<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>Dylan Rood</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Greg Balco</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Peter J. Stafford</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Lisa Grant Ludwig</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Katherine J. Kendrick</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>Klaus Wilcken</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>Anna H. Rood</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2023</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;Accurate estimates of earthquake ground shaking rely on uncertain ground-motion models derived from limited instrumental recordings of historical earthquakes. A critical issue is that there is currently no method to empirically validate the resultant ground-motion estimates of these models at the timescale of rare, large earthquakes; this lack of validation causes great uncertainty in ground-motion estimates. Here, we address this issue and validate ground-motion estimates for southern California utilizing the unexceeded ground motions recorded by 20 precariously balanced rocks. We used cosmogenic&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;10&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;span&gt;Be exposure dating to model the age of the precariously balanced rocks, which ranged from ca. 1 ka to ca. 50 ka, and calculated their probability of toppling at different ground-motion levels. With this rock data, we then validated the earthquake ground motions estimated by the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 3 (UCERF3) seismic-source characterization and the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA)-West2 ground-motion models. We found that no ground-motion model estimated levels of earthquake ground shaking consistent with the observed continued existence of all 20 precariously balanced rocks. The ground-motion model I14 estimated ground-motion levels that were inconsistent with the most rocks; therefore, I14 was invalidated and removed. At a 2475 year mean return period, the removal of this invalid ground-motion model resulted in a 2–7% reduction in the mean and a 10–36% reduction in the 5th–95th fractile uncertainty of the ground-motion estimates. Our findings demonstrate the value of empirical data from precariously balanced rocks as a validation tool for removing invalid ground-motion models and, in turn, reducing the uncertainty in earthquake ground-motion estimates.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1130/B36484.1</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>Geological Society of America</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Validation of earthquake ground-motion models in southern California, USA, using precariously balanced rocks</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>