798b0744b5
2a — Replace physically invalid summed-Mw seismic metric with correct
log10(ΣE) where E=10^(1.5·Mw+4.8) J (Kanamori 1977). Updates
usgs.py (new seismic_energy_per_bin()), scripts 02/07/08.
Impact: r(+15d) raw 0.310→0.081, peak r 0.469→0.139; sinusoidal
BF 27.5→0.75 (constant model now preferred).
2b — HP λ derivation: λ_5 = 1600×(365/5)^4 ≈ 4.54×10^10 (Ravn & Uhlig
2002 rescaling); detrend robustness figure (HP/Butterworth/rolling
mean), all show r(+15d)<0.04.
2c — Neff comparison: Bartlett 2923, Bretherton 769, Monte Carlo 594;
MC 95% CI [-0.002, +0.158] straddles zero → raw r not significant
under most conservative estimate.
2d — Magnitude threshold (M≥4.5/5.0/6.0): r(+15d) range 0.050–0.079
(Δ=0.029 < 0.05), peak stable at τ=−525 d; no aftershock bias.
Paper (main.tex, refs.bib): update all numbers, add Kanamori/Bartlett/
Ravn–Uhlig refs, new sections for 2b–2d with figures and Neff table.
PDF recompiled (27 pages).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
20 lines
No EOL
402 B
JSON
20 lines
No EOL
402 B
JSON
{
|
|
"M_ge_4.5": {
|
|
"r_at_tau_plus15d": 0.0786,
|
|
"peak_r": 0.1349,
|
|
"peak_lag_days": -525,
|
|
"frac_empty_bins_pct": 0.0
|
|
},
|
|
"M_ge_5.0": {
|
|
"r_at_tau_plus15d": 0.0722,
|
|
"peak_r": 0.1262,
|
|
"peak_lag_days": -525,
|
|
"frac_empty_bins_pct": 0.0
|
|
},
|
|
"M_ge_6.0": {
|
|
"r_at_tau_plus15d": 0.0495,
|
|
"peak_r": 0.1104,
|
|
"peak_lag_days": -525,
|
|
"frac_empty_bins_pct": 19.7
|
|
}
|
|
} |