Logic tree branches’ weights in the probabilistic seismic hazard analysis: the need to combine inter-subjective and propensity probability interpretations

IF 1.6 4区 地球科学 Q3 GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS Journal of Seismology Pub Date : 2023-11-21 DOI:10.1007/s10950-023-10177-1
Sasan Motaghed, Nasrollah Eftekhari, Mohammad Mohammadi, Mozhgan Khazaee
{"title":"Logic tree branches’ weights in the probabilistic seismic hazard analysis: the need to combine inter-subjective and propensity probability interpretations","authors":"Sasan Motaghed,&nbsp;Nasrollah Eftekhari,&nbsp;Mohammad Mohammadi,&nbsp;Mozhgan Khazaee","doi":"10.1007/s10950-023-10177-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) is the primary method for determining the earthquake forces as input to structural seismic evaluation and design. Epistemic uncertainty has been incorporated into the PSHA process using a logic tree. One of the main challenges in using logic trees is determining ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs) and their branches’ weights. In this paper, regarding the different definitions of probability, the philosophy of GMPE selection and logic tree branches’ weight allocation in the PSHA is investigated. The results show that the classical and frequency definitions of probability are not applicable in the selection and weight allocation process. We suggest that the best way to allocate weight can be obtained by combining the inter-subjective and propensity probability definitions. To evaluate the effect of weight allocation on the PSHA results, PSHA was performed for a site in Tehran using different selection and weighting approaches. The results of the numerical example show up to a 50% variation in the spectral acceleration in the range of common building periods. We show that the issue of GMPE selection and weight allocation has not been adequately addressed in the current procedures of PSHA. So, it is necessary to develop specific agendas in this field.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16994,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Seismology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Seismology","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10950-023-10177-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) is the primary method for determining the earthquake forces as input to structural seismic evaluation and design. Epistemic uncertainty has been incorporated into the PSHA process using a logic tree. One of the main challenges in using logic trees is determining ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs) and their branches’ weights. In this paper, regarding the different definitions of probability, the philosophy of GMPE selection and logic tree branches’ weight allocation in the PSHA is investigated. The results show that the classical and frequency definitions of probability are not applicable in the selection and weight allocation process. We suggest that the best way to allocate weight can be obtained by combining the inter-subjective and propensity probability definitions. To evaluate the effect of weight allocation on the PSHA results, PSHA was performed for a site in Tehran using different selection and weighting approaches. The results of the numerical example show up to a 50% variation in the spectral acceleration in the range of common building periods. We show that the issue of GMPE selection and weight allocation has not been adequately addressed in the current procedures of PSHA. So, it is necessary to develop specific agendas in this field.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
概率地震灾害分析中的逻辑树分支权值:主体间和倾向概率解释相结合的必要性
概率地震危险性分析(PSHA)是确定地震力作为结构抗震评估和设计输入的主要方法。使用逻辑树将认知不确定性纳入PSHA过程。使用逻辑树的主要挑战之一是确定地震动预测方程(GMPEs)及其分支的权重。本文针对概率的不同定义,研究了PSHA中GMPE选择和逻辑树分支权重分配的原理。结果表明,概率的经典定义和频率定义在选择和权重分配过程中不适用。我们建议将主观间和倾向概率的定义结合起来,以获得最佳的权重分配方法。为了评估权重分配对PSHA结果的影响,采用不同的选择和加权方法对德黑兰的一个站点进行了PSHA。数值算例的结果表明,在常见的建筑周期范围内,谱加速度的变化幅度可达50%。我们表明GMPE选择和权重分配的问题在PSHA目前的程序中没有得到充分解决。因此,有必要在这一领域制定具体议程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Seismology
Journal of Seismology 地学-地球化学与地球物理
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
67
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Seismology is an international journal specialising in all observational and theoretical aspects related to earthquake occurrence. Research topics may cover: seismotectonics, seismicity, historical seismicity, seismic source physics, strong ground motion studies, seismic hazard or risk, engineering seismology, physics of fault systems, triggered and induced seismicity, mining seismology, volcano seismology, earthquake prediction, structural investigations ranging from local to regional and global studies with a particular focus on passive experiments.
期刊最新文献
Source parameters of the May 28, 2016, Mihoub earthquake (Mw 5.4, Algeria) deduced from Bayesian modelling of Sentinel-1 SAR data Fault imaging using earthquake sequences: a revised seismotectonic model for the Albstadt Shear Zone, Southwest Germany A logic-tree based probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the central ionian islands of cephalonia and ithaca (Western Greece) Developing machine learning-based ground motion models to predict peak ground velocity in Turkiye Fault structures of the Haichenghe fault zone in Liaoning, China from high-precision location based on dense array observation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1