Earthquake risk assessment: Certitudes, fallacies, uncertainties and the quest for soundness

7Citations
Citations of this article
15Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This paper addresses, from engineering point of view, issues in seismic risk assessment. It is more a discussion on the current practice, emphasizing on the multiple uncertainties and weaknesses of the existing methods and approaches, which make the final loss assessment a highly ambiguous problem. The paper is a modest effort to demonstrate that, despite the important progress made the last two decades or so, the common formulation of hazard/risk based on the sequential analyses of source (M, hypocenter), propagation (for one or few IM) and consequences (losses) has probably reached its limits. It contains so many uncertainties affecting seriously the final result, and the way that different communities involved, modellers and end users are approaching the problem is so scattered, that the seismological and engineering community should probably re-think a new or an alternative paradigm.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Pitilakis, K. (2015). Earthquake risk assessment: Certitudes, fallacies, uncertainties and the quest for soundness. Geotechnical, Geological and Earthquake Engineering, 39, 59–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16964-4_3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free