Visini, Francesco

A probabilistic seismic hazard model consists of a set of weighted models/branches that describes the center, the body and the range of seismic hazard. Owing to the intrinsic nature of this kind of analysis, the weight of each model/branch represents its scientific credibility. However, practical uses of this model may sometimes require the selection of one or a few hazard curves that are sampled from the whole model, which often consists of thousands of branches. Here we put forward an innovative procedure that facilitates the scoring, ranking and selection of the hazard curves to account for the requirements of a specific application. The approach consists of a careful quality check of the data used for scoring and the adoption of a proper scoring rule. To show the applicability of this approach, we present an example that consists of scoring and ranking a set of multiple models/branches constituting a recent seismic hazard model of Italy. To score these branches, hazard estimates produced by each of them are compared with time series of macroseismic observations available in the Italian macroseismic database for a carefully selected set of localities deemed sufficiently representative, homogeneously distributed in space and complete with respect to time and intensity levels. The proper scoring parameter used for such a comparison is the logarithmic score, which can always be applied independently of the distribution of the data.

We propose an innovative methodology for seismic emergency planning and earthquake risk mitigation in central Italy by integrating three prototypal earthquake scenarios. The different scenarios derive maximum earthquake magnitudes from different input data. The first scenario utilizes local rheological, geological, and geophysical conditions; the second scenario considers the study area fault characteristics, while the third scenario relies on the cluster analysis of historical and instru- mental earthquake records. The magnitudes and related uncertainties are combined using a conflation method to derive the expected ground motions for a grid of sites in central Italy. The resulting scenarios include peak ground acceleration and spectral ordinates, presented as maps and spectra for two selected localities. The vertical component of ground motion is also presented, because it is essential for accurately assessing the response of short-period structures. Our methodology complements the more classic seismic hazard analyses, offering additional insights for earthquake contingency planning and loss analysis. The proposed methodology is flexible; multiple models and ongoing advancements in scenario practice (near-field effects, vertical ground motion, and the choice of ground motion models) can be easily incorporated, increasing the effectiveness of seismic scenario modeling in seismic emergency planning and risk mitigation.

In this paper we present the ground response analyses (GRA) of a site where an industrial facility is planned. Because of its location on an active normal fault system known as a relevant seismic gap, the Mt. Morrone Fault system (MMF), and at the edge of a basin filled with slow velocity continental deposits, a inter-disciplinary and non-standard approach has been applied to assess the seismic input of the dynamic numerical analyses. It includes geological, seismological, geotechnical and engineering contributions. Two fault scenarios, MMF1 and MMF2, were considered and scenario-based (SSHA) and probabilistic (time-dependent, TD, and time-independent, TI) seismic hazard (PSHA) analyses were implemented. Comparison among the spectra corresponding to the 90th percentile of the SSHA statistical distribution and the PSHA average ones, shows that the MMF2 has values similar to the TD model. The SSHA 90th percentile distribution was selected as target spectra to retrieve the seismic input for GRA. Nonlinear numerical simulations of seismic wave propagation were implemented to derive surface ground motion parameters. GRA acceleration response spectra and their PGA are notably higher, and thus on the safety site, than those obtained following the Italian code approach for seismic resistant buildings. These results confirm that a scenario-based methodology can better capture the shaking effect in near-field conditions, avoiding possibly unconservative underestimations of the seismic actions and in view of a more robust performance-based approach used by engineers for either new design and/or assessment/retrofit purposes of the built environment.

A key challenge in paleoseismology is constraining the timing and occurrence of past earthquakes to create an earthquake history along faults that can be used for testing or building fault-based seismic hazard assessments. We present a new methodological approach and accompanying code (Paleoseismic EArthquake CHronologies, PEACH) to meet this challenge. By using the integration of multi-site paleoseismic records through probabilistic modeling of the event times and an unconditioned correlation, PEACH improves the objectivity of constraining paleoearthquake chronologies along faults, including highly populated records and poorly dated events. Our approach reduces uncertainties in event times and allows increased resolution of the trench records. By extension, the approach can potentially reduce the uncertainties in the estimation of parameters for seismic hazard assessment such as earthquake recurrence times and coefficient of variation. We test and discuss this methodology in two well-studied cases: the Paganica Fault in Italy and the Wasatch Fault in the United States.

A new probabilistic seismic hazard model, called Modello di Pericolosità Sismica 2019 (MPS19), has been recently proposed for the Italian territory, as a result of the efforts of a large national scientific community. This model is based on 11 groups of earthquake rupture forecast inputs and, particularly, on 5 area-source seismogenic models, including the so-called MA4 model. Data-driven procedures were followed in MA4 to evaluate seismogenic parameters of each area source, such as upper and lower seismogenic depths, hypocentral-depth distributions, and nodal planes. In a few cases, expert judgement or ad hoc assumptions were necessary due to the scarcity of data. MA4 consists of 20 seismicity models that consider epistemic uncertainty in the estimations of the completeness periods of the earthquake catalogue, of maximum magnitude values and of seismicity rates. In particular, five approaches were adopted to calculate the rates, in the form of the truncated Gutenberg–Richter frequency–magnitude distribution. The first approach estimated seismicity rates using earthquakes located in each area source, while the other approaches firstly calculated the seismicity rates for groups of areas considered tectonically homogeneous and successively partitioned in different ways the values to the area forming each group. The results obtained in terms of seismic hazard estimates highlight that the uncertainty explored by the 20 seismicity models of MA4 is at least of the same order of magnitude as the uncertainty due to alternative ground motion models.

Earthquakes are usually clustered in both time and space and, within each cluster, the event ofhighest magnitude is conventionally identified as the mainshock, while the foreshocks and theaftershocks are the events that occur before and after it, respectively. Mainshocks are theearthquakes considered in the classical formulation of the probabilistic seismic hazard analysis(PSHA), where the contribution of foreshocks and aftershocks is usually neglected. In fact, ithas been shown that it is possible to rigorously, within the hypotheses of the model, account forthe effect of mainshock-aftershocks sequences by means of the sequence-based PSHA (i.e.,SPSHA). SPSHA extends the usability of the homogeneous Poisson process, adopted formainshocks within PSHA, to also describe the occurrence of clusters maintaining the same inputdata of PSHA; i.e., the seismic rates derived by a declustered catalog. The aftershocks’occurrences are accounted for by means of conditional non-homogeneous Poisson processesbased on the modified Omori law. The seismic source model for Italy has been recentlyinvestigated, and the objective of the study herein presented is to include and evaluate the effectof aftershocks, by means of SPSHA, based on a new grid model. In the paper, the results of PSHAand SPSHA are compared, considering the spectral and return periods that are of typical interestfor earthquake engineering. Finally, a comparison with the SPSHA map based on a well-established source model for Italy is also provided.

We describe the main structure and outcomes of the new probabilistic seismic hazard model for Italy, MPS19 [Modello di Pericolosità Sismica, 2019]. Besides to outline the probabilistic framework adopted, the multitude of new data that have been made available after the preparation of the previous MPS04, and the set of earthquake rate and ground motion models used, we give particular emphasis to the main novelties of the modeling and the MPS19 outcomes. Specifically, we (i) introduce a novel approach to estimate and to visualize the epistemic uncertainty over the whole country; (ii) assign weights to each model components (earthquake rate and ground motion models) according to a quantitative testing phase and structured experts’ elicitation sessions; (iii) test (retrospectively) the MPS19 outcomes with the horizontal peak ground acceleration observed in the last decades, and the macroseismic intensities of the last centuries; (iv) introduce a pioneering approach to build MPS19_cluster, which accounts for the effect of earthquakes that have been removed by declustering. Finally, to make the interpretation of MPS19 outcomes easier for a wide range of possible stakeholders, we represent the final result also in terms of probability to exceed 0.15 g in 50 years.

In the last 10 yr, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) revised its safety standards for site evaluations of nuclear installations in response to emerging fault displacement hazard evaluation practices developed in Member States. New amendments in the revised safety guidance (DS507) explicitly recommend fault displacement hazard assessment, including separate approaches for candidate new sites versus existing sites. If there is insufficient basis to conclusively determine that a fault is not capable of surface displace- ment at an existing site, then a probabilistic fault displacement hazard analysis (PFDHA) is recommended to better characterize the hazard. This new recommendation has generated the need for the IAEA to provide its Member States with guidance on performing PFDHA, including its formulation and implementation. This article provides an overview of current PFDHA state-of-practice for nuclear installations that is consistent with the new IAEA safety standards. We also summarize progress in an ongoing international PFDHA bench- mark project that will ultimately provide technical guidance to Member States for con- ducting site-specific fault displacement hazard assessments.

We present a database of field data for active faults in the central Apennines, Italy, including trace, fault and main fault locations with activity and location certainties, and slip-rate, slip-vector and surface geometry data. As advances occur in our capability to create more detailed fault-based hazard models, depending on the availability of primary data and observations, it is desirable that such data can be organized in a way that is easily understood and incorporated into present and future models. The database structure presented herein aims to assist this process. We recommend stating what observations have led to different location and activity certainty and presenting slip-rate data with point location coordinates of where the data were collected with the time periods over which they were calculated. Such data reporting allows more complete uncertainty analyses in hazard and risk modelling. The data and maps are available as kmz, kml, and geopackage files with the data presented in spreadsheet files and the map coordinates as txt files. The files are available at: https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.922582 .

The aim of the Fault2SHA European Seismological Commission Working Group Central Apennines laboratory is to enhance the use of geological data in fault-based seismic hazard and risk assessment and to promote synergies between data providers (earthquake geologists), end-users and decision-makers. Here we use the Fault2SHA Central Apennines Database where geologic data are provided in the form of characterized fault traces, grouped into faults and main faults, with individual slip rate estimates. The proposed methodology first derives slip rate profiles for each main fault. Main faults are then divided into distinct sections of length comparable to the seismogenic depth to allow consideration of variable slip rates and the exploration of multi-fault ruptures in the computations. The methodology further allows exploration of epistemic uncertainties documented in the database (e.g., main fault definition, slip rates) as well as additional parameters required to characterize the seismogenic potential of fault sources (e.g., 3D fault geometries). To illustrate the power of the methodology, in this paper we consider only one branch of the uncertainties affecting each step of the computation procedure. The resulting hazard and typological risk maps allow both data providers and end-users 1) to visualize the faults that threaten specific localities the most, 2) to appreciate the density of observations used for the computation of slip rate profiles, and 3) interrogate the degree of confidence on the fault parameters documented in the database (activity and location certainty). Finally, closing the loop, the methodology highlights priorities for future geological investigations in terms of where improvements in the density of data within the database would lead to the greatest decreases in epistemic uncertainties in the hazard and risk calculations. Key to this new generation of fault-based seismic hazard and risk methodology are the user-friendly open source codes provided with this publication, documenting, step-by-step, the link between the geological database and the relative contribution of each section to seismic hazard and risk at specific localities