Regions of low seismicity present a particular challenge for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis when identifying suitable ground motion models (GMMs) and quantifying their epistemic uncertainty. The 2020 European Seismic Hazard Model adopts a scaled backbone approach to characterise this uncertainty for shallow seismicity in Europe, incorporating region-to-region source and attenuation variability based on European strong motion data. This approach, however, may not be suited to stable cratonic region of northeastern Europe (encompassing Finland, Sweden and the Baltic countries), where exploration of various global geophysical datasets reveals that its crustal properties are distinctly different from the rest of Europe, and are instead more closely represented by those of the Central and Eastern United States. Building upon the suite of models developed by the recent NGA East project, we construct a new scaled backbone ground motion model and calibrate its corresponding epistemic uncertainties. The resulting logic tree is shown to provide comparable hazard outcomes to the epistemic uncertainty modelling strategy adopted for the Eastern United States, despite the different approaches taken. Comparison with previous GMM selections for northeastern Europe, however, highlights key differences in short period accelerations resulting from new assumptions regarding the characteristics of the reference rock and its influence on site amplification.

在确定合适的地面运动模型（GMM）并量化其认识不确定性时，低地震活动性地区对概率地震危险性分析提出了特殊挑战。2020年欧洲地震危险性模型采用规模化的主干方法来刻画欧洲浅层地震活动的不确定性，并结合了基于欧洲强运动数据的区域间震源和衰减变化性。但是，这种方法可能不适用于欧洲东北部稳定的克拉通地区（包括芬兰，瑞典和波罗的海国家），在该地区对各种全球地球物理数据集的探索表明其地壳特性与欧洲其他地区截然不同，并且相反，美国中部和东部的代表更为紧密。在最近的NGA East项目开发的模型套件的基础上，我们构建了新的缩放后的主干地面运动模型，并校准了其相应的认知不确定性。尽管采用了不同的方法，但所显示的逻辑树显示出与美国东部地区采用的认知不确定性建模策略可比的危害结果。但是，与之前针对东北欧的GMM选择进行的比较强调了短期加速的关键差异，这是由于对参考岩石的特性及其对场地放大的影响的新假设所致。尽管采用了不同的方法，但所显示的逻辑树显示出与美国东部地区的认知不确定性建模策略可比的危害结果。但是，与之前针对东北欧的GMM选择进行的比较强调了短期加速的关键差异，这是由于对参考岩石的特性及其对场地放大的影响的新假设所致。尽管采用了不同的方法，但所显示的逻辑树显示出与美国东部地区采用的认知不确定性建模策略可比的危害结果。但是，与之前针对东北欧的GMM选择进行的比较强调了短期加速的关键差异，这是由于对参考岩石的特性及其对场地放大的影响的新假设所致。