GNGTS 2023 - Atti del 41° Convegno Nazionale

Session 2.1 GNGTS 2023 Figure 2. The comparison of the 3D model with the classical 2D approach using residuals (i.e. the difference between model and observations). In blue, the differences between the catalogue hypocentral depths and the 3D grid points depths; in orange, the differences between the catalogue hypocentral depths and the average catalogue depth. This graphic reveals that the 3D model presents a less dispersed residual distribution compared to the classical 2D approach, therefore the 3D model is able to better capture the hypocentral depth variability of the catalogue. References Akinci A., Moschetti M.P. and Taroni M.; 2018: Ensemble smoothed seismicity models for the new Italian probabilistic seismic hazard map . Seismol. Res. Lett., 89, 1277–1287. de Nardis R., Pandolfi C., Cattaneo M., Monachesi G., Cirillo D., Ferrarini F., Bello S., Brozzetti F. and Lavecchia G.; 2022: Lithospheric double shear zone unveiled by microseismicity in a region of slow deformation . Sci. Rep., 12, 21066, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24903-1. Frankel A.; 1995: Mapping seismic hazard in the central and eastern United States . Seismol. Res. Lett., 66, 8-21. Kagan Y.Y. and Jackson D.D.; 1994: Long-term probabilistic forecasting of earthquakes . J. Geophys. Res., 99, 13685-13700. Taroni M. and Akinci A.; 2021: A New Smoothed Seismicity Approach to Include Aftershocks and Foreshocks in Spatial Earthquake Forecasting: Application to the Global Mw 5.5 Seismicity . Appl. Sci., 11, 10899, https://doi.org/10.3390/app112210899. Reference author: Claudia Pandolfi – claudia.pandolfi@unich.it