Electronic Supplement to
From Stiffness to Strength: Formulation and Validation of a Hybrid Hyperbolic Nonlinear Soil Model for Site-Response Analyses

by Jian Shi and Domniki Asimaki

This electronic supplement contains the goodness-of-fit score versus peak ground acceleration (PGA) plots (analogous to Fig. 10 in the main article) for all the nine KiK-net stations used in this study. The main article only lists station FKSH14.

---

Figures

Figure S1. Goodness-of-fit scores versus PGA (recorded by the seismometer at ground surface) at station FKSH11, for all five methods. Positive score indicates overprediction; negative score indicates underprediction; and 0 indicates perfect fit. (a) LN, EQ_MKZ, and EQ_HH. (b) LN, NL_MKZ, and NL_HH.

Figure S2. Goodness-of-fit scores versus PGA (recorded by the seismometer at ground surface) at station FKSH14, for all five methods. Positive score indicates overprediction; negative score indicates underprediction; and 0 indicates perfect fit. (a) LN, EQ_MKZ, and EQ_HH. (b) LN, NL_MKZ, and NL_HH.

Figure S3. Goodness-of-fit scores versus PGA (recorded by the seismometer at ground surface) at station IBRH10, for all five methods. Positive score indicates overprediction; negative score indicates underprediction; and 0 indicates perfect fit. (a) LN, EQ_MKZ, and EQ_HH. (b) LN, NL_MKZ, and NL_HH.

Figure S4. Goodness-of-fit scores versus PGA (recorded by the seismometer at ground surface) at station IBRH13, for all five methods. Positive score indicates overprediction; negative score indicates underprediction; and 0 indicates perfect fit. (a) LN, EQ_MKZ, and EQ_HH. (b) LN, NL_MKZ, and NL_HH.

Figure S5. Goodness-of-fit scores versus PGA (recorded by the seismometer at ground surface) at station IBRH17, for all five methods. Positive score indicates overprediction; negative score indicates underprediction; and 0 indicates perfect fit. (a) LN, EQ_MKZ, and EQ_HH. (b) LN, NL_MKZ, and NL_HH.

Figure S6. Goodness-of-fit scores versus PGA (recorded by the seismometer at ground surface) at station IWTH08, for all five methods. Positive score indicates overprediction; negative score indicates underprediction; and 0 indicates perfect fit. (a) LN, EQ_MKZ, and EQ_HH. (b) LN, NL_MKZ, and NL_HH.

Figure S7. Goodness-of-fit scores versus PGA (recorded by the seismometer at ground surface) at station IWTH27, for all five methods. Positive score indicates overprediction; negative score indicates underprediction; and 0 indicates perfect fit. (a) LN, EQ_MKZ, and EQ_HH. (b) LN, NL_MKZ, and NL_HH.

Figure S8. Goodness-of-fit scores versus PGA (recorded by the seismometer at ground surface) at station KSRH10, for all five methods. Positive score indicates overprediction; negative score indicates underprediction; and 0 indicates perfect fit. (a) LN, EQ_MKZ, and EQ_HH. (b) LN, NL_MKZ, and NL_HH.

Figure S9. Goodness-of-fit scores versus PGA (recorded by the seismometer at ground surface) at station TKCH08, for all five methods. Positive score indicates overprediction; negative score indicates underprediction; and 0 indicates perfect fit. (a) LN, EQ_MKZ, and EQ_HH. (b) LN, NL_MKZ, and NL_HH.

[ Back ]