Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/SVG/jax.js
Research article

Stochastic Extended Simulation (EXSIM) of Mw 7.0 Kumamoto-Shi earthquake on 15 April 2016 in the Southwest of Japan using the SCEC Broadband Platform (BBP)

  • Ground motions for Mw 7.0, 15 April 2016, Kumamoto-Shi earthquake of Japan are simulated employing Stochastic Extended Simulation (EXSIM) methodology within the Southern California Earthquake Centre (SCEC) Broadband Platform (BBP) version 15.3.0, utilizing the strong ground motion data from K-NET and KiK-net. Residuals [(ln(data/model)] are plotted as a function of hypocentral distance for a subset of eight periods. Trail simulations are run by varying stress drop until a better match of residuals is obtained. Validation exercise is run with a new data set to ascertain the accuracy of simulations. The results exhibit a close match between the recorded and predicted data. Adopting the validated seismological model of this study, ground motions are predicted at three important sites, which are devoid of strong-motion stations. These results can be used as inputs for conducting dynamic, response spectrum analysis of structures, liquefaction potential of soils, stability analysis and landslide runout estimation of slopes.

    Citation: M.C. Raghucharan, Surendra Nadh Somala. Stochastic Extended Simulation (EXSIM) of Mw 7.0 Kumamoto-Shi earthquake on 15 April 2016 in the Southwest of Japan using the SCEC Broadband Platform (BBP)[J]. AIMS Geosciences, 2018, 4(2): 144-165. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2018.2.144

    Related Papers:

    [1] Weihua Li, Chengcheng Fang, Wei Cao . On the number of irreducible polynomials of special kinds in finite fields. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(4): 2877-2887. doi: 10.3934/math.2020185
    [2] Shakir Ali, Amal S. Alali, Atif Ahmad Khan, Indah Emilia Wijayanti, Kok Bin Wong . XOR count and block circulant MDS matrices over finite commutative rings. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(11): 30529-30547. doi: 10.3934/math.20241474
    [3] Phitthayathon Phetnun, Narakorn R. Kanasri . Further irreducibility criteria for polynomials associated with the complete residue systems in any imaginary quadratic field. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(10): 18925-18947. doi: 10.3934/math.20221042
    [4] Qian Liu, Jianrui Xie, Ximeng Liu, Jian Zou . Further results on permutation polynomials and complete permutation polynomials over finite fields. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(12): 13503-13514. doi: 10.3934/math.2021783
    [5] Kaimin Cheng . Permutational behavior of reversed Dickson polynomials over finite fields. AIMS Mathematics, 2017, 2(2): 244-259. doi: 10.3934/Math.2017.2.244
    [6] Jovanny Ibarguen, Daniel S. Moran, Carlos E. Valencia, Rafael H. Villarreal . The signature of a monomial ideal. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 27955-27978. doi: 10.3934/math.20241357
    [7] Xiaofan Xu, Yongchao Xu, Shaofang Hong . Some results on ordinary words of standard Reed-Solomon codes. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(5): 1336-1347. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.5.1336
    [8] Varsha Jarali, Prasanna Poojary, G. R. Vadiraja Bhatta . A recent survey of permutation trinomials over finite fields. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 29182-29220. doi: 10.3934/math.20231495
    [9] Shitian Liu . Finite groups for which all proper subgroups have consecutive character degrees. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(3): 5745-5762. doi: 10.3934/math.2023289
    [10] Xiaoer Qin, Li Yan . Some specific classes of permutation polynomials over Fq3. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(10): 17815-17828. doi: 10.3934/math.2022981
  • Ground motions for Mw 7.0, 15 April 2016, Kumamoto-Shi earthquake of Japan are simulated employing Stochastic Extended Simulation (EXSIM) methodology within the Southern California Earthquake Centre (SCEC) Broadband Platform (BBP) version 15.3.0, utilizing the strong ground motion data from K-NET and KiK-net. Residuals [(ln(data/model)] are plotted as a function of hypocentral distance for a subset of eight periods. Trail simulations are run by varying stress drop until a better match of residuals is obtained. Validation exercise is run with a new data set to ascertain the accuracy of simulations. The results exhibit a close match between the recorded and predicted data. Adopting the validated seismological model of this study, ground motions are predicted at three important sites, which are devoid of strong-motion stations. These results can be used as inputs for conducting dynamic, response spectrum analysis of structures, liquefaction potential of soils, stability analysis and landslide runout estimation of slopes.


    The study of Diophantine equations plays a very important role in number theory, and the integer solutions of Diophantine equations are widely used in cryptography and coding theory. Silverman [1] studied the parametric solution of equation

    X3+Y3=A,

    Li and Yuan [2] proved that the simultaneous Pell equations possess at most one positive integer solution under certain conditions.

    A Diophantine equation of the form

    a1x1+a2x2++atxt=s (1.1)

    is called a multivariate linear Diophantine equation, where s,a1,a2,,at are nonzero integers and t2. It is well known that for any given nonzero integers a and b, there are two integers u and v such that

    ua+vb=(a,b),

    where (a,b) represents the greatest common divisor of a and b. Now we introduce some symbols associated with Eq (1.1) as follows:

    (a1,a2)=d2,(d2,a3)=d3,,(dt1,at)=dt.

    That is, there exist integers u1,u2,,ut and v2,v3,,vt1 such that

    {a1u1+a2u2=d2,d2v2+a3u3=d3,dt1vt1+atut=dt. (1.2)

    Li [3] gave the structure of the general solution of the multivariate linear Diophantine equation.

    Theorem 1.1. ([3]) The multivariate linear Diophantine Eq (1.1) has solutions if and only if dt|s. Furthermore, if dt|s and t4, then the general solutions of Diophantine Eq (1.1) are

    {x1=u1(δ2it1vi+4jtˉaj2ij2visj1+ˉa3s2)+ˉa2s1,x2=u2(δ2it1vi+4jtˉaj2ij2visj1+ˉa3s2)a1d12s1,x3=u3(δ3it1vi+5jtˉaj3ij2visj1+ˉa4s3)d2d13s2,xt1=ut1(δvt1+ˉatst1)dt2d1t1st2,xt=utδdt1d1tst1, (1.3)

    where si(1it1) are arbitrary integers and δ=sd1t,ˉaj=ajd1j for 2jt.

    Let Fq be a finite field of q elements with characteristic p, and Fqn be its extension of degree n, where p is a prime number and n 2 is an integer. Zhu et al. [4] obtained an explicit formula for the number of solutions to the equation

    f(x1)++f(xn)=a

    over Fq. Zhao et al. [5] found an explicit formula for the number of solutions of the two-variable diagonal quartic equation

    x41+x42=c

    over Fq.

    A basis of Fqn over Fq of the form {α,αq,,αqn1} is called a normal basis of Fqn over Fq, and α is called a normal element of Fqn over Fq. An irreducible polynomial f(x) Fq[x] is called a normal polynomial if all the roots of f(x) are normal elements of Fqn over Fq. The trace of α is defined as

    Tr(α)=α+αq++αqn1

    and the trace of f(x) is defined to be the coefficient of xn1. Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 below give a simple criterion to check when an irreducible polynomial is a normal polynomial.

    Theorem 1.2. ([6]) Let n=pe with e1. Then an irreducible polynomial

    f(x)=xn+a1xn1++anFq[x]

    is a normal polynomial if and only if a10.

    Theorem 1.3. ([7]) Let n be a prime different from p, and let q be a primitive root modulo n. Then an irreducible polynomial

    f(x)=xn+a1xn1++anFq[x]

    is a normal polynomial if and only if a10.

    In 2001, Chang([8]) et al. furthermore proved that the conditions in Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 are also necessary.

    Theorem 1.4. ([8]) If every irreducible polynomial

    f(x)=xn+a1xn1++anFq[x]

    with a10 is a normal polynomial, then n is either a power of p or a prime different from p, and q is a primitive root modulo n.

    In 2018, Huang et al. [9] presented a unified proof of Theorems 1.1–1.3 by comparing the number of normal polynomials and that of irreducible polynomials over Fq.

    The factorization of xn1 and its irreducible factors are closely related to the normal elements in Fqn over Fq (see [10, Section 2]). Denote by F(xn1) the set of all distinct monic irreducible factors of xn1 in a given finite field, Φr(x) a r-th cyclotomic polynomial, and φ() the Euler function. Write

    n=mpe,

    where e0 is an integer, p is the characteristic of Fq, and pm. Below are the known results for

    |F(xn1)|=1,2.

    Theorem 1.5. ([11]) The following statements are equivalent:

    (a) |F(xn1)|=1.

    (b) F(xn1) = {x1}.

    (c) n=pe.

    Theorem 1.6. ([11]) The following statements are equivalent:

    (a) |F(xn1)|=2.

    (b) F(xn1) = {x1,1+x++xm1}.

    (c) m is a prime different from p, and q is a primitive root modulo m.

    We summarize the five theorems above into the theorem below:

    Theorem 1.7. The following statements are equivalent:

    (a) Every irreducible polynomial of degree n over Fq with a nonzero trace is a normal polynomial.

    (b) F(xn1){x1,1+x++xn1}.

    (c) (c1) n=pe, or

    (c2) n is a prime different from p, with q being a primitive root modulo n.

    Cao [11] presented a new and unified proof of Theorem 1.6 and also extended Theorem 1.6. In this paper, we give the necessary and sufficient condition for the polynomial xn1 to have s different irreducible factors for a given positive integer s.

    Lemma 2.1 indicates that factorization of xn1 in finite fields is closely related to the cyclotomic polynomials.

    Lemma 2.1. ([12]) Let Fq be a finite field of characteristic p, and let n be a positive integer not divisible by p. Then

    xn1=d|nΦd(x).

    Lemma 2.2. ([13]) Let l be the order of a modulo m, an1 (mod m), then ln.

    Lemma 2.3. ([12]) Let Fq be a finite field and n a positive integer with (q,n)=1. Then the cyclotomic polynomial Φn(x) factors into φ(n)d distinct monic irreducible polynomials in Fq[x] of the same degree d, where d is the order of q modulo n.

    Lemma 2.4 is the well-known theorem about the existence of primitive roots.

    Lemma 2.4. ([14]) Let n be a positive integer. Then n possesses primitive roots if and only if n is of the form 2, 4, pα, or 2pα, where p is an odd prime and α is a positive integer.

    By Lemmas 2.3 and 2.4, we have the following lemma:

    Lemma 2.5. The cyclotomic polynomial Φn(x) is irreducible over Fq if and only if n=2,4,pα,2pα, and q is a primitive root modulo n.

    We define vp(x) to be the greatest power in which a prime p divides x, that is, if vp(x)=α, then pα|x but pα+1x. The following lemma is called the lifting the exponent lemma (LTE):

    Lemma 2.6. ([15]) Let x and y be (not necessarily positive) integers, n be a positive integer, and p be an odd prime such that p|xy and none of x and y is divisible by p. We have

    vp(xnyn)=vp(xy)+vp(n).

    Lemma 2.7. Let p be an odd prime and g be a primitive root modulo p2, with (g,p)=1. Then g is a primitive root modulo pl(l1).

    Proof. We first prove that g is a primitive root modulo pl(l2) by induction on l. Let g be a primitive root modulo pl. The order of g modulo pl+1 is d. We have

    φ(pl)|d,d|φ(pl+1),

    which shows that

    d=pl1(p1)

    or

    d=pl(p1).

    We next prove that

    dpl1(p1).

    According to Euler's theorem, we have

    gpl2(p1)1(mod pl1),

    there exists an integer k such that

    gpl2(p1)=1+kpl1,

    since g is a primitive root modulo pl, we have

    gpl2(p1)1(mod pl),plkpl1,(k,p)=1.

    Obviously, for l2, we have

    2l1l+1

    and

    3(l1)l+1,

    which shows that

    gpl1(p1)=(1+kpl1)p=1+kpl+k2p(p1)2p2(l1)+tp3(l1)+1+kpl(modpl+1),

    where t is an integer and (k,p)=1. It follows that

    gpl1(p1)1+kpl1(mod pl+1).

    Therefore

    dpl1(p1),d=pl(p1),

    and g is a primitive root modulo pl+1.

    We next use the LTE to prove that g is a primitive root modulo p. The Euler's theorem shows that

    gφ(p)1(modp),

    since g is a primitive root modulo p2, we have

    vp(gφ(p)1)=1.

    Let h be the order of g modulo p, then h|φ(p). Similarly, we can obtain

    vp(gh1)=1.

    Let x=gh, y=1, then (p,gh)=1, p|gh1. By the LTE, we have

    vp(gph1)=vp(gh1)+vp(p)=1+1=2,

    which shows that

    p2|gph1,gph1(mod p2),

    if h<φ(p), then ph<φ(p2), a contradiction. Thus h=φ(p), g is a primitive root modulo p.

    Lemma 2.8. Let g be a primitive root modulo pl. Then g is a primitive root modulo 2pl, where g is odd and p and l are the same as mentioned above.

    Proof. Let s be the order of g modulo 2pl. Then

    gs1(mod 2pl),s|φ(2pl).

    So we have

    gs1(mod pl).

    Since g is a primitive root modulo pl, we have φ(pl)|s and hence φ(2pl)|s. So

    s=φ(2pl)

    and g is a primitive root modulo 2pl.

    Combining Lemmas 2.1 and 2.3, we can calculate the number of different irreducible factors for xn1 over Fq. Let m be a positive integer,

    m=pα11pα22pαll

    be its prime decomposition. If

    n=mpe,

    where e0 is an integer, and p is the characteristic of Fq with pm. Then we can calculate that

    |F(xn1)|=mmφ(m)dm,

    where dm denotes the order of q modulo m. Note that there are lk=1(αk+1) items in the summation, where lk=1(αk+1) is the number of factors of m.

    Now assume that s and m are given positive integers, m1,,mt are the t factors of m. Thus, we have

    xn1=ti=1Φmi(x)pe.

    If xn1 factors into s distinct irreducible polynomials in Fq[x], then

    |F(xn1)|=ti=1φ(mi)dmi=s, (3.1)

    there are t items in the summation, the necessary and sufficient condition for

    |F(xn1)|=s

    is determined as follows:

    Observe φ(mi)dmi (i=1,2,,t), and φ(mi) are known; with the difference of q, the values of dmi will also change, that is, the values of φ(mi)dmi will change in the different Fq. Therefore, the t items in (3.1) can be regarded as t variables, and (3.1) can be regarded as the Diophantine equation with t variables

    x1+x2++xt=s. (3.2)

    Remark 3.1. Combining Lemma 2.2 and Euler's theorem, we know that φ(mi)dmi (i=1,2,,t) are positive integers. So we only need to consider the positive integer solutions of (3.2).

    Remark 3.2. The positive integers s and t satisfy ts. Otherwise, if t>s, then it follows from Lemmas 2.1 and 2.3 that

    |F(xn1)|>s.

    Remark 3.3. As we all know

    Φ1(x)=x1

    is a factor of xn1, and x1 is irreducible over Fq; the order of q modulo 1 is d1=1. Thus, at least one positive integer solution of (3.2) whose value is 1.

    We can find the positive integer solutions of (3.2). Without loss of generality, we suppose that

    xi=φ(mi)dmi=ki (i=1,2,,t) (3.3)

    is the positive integer solution of (3.2), thus we have

    dmi=φ(mi)ki (i=1,2,,t). (3.4)

    If there exists q such that the order of q modulo mi is

    dmi=φ(mi)ki  (i=1,2,,t),

    then it follows from Lemma 2.3 that Φmi(x) factors into

    φ(mi)φ(mi)ki=ki

    distinct monic irreducible polynomials over Fq of the same degree

    dmi=φ(mi)ki.

    Therefore, we have

    |F(xn1)|=k1+k2++kt=s,

    that is, xn1 factors into s distinct irreducible polynomials over Fq.

    In conclusion, we have the following result:

    Theorem 3.4. (Main result) Let Fq denote the finite field of q elements with characteristic p. Let p be a prime. Let

    n=mpe

    with e0, pm. Let s be a positive integer. The t factors of m are m1,m2,,mt and dmi denotes the order of q modulo mi. Then

    |F(xn1)|=s,

    if and only if

    xi=φ(mi)dmi  (i=1,2,,t)

    is a solution to the Diophantine equation

    x1+x2++xt=s.

    Proof. We first assume that

    xi=φ(mi)dmi=ki  (i=1,2,,t)

    is the solution of the Diophantine equation

    x1+x2++xt=s.

    By Lemmas 2.1 and 2.3, we have

    xn1=ti=1Φmi(x)pe

    and Φmi(x) factors into

    φ(mi)φ(mi)ki=ki

    distinct monic irreducible polynomials in Fq[x] of the same degree

    dmi=φ(mi)ki  (i=1,2,,t).

    Hence, we obtain

    |F(xn1)|=ti=1ki=s.

    Suppose

    |F(xn1)|=s.

    According to Lemma 2.3, we have

    |F(xn1)|=ti=1φ(mi)dmi=s.

    So

    xi=φ(mi)dmi  (i=1,2,,t)

    is the solution of the Diophantine equation

    x1+x2++xt=s.

    We apply Theorem 3.4 to deduce Theorem 1.6. Note that Theorem 1.5 is trivial. Recall that

    n=mpe,

    where e0 is an integer and p is the characteristic of Fq with pm.

    For Theorem 1.6

    |F(xn1)|=2,

    we know that m has two factors; thus, m is a prime different from p,

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φm(x))pe.

    The unique positive integer solution of the Diophantine equation

    x1+x2=2

    is

    x1=x2=1.

    Since

    φ(1)d1=1,

    and by Theorem 3.4, we have

    φ(m)dm=1,

    that is, dm=φ(m), q is a primitive root modulo m. It follows from Lemma 2.5 that the cyclotomic polynomial Φm(x) is irreducible over Fq. Thus

    |F(xn1)|=2.

    The necessary and sufficient conditions for

    |F(xn1)|=3,4,5

    are given, respectively, below: for

    |F(xn1)|=3,

    we know that t3, where t is the number of factors of m.

    Case 1. If m has three factors, then m=r2, where r is a prime different from p.

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φr(x)Φr2(x))pe.

    The unique positive integer solution of the Diophantine equation

    x1+x2+x3=3

    is

    x1=x2=x3=1.

    By Theorem 3.4, we have

    φ(r)dr=1,  φ(r2)dr2=1,

    that is,

    dr=φ(r),  dr2=φ(r2),

    q is a primitive root modulo r and r2. Recall Lemma 2.7: If q is a primitive root modulo r2, then q is a primitive root modulo r. Cyclotomic polynomials Φr(x) and Φr2(x) are irreducible over Fq. Thus

    |F(xn1)|=3.

    Case 2. If m has two factors, then m=r,

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φr(x))pe.

    The positive integer solution of the Diophantine equation

    x1+x2=3

    is x1=1, x2=2. Hence, we obtain

    φ(r)dr=2,

    that is,

    dr=φ(r)2,

    the order of q modulo r is φ(r)2. According to Lemma 2.3, the cyclotomic polynomial Φr(x) factors into

    φ(r)φ(r)2=2

    distinct monic irreducible polynomials in Fq[x] of the same degree

    dr=φ(r)2.

    Thus

    |F(xn1)|=3.

    In conclusion, we have the following result:

    Theorem 4.1. The following statements are equivalent:

    (a) |F(xn1)|=3.

    (b) (b1) F(xn1) = {x1,f1(x),f2(x)}, where m=r,

    f1(x)f2(x)=Φr(x),degf1=degf2=φ(r)2.

    (b2) F(xn1) = {x1,Φr(x),Φr2(x)}, where m=r2.

    (c) (c1) m=r, and the order of q modulo r is φ(r)2.

    (c2) m=r2, and q is a primitive root modulo r2.

    For

    |F(xn1)|=4,

    we know that t4, where t is the number of factors of m. In the remaining part of this paper, we always assume that r is an odd prime different from p.

    If m has four factors, then the possible values of m are r3, 2r, p1p2 or 8, where p1 and p2 are odd primes different from p. The unique positive integer solution of the Diophantine equation

    x1+x2+x3+x4=4

    is

    x1=x2=x3=x4=1.

    Case 1. If m=r3, then

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φr(x)Φr2(x)Φr3(x))pe,

    and we have

    φ(r)dr=φ(r2)dr2=φ(r3)dr3=1,

    that is, q is a primitive root modulo rl,l=1,2,3, which requires that q is a primitive root modulo r2. The cyclotomic polynomials Φr(x), Φr2(x), and Φr3(x) are irreducible over Fq. Thus

    |F(xn1)|=4.

    Case 2. If m=2r, then

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φ2(x)Φr(x)Φ2r(x))pe,

    and we have

    φ(2)d2=φ(r)dr=φ(2r)d2r=1,

    that is, q is a primitive root modulo r and 2r. Recall Lemma 2.8: If q is a primitive root modulo r, then q is a primitive root modulo 2r. The cyclotomic polynomials Φr(x) and Φ2r(x) are irreducible over Fq. Obviously, the order of q modulo 2 is d2=1, and

    Φ2(x)=x+1

    is irreducible over Fq. Thus

    |F(xn1)|=4.

    Case 3. If m=p1p2, then

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φp1(x)Φp2(x)Φp1p2(x))pe,

    and we have

    φ(p1)dp1=φ(p2)dp2=φ(p1p2)dp1p2=1.

    It follows from Lemma 2.4 that p1p2 has no primitive root, which contradicts

    dp1p2=φ(p1p2).

    The cyclotomic polynomial Φp1p2(x) is reducible over Fq. Thus

    |F(xn1)|>4.

    Case 4. If m=8, then

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φ2(x)Φ4(x)Φ8(x))pe.

    Since 8 has no primitive root, Φ8(x) is reducible over Fq. Thus

    |F(xn1)|>4.

    If m has three factors, then the possible values of m are r2 or 4. The positive integer solution of the equation

    x1+x2+x3=4

    is

    x1=x2=1,x3=2.

    Case 1. If m=r2, then

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φr(x)Φr2(x))pe,

    and we have

    φ(r)dr=2,  φ(r2)dr2=1

    or

    φ(r)dr=1,  φ(r2)dr2=2.

    For the former, the order of q modulo r is

    dr=φ(r)2,

    and q is a primitive root modulo r2, which is impossible by Lemma 2.7. For the latter, q is a primitive root modulo r, and the order of q modulo r2 is φ(r2)2. It follows that

    qφ(r)1(mod r),  qφ(r2)2=qrφ(r)21(mod r2),  qrφ(r)21(mod r).

    Thus φ(r)|rφ(r)2. Since r is an odd prime, r2 is not an integer, and the divisibility is not valid.

    Case 2. If m=4, then

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φ2(x)Φ4(x))pe,

    and we have

    φ(4)d4=2,

    that is, the order of q modulo 4 is

    d4=φ(4)2=1.

    The cyclotomic polynomial

    Φ4(x)=1+x2

    factors into

    φ(4)φ(4)2=2

    distinct monic irreducible polynomials in Fq[x] of the same degree, d4=1. Thus

    |F(xn1)|=4.

    If m has two factors, then m=r,

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φr(x))pe.

    The positive integer solution of the Diophantine equation

    x1+x2=4

    is x1=1, x2=3. Hence, we have

    φ(r)dr=3,

    that is, the order of q modulo r is φ(r)3. The cyclotomic polynomial Φr(x) factors into three distinct monic irreducible polynomials in Fq[x] of the same degree φ(r)3. Thus

    |F(xn1)|=4.

    In conclusion, we have the following result:

    Theorem 4.2. The following statements are equivalent:

    (a) |F(xn1)|=4.

    (b) (b1) F(xn1) = {x1,f1(x),f2(x),f3(x)}, where m=r,

    f1(x)f2(x)f3(x)=Φr(x),degf1=degf2=degf3=φ(r)3.

    (b2) F(xn1) = {x1,Φr(x),Φr2(x),Φr3(x)}, where m=r3.

    (b3) F(xn1) = {x1,x+1,Φr(x),Φ2r(x)}, where m=2r.

    (b4) F(xn1) = {x1,x+1,x+e1,x+e2}, where m=4, e1 and e2 are integers.

    (c) (c1) m=r, and the order of q modulo r is φ(r)3.

    (c2) m=r3, and q is a primitive root modulo r2.

    (c3) m=2r, and q is a primitive root modulo r.

    (c4) m=4, and the order of q modulo 4 is 1.

    For

    |F(xn1)|=5,

    we know that t5, where t is the number of factors of m.

    If m has five factors, then the possible values of m are r4 or 16. The unique positive integer solution of the equation

    x1+x2+x3+x4+x5=5

    is

    x1=x2=x3=x4=x5=1.

    Case 1. If m=r4, then

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φr(x)Φr2(x)Φr3(x)Φr4(x))pe,

    and we have

    φ(r)dr=φ(r2)dr2=φ(r3)dr3=φ(r4)dr4=1,

    that is, q is a primitive root modulo rl,l=1,2,3,4, which requires that q is a primitive root modulo r2. The cyclotomic polynomials Φr(x),Φr2(x),Φr3(x), and Φr4(x) are irreducible over Fq. Thus

    |F(xn1)|=5.

    Case 2. If m=16, then

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φ2(x)Φ4(x)Φ8(x)Φ16(x))pe.

    Since 8 and 16 have no primitive root, we know that Φ8(x) and Φ16(x) are reducible over Fq. Thus

    |F(xn1)|>5.

    If m has four factors, then the possible values of m are r3,8,2r or p1p2. The positive integer solution of the equation

    x1+x2+x3+x4=5

    is

    x1=x2=x3=1,x4=2.

    Case 1. If m=r3, then

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φr(x)Φr2(x)Φr3(x))pe.

    It follows from Lemma 2.7 that

    φ(r2)dr2=2

    and

    φ(r)dr=φ(r3)dr3=1,

    that is, q is a primitive root modulo r3, the order of q modulo r2 is φ(r2)2. It follows that

    qφ(r3)1(mod r3),  qφ(r2)21(mod r2),  qφ(r2)21(mod r).

    Since q is a primitive root modulo r3, we have

    vr(qφ(r2)21)=2.

    By Lemma 2.6, we have

    vr(qrφ(r2)21)=vr(qφ(r2)21)+vr(r)=2+1=3,
    qφ(r3)21(modr3),

    which is a contradiction. Thus, if m=r3, then

    |F(xn1)|5.

    Case 2. If m=8, then

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φ2(x)Φ4(x)Φ8(x))pe,

    and we have

    φ(4)d4=1,  φ(8)d8=2,

    that is, q is a primitive root modulo 4, which means q is congruent to 3 modulo 4, therefore the order of q modulo 8 is

    φ(8)2=2.

    Φ4(x) is irreducible over Fq, and Φ8(x) factors into

    φ(8)φ(8)2=2

    distinct monic irreducible polynomials in Fq[x] of the same degree 2. Thus

    |F(xn1)|=5.

    Case 3. If m=2r, then

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φ2(x)Φr(x)Φ2r(x))pe.

    It follows from Lemma 2.8 that

    φ(r)dr=2,  φ(2r)d2r=1,

    that is, q is a primitive root modulo 2r, and the order of q modulo r is φ(r)2, Φ2r(x) is irreducible over Fq and Φr(x) factors into

    φ(r)φ(r)2=2

    distinct monic irreducible polynomials in Fq[x] of the same degree φ(r)2. Thus

    |F(xn1)|=5.

    Case 4. If m=p1p2, then

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φp1(x)Φp2(x)Φp1p2(x))pe.

    Since p1p2 has no primitive root, we have

    φ(p1)dp1=φ(p2)dp2=1,  φ(p1p2)dp1p2=2,

    that is, q is a primitive root modulo p1 and p2, and the order of q modulo p1p2 is φ(p1p2)2, Φp1(x) and Φp2(x) are irreducible over Fq, and Φp1p2(x) factors into

    φ(p1p2)φ(p1p2)2=2

    distinct monic irreducible polynomials in Fq[x] of the same degree φ(p1p2)2. Thus

    |F(xn1)|=5.

    If m has three factors, then the possible values of m are 4 or r2. If m=4, there are at most four distinct irreducible factors for xn1. Thus

    |F(xn1)|<5.

    If m=r2, then

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φr(x)Φr2(x))pe.

    The positive integer solutions of the equation

    x1+x2+x3=5

    are

    x1=1,  x2=x3=2,orx1=x2=1,  x3=3.

    For the former, we have

    φ(r)dr=φ(r2)dr2=2,

    that is, the order of q modulo r is φ(r)2 and the order of q modulo r2 is φ(r2)2, Φr(x), and Φr2(x) factor into 2 distinct monic irreducible polynomials in Fq[x]. Thus

    |F(xn1)|=5.

    For the latter, it follows from Lemma 2.7 that

    φ(r)dr=1andφ(r2)dr2=3,

    that is, q is a primitive root modulo r, and the order of q modulo r2 is φ(r2)3, Φr(x) is irreducible over Fq and Φr2(x) factors into 3 distinct monic irreducible polynomials in Fq[x]. Thus

    |F(xn1)|=5.

    If m has two factors, then

    m=r,  xn1=(Φ1(x)Φr(x))pe.

    The positive integer solution of the equation x1+x2=5 is x1=1,x2=4. Hence, we have

    φ(r)dr=4,

    that is, the order of q modulo r is φ(r)4. The cyclotomic polynomial Φr(x) factors into four distinct monic irreducible polynomials in Fq[x]. Thus

    |F(xn1)|=5.

    In conclusion, we obtain the following result:

    Theorem 4.3. The following statements are equivalent:

    (a) |F(xn1)|=5.

    (b) (b1) F(xn1) = {x1,Φr(x),Φr2(x),Φr3(x),Φr4(x)}, where m=r4.

    (b2) F(xn1) = {x1,x+1,Φ4(x),f1(x),f2(x)}, where m=8,

    f1(x)f2(x)=Φ8(x),degf1=degf2=2.

    (b3) F(xn1) = {x1,x+1,g1(x),g2(x),Φ2r(x)}, where m=2r,

    g1(x)g2(x)=Φr(x),degg1=degg2=φ(r)2.

    (b4) F(xn1) = {x1,Φp1(x),Φp2(x),h1(x),h2(x)}, where m=p1p2,

    h1(x)h2(x)=Φp1p2(x),degh1=degh2=φ(p1p2)2.

    (b5) F(xn1) = {x1,k1(x),k2(x),r1(x),r2(x)}, where m=r2,

    k1(x)k2(x)=Φr(x),degk1=degk2=φ(r)2andr1(x)r2(x)=Φr2(x),degr1=degr2=φ(r2)2.

    Or F(xn1) = {x1,Φr(x),u1(x),u2(x),u3(x)}, where m=r2,

    u1(x)u2(x)u3(x)=Φr2(x),degu1=degu2=degu3=φ(r2)3.

    (b6) F(xn1) = {x1,v1(x),v2(x),v3(x),v4(x)}, where m=r,

    v1(x)v2(x)v3(x)v4(x)=Φr(x),degv1=degv2=degv3=degv4=φ(r)4.

    (c) (c1) m=r4, and q is a primitive root modulo r2.

    (c2) m=8, q is a primitive root modulo 4, and the order of q modulo 8 is 2.

    (c3) m=2r, the order of q modulo r is φ(r)2 and q is a primitive root modulo 2r.

    (c4) m=p1p2, the order of q modulo p1p2 is φ(p1p2)2, and q is a primitive root modulo p1 and p2.

    (c5) m=r2, the order of q modulo r is φ(r)2 and the order of q modulo r2 is φ(r2)2; or q is a primitive root modulo r and the order of q modulo r2 is φ(r2)3.

    (c6) m=r, and the order of q modulo r is φ(r)4.

    In this final section, we provide two examples.

    Example 5.1. Let Fq denote the finite field of q elements with characteristic p. Let p be a prime, let r be a prime different from p, and let n=rlpe, with l1, e0. Denote by F(xn1) the set of all distinct monic irreducible factors of xn1 in a given finite field. Given a positive integer s, we consider the special case for

    |F(xn1)|=s=l+1.

    Since n=rlpe,

    xn1=(Φ1(x)Φr(x)Φr2(x)Φrl(x))pe.

    The unique positive integer solution of the equation

    x0+x1+x2++xl=l+1

    is

    xi=φ(ri)dri=1  (i=0,1,,l),

    where dri denotes the order of q modulo ri (i=0,1,,l). That is, q is a primitive root modulo rj (j=1,2,,l). Recall Lemma 2.7 that if q is a primitive root modulo r2, then q is a primitive root modulo rj (j=1,2,,l). Cyclotomic polynomials Φrj(x) (j=1,2,,l) are irreducible over Fq.

    In conclusion, if q is a primitive root modulo r2, then

    |F(xrlpe1)|=l+1.

    Example 5.2. We factor polynomial x251 into distinct monic irreducible polynomials over F7. Since 25=52,

    x251=x521=Φ1(x)Φ5(x)Φ25(x).

    We first calculate

    72(mod5),  7241(mod5),  741(mod5),

    where 7 is a primitive root modulo 5, thus

    Φ5(x)=1+x+x2+x3+x4

    is irreducible over F7.

    We next calculate

    77(mod25),  72241(mod25),  741(mod25),

    the order of  7 modulo 25 is 4, thus

    Φ25(x)=1+x5+x10+x15+x20

    factors into

    φ(25)4=5

    distinct monic irreducible polynomials over F7 of the same degree 4,

    f1(x)=1+2x+4x2+2x3+x4,f2(x)=1+4x+4x3+x4,f3(x)=1+4x+3x2+4x3+x4,f4(x)=1+5x+5x2+5x3+x4,f5(x)=1+6x+5x2+6x3+x4,

    respectively.

    Thus

    x251=((x1)(1+x+x2+x3+x4)(1+2x+4x2+2x3+x4)(1+4x+4x3+x4)(1+4x+3x2+4x3+x4)(1+5x+5x2+5x3+x4)(1+6x+5x2+6x3+x4))

    and

    |F(x251)|=7.

    {Let Fq be the finite field of q elements, and Fqn be its extension of degree n. Denote by F(xn1) the set of all distinct monic irreducible factors of the polynomial xn1 in the finite field Fq. Given a positive integer s, we use the properties of cyclotomic polynomials in finite fields and results from the Diophantine equations to provide the sufficient and necessary condition for

    |F(xn1)|=s.

    As an application, we also obtain the sufficient and necessary conditions for

    |F(xn1)|=3,4,5.

    Weitao Xie: the first draft of the manuscript; Jiayu Zhang: preliminaries collection and analysis; Wei Cao: originally raised the problem and commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the study conception and design. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

    The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    The authors thank the anonymous referees for their helpful comments that improved the quality of the manuscript. This work was jointly supported by the Fujian Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 2022J02046), and Fujian Key Laboratory of Granular Computing and Applications (Minnan Normal University).

    All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.

    [1] Zhao D, Ochi F, Hasegawa A, et al. (2000) Evidence for the location and cause of large crustal earthquakes in Japan. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 105: 13579–13594. doi: 10.1029/2000JB900026
    [2] Sun A, Zhao D, Ikeda M, et al. (2008) Seismic imaging of southwest Japan using P and PmP data: Implications for arc magmatism and seismotectonics. Gondwana Res 14: 535–542. doi: 10.1016/j.gr.2008.04.004
    [3] Zhao D, Kanamori H, Negishi H, et al. (1996) Tomography of the source area of the 1995 Kobe earthquake: Evidence for fluids at the hypocenter? Science 274: 1891–1894. doi: 10.1126/science.274.5294.1891
    [4] Zhao D, Wang Z, Umino N, et al. (2007) Tomographic imaging outside a seismic network: Application to the northeast Japan arc. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97: 1121–1132. doi: 10.1785/0120050256
    [5] EERI KUMAMOTO JAPAN EARTHQUAKE CLEARINGHOUSE: M7.0 APRIL 15, 2016 AT 16:25:06 UTC. Available from: http://www.eqclearinghouse.org/2016-04-15-kumamoto/2016/ 04/22/ground-motions-of-the-2016-kumamoto-earthquake/.
    [6] Yoshida Y, Abe K (1992) Source mechanism of the Luzon, Philippines earthquake of July 16, 1990. Geophys Res Lett 19: 545–548. doi: 10.1029/91GL02467
    [7] USGS Seismicity of the Earth 1900-2012, Philippine Sea plate and vicinity: Open-File Report 2010-1083-M. Available from: https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1083/m/.
    [8] Simutė S, Steptoe H, Cobden L, et al. (2016) Full-waveform inversion of the Japanese Islands region. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 121: 3722–3741. doi: 10.1002/2016JB012802
    [9] Burks LS (2015) Ground motion simulations: Validation and application for civil engineering problems (Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University).
    [10] Bhattacharya S, Hyodo M, Nikitas G, et al. (2018) Geotechnical and infrastructural damage due to the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake sequence. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 104: 390–394. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.11.009
    [11] Atkinson GM, Boore DM (1998) Ground-motion relations for eastern North America. Bull Seismol Soc Am 85: 17–30.
    [12] Hwang H, Huo JR (1997) Attenuation relations of ground motion for rock and soil sites in eastern United States. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 16: 363–372. doi: 10.1016/S0267-7261(97)00016-X
    [13] Toro GR, Abrahamson NA, Schneider JF (1997) Model of strong ground motions from earthquakes in central and eastern North America: Best estimates and uncertainties. Seismol Res Lett 68: 41–57.
    [14] Yoshita M, Okano M, Akiyama H, et al. (1999) A spectral analysis of the 21 May 1997, Jabalpur, India, earthquake (Mw = 5.8) and estimation of ground motion from future earthquakes in the Indian shield region. Bull Seismol Soc Am 89: 1620–1630.
    [15] Iyengar RN, Kanth SR (2004) Attenuation of strong ground motion in peninsular India. Seismol Res Lett 75: 530–540. doi: 10.1785/gssrl.75.4.530
    [16] Saragoni GR, Hart FC (1974) Simulation of artificial earthquake accelerograms. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 2: 249–267.
    [17] Nau RF, Oliver RM, Pister KS (1982) Simulating and analyzing artificial nonstationary earthquake ground motions. Bull Seismol Soc Am 72: 615–636.
    [18] Kaul MK (1978) Spectrum-consistent time-history generation. J Eng Mech Div 104: 781–788.
    [19] Vanmarcke EH (1979) State-of-the-art for assessing earthquake hazards in the United States. Report 14, representation of earthquake ground motion: Scaled accelerograms and equivalent response spectra. Massachusetts Inst of Tech Cambridge Dept of Civil Engineering.
    [20] Gasparini DA, Vanmarcke EH (1976) Simulated earthquake motions compatible with prescribed response spectra. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Civil Engineering, Constructed Facilities Division.
    [21] Hartzell SH (1978) Earthquake aftershocks as Green's functions. Geophys Res Lett 5: 1–4. doi: 10.1029/GL005i001p00001
    [22] Irikura K (1983) Semi-empirical estimation of strong ground motions during large earthquakes. Bull Disaster Prev Res Inst.
    [23] Zeng Y, Anderson JG, Yu G (1994) A composite source model for computing realistic synthetic strong ground motions. Geophys Res Lett 21: 725–728. doi: 10.1029/94GL00367
    [24] Schneider JF, Silva WJ, Stark C (1993) Ground motion model for the 1989 M 6.9 Loma Prieta earthquake including effects of source, path, and site. Earthquake Spectra 9: 251–287.
    [25] Beresnev IA, Atkinson GM (1997) Modeling finite-fault radiation from the ωn spectrum. Bull Seismol Soc Am 87: 67–84.
    [26] Hartzell S, Guatteri M, Mai PM, et al. (2005) Calculation of broadband time histories of ground motion, Part II: Kinematic and dynamic modeling using theoretical Green's functions and comparison with the 1994 Northridge earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 95: 614–645. doi: 10.1785/0120040136
    [27] Kristek J, Moczo P (2003) Seismic-wave propagation in viscoelastic media with material discontinuities: A 3D fourth-order staggered-grid finite-difference modeling. Bull Seismol Soc Am 93: 2273–2280. doi: 10.1785/0120030023
    [28] Graves RW (1996) Simulating seismic wave propagation in 3D elastic media using staggered-grid finite differences. Bull Seismol Soc Am 86: 1091–1106.
    [29] Pitarka A (1999) 3D elastic finite-difference modeling of seismic motion using staggered grids with nonuniform spacing. Bull Seismol Soc Am 89: 54–68.
    [30] Aoi S, Fujiwara H (1999) 3D finite-difference method using discontinuous grids. Bull Seismol Soc Am 89: 918–930.
    [31] Moczo P, Kristek J, Vavrycuk V, et al. (2002) 3D heterogeneous staggered-grid finite-difference modeling of seismic motion with volume harmonic and arithmetic averaging of elastic moduli and densities. Bull Seismol Soc Am 92: 3042–3066. doi: 10.1785/0120010167
    [32] Lee SJ, Chen HW, Huang BS (2008) Simulations of strong ground motion and 3D amplification effect in the Taipei Basin by using a composite grid finite-difference method. Bull Seismol Soc Am 98: 1229–1242. doi: 10.1785/0120060098
    [33] Komatitsch D, Liu Q, Tromp J, et al. (2004) Simulations of ground motion in the Los Angeles basin based upon the spectral-element method. Bull Seismol Soc Am 94: 187–206. doi: 10.1785/0120030077
    [34] Komatitsch D, Tromp J, Vilotte JP, et al. (2015) The spectral element method for elastic wave equations-application to 2-D and 3-D seismic problems. Int J Numer Methods Eng 45: 1139–1164.
    [35] Priolo E (2001) Earthquake ground motion simulation through the 2-D spectral element method. J Comput Acoust 9: 1561–1581. doi: 10.1142/S0218396X01001522
    [36] Komatitsch D, Liu Q, Tromp J, et al. (2004) Simulations of ground motion in the Los Angeles basin based upon the spectral-element method. Bull Seismol Soc Am 94: 187–206. doi: 10.1785/0120030077
    [37] Lee SJ, Chen HW, Liu Q, et al. (2008) Three-dimensional simulations of seismic-wave propagation in the Taipei basin with realistic topography based upon the spectral-element method. Bull Seismol Soc Am 98: 253–264. doi: 10.1785/0120070033
    [38] Stupazzini M, Paolucci R, Igel H (2009) Near-fault earthquake ground-motion simulation in the Grenoble valley by a high-performance spectral element code. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99: 286–301. doi: 10.1785/0120080274
    [39] Maechling PJ, Silva F, Callaghan S, et al. (2014) SCEC Broadband Platform: System architecture and software implementation. Seismol Res Lett 86: 27–38.
    [40] Graves R, Pitarka A (2015) Refinements to the Graves and Pitarka (2010) broadband ground-motion simulation method. Seismol Res Lett 86: 75–80.
    [41] Olsen K, Takedatsu R (2015) The SDSU broadband ground-motion generation module BBtoolbox version 1.5. Seismol Res Lett 86: 81–88. doi: 10.1785/0220140102
    [42] Crempien JG, Archuleta RJ (2015) UCSB method for simulation of broadband ground motion from kinematic earthquake sources. Seismol Res Lett 86: 61–67. doi: 10.1785/0220140103
    [43] Motazedian D, Atkinson GM (2005) Stochastic finite-fault modeling based on a dynamic corner frequency. Bull Seismol Soc Am 95: 995–1010. doi: 10.1785/0120030207
    [44] Anderson JG (2015) The composite source model for broadband simulations of strong ground motions. Seismol Res Lett 86: 68–74. doi: 10.1785/0220140098
    [45] Boore DM (1983) Stochastic simulation of high-frequency ground motions based on seismological models of the radiated spectra. Bull Seismol Soc Am 73: 1865–1894.
    [46] Boore DM (2003) Simulation of ground motion using the stochastic method. Pure Appl Geophys 160: 635–676. doi: 10.1007/PL00012553
    [47] Beresnev IA, Atkinson GM (1998) FINSIM-a FORTRAN program for simulating stochastic acceleration time histories from finite faults. Seismol Res Lett 69: 27–32. doi: 10.1785/gssrl.69.1.27
    [48] Zonno G, Carvalho A (2006) Modeling the 1980 Irpinia earthquake by stochastic simulation. Comparison of seismic scenarios using finite-fault approaches. InFirst European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology.
    [49] Motazedian D, Moinfar A (2006) Hybrid stochastic finite fault modeling of 2003, M6.5, Bam earthquake (Iran). J Seismol 10: 91–103.
    [50] Moratto L, Vuan A, Saraò A (2015) A hybrid approach for broadband simulations of strong ground motion: The case of the 2008 Iwate-Miyagi Nairiku earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 105: 2823–2829. doi: 10.1785/0120150054
    [51] Ghofrani H, Atkinson G, Goda K, et al. (2012) Interpreting the 11th March 2011 Tohoku, Japan Earthquake Ground-Motions Using Stochastic Finite-Fault Simulations. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281463795_Interpreting_the_11th_March_2011_Tohoku_Japan_Earthquake_Ground-Motions_Using_Stochastic_Finite-Fault_Simulations.
    [52] Raghucharan MC, Somala SN (2017) Simulation of strong ground motion for the 25 April 2015 Nepal (Gorkha) Mw 7.8 earthquake using the SCEC broadband platform. J Seismol 21: 777–808.
    [53] Atkinson GM, Assatourians K, Boore DM, et al. (2009) A guide to differences between stochastic point-source and stochastic finite-fault simulations. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99: 3192–3201. doi: 10.1785/0120090058
    [54] Aki K (1967) Scaling law of seismic spectrum. J Geophys Res 72: 1217–1231. doi: 10.1029/JZ072i004p01217
    [55] Boore DM (2009) Comparing stochastic point-source and finite-source ground-motion simulations: SMSIM and EXSIM. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99: 3202–3216. doi: 10.1785/0120090056
    [56] Atkinson GM, Assatourians K (2015) Implementation and validation of EXSIM (a stochastic finite-fault ground-motion simulation algorithm) on the SCEC broadband platform. Seismol Res Lett 86: 48–60. doi: 10.1785/0220140097
    [57] Atkinson GM, Boore DM (2006) Earthquake ground-motion prediction equations for eastern North America. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96: 2181–2205. doi: 10.1785/0120050245
    [58] Aoi S, Kunugi T, Fujiwara H (2004) Strong-motion seismograph network operated by NIED: K-Net and KiK-Net. J Jpn Assoc Earthquake Eng 4: 65–74. doi: 10.5610/jaee.4.3_65
    [59] Asano K, Iwata T (2016) Source rupture processes of the foreshock and mainshock in the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake sequence estimated from the kinematic waveform inversion of strong motion data. Earth Planets Space 68: 147.
    [60] Molkenthin C, Scherbaum F, Griewank A, et al. (2014) A study of the sensitivity of response spectral amplitudes on seismological parameters using algorithmic differentiation. Bull Seismol Soc Am 104: 2240–2252. doi: 10.1785/0120140022
    [61] J-SHIS (Japan Seismic Hazard Information Station): Subsurface structure of entire Japan. Available from: www.j-shis.bosai.go.jp/map/JSHIS2/download.html?lang=en.
    [62] Edwards B, Rietbrock A (2009)A comparative study on attenuation and source-scaling relations in the Kantō, Tokai, and Chubu regions of Japan, using data from Hi-Net and KiK-Net. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99: 2435–2460.
    [63] Petukhin A, Kagawa T, Koketsu K, et al. (2011) Construction and waveform testing of the large scale crustal structure model for southwest Japan. InInternational Symposium on Disaster Simulation & Structural Safety in the Next Generation 2011 (DS'11), September 17–18, 2011, Univ. of Hyogo, Kobe, Japan 2011.
    [64] Huang HC, Teng TL (1999) An evaluation on H/V ratio vs. spectral ratio for site-response estimation using the 1994 Northridge earthquake sequences. Pure Appl Geophys 156: 631–649.
    [65] Yamazaki F, Ansary MA (1997) Horizontal-to-vertical spectrum ratio of earthquake ground motion for site characterization. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn 26: 671–689. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199707)26:7<671::AID-EQE669>3.0.CO;2-S
    [66] Wen KL, Chang TM, Lin CM, et al. (2006) Identification of nonlinear site response using the H/V spectral ratio method. Terr Atmos Ocean Sci 17: 533. doi: 10.3319/TAO.2006.17.3.533(T)
    [67] Bozorgnia Y, Campbell KW (2016) Ground motion model for the vertical-to-horizontal (V/H) ratios of PGA, PGV, and response spectra. Earthquake Spectra 32: 951–978. doi: 10.1193/100614EQS151M
    [68] Raghukanth ST, Somala SN (2009) Modeling of strong-motion data in northeastern India: Q, stress drop, and site amplification. Bull Seismol Soc Am 99: 705–725. doi: 10.1785/0120080025
    [69] Chen SZ, Atkinson GM (2002) Global comparisons of earthquake source spectra. Bull Seismol Soc Am 92: 885–895. doi: 10.1785/0120010152
    [70] Wald DJ, Earle PS, Allen TI, et al. (2008) Development of the US Geological Survey's PAGER system (prompt assessment of global earthquakes for response). J Autom Chem 1: 40–42.
    [71] Boore DM (2010) Orientation-independent, nongeometric-mean measures of seismic intensity from two horizontal components of motion. Bull Seismol Soc Am 100: 1830–1835. doi: 10.1785/0120090400
    [72] Abrahamson NA, Silva WJ, Kamai R (2014) Summary of the ASK14 ground motion relation for active crustal regions. Earthquake Spectra 30: 1025–1055. doi: 10.1193/070913EQS198M
    [73] Boore DM, Stewart JP, Seyhan E, et al. (2014) NGA-West2 equations for predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% damped PSA for shallow crustal earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra 30: 1057–1085. doi: 10.1193/070113EQS184M
    [74] Campbell KW, Bozorgnia Y (2014) NGA-West2 ground motion model for the average horizontal components of PGA, PGV, and 5% damped linear acceleration response spectra. Earthquake Spectra 30: 1087–1115. doi: 10.1193/062913EQS175M
    [75] Chiou BS, Youngs RR (2014) Update of the Chiou and Youngs NGA model for the average horizontal component of peak ground motion and response spectra. Earthquake Spectra 30: 1117–1153. doi: 10.1193/072813EQS219M
    [76] Zhang L, Chen G, Wu Y, et al. (2016) Stochastic ground-motion simulations for the 2016 Kumamoto, Japan, earthquake. Earth Planets Space 68: 184. doi: 10.1186/s40623-016-0565-3
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Jinle Liu, Hongfeng Wu, A Note on Factorization and the Number of Irreducible Factors of xn − λ over Finite Fields, 2025, 13, 2227-7390, 473, 10.3390/math13030473
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2018 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(5740) PDF downloads(1151) Cited by(1)

Figures and Tables

Figures(14)  /  Tables(3)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog