Rapid Computation of Seismic Loss Curves for Canadian Buildings Using Tail Approximation Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditional seismic risk assessments often require specialized expertise and extensive computational time, making probabilistic seismic risk evaluations less accessible to practitioners and decision-makers. To reduce the barriers related to applications of quantitative seismic risk analysis, this paper develops a Quick Loss Estimation Tool (QLET) designed for rapid seismic risk assessment of Canadian buildings. By approximating the upper tail of a seismic hazard curve using an extreme value distribution and by integrating it with building exposure-vulnerability models, the QLET enables efficient computation of seismic loss curves for individual sites. The tool generates seismic loss exceedance probability curves and financial risk metrics based on Monte Carlo simulations, offering customizable risk assessments for various building types. The QLET also incorporates regional site proxy models based on average shear-wave velocity in the uppermost 30 m to enhance site-specific hazard characterization, addressing key limitations of global site proxy models and enabling risk-based seismic microzonation. The QLET streamlines hazard, exposure, and vulnerability assessments into a user-friendly tool, facilitating regional-scale risk evaluations within practical timeframes, making it particularly applicable to emergency preparedness, urban planning, and insurance analysis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".