Spatial seismic hazard variation and adaptive sampling of portfolio location uncertainty in probabilistic seismic risk analysis

Scheingraber, Christoph; Käser, Martin

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-1903-2020

Articles | Volume 20, issue 7

https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-1903-2020

© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-1903-2020

© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 20, issue 7

Research article

|

02 Jul 2020

Research article |

| 02 Jul 2020

Spatial seismic hazard variation and adaptive sampling of portfolio location uncertainty in probabilistic seismic risk analysis

Christoph Scheingraber and Martin Käser

Download

Final revised paper (published on 02 Jul 2020)
Preprint (discussion started on 10 Jul 2019)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Improving Erasmus and other educational actions in EE', Gerasimos Papadopoulos, 15 Oct 2019
- AC1: 'Answer to Interactive Comment by Gerasimos Papadopoulos', Christoph Scheingraber, 20 Dec 2019
RC2: 'Comment', Anonymous Referee #2, 18 Oct 2019
- AC2: 'Answer to Interactive Comment', Christoph Scheingraber, 20 Dec 2019
SC1: 'Comment on nhess 2019-110', Rodolfo Console, 20 Oct 2019
- AC3: 'Answer to Interactive Comment by Rodolfo Console', Christoph Scheingraber, 20 Dec 2019
RC3: 'Review of “Spatial Seismic Hazard Variation and Adaptive Sampling of Portfolio Location Uncertainty in Probabilistic Seismic Risk Analysis” by Christoph Scheingraber and Martin Käser', Robert J. Geller, 08 Nov 2019
- AC4: 'Answer to Interactive Comment by Robert J. Geller', Christoph Scheingraber, 20 Dec 2019

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (29 Jan 2020) by Filippos Vallianatos

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (further review by editor and referees) (29 Jan 2020) by Filippos Vallianatos

AR by Christoph Scheingraber on behalf of the Authors (25 Feb 2020) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (29 Mar 2020) by Filippos Vallianatos

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (08 Apr 2020)

RR by Anonymous Referee #4 (09 May 2020)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

Comments on the manuscript entitled: “Spatial Seismic Hazard Variation and Adaptive Sampling of Portfolio Location Uncertainty in Probabilistic Seismic Risk Analysis” by Christoph Scheingraber and Martin Käser

The manuscript deals with Probabilistic Seismic Risk Analysis, applied in Indonesia, also implementing Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment. The subject is of wide interest, both for Academics and for Insurance Companies, and the work is worth being published. It is a well-written manuscript. However, general expressions, such as (among others) “seismological data is often limited” or “poor data quality” must be avoided and specified. In addition, other methods of Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment must be mentioned and the selection of the applied method should be justified,

Thus, the manuscript can be considered for publication in Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences after minor revisions.

Detailed comments, corrections and additions are included, mainly as sticky motes, in the pdf file: nhess-2019-110-manuscript-version2_reviewer1.pdf
Some of the main comments (also included in the .pdf file) are:

1. In all maps add a scale in kilometers (km)

2. Page 1, Line 2: “seismological data is often limited”.
Which seismological data are often limited? Please be more precise. Seismological networks are densified, so this sentence might be misleading.

3. Page 1, Lines 2-3: “resulting in many uncertainties and assumptions”.
This is a general statement which is misleading. You refer in general in “seismological data”. But, for example, source parameters are quite all determined nowadays. You have to clarify to what uncertainties and assumptions you refer to. Try to avoid general and misleading comments.

4. Page 1, Lines 7-8: “, but also between different return periods for a fixed zone.”
This is self-evident and is always the case in regions with high seismicity. Delete this part of the sentence.

5. Page 1, Line 20: “poor data quality”.
Again, which data have poor quality? I urge the authors to avoid such general and misleading comments.

6. Page 6, Lines 21-22: “where p is a perturbation factor set to 0:2, which is consistent with the characteristics of many real portfolios”.
Provide more details for p and add references.

7. Page 7, Lines 6-7: “For this study, we use a custom seismic risk model based on the South-East Asia hazard model by Petersen et al. (2007) of the United States Geological Survey (USGS)”.
The authors should first describe different models and methods applied for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment in several studies. For example they should refer to the Extreme Values method (e.g. Papadopoulou-Vrynioti et al., 2013; Pavlou et al., 2013) and to the SEISRISK III method (e.g. Benders and Perkins, 1987). Following, the authors should explain why (based on which criteria) they chose to use the model by Petersen et al. (2007).
Citations:
Bender, B., and Perkins, D.M., 1987. SEISRISK III: a computer program for seismic hazard estimation. United States Geological Survey, Bulletin 1772-1820, 48pp.
Papadopoulou-Vrynioti, K., Bathrellos, G., Skilodimou, H., Kaviris, G., Makropoulos, K., 2013. Karst collapse susceptibility mapping considering peak ground acceleration in a rapidly growing urban area. Eng Geol 158:77–88.
Pavlou, K., Kaviris, G., Chousianitis, K., Drakatos, G., Kouskouna, V., Makropoulos, K., 2013. Seismic hazard assessment in Polyphyto Dam area (NW Greece) and its relation with the ‘‘unexpected’’ earthquake of 13 May 1995 (Ms = 6.5, NW Greece). Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 13:141–149.

8. Page 8, Line 1: “Sumatra, Java, and Kalimantan (the Indonesian sector on the island of Borneo”. Page 8, Last Line “Jakarta”.
All toponyms must be added to Figure 2

9. Figure 2: Add all toponyms to the map (Sumatra, Java, Kalimantan, Jakarta etc)

Referee Report: PDF

Hide

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (09 May 2020) by Filippos Vallianatos

AR by Christoph Scheingraber on behalf of the Authors (19 May 2020) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (31 May 2020) by Filippos Vallianatos

Short summary

Probabilistic seismic risk analysis is widely used in the insurance industry to model losses to insured portfolios by earthquake events. Risk items are often only known to be located within an administrative geographical zone, but precise coordinates remain unknown to the modeler. We analyze spatial seismic hazard and loss rate variation inside administrative zones in western Indonesia. Building upon this, we present a novel framework for efficient treatment of portfolio location uncertainty.