This study investigates the influence of intensity measure (IM) selection on simulation-based regional seismic risk assessment (RSRA) of spatially distributed structural portfolios. First, a co-simulation method for general spectral averaging vector IMs is derived. Then a portfolio-level surrogate demand modeling approach, which incorporates the seismic demand estimation of the non-collapse and collapse states, is proposed. The derived IM co-simulation method enables the first comparative study of different IMs, including the conventional IMs and some more advanced scalar and vector IMs, in the context of RSRA. The influence of IM selection on the predictive performance of the portfolio-level surrogate demand models, as well as on the regional seismic risk estimates, is explored based on a virtual spatially distributed structural portfolio subjected to a scenario earthquake. The results of this study provide pertinent insights in surrogate demand modeling, IM co-simulation and selection, which can facilitate more accurate and reliable regional seismic risk estimates.
AnchetaTDDarraghRBStewartJP, et al. (2014) NGA-West2 database. Earthquake Spectra30: 989–1005.
2.
BakerJWCornellCA (2008) Vector-valued intensity measures incorporating spectral shape for prediction of structural response. Journal of Earthquake Engineering12: 534–554.
3.
BakerJWJayaramN (2008) Correlation of spectral acceleration values from NGA ground motion models. Earthquake Spectra24: 299–317.
4.
BasözNManderJ (1999) Enhancement of the highway transportation lifeline module in HAZUS. National Institute of Building Sciences16: 31–40.
5.
BerryMPEberhardMO (2004) Performance models for flexural damage in reinforced concrete columns. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Centerxvi: 156.
6.
BerryMPLehmanDELowesLN (2008) Lumped-plasticity models for performance simulation of bridge columns. ACI Structural Journal105: 270.
7.
BianchiniMDiotalleviPBakerJW (2009) Prediction of inelastic structural response using an average of spectral accelerations. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on structural safety and reliability (ICOSSAR09), Osaka, Japan, 13–19 September.
8.
BojórquezELervolinoLReyes-SalazarA, et al. (2012) Comparing vector-valued intensity measures for fragility analysis of steel frames in the case of narrow-band ground motions. Engineering Structures45: 472–480.
9.
BommerJJStaffordPJAlarconJE (2009) Empirical equations for the prediction of the significant, bracketed, and uniform duration of earthquake ground motion. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America99: 3217–3233.
10.
BooreDMAtkinsonGM (2008) Ground-motion prediction equations for the average horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods between 0.01 s and 10.0 s. Earthquake Spectra24: 99–138.
11.
BoxGEPWilsonKB (1951) On the experimental attainment of optimum conditions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B-statistical Methodology13: 1–45.
12.
BurattiNFerracutiBSavolaM (2010) Response surface with random factors for seismic fragility of reinforced concrete frames. Structural Safety32: 42–51.
13.
CampbellKWBozorgniaY (2010) A ground motion prediction equation for the horizontal component of cumulative absolute velocity (CAV) based on the PEER-NGA strong motion database. Earthquake Spectra26: 635–650.
14.
CampbellKWBozorgniaY (2012) A comparison of ground motion prediction equations for arias intensity and cumulative absolute velocity developed using a consistent database and functional form. Earthquake Spectra28: 931–941.
ChungRM (1996) January 17, 1995 Hyogoken-Nanbu (Kobe) earthquake: Performance of structures, lifelines, and fire protection systems (NIST SP 901).
17.
CordovaPPDeierleinGGMehannySSF, et al. (2000) Development of a two-parameter seismic intensity measure and probabilistic assessment procedure. In: Proceedings of the Second US-Japan workshop on performance-based earthquake engineering methodology for reinforced concrete building structures, Sapporo, Japan, 11–13 September.
18.
CornellCAJalayerFHamburgerRO, et al. (2002) Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC federal emergency management agency steel moment frame guidelines. Journal of Structural Engineering128: 526–533.
19.
CrowleyHBommerJJ (2006) Modelling seismic hazard in earthquake loss models with spatially distributed exposure. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering4: 249–273.
20.
DavisJGoadrichM (2006) The relationship between Precision-Recall and ROC curves. In: Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on Machine learning, Pittsburgh, PA, 25–29 June.
21.
DuAPadgettJEShafieezadehA (2018a) Adaptive IMs for improved seismic demand modeling of highway bridge portfolios. In: Proceedings, the 11th national conference in earthquake engineering, Los Angeles, CA, 25–29 June.
22.
DuAPadgettJEShafieezadehA (2018b) A posteriori optimal intensity measures for probabilistic seismic demand modeling. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering17: 681–706.
23.
EadsLMirandaELignosDG (2015) Average spectral acceleration as an intensity measure for collapse risk assessment. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics44: 2057–2073.
24.
EbrahimianHJalayerFLucchiniA, et al. (2015) Preliminary ranking of alternative scalar and vector intensity measures of ground shaking. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering13: 2805–2840.
25.
EfronBTibshiraniRJ (1994) An Introduction to the Bootstrap. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
26.
EspositoSIervolinoI (2012) Spatial correlation of spectral acceleration in European data. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America102: 2781–2788.
27.
FEMA (2013) HAZUS-MH 2.1 Earthquake Model Technical Manual. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
28.
FHWA (2017) National Bridge Inventory Data. Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration.
29.
FriedmanJH (1991) Multivariate adaptive regression splines. The Annals of Statistics19: 1–67.
30.
GhoshJPadgettJEDueñas-OsorioL (2013) Surrogate modeling and failure surface visualization for efficient seismic vulnerability assessment of highway bridges. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics34: 189–199.
31.
GhoshJRokneddinKPadgettJE (2014) Seismic reliability assessment of aging highway bridge networks with field instrumentation data and correlated failures, I: methodology. Earthquake Spectra30: 795–817.
32.
GhoshJPadgettJESánchez-SilvaM (2015) Seismic damage accumulation in highway bridges in earthquake-prone regions. Earthquake Spectra31: 115–135.
33.
GodaKAtkinsonGM (2009) Probabilistic characterization of spatially correlated response spectra for earthquakes in Japan. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America99: 3003–3020.
34.
GodaKHongH (2008a) Estimation of seismic loss for spatially distributed buildings. Earthquake Spectra24: 889–910.
35.
GodaKHongH (2008b) Spatial correlation of peak ground motions and response spectra. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America98: 354–365.
36.
JalayerFBeckJLZareianF (2011) Analyzing the sufficiency of alternative scalar and vector intensity measures of ground shaking based on information theory. Journal of Engineering Mechanics138: 307–316.
37.
JalayerFEbrahimianHMianoA, et al. (2017) Analytical fragility assessment using unscaled ground motion records. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics46: 2639–2663.
38.
JayaramNBakerJW (2009) Correlation model for spatially distributed ground-motion intensities. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics38: 1687–1708.
39.
KarthikMMManderJB (2010) Stress-block parameters for unconfined and confined concrete based on a unified stress-strain model. Journal of Structural Engineering137: 270–273.
40.
KohrangiMBazzurroPVamvatsikos (2016) Vector and scalar IMs in structural response estimation, Part II: Building demand assessment. Earthquake Spectra32: 1525–1543.
41.
LothCBakerJW (2013) A spatial cross-correlation model of spectral accelerations at multiple periods. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics42: 397–417.
42.
LuYGuXGuanJ (2005) Probabilistic drift limits and performance evaluation of reinforced concrete columns. Journal of Structural Engineering131: 966–978.
43.
McKennaF (2011) OpenSees: A framework for earthquake engineering simulation. Computing in Science & Engineering13: 58–66.
44.
MackieKStojadinovićB (2001) Probabilistic seismic demand model for California highway bridges. Journal of Bridge Engineering6: 468–481.
45.
MangalathuSHeoGJeonJS (2018) Artificial neural network based multi-dimensional fragility development of skewed concrete bridge classes. Engineering Structures162: 166–176.
46.
MenengottoMPintoPE (1973) Method of analysis for cyclically loaded reinforced concrete plane frames including changes in geometry and nonelastic behavior of elements under combined normal force and bending. In: Proceedings, IABSE symposium on the resistance and ultimate deformability of structures acted on by well-defined repeated loads, Lisboa, Zurich, 22–24 January.
47.
MianoAJalayerFDe RisiR, et al. (2016) Model updating and seismic loss assessment for a portfolio of bridges. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering14: 699–719.
48.
NielsonBG (2005) Analytical fragility curves for highway bridges in moderate seismic zones. PhD thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
49.
PadgettJENielsonBGDesRochesR (2008) Selection of optimal intensity measures in probabilistic seismic demand models of highway bridge portfolios. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics37: 711–725.
50.
PadgettJEDesRochesRNilssonE (2010) Regional seismic risk assessment of bridge network in Charleston, South Carolina. Journal of Earthquake Engineering14: 918–933.
51.
PanagiotakosTBFardisMN (2001) Deformations of reinforced concrete members at yielding and ultimate. Structural Journal98: 135–148.
52.
ParkJBazzuroPBakerJ (2007) Modeling spatial correlation of ground motion intensity measures for regional seismic hazard and portfolio loss estimation. Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, 31 July–3 August.
53.
PopovicsS (1973) A numerical approach to the complete stress-strain curve of concrete. Cement and Concrete Research3: 583–599.
54.
RamanathanKDesRochesRPadgettJE (2012) A comparison of pre- and post-seismic design considerations in moderate seismic zones through the fragility assessment of multispan bridge classes. Engineering Structures45: 559–573.
55.
SaitoTRehmsmeierM (2015) The precision-recall plot is more informative than the ROC plot when evaluating binary classifiers on imbalanced datasets. PLoS ONE10: e0118432.
56.
ShafieezadehARamanathanKPadgettJE, et al. (2012) Fractional order intensity measures for probabilistic seismic demand modeling applied to highway bridges. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics41: 391–409.
57.
ShomeNCornellC (2000) Structural seismic demand analysis: Consideration of “Collapse.” In: Proceedings, 8th ASCE specialty conference on probabilistic mechanics and structural reliability, Notre dame, 24–26 July.
58.
SokolovVWenzelF (2011) Influence of ground-motion correlation on probabilistic assessments of seismic hazard and loss: Sensitivity analysis. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering9: 1339.
59.
TanakaSShinozukaMSchiffA, et al. (1997) Lifeline seismic performance of electric power systems during the Northridge earthquake. In: Proceedings, the Northridge earthquake research conference, Los Angeles, CA, 20–22 August.
60.
TarbaliKBradleyBA (2015) Ground motion selection for scenario ruptures using the generalised conditional intensity measure (GCIM) method. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics44: 1601–1621.
61.
TerzicVStojadinovicB (2010) Post-earthquake traffic capacity of modern bridges in California. PEER 2010/103, California Department of Transportation, Division of Research and Innovation, Sacramento, CA.
TowashirapornP (2004) Building seismic fragilities using response surface metamodels. PhD thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
64.
VamvatsikosDCornellCA (2005) Developing efficient scalar and vector intensity measures for IDA capacity estimation by incorporating elastic spectral shape information. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics34: 1573–1600.
65.
WangMTakadaT (2005) Macrospatial correlation model of seismic ground motions. Earthquake Spectra21: 1137–1156.
66.
WangZPadgettJEDueñas-OsorioL (2014) Toward a uniform seismic risk design of reinforced concrete bridges: A displacement-based approach. Structural Safety50: 103–112.
67.
WeatherillGASilvaVCrowleyH, et al. (2015) Exploring the impact of spatial correlations and uncertainties for portfolio analysis in probabilistic seismic loss estimation. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering13: 957–981.
