## 3 Materials and Methods
### Strong Motion Record Screening and Processing  
During the initial screening of the raw data, the study observed a phenomenon in which a small number of station records displayed 'truncated' characteristics. For instance, at Station 0208 (as shown in Table 2), despite being only 1.67 km away from the fault, the recorded PGA was only around 30 cm/s\({}^{2}\) (significantly lower than the average acceleration within 5 km of the fault, which exceeds 500 cm/s\({}^{2}\)). The record had a duration of fewer than 8 s. Station 0214 demonstrated analogous behavior, as it was located at a distance of 2.91 km from the fault and experienced a peak acceleration below 70 cm/s\({}^{2}\). Nineteen stations in the acquired strong-motion records displayed the previously mentioned 'truncated' characteristics. Further analysis revealed that most of these stations were located closer to the fault or epicenter. Additionally, it should be noted that station 4702 exhibited a deficiency in its seismic motion records. Specifically, this station only captured seismic motion along the east-west and vertical axes, while lacking data for the north-south direction. The recorded magnitudes were approximately 15 cm/s\({}^{2}\) for the east-west and vertical directions, whereas the north-south direction only registered a magnitude of 0.4 cm/s\({}^{2}\). To ensure data accuracy, this study excluded the aforementioned 20 records that potentially had anomalous data. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Station** & **District** & **Lon.** & **Lat.** & **Repi. (km)** & **Rrup. (km)** & **PGA\_E** & **PGA\_N** & **PGA\_U** \\  & & & & & & & **(km)** & **(km)** & **(km)** \\ \hline
0208 & Golbasi & 37.653 & 37.787 & 77.255 & 1.67 & 14.00 & 30.20 & 16.97 \\
0214 & Celikhan & 38.226 & 38.028 & 132.738 & 2.91 & 54.38 & 61.68 & 69.91 \\
2712 & Nurdaßg & 36.732 & 37.184 & 29.85 & 1.10 & 592.35 & 555.59 & 313.75 \\
2718 & Islahiye & 36.627 & 37.008 & 48.33 & 1.45 & 630.31 & 654.43 & 592.28 \\
3123 & Hatay & 36.160 & 36.214 & 142.92 & 1.72 & 593.94 & 655.57 & 867.58 \\
3125 & Hatay & 36.133 & 36.238 & 142.09 & 5.15 & 1121.95 & 822.62 & 1151.56 \\
3129 & Define & 36.134 & 36.191 & 146.39 & 2.42 & 1198.74 & 1351.50 & 716.94 \\
3134 & Dörtylol & 36.205 & 36.828 & 90.39 & 28.95 & 203.91 & 246.11 & 141.51 \\
3135 & Arsuz & 35.883 & 36.409 & 142.23 & 33.44 & 1372.07 & 740.97 & 588.97 \\
3137 & Hatay & 36.489 & 36.693 & 82.46 & 0.39 & 670.17 & 428.37 & 448.37 \\
4614 & Kahramammaras & 37.298 & 37.485 & 31.42 & 6.81 & 2039.20 & 2016.99 & 1582.62 \\
4615 & Kahramammaras & 37.138 & 37.387 & 13.82 & 11.28 & 556.65 & 584.65 & 656.68 \\
4626 & Onikgibust & 36.915 & 37.575 & 33.84 & 16.15 & 223.09 & 108.81 & 112.27 \\
4702 & Midyat & 41.357 & 37.417 & 381.59 & 248.63 & 21.33 & 0.38 & 15.82 \\
7901 & Kilis & 37.112 & 36.709 & 64.57 & 50.92 & 16.55 & 53.11 & 50.14 \\
8002 & Osmaniye & 36.562 & 37.192 & 44.01 & 14.19 & 202.89 & 242.95 & 336.56 \\
8004 & Kadirli & 36.100 & 37.380 & 181.86 & 168.43 & 181.86 & 168.42 & 71.780 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Compilation table of seismic recording data. Figure 7: Distribution of seismic recording stations and PGA. The strong motion data are subject to various issues that can affect their accuracy and consistency, such as instrument errors, baseline drift, and digitization distortion. To avoid such problems, we have followed the standard procedures and methods for processing and correcting our data, such as applying filters, removing outliers, interpolating missing values, etc. Moreover, we have verified our data with other sources, such as seismic stations, satellite images, etc., to ensure their validity and usefulness. We processed the acceleration data in two steps, using two different software programs. First, we used MATLAB Software (Version R2016a) to perform batch processing of the raw data from all stations, which included converting the data format, extracting the time and amplitude values, and synchronizing the time stamps.