Research Article| October 03, 2018 Improving Earthquake Rupture Forecasts Using California as a Guide Edward H. Field; Edward H. Field aU.S. Geological Survey, Denver Federal Center, P.O. Box 25046, MS‐966, Denver, Colorado 80225‐0046 U.S.A., field@usgs.gov Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Seismological Research Letters (2018) 89 (6): 2337–2346. https://doi.org/10.1785/0220180151 Article history first online: 03 Oct 2018 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Search Site Citation Edward H. Field, Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities; Improving Earthquake Rupture Forecasts Using California as a Guide. Seismological Research Letters 2018;; 89 (6): 2337–2346. doi: https://doi.org/10.1785/0220180151 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Refmanager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentBy SocietySeismological Research Letters Search Advanced Search ABSTRACT This article discusses ways in which earthquake rupture forecast models might be improved. Because changes are most easily described in the context of specific models, the third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3) and its presumed successor, UCERF4, is used as a basis for discussion. Virtually all of the issues and possible improvements discussed are nevertheless general and should therefore be applicable to other regions as well. Two common themes are a need for better epistemic uncertainty representation and the potential utility of physics‐based simulators. Given the large number of possible improvements, coupled with challenges in defining the potential value of each, which will vary among uses, community feedback is invaluable in terms of setting priorities. We should also strive to define more objective valuation metrics. You do not have access to this content, please speak to your institutional administrator if you feel you should have access.