Seismic vulnerability assessment of urban environments in moderate-to-low seismic hazard regions using association rule learning and support vector machine methods

Natural Hazards

Volumn 76, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 1111-1141

  Riedel, Ismaël ^a   Guéguen, Philippe ^a   Dalla Mura, Mauro ^b   Pathier, Erwan ^a   Leduc, Thomas ^c   Chanussot, Jocelyn ^b  

^a CNRS   (France)

^b GIPSA LAB   (France)

^c Laboratoire d'Acoustique Environnementale   (France)

Author keywords

Data mining; Europe; Existing building; Moderate hazard; Seismic vulnerability; Support vector machine

Indexed keywords

EID: 84925502713     PISSN: 0921030X     EISSN: 15730840     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11069-014-1538-0     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Agrawal R, Imieliński T, Swami A (1993) Mining association rules between sets of items in large databases. In: Proceedings of the 1993 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data—SIGMOD ‘93, p 207. doi:10.1145/170035.17007
2. Bard PY, Duval AM, Bertrand E, Vassiliadès JF, Vidal S, Thibault C, Guyet B, Mèneroud JP, Gueguen P, Foin P, Dunand F, Bonnefoy-Claudet S, Vettori G (2005) Le risque Sismique à Nice: apport méthodologique. résultats et perspectives opérationnelles. Final technical report of the GEMGEP project. CETE-Méditerranée
3. Baroux E, Pino NA, Valensise G, Soctti O, Cushing ME (2003) Source parameters of the 11 June 1909. Lambesc (Provence. southeastern France) earthquake: a reappraisal based on macroseismic. seismological. and geodetic observations. J Geophys Res 108(B9):2454. doi:10.1029/2002JB002348
4. Borsi B, Dell’Acqua F, Faravelli M, Gamba P, Lisini G, Onida M, Polli D (2010) Vulnerability study on a large industrial area using satellite remotely sensed images. Bull Earthq Eng 9:675–690. doi:10.1007/s10518-010-9211_9
5. Boser BE, Guyon IM, Vapnik VN (1992) A training algorithm for optimal margin classifiers. In: Haussler D (ed) 5th annual ACM workshop on COLT. ACM Press, Pittsburgh, pp 144–152
6. Cortes C, Vapnik V (1995) Support-vector networks. Mach Learn 20:273–297
7. Duin RPW, Juszczak P, Paclik P, Pekalska E, de Ridder D, Tax DMJ, Verzakov S (2007) PRTools 4.1, a Matlab toolbox for pattern recognition. Delft University of Technology, Delft
8. Dunand F, Gueguen P (2012) Comparison between seismic and domestic risk in moderate seismic hazard prone region: the Grenoble City (France) test site. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 12:511–526. doi:10.5194/nhess-12-511-2012
9. Geiss C, Taubenböck H (2012) Remote sensing contributing to asses earthquake risk/from a literature review towards a roadmap. Nat Hazards 68:7–48. doi:10.1007/s11069-012-0322-2
10. Grunthal G, Levret A (2001) L’échelle macrosismique européenne. European macroseismic scale 1998(EMS-98) Conseil de l’Europe—Cahiers du Centre Européen de Géodynamique et de Séismologie, vol 19
11. Gruppo Nazionale per la Difensa dai Terremoti, Roma (GNDT) (1993) Rischio Sismico di Edifici Pubblici. Consiglio Nazionale delle Richerche
12. Gueguen P (2013) Seismic vulnerability of structures. Civil engineering and geomechanics series. ISTE Ltd and Wiley, London. ISBN 978-1-84821-524-5. Edited by Philippe Gueguen
13. Gueguen P, Michel C, LeCorre L (2007) A simplified approach for vulnerability assessment in moderate-to-low seismic hazard regions: application to Grenoble (France). Bull Earthq Eng 2007(5):467–490. doi:10.1007/s10518-007-9036-3
14. Hamaina R, Leduc T, Moreau G (2012) Towards urban fabrics characterization based on building footprints. In: Gensel J et al (eds) Bridging the geographic information sciences, lecture notes in geoinformation and cartography. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-29063_18
15. HAZUS (1997) Earthquake loss estimation methodology, Hazus technical manuals. National Institute of Building Science, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Washington
16. Jackson J (2006) Fatal attraction: living with earthquakes. The growth of villages into megacities and earthquake vulnerability in the modern world. Philos Trans R Soc 364(1845):1911–1925
17. Kappos AJ, Panagopoulos G, Panagiotopoulos C, Penelis G (2006) A hybrid method for the vulnerability assessment of R/C and URM buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 4(4):391–413
18. Lagomarsino S, Giovinazzi S (2006) Macroseismic and mechanical models for the vulnerability and damage assessment of current buildings. Bull Earthq Eng 2006(4):415–443. doi:10.1007/s10518-006-9024-z
19. Lambert J (1997) Les tremblements de terre en France: hier, aujourd’hui, demain. BRGM Eds. Orléans, France
20. Michel C, Guéguen P, Causse M (2012) Seismic vulnerability assessment to slight damage based on experimental modal parameters. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 41(1):81–98. doi:10.1002/eqe.1119
21. Pierre J-P, Montagne M (2004) The 20 April 2002, Mw 5.0 Au Sable Forks, New York, earthquake: a supplementary source of knowledge on earthquake damage to lifelines and buildings in Eastern North America. Seismol Res Lett 75(5):626–635
22. Riedel I, Gueguen P, Dunand F, Cottaz S (2014) Macro-scale vulnerability assessment of cities using association rule learning. Seismol Res Lett 85(2):295–305. doi:10.1785/0220130148
23. Rothé J-P, Vitart M (1969) Le séisme d’Arette et la séismicité des Pyrénées. 94e Congrès national des sociétés savantes, Pau, sciences, t. II, pp 305–319
24. Scotti O, Baumont D, Quenet G, Levret A (2004) The French macroseismic database SISFRANCE: objectives, results and perspectives. Ann Geophys 47(2/3):571–581. doi:10.4401/ag-3323
25. Spence R, Lebrun B (2006) Earthquake scenarios for European cities: the risk-UE project. Bull Earthq Eng 4 special issue
26. Spence R, So E, Jenny S, Castella H, Ewald M, Booth E (2008) The global earthquake vulnerability estimation system (GEVES): an approach for earthquake risk assessment for insurance applications. Bull Earthq Eng 6:463–483. doi:10.1007/s10518-008-9072-7
27. Spence R, Foulser-Piggott R, Pomonis A, Crowley H, Guéguen P, Masi A, Chiauzzi L, Zuccaro G, Cacace F, Zulfikar C, Markus M, Schaefer D, Sousa ML, Kappos A (2012) The European building stock inventory: creating and validating a uniform database for earthquake risk modeling and validating a uniform database for earthquake risk modeling risk modeling. In: The 15th world conference on earthquake engineering, Sept 2012, Lisbon, Portugal
28. Teukolsky SA, Vetterling W, Flannery BP (2007) Section 16.5. Support vector machines. Numerical recipes: the art of scientific computing, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York. ISBN 978-0-521-88068-8
29. Wald DJ, Quitoriano V, Heaton TH, Kanamori H, Scrivner CW, Worden CB (1999) Trinet “shakes maps”: rapid generation of peak ground motion and intensity maps for earthquakes in Southern California. Earthq Spectra 15(3):537–555
30. Worden CB, Wald DJ, Allen TI, Lin K, Garcia D, Cua G (2010) A revised ground motion and intensity interpolation scheme for shakemap. Bull Seismol Soc Am 100(6):3083–3096