2020
DOI: 10.1007/s11069-020-04201-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Exploring the impact of epistemic uncertainty on a regional probabilistic seismic risk assessment model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
17
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
1
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These results are in accordance with [21], who mentioned that the loss estimates become accurate and stable beyond a certain (fine) spatial resolution. They also proposed that a potential way to reduce this type of uncertainty is by improving the detail of information, concerning the location of the building inventory; however, this process can be time-and resource-demanding and, in many cases, it is simply impractical (e.g., for risk analysis at the national level).…”
Section: Harmonizing Vulnerability Indices From Different Exposure Databasessupporting
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These results are in accordance with [21], who mentioned that the loss estimates become accurate and stable beyond a certain (fine) spatial resolution. They also proposed that a potential way to reduce this type of uncertainty is by improving the detail of information, concerning the location of the building inventory; however, this process can be time-and resource-demanding and, in many cases, it is simply impractical (e.g., for risk analysis at the national level).…”
Section: Harmonizing Vulnerability Indices From Different Exposure Databasessupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The practical implementation of aggregated exposure models unavoidably includes some form of spatial aggregation. Furthermore, the aggregation and relocation of buildings result in a misrepresentation of the distance between the assets and the seismic sources [21]. Thus, such building exposure models add uncertainty to the damage assessment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…535 (Medina et al, 2019) would benefit future risk assessment studies for Lima. Another area that would benefit from future research is the differential selection of loss ratios with dependencies on the building classes, as for instance recently investigated by Kalakonas et al, (2020) for seismic risk applications. This might be also relevant for tsunami-induced losses that are strongly influenced by the presence and cost of non-structural building elements.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(1) To independently represent the building portfolio over a series of aggregation entities such as administrative units, or 100 equidimensional regular grids, and explore their individual contribution to the uncertainty in the losses imposed by certain hazard(s) to ultimately select a representative aggregation model. This option has been explored in Bal et al, (2010), Frolova et al, (2017, Senouci et al, (2018) and Kalakonas et al, (2020) for seismic vulnerability applications, and in Figueiredo and Martina, (2016) for flood vulnerability. These studies discuss the weakness of the physical vulnerability mapping at the individual building scale and over coarse aggregation areas, and highlight the importance of finding an optimal resolution for 105 building exposure modelling while minimizing the uncertainties in the losses estimates.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is partly because the associated complexity in the building classification would increase and lead to a more extensive set of classes in comparison with the available set of fragility functions Martins and Silva, 2020). Recently, further contributions about the epistemic uncertainties in regional exposure models have been explored in Kalakonas et al (2020). The authors observed negligible differences loss estimates when alternative exposure models were compared in a probabilistic risk assessment.…”
Section: Current State Of the Art In Building-exposure Modelling For mentioning
confidence: 99%