69 citations as recorded by crossref.

1. Vulnerability Analysis of the Urban Environments to Different Seismic Scenarios: Residential Buildings and Associated Population Distribution Modelling through Integrating Dasymetric Mapping Method and GIS M. Mesgar & P. Jalilvand https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.07.100
2. Adjustability of exposed elements by updating their capacity for resistance after a damaging event: application to an earthquake–tsunami cascade scenario C. Negulescu et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-04189-0
3. Testing machine learning models for seismic damage prediction at a regional scale using building‐damage dataset compiled after the 2015 Gorkha Nepal earthquake S. Ghimire et al. https://doi.org/10.1177/87552930221106495
4. Optical satellite imagery for quantifying spatio-temporal dimension of physical exposure in disaster risk assessments D. Ehrlich & P. Tenerelli https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-012-0372-5
5. İstanbul’daki 2000 Yılı Sonrası Binalar İçin Tasarım Depremi Altında Karşılaştırmalı Yapısal Hasar ve Mali Kayıp Tahminleri U. HANCILAR et al. https://doi.org/10.18400/tekderg.326939
6. Benefit-Cost Analysis of the Seismic Risk Mitigation for a Region with Moderate Seismicity: The Case of Tiberias, Israel H. Wei et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2014.10.581
7. Assessment of the ripple effects and spatial heterogeneity of total losses in the capital of China after a great catastrophic shock Z. Zhang et al. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-17-367-2017
8. The economic implications of earthquake parameters for formulating financial risk management strategies: the Dead Sea Fault, Israel A. Osipov et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-026-08177-8
9. A Critical Look at the Use of Design Spectrum Shape for Seismic Risk Assessment E. Erduran & C. Lindholm https://doi.org/10.1193/1.4000086
10. Time-Frequency Feature-Based Seismic Response Prediction Neural Network Model for Building Structures P. Zhang et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13052956
11. Efficient disaster waste management: identifying suitable temporary sites using an emission-aware approach after the Kahramanmaraş earthquakes A. Demir & A. Dinçer https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-023-05123-0
12. Yer Hareketi Tahmin Modellerinin Deprem Ön Hasar Tahmin Sistemleri’nin Performansına Etkileri: 6 Şubat 2023 Kahramanmaraş Depremi F. Kara & Y. Fahjan https://doi.org/10.46464/tdad.1411559
13. Impact of Temporal Population Distribution on Earthquake Loss Estimation: A Case Study on Sylhet, Bangladesh S. Ara https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-014-0033-2
14. Empirical fragility curves for single-story precast industrial buildings extracted from the 2023 Turkiye earthquake survey data R. Sisman et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2025.120340
15. Development of empirical fragility functions after the 2020 earthquakes in and around Türkiye N. Acikgoz & U. Hancilar https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-026-02396-x
16. A New Agent-Based Methodology for the Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Urban Areas A. Greco et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi8060274
17. Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the Area of Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Eastern Uzbekistan, Central Asia A. Ischuk et al. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120160330
18. Comparison of seismic risk assessment based on macroseismic intensity and spectrum approaches using ‘SeisVARA’ P. Haldar et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2013.01.016
19. A Comparative Study of the Effects of Earthquakes in Different Countries on Target Displacement in Mid-Rise Regular RC Structures E. Işık et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/app122312495
20. Corrosion in concrete structures: case study of an existing I-girder bridge A. Mohammad et al. https://doi.org/10.1680/jbren.24.00017
21. The impact of behavior on the risk of injury and death during an earthquake: a simulation-based study S. Shapira et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3167-5
22. Impact of ground motion model selection on the benefit from monitoring data N. Caglar & M. Limongelli https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-026-02393-0
23. Seismic Vulnerability Assessment from Earthquake Damages Historical Data Using Constrained Optimization Technique A. Benaïchouche et al. https://doi.org/10.4236/gep.2018.62007
24. Risk assessment of people trapped in earthquake based on km grid: a case study of the 2014 Ludian earthquake, China B. Wei et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2017.1318795
25. 6 Şubat 2023 Depremleri ve Saha Gözlemlerine Dayalı Bina Hasarları Hakkında Ön Değerlendirme C. Yenidoğan https://doi.org/10.18400/tjce.1335742
26. Extracting building stock information from optical satellite imagery for mapping earthquake exposure and its vulnerability D. Ehrlich et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-012-0482-0
27. A framework for estimating immediate interdependent functionality reduction of a steel hospital following a seismic event E. Hassan & H. Mahmoud https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.05.009
28. Seismic damage assessment using RADIUS and GIS: A case study of Sylhet City, Bangladesh R. Mazumder & A. Salman https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.11.023
29. Earthquake hazard potential of Indo-Gangetic Foredeep: its seismotectonism, hazard, and damage modeling for the cities of Patna, Lucknow, and Varanasi S. Nath et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10950-019-09832-3
30. Risk assessment of people trapped in earthquake disasters based on a single building: a case study in Xichang city, Sichuan Province, China B. Wei et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2021.2017358
31. Karma Deprem Yalıtım Sistemlerinin Deneysel Performans Değerlendirmesi C. YENİDOGAN https://doi.org/10.21205/deufmd.2021236906
32. Determination of Urban Earthquake Risk for Kırşehir, Turkey E. Isik et al. https://doi.org/10.15446/esrj.v23n3.60255
33. A Technological System for Post-Earthquake Damage Scenarios Based on the Monitoring by Means of an Urban Seismic Network A. Costanzo et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21237887
34. Quantitative assessment of the environmental risks of geothermal energy: A review S. Chen et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111287
35. Population density modelling in support of disaster risk assessment P. Tenerelli et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.07.015
36. An evolutionary multi-objective optimization approach to disaster waste management: A case study of Istanbul, Turkey K. Onan et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.07.039
37. Earthquake Risk Analysis in a Medium-Scale Settlement Area Using Empirical Attenuation Models: The Saraydüzü Example M. Dereli & B. Çınkır Kural https://doi.org/10.64808/engineeringperspective.1834598
38. IRMA platform for the calculation of damages and risks of Italian residential buildings B. Borzi et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00924-x
39. New macroseismic intensity predictive models for Turkey E. Bayrak et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11600-019-00357-4
40. Epistemic uncertainty of probabilistic building exposure compositions in scenario-based earthquake loss models J. Gómez Zapata et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-021-01312-9
41. Incomplete information imputation in limited data environments with application to disaster response K. Yagci Sokat et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2018.02.016
42. Rapid earthquake response: The state-of-the art and recommendations with a focus on European systems S. Guérin-Marthe et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101958
43. Fine–Scale Spatiotemporal Distribution Assessment of Indoor Population Based on Single Buildings: A Case in Dongcheng Subdistrict, Xichang, China B. Wei et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097423
44. Deriving fragility functions from bilinearized capacity curves for earthquake scenario modelling using the conditional spectrum C. Michel et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0371-3
45. Armagedom — A Tool for Seismic Risk Assessment Illustrated with Applications O. Sedan et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2012.726604
46. Resilience-Based Design of Infrastructure: Review of Models, Methodologies, and Computational Tools M. Shadabfar et al. https://doi.org/10.1061/AJRUA6.0001184
47. Seismic risk assessment of a large metropolitan area by means of simulated earthquakes E. Fischer et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-023-05995-y
48. Unravelling Karachi’s Seismic Potential: Estimating Maximum Ground Shaking in Various Zones M. Ahmed & S. Lodi https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793431123500252
49. A Spatiotemporal Risk Scenario for a Predictive Earthquake in Western Himalaya S. Rajput et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2022.2033352
50. Review of literature on decision support systems for natural hazard risk reduction: Current status and future research directions J. Newman et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.06.042
51. Earthquake risk assessment for the building inventory of Muscat, Sultanate of Oman U. Hancilar et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3357-1
52. VIGIRISKS platform, a web-tool for single and multi-hazard risk assessment C. Negulescu et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-022-05567-6
53. First-Order Seismic Loss Assessment at Urban Scale: A Case Study of Skopje, North Macedonia V. Mircevska et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2019.1662342
54. A systematic approach to identify, characterize, and prioritize the data needs for quantitative sustainable disaster debris management H. Jalloul et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106174
55. Comparative earthquake loss estimations for high-code buildings in Istanbul U. Hancilar et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.105956
56. Pan-European seismic risk assessment: a proof of concept using the Earthquake Loss Estimation Routine (ELER) C. Corbane et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-016-9993-5
57. Topological network and GIS approach to modeling earthquake risk of infrastructure systems: A case study in Japan C. Lam et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2021.102392
58. An Integrated Computational Approach for Seismic Risk Assessment of Individual Buildings J. Estêvão https://doi.org/10.3390/app9235088
59. Insights from Hazus loss estimations in Israel for Dead Sea Transform earthquakes T. Levi et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1325-y
60. LOG-IDEAH: LOGic trees for identification of damage due to earthquakes for architectural heritage V. Novelli & D. D’Ayala https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-014-9622-0
61. Urban RAT: New Tool for Virtual and Site-Specific Mobile Rapid Data Collection for Seismic Risk Assessment S. Ploeger et al. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000472
62. Development of integrated earthquake simulation system for Istanbul A. Sahin et al. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40623-016-0497-y
63. Volume loss fatality model for as-built and retrofitted clay brick unreinforced masonry buildings damaged in the 2010/11 Canterbury earthquakes S. Abeling & J. Ingham https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.02.014
64. Fragility functions for code complying RC frames via best correlated IM–EDP pairs U. Hancilar & E. Çaktı https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-015-9775-5
65. Damage Catalogue Software and the Role of Architecture & Architects: A Comprehensive Review M. DALLI & A. SOYLUK https://doi.org/10.30785/mbud.1317394
66. Fine-scale spatiotemporal earthquake casualty risk assessment considering building function types W. Nie et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104806
67. Loss Assessment and Earthquake Parametric Insurance Pricing Using Hybrid Bayesian Network D. Bai & X. Chen https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.70226
68. Farklı Deprem Senaryolarına Göre Kırşehir İli Kayıp Tahmin Analizleri E. IŞIK et al. https://doi.org/10.21324/dacd.432592
69. Seismic vulnerability of the Himalayan half-dressed rubble stone masonry structures, experimental and analytical studies N. Ahmad et al. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-12-3441-2012