A next generation ground motion model for the prediction of spectral accelerations both in the fore-arc and back-arc regions of the Carpathians Mountains is developed in this research for the Vrancea intermediate depth seismic source in Romania. This ground motion prediction equation (GMPE) is an updated version of the model given in Vacareanu et al. [2014] and is applicable in both the fore-arc and the back-arc regions. The strong ground motion database from which the prediction model is derived consists of over 700 triaxial accelerograms from Vrancea subcrustal seismic events, as well as from other intermediate-depth earthquakes produced in other seismically active regions in the world. The applicability of this ground motion prediction model in both the fore-arc and the back-arc region is tested using the analysis of residuals. Moreover, the appropriateness of this GMPE for soil classes B and C defined in EN 1998-1, as well as for average soil conditions is investigated. All results suggest that this model is an improvement of the previous versions of ground motion prediction equations for Vrancea intermediate-depth seismic source and its use in both the fore-arc and the back-arc regions make it a reliable candidate for more accurate seismic hazard studies of Romania.

This paper reports on methodological approaches, experiences and expectations referring to impact analysis of quality assurance from the perspective of three higher education institutions (students, teaching staff, quality managers) from Germany, Finland and Romania. The presentations of the three sample institutions focus on discussing the core characteristics of quality assurance procedures applied and their expected and observed impacts, and how intended and non-intended undesirable ones are measured. It turns out that all sample institutions have already some instruments and sub-procedures in place for impact analysis of quality assurance and all of them are striving for further improvement by applying internal and external quality assurance procedures and impact analyses. Finally, a closer look at the recently revised Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area shows that the European sample institutions are on their way towards coherent quality assurance policies, while there is also room left for further improvement and investigation (for example, in implementing systematic methodologies of impact evaluation and quality policies in general).