Plate consistent with NUVEL-1 and geological data. Journal of Geophysical Research98(17): 941–948.
44.
ShinTCTengTL (2001) An overview of the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan, earthquake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America91: 895–913.
45.
ShyuJBHChenCFWuYM (2016) Seismotectonic characteristics of the northernmost Longitudinal Valley, eastern Taiwan: Structural development of a vanishing suture. Tectonophysics692: 295–308.
46.
TengLS (1990) Late Cenozoic arc–Continent collision in Taiwan. Tectonophysics183: 57–76.
47.
TengTL (1987) Stratigraphic records of the late Cenozoic Penglai Orogeny of Taiwan. Acta Geologica Taiwanica25: 205–224.
48.
TheunissenTFontYLallemandSLiangWT (2010) The largest instrumentally recorded earthquake in Taiwan: Revised location and magnitude, and tectonic significance of the 1920 event. Geophysical Journal International183: 1119–1133.
49.
TsaiCCLohCHYehYT (1987) Analysis of earthquake risk in Taiwan based on seismotectonic zones. Memoirs Geological Society of China9: 413–446.
50.
WangGQBooreDMIgelHZhouXY (2004) Comparisons of Ground Motions from Five Aftershocks of the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan, Earthquake with Empirical Predictions Largely Based on Data from California. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America94(6): 2198–2212.
51.
WuYHChenCCTurcotteDLRundleJB (2013) Quantifying the seismicity on Taiwan. Geophysical Journal International194(1): 465–469.
52.
WuYMChengSNLiuTY (2016) A foundation and basis analysis of earthquake catalog and historical earthquakes database: Taiwan ground motion characterization SSHAC level 3: Appendix B. Technical Report, December2016. Taipei: SSC TI Team.
53.
WuYMShinTCChangCH (2001) Near real-time mapping of peak ground acceleration and peak ground velocity following a strong earthquake. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America91: 1218–1228.
54.
YuSBChenHYKuoLC (1997) Velocity field of GPS stations in the Taiwan area. Tectonophysics274: 41–59.
