64 citations as recorded by crossref.

1. Comprehensive vulnerability assessment for environmental facility depending on spatial characteristics in South Korea Y. Choi et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2024.100715
2. Security risk assessment and visualization study of key nodes of sea lanes: case studies on the Tsugaru Strait and the Makassar Strait L. Xiao et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-022-05484-8
3. A quick earthquake disaster loss assessment method supported by dasymetric data for emergency response in China J. Xu et al. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-16-885-2016
4. Earthquake vulnerability assessment of the built environment in the city of Srinagar, Kashmir Himalaya, using a geographic information system M. Fayaz et al. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-1593-2023
5. Seismic Performance Assessment of a Reinforced Concrete School Building S. Şahin et al. https://doi.org/10.65520/erciyesfen.1927039
6. A multi-criteria-based procedure for the robust definition of algorithms aimed at fast seismic risk assessment of existing RC buildings V. Sangiorgio et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.01.048
7. Türkiye’de meydana gelebilecek depremlere karşı afet yönetim sistemi performansının veri zarflama analizi ile değerlendirilmesi U. ALTINSOY & E. AKSAKAL https://doi.org/10.24012/dumf.496680
8. Assessment of the seismic vulnerability in an urban area with the integration of machine learning methods and GIS A. Doğan et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-025-07185-4
9. Third-and Fourth-Tier City Real Estate Collection Trust Plan: Research on Risk Assessment System F. Saci https://doi.org/10.1080/10835547.2023.2225381
10. Integrated multi-hazard risk assessment under compound disasters using analytical hierarchy process (AHP) J. Gacu et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2025.e43173
11. Seismic Vulnerability Assessment and Mapping of Gyeongju, South Korea Using Frequency Ratio, Decision Tree, and Random Forest J. Han et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187787
12. An AHP-Based Methodology for Decision Support in Integrated Interventions in School Buildings P. Fiore et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122310181
13. Estimation of earthquake vulnerability by using analytical hierarchy process S. Shadmaan & A. Islam https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nhres.2021.10.005
14. GIS-Based Landslide Susceptibility Mapping in Qazvin Province of Iran R. Arjmandzadeh et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-019-00326-3
15. Practical seismic resilience evaluation and crisis management planning through GIS-based vulnerability assessment of buildings P. Narjabadifam et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-021-2003-1
16. Geospatial Multicriteria Analysis for Earthquake Risk Assessment: Case Study of Fujairah City in the UAE D. Al-Dogom et al. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6638316
17. Social Vulnerability Assessment Using Artificial Neural Network (ANN) Model for Earthquake Hazard in Tabriz City, Iran M. Alizadeh et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103376
18. Evidence Admission in Spatial Decision Models: Gating Layers Before Fusion in Municipal Seismic Screening M. Mograby & A. Iaaly https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi15090425
19. Energy poverty measurement and determinants in rural China: Does education inequality matter? F. Wang et al. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958305X241268913
20. Seismic risk assessment using integrated MCDM method in West Bengal, India M. Malakar et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eve.2024.100036
21. Quantitative seismic risk assessment method for gate tower architectural heritage H. Song et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2026.112767
22. Quantitative assessment of the impact of earthquake-induced geohazards on natural landscapes in Jiuzhaigou Valley X. Hu et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-018-5240-7
23. Mapping accessibility for earthquake hazard response in the historic urban centre of Bucharest C. Merciu et al. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2011-2018
24. Integrated Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Historical Masonry Churches Including Architectural and Artistic Assets Based on Macro-element Approach V. Sangiorgio et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2019.1709916
25. Building vulnerability assessment in seismic areas using ensemble learning: A Nepal case study W. Chen & L. Zhang https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131418
26. Degradation Assessment of Natural Stone Claddings over Their Service Life: Comparison between Tehran (Iran) and Lisbon (Portugal) S. Mousavi et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11100438
27. A REVIEW OF MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING METHODS FOR BUILDING ASSESSMENT, SELECTION, AND RETROFIT P. Villalba et al. https://doi.org/10.3846/jcem.2024.21621
28. Prioritising Barrier Removal on the UK’s National Cycle Network C. Larkin et al. https://doi.org/10.16997/ats.1994
29. GIS-based fuzzy-analytic network process (FAHP), fuzzy-analytic hierarchy process (FANP) methods and feature selection algorithm (FSA) to determine earthquake-prone areas in Kermanshah Province M. Mokarram et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-021-09934-7
30. Seismic hazard assessment in active tectonic basins using a AHP-LR model: The case of Tokat (North Anatolian Fault Zone, Türkiye) A. Toprak & S. Yaşarul https://doi.org/10.17211/tcd.1870383
31. Risk assessment for yachting tourism in China using dynamic Bayesian networks Y. Yao et al. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0289607
32. Seismicity clusters and vulnerability in the Himalayas by machine learning and integrated MCDM models S. Malakar & A. Rai https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-022-10946-1
33. Integrated model for earthquake risk assessment using neural network and analytic hierarchy process: Aceh province, Indonesia R. Jena et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2019.07.006
34. Development of Vulnerability Evaluation Technology for Environmental Facilities Focused on the Water Treatment Systems in South Korea Y. Choi et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310257
35. Earthquake vulnerability assessment in Northern Sumatra province by using a multi-criteria decision-making model R. Jena et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101518
36. Coastal erosion vulnerability assessment along the eastern coast of Bangladesh using geospatial techniques N. Ahmed et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2020.105408
37. Augmented reality based - decision making (AR-DM) to support multi-criteria analysis in constructions V. Sangiorgio et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103567
38. Estimating seismic vulnerability in West Bengal by AHP-WSM and AHP-VIKOR S. Malakar & A. Rai https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nhres.2023.06.001
39. Development of an integrated model for seismic vulnerability assessment of residential buildings: Application to Mahabad City, Iran H. Bahadori et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2017.05.014
40. Seismic hazard assessment of Agartala agglomeration based on 1D nonlinear ground response analysis and empirically derived liquefaction susceptibility R. Debnatha et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11600-024-01502-4
41. SEVUCAS: A Novel GIS-Based Machine Learning Software for Seismic Vulnerability Assessment S. Lee et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9173495
42. Spatial earthquake vulnerability assessment by using multi-criteria decision making and probabilistic neural network techniques in Odisha, India R. Jena et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2021.1992023
43. Performance of Logistic Regression and Support Vector Machines for Seismic Vulnerability Assessment and Mapping: A Case Study of the 12 September 2016 ML5.8 Gyeongju Earthquake, South Korea J. Han et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11247038
44. Earthquake vulnerability assessment for the Indian subcontinent using the Long Short-Term Memory model (LSTM) R. Jena et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102642
45. Mapping soil liquefaction susceptibility across Europe using the analytic hierarchy process C. Meisina et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-022-01442-8
46. A GIS-BASED MULTI-CRITERIA EVALUATION FRAMEWORK FOR UNCERTAINTY REDUCTION IN EARTHQUAKE DISASTER MANAGEMENT USING GRANULAR COMPUTING F. Khamespanah et al. https://doi.org/10.3846/20296991.2016.1199139
47. Seismic vulnerability and risk assessment of Kolkata City, India S. Nath et al. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-1103-2015
48. Optimized AHP to Overcome Limits in Weight Calculation: Building Performance Application V. Sangiorgio et al. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001418
49. Disaster risk assessment of educational infrastructure in mountain geographies using PROMETHEE-II S. Mir et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104489
50. A GIS-based multi-criteria decision-making approach for seismic vulnerability assessment using quantifier-guided OWA operator: a case study of Tehran, Iran M. Moradi et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475683.2014.966858
51. Risk assessment of confined unreinforced masonry buildings based on FEMA P-58 methodology: a case study—school buildings in Tehran M. Yekrangnia et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00990-1
52. Eigenvector spatial filtering enhancing natural hazards vulnerability assessment in a susceptible urban environment: A case study of Izmir earthquake in Turkey M. Ahmadi et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2024.103666
53. Post-Earthquake People Loss Evaluation Based on Seismic Multi-Level Hybrid Grid: A Case Study on Yushu Ms 7.1 Earthquake in China X. Yang et al. https://doi.org/10.1515/geo-2016-0051
54. An auxiliary framework to facilitate earthquake search and rescue operations in urban regions M. Yousefi et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-024-06619-9
55. Comparing seismic susceptibility models of the Himalayan terrain S. Som et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10950-016-9562-z
56. A Hybrid Intelligent Model for Urban Seismic Risk Assessment from the Perspective of Possibility and Vulnerability Based on Particle Swarm Optimization J. Chu et al. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/2218044
57. Active source zones and earthquake vulnerability around Sumatra subduction zone A. Rai et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-023-02070-9
58. Assessing social vulnerability of villages in Mt. Kasigau area, Kenya, using the analytical hierarchy process N. Gathongo & L. Tran https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-019-10004-6
59. GIS modeling of seismic vulnerability of residential fabrics considering geotechnical, structural, social and physical distance indicators in Tehran using multi-criteria decision-making techniques F. Rezaie & M. Panahi https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-461-2015
60. Spatial Modelling of Urban Physical Vulnerability to Explosion Hazards Using GIS and Fuzzy MCDA Y. Ghajari et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9071274
61. The road to recovery: Understanding the challenges affecting school reconstruction in rural Nepal following the 2015 Gorkha earthquake L. Westoby et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102120
62. Kars kentinde deprem hasar risk potansiyeli taşıyan alanların CBS tabanlı AHP analizlerine dayalı olarak belirlenmesi M. DEMİR & N. ALTAŞ https://doi.org/10.29128/geomatik.1375650
63. Developing an Agent-Based Simulation System for Post-Earthquake Operations in Uncertainty Conditions: A Proposed Method for Collaboration among Agents N. Hooshangi & A. Alesheikh https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7010027
64. Earthquake risk assessment using an integrated Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process with Artificial Neural Networks based on GIS: A case study of Sanandaj in Iran P. Yariyan et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101705