MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3019779094 · doi:10.1002/eqe.3286

Spatiotemporal seismic hazard and risk assessment of M9.0 megathrust earthquake sequences of wood‐frame houses in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

2020· article· en· W3019779094 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lizhong Zhang, Katsuichiro Goda, Maximilian J. Werner, Solomon Tesfamariam

Bibliographic record

VenueEarthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British ColumbiaWestern University
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeCanada Research ChairsSouthern California Earthquake Center
KeywordsAftershockSeismologyGeologySeismic hazardFragilitySubductionSeismic riskHazardCrustUrban seismic riskGeophysicsTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Megathrust earthquake sequences, comprising mainshocks and triggered aftershocks along the subduction interface and in the overriding crust, can impact multiple buildings and infrastructure in a city. The time between the mainshocks and aftershocks usually is too short to retrofit the structures; therefore, moderate‐size aftershocks can cause additional damage. To have a better understanding of the impact of aftershocks on city‐wide seismic risk assessment, a new simulation framework of spatiotemporal seismic hazard and risk assessment of future M9.0 sequences in the Cascadia subduction zone is developed. The simulation framework consists of an epidemic‐type aftershock sequence (ETAS) model, ground‐motion model, and state‐dependent seismic fragility model. The spatiotemporal ETAS model is modified to characterise aftershocks of large and anisotropic M9.0 mainshock ruptures. To account for damage accumulation of wood‐frame houses due to aftershocks in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, state‐dependent fragility curves are implemented. The new simulation framework can be used for quasi‐real‐time aftershock hazard and risk assessments and city‐wide post‐event risk management.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.177 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarthquake Engineering & Structural DynamicsSame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207