The paper is dedicated to the review of methods of seismic hazard analysis currently in use, analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches. The review is performed from the perspective of a user of the results of seismic hazard analysis for different applications such as the design of critical and general (non-critical) civil infrastructures, technical and financial risk analysis. A set of criteria is developed for and applied to an objective assessment of the capabilities of different analysis methods. It is demonstrated that traditional probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) methods have significant deficiencies, thus limiting their practical applications. These deficiencies have their roots in the use of inadequate probabilistic models and insufficient understanding of modern concepts of risk analysis, as have been revealed in some recent large scale studies. These deficiencies result in the lack of ability of a correct treatment of dependencies between physical parameters and finally, in an incorrect treatment of uncertainties. As a consequence, results of PSHA studies have been found to be unrealistic in comparison with empirical information from the real world. The attempt to compensate these problems by a systematic use of expert elicitation has, so far, not resulted in any improvement of the situation. It is also shown that scenario-earthquakes developed by disaggregation from the results of a traditional PSHA may not be conservative with respect to energy conservation and should not be used for the design of critical infrastructures without validation. Because the assessment of technical as well as of financial risks associated with potential damages of earthquakes need a risk analysis, current method is based on a probabilistic approach with its unsolved deficiencies.
Traditional deterministic or scenario-based seismic hazard analysis methods provide a reliable and in general robust design basis for applications such as the design of critical infrastructures, especially with systematic sensitivity analyses based on validated phenomenological models. Deterministic seismic hazard analysis incorporates uncertainties in the safety factors. These factors are derived from experience as well as from expert judgment. Deterministic methods associated with high safety factors may lead to too conservative results, especially if applied for generally short-lived civil structures. Scenarios used in deterministic seismic hazard analysis have a clear physical basis. They are related to seismic sources discovered by geological, geomorphologic, geodetic and seismological investigations or derived from historical references. Scenario-based methods can be expanded for risk analysis applications with an extended data analysis providing the frequency of seismic events. Such an extension provides a better informed risk model that is suitable for risk-informed decision making. 相似文献
With the regional population growth, socioeconomic development, more and more attention has been paid to issues on the shared water allocation and the transboundary eco-security conservation during the development of water resources in the international rivers. In this paper, the existing major problems on transboundary waters in different sub-regions of Asia, such as water shortage, transboundary waters pollution, fragile eco-environment are discussed. Then, the key scientific issues to be concerned in the next study progress on the basis of the analyses of the new research directions and focus fields are raised: (1) unpredicted changes of the hydrologic and water system, and their impacts on the allocation of the sharing waters by global changes; (2) models of the international cooperation on the international rivers on the studies of international and national water laws or regulations, policies, the relative experiences and the case studies; (3) quantificational assessment on environmental flow, available water, and the comprehensive functions and values of the international watercourse system; (4) studies on transboundary aquatic bio-diversity maintenance, transboundary pollution supervision and treatment under the rules and principles accepted by the riparian states; (5) issues on transboundary compensation at the rules of “payments for using”, “payments for harm” and “compensation for benefit”; (6) using advanced 3S techniques to promote the integrated watershed development and management; and so on. 相似文献