Proposed Bayesian Network Framework to Model Multisite Seismic Hazard with Existing Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis Results
Publication: ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering
Volume 10, Issue 3
Abstract
Seismic events concurrently affect multiple facilities within an infrastructure system or portfolio distributed across a geographic region. When calculating the multisite seismic hazard to support system-level risk assessments, various sources of hazard correlation need to be considered. A Bayesian network (BN) framework is proposed herein, which transparently characterizes the dependencies between seismic hazard input parameters while leveraging the outcomes of an existing probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (PSHA). Specifically, one of the major benefits of the framework is that it utilizes mean hazard curves and deaggregation from an existing PSHA, thereby reducing the computational resources required to estimate the multisite seismic hazard. Derivations of the mathematical formulations required to manipulate the PSHA data are provided along with the configuration of the proposed framework. An example problem is then presented to validate the BN against Monte Carlo simulations.
Practical Applications
In engineering practice, seismic risk is most often assessed for a single facility or infrastructure component. However, when an earthquake occurs, it will impact an entire region, and multiple structures will be impacted at the same time. Some of these structures are part of a larger system, such as a river with multiple dams, and system failure may create larger consequences than if a single structure failed. Available methods for assessing the seismic hazard at multiple sites often require significant computing resources. This research proposes a new framework to assess this hazard that is more transparent than existing methods and requires less effort to develop and compute. This framework would be especially useful in the central and eastern US where it can be difficult to justify the cost of expensive seismic analyses because the seismic risk is not as apparent to most stakeholders. A simpler, cheaper framework would allow people in this region to better understand the seismic risk posed to their infrastructure systems.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
All data, models, and/or code that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported, in part, by the National Science Foundation under CAREER Award No. 2047966 as well as University of Maryland research funding. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funding agency or any other organizations.
References
Al Atik, L. 2015. NGA-East: Ground-motion standard deviation models for central and eastern North America. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
Baker, J., B. Bradley, and P. Stafford. 2021. Seismic hazard and risk analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
BayesFusion. 2022. “GeNIe user manual (4.0.R4).” Accessed March 1, 2023. https://support.bayesfusion.com/docs/GeNIe.pdf.
BayesFusion. 2023. “SMILE wrappers—Programmer’s manual (2.0.10.R3).” Accessed March 1, 2023. https://support.bayesfusion.com/docs/Wrappers.pdf.
Bayraktarli, Y., J. Baker, and M. Faber. 2011. “Uncertainty treatment in earthquake modelling using Bayesian probabilistic networks.” Georisk 5 (1): 44–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/17499511003679931.
Bazzurro, P., and C. A. Cornell. 1999. “Disaggregation of seismic hazard.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 89 (2): 501–520. https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0890020501.
Bazzurro, P., J. Park, P. Tothong, N. Jayaram, and J. Baker. 2008. Effects of spatial correlation of ground motion parameters for multi-site seismic risk assessment: Collaborative research with Stanford University (Prof. Jack Baker) and AIR. Reston, VA: USGS.
Bensi, M., A. Der Kiureghian, and D. Straub. 2011a. A Bayesian network methodology for infrastructure seismic risk assessment and decision support. Berkeley, CA: Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
Bensi, M., A. Der Kiureghian, and D. Straub. 2011b. “Bayesian network modeling of correlated random variables drawn from a Gaussian random field.” Struct. Saf. 33 (6): 317–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2011.05.001.
Bensi, M., A. D. Kiureghian, and D. Straub. 2013. “Efficient Bayesian network modeling of systems.” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 112 (Apr): 200–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2012.11.017.
Bommer, J. J. 2012. “Challenges of building logic trees for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis.” Earthquake Spectra 28 (4): 1723–1735. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.4000079.
Budnitz, R. J., G. S. Hardy, D. L. Morre, and M. K. Ravindra. 2017. Correlation of seismic performance in similar SSCs (structures, systems, and components). Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
Byun, J.-E., and J. Song. 2021. “A general framework of Bayesian network for system reliability analysis using junction tree.” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 216 (Dec): 107952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.107952.
Crowley, H., and J. J. Bommer. 2006. “Modelling seismic hazard in earthquake loss models with spatially distributed exposure.” Bull. Earthquake Eng. 4 (3): 249–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-006-9009-y.
DeJesus Segarra, J., M. Bensi, T. Weaver, and M. Modarres. 2020. “Extension of probabilistic seismic hazard analysis to account for the spatial variability of ground motions at a multi-unit nuclear power plant hard-rock site.” Struct. Saf. 85 (Jul): 101958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2020.101958.
GEM (Global Earthquake Model Foundation). 2020. The OpenQuake-engine user manual. Global earthquake model (GEM) OpenQuake manual for engine version 3.10.1. Pavia, Italy: GEM.
Gibson, E. M., and M. T. Bensi. 2022. “Spatial correlation in ground motion prediction errors in Central and Eastern North America.” Earthquake Spectra 38 (1): 543–578. https://doi.org/10.1177/87552930211034886.
Gibson, E. M., and M. T. Bensi. 2023. “Proposed framework to assess the influence of ground motion residual correlation on the joint seismic hazard.” In Proc., Geo-Risk 2023: Hazards and Climate Change, 44–53. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Giorgio, M., and I. Iervolino. 2016. “On multisite probabilistic seismic hazard analysis.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 106 (3): 1223–1234. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120150369.
Goda, K., and G. Atkinson. 2010. “Intraevent spatial correlation of ground-motion parameters using SK-net data.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 100 (6): 3055–3067. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120100031.
Goda, K., and H. P. Hong. 2008. “Spatial correlation of peak ground motions and response spectra.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98 (1): 354–365. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120070078.
Han, Y., and R. A. Davidson. 2012. “Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for spatially distributed infrastructure.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 41 (15): 2141–2158. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2179.
Hassani, B., and G. M. Atkinson. 2015. “Referenced empirical ground-motion model for Eastern North America.” Seismol. Res. Lett. 86 (2A): 477–491.
Heresi, P., and E. Miranda. 2019. “Uncertainty in intraevent spatial correlation of elastic pseudo-acceleration spectral ordinates.” Bull. Earthquake Eng. 17 (3): 1099–1115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0506-6.
Jayaram, N., and J. W. Baker. 2009. “Correlation model for spatially distributed ground-motion intensities.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 38 (15): 1687–1708. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.922.
Kuehn, N. M., C. Riggelsen, and F. Scherbaum. 2011. “Modeling the joint probability of earthquake, site, and ground-motion parameters using Bayesian networks.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 101 (1): 235–249. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120100080.
Langseth, H., T. D. Nielsen, R. Rumí, and A. Salmerón. 2009. “Inference in hybrid Bayesian networks.” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 94 (10): 1499–1509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2009.02.027.
Lee, R., and A. S. Kiremidjian. 2007. “Uncertainty and correlation for loss assessment of spatially distributed systems.” Earthquake Spectra 23 (4): 753–770. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2791001.
Lin, T., S. Harmsen, J. Baker, and N. Luco. 2013. “Conditional spectrum computation incorporating multiple causal earthquakes and ground-motion prediction models.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 103 (2A): 1103–1116. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120110293.
Madsen, A. L. 2008. “Belief update in CLG Bayesian networks with lazy propagation.” Int. J. Approximate Reasoning 49 (2): 503–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2008.05.001.
McCallen, D., A. Petersson, A. Rodgers, A. Pitarka, M. Miah, F. Petrone, B. Sjogreen, N. Abrahamson, and H. Tang. 2021. “EQSIM—A multidisciplinary framework for fault-to-structure earthquake simulations on exascale computers part I: Computational models and workflow.” Earthquake Spectra 37 (2): 707–735. https://doi.org/10.1177/8755293020970982.
Miller, M., and J. Baker. 2015. “Ground-motion intensity and damage map selection for probabilistic infrastructure network risk assessment using optimization.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 44 (7): 1139–1156. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2506.
PEER (Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center). 2015. NGA-East: Median ground-motion models for the central and eastern North America. PEER Rep. No. 2015/04. Berkeley, CA: PEER.
Petersen, M. D. 2014. Documentation for the 2014 update of the United States National Seismic Hazard Maps. Reston, VA: USGS.
Rosero-Velásquez, H., and D. Straub. 2022. “Selection of representative natural hazard scenarios for engineering systems.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 51 (15): 3680–3700. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3743.
Salmerón, A., R. Rumí, H. Langseth, T. D. Nielsen, and A. L. Madsen. 2018. “A review of inference algorithms for hybrid Bayesian networks.” J. Artif. Intell. Res. 62 (Aug): 799–828. https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1.11228.
Sokolov, V., F. Wenzel, W.-Y. Jean, and K.-L. Wen. 2010. “Uncertainty and spatial correlation of earthquake ground motion in Taiwan.” Terr. Atmos. Oceanic Sci. 21 (6): 905. https://doi.org/10.3319/TAO.2010.05.03.01(T).
SSHAC (Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee). 1997. “NUREG/CR-6372—Recommendations for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis: Guidance on uncertainty and use of experts.” Accessed May 13, 2023. https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/contract/cr6372/.
Stewart, J. P., G. A. Parker, G. M. Atkinson, Y. M. A. Hashash, and W. J. Silva. 2020. “Ergodic site amplification model for central and eastern North America.” Earthquake Spectra 36 (1): 42–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/8755293019878185.
Straub, D., and A. Der Kiureghian. 2010. “Bayesian network enhanced with structural reliability methods: Methodology.” J. Eng. Mech. 136 (10): 1248–1258. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000173.
Vogel, K., C. Riggelsen, O. Korup, and F. Scherbaum. 2014. “Bayesian network learning for natural hazard analyses.” Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 14 (9): 2605–2626. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-14-2605-2014.
Wesson, R. L., and D. M. Perkins. 2001. “Spatial correlation of probabilistic earthquake ground motion and loss.” Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 91 (6): 1498–1515. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120000284.
Zwirglmaier, K., and D. Straub. 2016. “A discretization procedure for rare events in Bayesian networks.” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 153 (Sep): 96–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2016.04.008.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering
Volume 10 • Issue 3 • September 2024
Copyright
© 2024 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Oct 8, 2023
Accepted: Apr 5, 2024
Published online: Jul 5, 2024
Published in print: Sep 1, 2024
Discussion open until: Dec 5, 2024
ASCE Technical Topics:
- Analysis (by type)
- Architectural engineering
- Bayesian analysis
- Buildings
- Disaster risk management
- Disasters and hazards
- Earthquake engineering
- Engineering fundamentals
- Existing buildings
- Geohazards
- Geotechnical engineering
- Mathematics
- Natural disasters
- Network analysis
- Probability
- Seismic effects
- Seismic tests
- Statistical analysis (by type)
- Structural engineering
- Structures (by type)
- Tests (by type)
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.