Geophysical Journal International Geophys. J. Int. (2018) 212, 1314–1314 doi: 10.1093/gji/ggx496 Erratum: Prospective and retrospective evaluation of ﬁve-year earthquake forecast models for California 1 2,3 1,4 by Anne Strader, Max Schneider and Danijel Schorlemmer Section 2.6: Seismic Hazard and Stress Field, GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, D-14467 Potsdam, Germany. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Institute of Mathematics, University of Potsdam, D-14476 Potsdam, Germany Department of Statistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195,USA Department of Earth Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0740,USA Erratum of the paper ‘Prospective and retrospective evaluation of ﬁve-year earthquake forecast models for California’, by Anne Strader, Max Schneider and Danijel Schorlemmer, published in Geophys. J. Int. (2017) 211(1), 239–251, doi:10.1093/gji/ggx268. In the Result section, the Fig. 3 is not displaying properly due to technical reasons. The error has now been corrected online. The publisher apologise for this error. Figure 3. S-test results for the USGS and RELM forecasts. The differences between the simulated log-likelihoods and the observed log-likelihood are labelled on the horizontal axes, with scaling adjustments for the 40YEAR.RETRO experiment. The horizontal lines represent the conﬁdence intervals, within the 0.05 signiﬁcance level, for each forecast and experiment. If this range contains a log-likelihood difference of zero, the forecasted log-likelihoods are consistent with the observed, and the forecast passes the S-test (denoted by thin lines). If the minimum difference within this range does not contain zero, the forecast fails the S-test for that particular experiment, denoted by thick lines. Colours distinguish between experiments (see Table 2 for explanation of experiment durations). Due to anomalously large likelihood differences, S-test results for WIEMER-SCHORLEMMER.ALM during the 10YEAR.RETRO and 40YEAR.RETRO experiments are not displayed. The range of log-likelihoods for the HOLLIDAY-ET-AL.PI forecast is lower than for the other forecasts due to relatively homogeneous forecasted seismicity rates and use of a small fraction of the RELM testing region. 1314 The Author(s) 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Royal Astronomical Society. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/gji/article-abstract/212/2/1314/4732654 by Ed 'DeepDyve' Gillespie user on 16 March 2018
Geophysical Journal International – Oxford University Press
Published: Feb 1, 2018
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.
Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.
It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.
Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Hi guys, I cannot tell you how much I love this resource. Incredible. I really believe you've hit the nail on the head with this site in regards to solving the research-purchase issue.”Daniel C.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud
“I must say, @deepdyve is a fabulous solution to the independent researcher's problem of #access to #information.”@deepthiw
“My last article couldn't be possible without the platform @deepdyve that makes journal papers cheaper.”@JoseServera