On Bayesian procedure for maximum earthquake magnitude estimation

This work is focused on the Bayesian procedure for the estimation of the regional maximum possible earthquake magnitude m max . The paper briefly discusses the currently used Bayesian procedure for m max , as developed by Cornell, and a statistically justifiable alternative approach is suggested. The fundamental problem in the application of the current Bayesian formalism for m max estimation is that one of the components of the posterior distribution is the sample likelihood function, for which the range of observations (earthquake magnitudes) depends on the unknown parameter m max . This dependence violates the property of regularity of the maximum likelihood function. The resulting likelihood function, therefore, reaches its maximum at the maximum observed earthquake magnitude m obs max and not at the required maximum possible magnitude m max . Since the sample likelihood function is a key component of the posterior distribution, the posterior estimate of m^ max is biased. The degree of the bias and its sign depend on the applied Bayesian estimator, the quantity of information provided by the prior distribution, and the sample likelihood function. It has been shown that if the maximum posterior estimate is used, the bias is negative and the resulting underestimation of m max can be as big as 0.5 units of magnitude. This study explores only the maximum posterior estimate of m max , which is conceptionally close to the classic maximum likelihood estimation. However, conclusions regarding the shortfall of the current Bayesian procedure are applicable to all Bayesian estimators, e.g. posterior mean and posterior median. A simple, ad hoc solution of this non-regular maximum likelihood problem is also presented.

[1]  Andrzej Kijko,et al.  Parametric-historic Procedure for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis Part I: Estimation of Maximum Regional Magnitude mmax , 1998 .

[2]  V. Pisarenko,et al.  Statistical estimation of seismic hazard parameters: Maximum possible magnitude and related parameters , 1996, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[3]  L. J. Bain,et al.  Introduction to Probability and Mathematical Statistics , 1987 .

[4]  L. Lecam On the Assumptions Used to Prove Asymptotic Normality of Maximum Likelihood Estimates , 1970 .

[5]  R. Tate,et al.  Unbiased Estimation: Functions of Location and Scale Parameters , 1959 .

[6]  Andrzej Kijko,et al.  "Parametric-historic" Procedure for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis Part II: Assessment of Seismic Hazard at Specified Site , 1999 .

[7]  Maurice G. Kendall,et al.  The advanced theory of statistics , 1945 .

[8]  A. Johnston,et al.  The earthquakes of stable continental regions , 1994 .

[9]  D. Rubin,et al.  Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. , 1989 .

[10]  Franklin A. Graybill,et al.  Introduction to The theory , 1974 .

[11]  F. James Statistical Methods in Experimental Physics , 1973 .

[12]  Charles S. Mueller,et al.  Documentation for the 2008 update of the United States National Seismic Hazard Maps , 2008 .

[13]  P. Cosentino,et al.  Truncated exponential frequency-magnitude relationship in earthquake statistics , 1977, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[14]  Andrzej Kijko,et al.  Estimation of the Maximum Earthquake Magnitude, mmax , 2004 .

[15]  Robert A. Page,et al.  Aftershocks and microaftershocks of the great Alaska earthquake of 1964 , 1968 .

[16]  D. Rubin,et al.  Statistical Analysis with Missing Data , 1988 .

[17]  P. Cooke,et al.  Statistical inference for bounds of random variables , 1979 .

[18]  Maurice G. Kendall,et al.  Inference and relationship , 1979 .

[19]  Franklin A. Graybill,et al.  Introduction to the Theory of Statistics, 3rd ed. , 1974 .