## 3 Results
### The Influence of Initial Rupture Points  
The location of the initial rupture point controls the distribution and superposition of energy on the rupture plane [62]. In this study, three initial rupture points were established on the fault, namely, points a quarter of the way in from both ends of the fault and a point in the middle of the fault, as shown in Figure 4. The depth of the three rupture points was set to 15 km. Different rupture propagation directions may result in different ground motion parameters. In this case, the rupture direction could be from either the southwest end of the fault to the northeast end of the fault or vice versa. Thus, combining the rupture directions and the initial rupture points, we adopted four rupture schemes, represented by points 1-4 in Figure 4. Moreover, adopting different weight coefficients can also lead to different results. We designed 12 weight schemes with different weight coefficient combinations for points 1-4, as shown in Table 4.  
Based on the values and weights of the other simulation parameters shown in Figure 5, we adopted Site 1 in Figure 1b and the stochastic finite-fault approach to obtain the simulation results. Comparisons of the 84 th-percentile PGA and acceleration response spectra of the ground motion simulations for Slip Models 1 and 2 are presented in Tables S1 and S2, respectively. The results show that the different weight schemes of the initial rupture point had a very limited impact on the simulation result for both Slip Models 1 and 2. Detailed analysis revealed that the simulation results for Slip Models 1 and 2 show slight differences  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Weight Scheme** & **Point 1** & **Point 2** & **Point 3** & **Point 4** \\ \hline
1 & 0.1 & 0.4 & 0.4 & 0.1 \\
2 & 0.2 & 0.3 & 0.3 & 0.2 \\
3 & 0.4 & 0.1 & 0.1 & 0.4 \\
4 & 0.4 & 0.1 & 0.4 & 0.1 \\
5 & 0.3 & 0.2 & 0.2 & 0.3 \\
6 & 0.3 & 0.2 & 0.3 & 0.2 \\
7 & 0.2 & 0.2 & 0.3 & 0.3 \\
8 & 0.1 & 0.1 & 0.4 & 0.4 \\
9 & 0.4 & 0.4 & 0.1 & 0.1 \\
10 & 0.3 & 0.3 & 0.2 & 0.2 \\
11 & 0.1 & 0.4 & 0.1 & 0.4 \\
12 & 0.25 & 0.25 & 0.25 & 0.25 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: Weight schemes for the different initial rupture points.  
when T \(<\) 0.5 s, but these results are almost equal when T \(>\) 0.5 s. For Slip Model 1, the PGAs for weight schemes 1, 4, and 9 are slightly higher than those for the other weight schemes. We found that the total weights of points 1-3 located near the asperities for weight schemes 1, 4, and 9 are higher. Conversely, the PGAs of weight schemes 3, 8, and 11 are lower, and their weight compositions show that the weights of points 1-3 are lower, while the weights of point 4 are higher. For Slip Model 2, the simulation results are slightly higher when the sum weights of points 2 and 3 are higher, as reflected by the simulation results of weight scheme 1. In summary, the different weight schemes of the initial rupture point had a very limited impact on the simulation results.  
Then, with the other parameters remaining unchanged, we adopted weight scheme 12 to analyze the impact of different initial rupture point depths along the rupture width on the simulation results. We calculated the average and 84 th-percentile acceleration response spectra of the ground motion simulations for the two source models using the following depths for the initial rupture point: 11, 13, 15, 17, and 19 km (Figure 7). The results of the two slip models show that as the depth of the initial rupture point increases, the simulation results of the ground motion parameters also increase. However, the effect of the change in the depth of the initial rupture point on the simulation results was not significant.  
Figure 7: (**a**) The average and (**b**) 84 th-percentile acceleration response spectra for different initial rupture point depths.