### Abstract

This article is concerned with attempting to ‘predict’ (hindcast) the damage caused by the L’Aquila 2009 earthquake (M<inf>w</inf> 6.3) and, more generally, with the question of how close predicted damage can ever be to observations. Damage is hindcast using a well-established empiricalbased approach based on vulnerability indices and macroseismic intensities, adjusted for local site effects. Using information that was available before the earthquake and assuming the same event characteristics as the L’Aquila mainshock, the overall damage is reasonably well predicted but there are considerable differences in the damage pattern. To understand the reasons for these differences, information that was only available after the event were include within the calculation. Despite some improvement in the predicted damage, in particularly by the modification of the vulnerability indices and the parameter influencing the width of the damage distribution, these hindcasts do not match all the details of the observations. This is because of local effects: both in terms of the ground shaking, which is only detectable by the installation of a much denser strong-motion network and a detailed microzonation, and in terms of the building vulnerability, which cannot be modeled using a statistical approach but would require detailed analytical modeling for which calibration data are likely to be lacking. Future studies should concentrate on adjusting the generic components of the approach to make them more applicable to their location of interest. To increase the number of observations available to make these adjustments, we encourage the collection of damage states (and not just habitability classes) following earthquakes and also the installation of dense strongmotion networks in built-up areas.

Language | English |
---|---|

Article number | S0214 |

Number of pages | 17 |

Journal | Annals of Geophysics |

Volume | 58 |

Issue number | 2 |

DOIs | |

Publication status | Published - 2015 |

### Fingerprint

### Keywords

- seismic risk
- hindcasting
- L'Aquila earthquake
- damage evaluation
- epistemic uncertainty

### Cite this

*Annals of Geophysics*,

*58*(2), [S0214]. https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-6651

}

*Annals of Geophysics*, vol. 58, no. 2, S0214. https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-6651

**Limits on the potential accuracy of earthquake risk evaluations using the L’aquila (Italy) earthquake as an example.** / Douglas, John; Climent, Daniel Monfort; Negulescu, Caterina; Roullé, Agathe; Sedan, Olivier.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Limits on the potential accuracy of earthquake risk evaluations using the L’aquila (Italy) earthquake as an example

AU - Douglas, John

AU - Climent, Daniel Monfort

AU - Negulescu, Caterina

AU - Roullé, Agathe

AU - Sedan, Olivier

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - This article is concerned with attempting to ‘predict’ (hindcast) the damage caused by the L’Aquila 2009 earthquake (Mw 6.3) and, more generally, with the question of how close predicted damage can ever be to observations. Damage is hindcast using a well-established empiricalbased approach based on vulnerability indices and macroseismic intensities, adjusted for local site effects. Using information that was available before the earthquake and assuming the same event characteristics as the L’Aquila mainshock, the overall damage is reasonably well predicted but there are considerable differences in the damage pattern. To understand the reasons for these differences, information that was only available after the event were include within the calculation. Despite some improvement in the predicted damage, in particularly by the modification of the vulnerability indices and the parameter influencing the width of the damage distribution, these hindcasts do not match all the details of the observations. This is because of local effects: both in terms of the ground shaking, which is only detectable by the installation of a much denser strong-motion network and a detailed microzonation, and in terms of the building vulnerability, which cannot be modeled using a statistical approach but would require detailed analytical modeling for which calibration data are likely to be lacking. Future studies should concentrate on adjusting the generic components of the approach to make them more applicable to their location of interest. To increase the number of observations available to make these adjustments, we encourage the collection of damage states (and not just habitability classes) following earthquakes and also the installation of dense strongmotion networks in built-up areas.

AB - This article is concerned with attempting to ‘predict’ (hindcast) the damage caused by the L’Aquila 2009 earthquake (Mw 6.3) and, more generally, with the question of how close predicted damage can ever be to observations. Damage is hindcast using a well-established empiricalbased approach based on vulnerability indices and macroseismic intensities, adjusted for local site effects. Using information that was available before the earthquake and assuming the same event characteristics as the L’Aquila mainshock, the overall damage is reasonably well predicted but there are considerable differences in the damage pattern. To understand the reasons for these differences, information that was only available after the event were include within the calculation. Despite some improvement in the predicted damage, in particularly by the modification of the vulnerability indices and the parameter influencing the width of the damage distribution, these hindcasts do not match all the details of the observations. This is because of local effects: both in terms of the ground shaking, which is only detectable by the installation of a much denser strong-motion network and a detailed microzonation, and in terms of the building vulnerability, which cannot be modeled using a statistical approach but would require detailed analytical modeling for which calibration data are likely to be lacking. Future studies should concentrate on adjusting the generic components of the approach to make them more applicable to their location of interest. To increase the number of observations available to make these adjustments, we encourage the collection of damage states (and not just habitability classes) following earthquakes and also the installation of dense strongmotion networks in built-up areas.

KW - seismic risk

KW - hindcasting

KW - L'Aquila earthquake

KW - damage evaluation

KW - epistemic uncertainty

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84935877250&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4401/ag-6651

DO - 10.4401/ag-6651

M3 - Article

VL - 58

JO - Annals of Geophysics

T2 - Annals of Geophysics

JF - Annals of Geophysics

SN - 2037-416X

IS - 2

M1 - S0214

ER -