Epistemic Uncertainty in Site Response as Derived from One-Dimensional Ground Response Analyses

Abstract

One-dimensional ground response analyses (GRAs) are often used with an expectation that they provide unbiased estimates of site effects. Under that hypothesis, epistemic uncertainty in site response arises mainly from uncertain soil properties. This approach has dominated practice for projects where site-specific site response is estimated for use in probabilistic seismic hazard analyses. We extend the uncertainty framework to also consider modeling errors (i.e., inability of GRAs to model site response for some sites). We quantify this epistemic uncertainty using vertical array data in which the downhole motion is input to GRAs to predict ground motions at the surface. Residuals (i.e., difference between observed and predicted ground motion intensity measures in natural log units) are partitioned into between- and within-site components. After correcting for overprediction bias near the site period, we quantify epistemic uncertainty using between-site standard deviation, which ranges from 0.2 to 0.35 using California data. A Japan data set analyzed in the literature provides similar results. This dispersion is only modestly smaller than the site-to-site variability from ergodic models for active tectonic regions, which limits the apparent benefits of site-specific GRAs. Dispersion results are not appreciably affected by varying damping models, although a model informed by site-specific observations minimizes bias relative to alternative models based on geotechnical laboratory tests and seismological crustal attenuation studies.