James W. Dewey

James W. Dewey

Auto-generated profile, based on publicly available information

James W. Dewey

U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

46Years (1981-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 January 2017
Verified
Report
Closed access
GHGavin P. Hayes
Gavin P. Hayes
EMEmma K. Meyers
Emma K. Meyers
JDJames W. Dewey
James W. Dewey
RBRichard W. Briggs
Richard W. Briggs
PEPaul S. Earle
Paul S. Earle
KFKevin P. Furlong
Kevin P. Furlong

1 January 1992
Verified
Report
Open access
PDF file
JHJohn H. Healy
John H. Healy
VKVladimir Kossobokov
Vladimir Kossobokov
JDJames W. Dewey
James W. Dewey
A test of the algorithm M8 is described. The test is constructed to meet four rules, which we propose to be applicable to the test of any method for earthquake prediction: 1. An earthquake prediction technique should be presented as a well documented, logical algorithm that can be used by investigators without restrictions. 2. The algorithm should be coded in a common programming language and implementable on widely available computer systems. 3. A test of the earthquake prediction technique should involve future predictions with a black box version of the algorithm in which potentially adjustable parameters are fixed in advance. The source of the input data must be defined and ambiguities in these data must be resolved automatically by the algorithm. 4. At least one reasonable null hypothesis should be stated  in advance of testing the earthquake prediction method, and it should be stated how this null hypothesis will be used to estimate the statistical significance of the earthquake predictions. The M8 algorithm has successfully predicted several destructive  earthquakes, in the sense that the earthquakes occurred inside regions with linear dimensions from 384 to 854 km that the algorithm had identified as being in times of increased probability for strong earthquakes. In addition, M8 has successfully "post predicted" high percentages of strong earthquakes in regions to which it has been applied in retroactive studies. The statistical significance of previous predictions has not been established, however, and post-prediction studies in general are notoriously subject to success-enhancement through hindsight. Nor has it been determined how much more precise an M8 prediction might be than forecasts and probability-of-occurrence estimates made by other techniques. We view our test of M8 both as a means to better determine the effectiveness of M8 and as an experimental structure within which to make observations that might lead to improvements in the algorithm or conceivably lead to a radically different approach to earthquake prediction.

1 January 1995
Verified
Report
Open access
PDF file
JDJames W. Dewey
James W. Dewey
BRB.G. Reagor
B.G. Reagor
LDL.A. Dengler
L.A. Dengler
KMKathy Moley
Kathy Moley

1 January 2002
Verified
Report
Closed access
MMMark E. Meremonte
Mark E. Meremonte
JLJohn C. Lahr
John C. Lahr
AFArthur D. Frankel
Arthur D. Frankel
JDJames W. Dewey
James W. Dewey
ACAnthony J. Crone
Anthony J. Crone
WBW. Thomas Bice.
W. Thomas Bice.

1 January 2006
Verified
Report
Closed access
JDJames W. Dewey
James W. Dewey