Articles | Volume 24, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3049-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Special issue:
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3049-2024
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| Highlight paper
| 
13 Sep 2024
Research article | Highlight paper |
| 13 Sep 2024
| 13 Sep 2024
The 2020 European Seismic Hazard Model: overview and results
Laurentiu Danciu
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Swiss Seismological Service (SED), Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, ETH Zurich, Zurich, 8009, Switzerland
Domenico Giardini
Swiss Seismological Service (SED), Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, ETH Zurich, Zurich, 8009, Switzerland
Graeme Weatherill
Seismic Hazard and Risk Dynamics, GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Potsdam, 14467, Germany
Roberto Basili
Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, Sezione di Roma 1, 00143, Roma, Italy
Shyam Nandan
Swiss Seismological Service (SED), Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, ETH Zurich, Zurich, 8009, Switzerland
Andrea Rovida
Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, 20133, Milan, Italy
Céline Beauval
Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, IRD, Univ. Gustave Eiffel, ISTerre, 38000, Grenoble, France
Pierre-Yves Bard
Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, IRD, Univ. Gustave Eiffel, ISTerre, 38000, Grenoble, France
Marco Pagani
GEM Foundation, Pavia, Italy
Institute of Catastrophe Risk Management, Nanyang Technological University, 639798, Singapore, Singapore
Celso G. Reyes
Swiss Seismological Service (SED), Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, ETH Zurich, Zurich, 8009, Switzerland
Karin Sesetyan
Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute, Boğaziçi University, 34684, Istanbul, Türkiye
Susana Vilanova
Instituto Superior Tecnico (IST), University of Lisbon, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal
Fabrice Cotton
Seismic Hazard and Risk Dynamics, GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Potsdam, 14467, Germany
Stefan Wiemer
Swiss Seismological Service (SED), Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, ETH Zurich, Zurich, 8009, Switzerland
Related authors
Bénédicte Donniol Jouve, Anne Socquet, Céline Beauval, Jesus Piña Valdès, and Laurentiu Danciu
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1789–1809, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-1789-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-1789-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate how geodetic monitoring enhances accuracy in seismic hazard assessment. By utilizing geodetic strain rate maps for Europe and the European Seismic Hazard Model 2020 source model, we compare geodetic and seismic moment rates across the continent while addressing associated uncertainties. Our analysis reveals primary compatibility in high-activity zones. In well-constrained regions of lower activity, we also observed an overlap in the distribution of seismic and geodetic moments.
Elena F. Manea, Laurentiu Danciu, Carmen O. Cioflan, Dragos Toma-Danila, and Matthew C. Gerstenberger
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1–12, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-1-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-1-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We test and evaluate the results of the 2020 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20) against observations spanning a few centuries at 12 cities in Romania. The full distributions of the hazard curves at the given locations were considered, and the testing was performed for two relevant peak ground acceleration (PGA) values. Our analysis suggests that the observed exceedance rates for the selected PGA levels are consistent with ESHM20 estimates.
Roberto Basili, Laurentiu Danciu, Céline Beauval, Karin Sesetyan, Susana Pires Vilanova, Shota Adamia, Pierre Arroucau, Jure Atanackov, Stéphane Baize, Carolina Canora, Riccardo Caputo, Michele Matteo Cosimo Carafa, Edward Marc Cushing, Susana Custódio, Mine Betul Demircioglu Tumsa, João C. Duarte, Athanassios Ganas, Julián García-Mayordomo, Laura Gómez de la Peña, Eulàlia Gràcia, Petra Jamšek Rupnik, Hervé Jomard, Vanja Kastelic, Francesco Emanuele Maesano, Raquel Martín-Banda, Sara Martínez-Loriente, Marta Neres, Hector Perea, Barbara Šket Motnikar, Mara Monica Tiberti, Nino Tsereteli, Varvara Tsironi, Roberto Vallone, Kris Vanneste, Polona Zupančič, and Domenico Giardini
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 3945–3976, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3945-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3945-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study presents the European Fault-Source Model 2020 (EFSM20), a dataset of 1248 geologic crustal faults and four subduction systems, each having the necessary parameters to forecast long-term earthquake occurrences in the European continent. This dataset constituted one of the main inputs for the recently released European Seismic Hazard Model 2020, a key instrument to mitigate seismic risk in Europe. EFSM20 adopts recognized open-standard formats, and it is openly accessible and reusable.
Athanasios N. Papadopoulos, Philippe Roth, Laurentiu Danciu, Paolo Bergamo, Francesco Panzera, Donat Fäh, Carlo Cauzzi, Blaise Duvernay, Alireza Khodaverdian, Pierino Lestuzzi, Ömer Odabaşi, Ettore Fagà, Paolo Bazzurro, Michèle Marti, Nadja Valenzuela, Irina Dallo, Nicolas Schmid, Philip Kästli, Florian Haslinger, and Stefan Wiemer
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 3561–3578, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3561-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3561-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The Earthquake Risk Model of Switzerland (ERM-CH23), released in early 2023, is the culmination of a multidisciplinary effort aiming to achieve, for the first time, a comprehensive assessment of the potential consequences of earthquakes on the Swiss building stock and population. ERM-CH23 provides risk estimates for various impact metrics, ranging from economic loss as a result of damage to buildings and their contents to human losses, such as deaths, injuries, and displaced population.
Konstantinos Trevlopoulos, Pierre Gehl, Caterina Negulescu, Helen Crowley, and Laurentiu Danciu
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 2383–2401, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-2383-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-2383-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The models used to estimate the probability of exceeding a level of earthquake damage are essential to the reduction of disasters. These models consist of components that may be tested individually; however testing these types of models as a whole is challenging. Here, we use observations of damage caused by the 2019 Le Teil earthquake and estimations from other models to test components of seismic risk models.
Graeme Weatherill, Sreeram Reddy Kotha, Laurentiu Danciu, Susana Vilanova, and Fabrice Cotton
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 1795–1834, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1795-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1795-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The ground motion models (GMMs) selected for the 2020 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20) and their uncertainties require adaptation to different tectonic environments. Using insights from new data, local experts and developments in the scientific literature, we further calibrate the ESHM20 GMM logic tree to capture previously unmodelled regional variation. We also propose a new scaled-backbone logic tree for application to Europe's subduction zones and the Vrancea deep seismic source.
Maren Böse, Laurentiu Danciu, Athanasios Papadopoulos, John Clinton, Carlo Cauzzi, Irina Dallo, Leila Mizrahi, Tobias Diehl, Paolo Bergamo, Yves Reuland, Andreas Fichtner, Philippe Roth, Florian Haslinger, Frédérick Massin, Nadja Valenzuela, Nikola Blagojević, Lukas Bodenmann, Eleni Chatzi, Donat Fäh, Franziska Glueer, Marta Han, Lukas Heiniger, Paulina Janusz, Dario Jozinović, Philipp Kästli, Federica Lanza, Timothy Lee, Panagiotis Martakis, Michèle Marti, Men-Andrin Meier, Banu Mena Cabrera, Maria Mesimeri, Anne Obermann, Pilar Sanchez-Pastor, Luca Scarabello, Nicolas Schmid, Anastasiia Shynkarenko, Bozidar Stojadinović, Domenico Giardini, and Stefan Wiemer
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 583–607, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-583-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-583-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Seismic hazard and risk are time dependent as seismicity is clustered and exposure can change rapidly. We are developing an interdisciplinary dynamic earthquake risk framework for advancing earthquake risk mitigation in Switzerland. This includes various earthquake risk products and services, such as operational earthquake forecasting and early warning. Standardisation and harmonisation into seamless solutions that access the same databases, workflows, and software are a crucial component.
Irina Dallo, Michèle Marti, Nadja Valenzuela, Helen Crowley, Jamal Dabbeek, Laurentiu Danciu, Simone Zaugg, Fabrice Cotton, Domenico Giardini, Rui Pinho, John F. Schneider, Céline Beauval, António A. Correia, Olga-Joan Ktenidou, Päivi Mäntyniemi, Marco Pagani, Vitor Silva, Graeme Weatherill, and Stefan Wiemer
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 291–307, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-291-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-291-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
For the release of cross-country harmonised hazard and risk models, a communication strategy co-defined by the model developers and communication experts is needed. The strategy should consist of a communication concept, user testing, expert feedback mechanisms, and the establishment of a network with outreach specialists. Here we present our approach for the release of the European Seismic Hazard Model and European Seismic Risk Model and provide practical recommendations for similar efforts.
John Douglas, Helen Crowley, Vitor Silva, Warner Marzocchi, Laurentiu Danciu, and Rui Pinho
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-991, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-991, 2023
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
Estimates of the earthquake ground motions expected during the lifetime of a building or the length of an insurance policy are frequently calculated for locations around the world. Estimates for the same location from different studies can show large differences. These differences affect engineering, financial and risk management decisions. We apply various approaches to understand when such differences have an impact on such decisions and when they are expected because data are limited.
Sandro Truttmann, Tobias Diehl, Marco Herwegh, and Stefan Wiemer
Solid Earth, 16, 641–662, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-16-641-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-16-641-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Our study investigates the statistical relationship between geological fractures and earthquakes in the southwestern Swiss Alps. We analyze how the fracture size and earthquake rupture are related and find differences in how fractures at different depths rupture seismically. While shallow fractures tend to rupture only partially, deeper fractures are more likely to rupture along their entire length, potentially resulting in larger earthquakes.
Andrea Rovida, Mario Locati, Andrea Antonucci, and Romano Camassi
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 3109–3124, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-3109-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-3109-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
ASMI, the Italian Archive of Historical Earthquake Data, is an online data collection that currently provides seismological data on earthquakes that occurred in and around Italy from from 461 BCE to 2025 CE. Based on more than 450 data sources, ASMI's web portal distributes earthquake parameters and macroseismic intensity data, along with the bibliographical reference of the data source and – if possible – the data source itself, through queries by both earthquake and data source.
Bénédicte Donniol Jouve, Anne Socquet, Céline Beauval, Jesus Piña Valdès, and Laurentiu Danciu
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1789–1809, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-1789-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-1789-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate how geodetic monitoring enhances accuracy in seismic hazard assessment. By utilizing geodetic strain rate maps for Europe and the European Seismic Hazard Model 2020 source model, we compare geodetic and seismic moment rates across the continent while addressing associated uncertainties. Our analysis reveals primary compatibility in high-activity zones. In well-constrained regions of lower activity, we also observed an overlap in the distribution of seismic and geodetic moments.
Kathrin Behnen, Marian Hertrich, Hansruedi Maurer, Alexis Shakas, Kai Bröker, Claire Epiney, María Blanch Jover, and Domenico Giardini
Solid Earth, 16, 333–350, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-16-333-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-16-333-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Several cross-hole seismic surveys in the undisturbed Rotondo granite are used to analyze the seismic anisotropy in the Bedretto Lab, Switzerland. The P and S1 waves show a clear trend of faster velocities in the NE–SW direction and slower velocities perpendicular to it, indicating a tilted transverse isotropic velocity model. The symmetry plane is mostly aligned with the direction of maximum stress, but also the orientation of fractures is expected to influence the velocities.
Naveen Ragu Ramalingam, Kendra Johnson, Marco Pagani, and Mario L. V. Martina
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1655–1679, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-1655-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-1655-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
By combining limited tsunami simulations with machine learning, we developed a fast and efficient framework to predict tsunami impacts such as wave heights and inundation depths at different coastal sites. Testing our model with historical tsunami source scenarios helped assess its reliability and broad applicability. This work enables more efficient and comprehensive tsunami hazard modelling workflow, which is essential for tsunami risk evaluations and enhancing coastal disaster preparedness.
Miriam Larissa Schwarz, Hansruedi Maurer, Anne Christine Obermann, Paul Antony Selvadurai, Alexis Shakas, Stefan Wiemer, and Domenico Giardini
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1094, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1094, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study applied fat ray travel time tomography to image the geothermal testbed at the BedrettoLab. An active seismic crosshole survey provided a dataset of 42'843 manually picked first breaks. The complex major fault zone was successfully imaged by a 3D velocity model and validated with wireline logs and geological observations. Seismic events from hydraulic stimulation correlated with velocity structures, "avoiding" very high and low velocities, speculatively due to stress gradients.
Marta Han, Leila Mizrahi, and Stefan Wiemer
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 991–1012, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-991-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-991-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Relying on recent accomplishments of collecting and harmonizing data by the 2020 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20) and leveraging advancements in state-of-the-art earthquake forecasting methods, we develop a harmonized earthquake forecasting model for Europe. We propose several model variants and test them on training data for consistency and on a 7-year testing period against each other, as well as against both a time-independent benchmark and a global time-dependent benchmark.
Elena F. Manea, Laurentiu Danciu, Carmen O. Cioflan, Dragos Toma-Danila, and Matthew C. Gerstenberger
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1–12, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-1-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-1-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We test and evaluate the results of the 2020 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20) against observations spanning a few centuries at 12 cities in Romania. The full distributions of the hazard curves at the given locations were considered, and the testing was performed for two relevant peak ground acceleration (PGA) values. Our analysis suggests that the observed exceedance rates for the selected PGA levels are consistent with ESHM20 estimates.
Sarah El Kadri, Celine Beauval, Marlene Brax, and Yann Klinger
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2024-184, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2024-184, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for NHESS
Short summary
Short summary
Seismic hazard evaluation is required for establishing earthquake-resistant building codes. Our aim is to improve the quantification of seismic hazard in the Levant by including our knowledge on how faults may be interconnected. We build an earthquake forecast by redistributing the energy stored in the fault system over all possible earthquake ruptures. This interconnected fault model leads to seismic hazard maps where hazard is as high on secondary fault branches as on main branches.
Roberto Basili, Laurentiu Danciu, Céline Beauval, Karin Sesetyan, Susana Pires Vilanova, Shota Adamia, Pierre Arroucau, Jure Atanackov, Stéphane Baize, Carolina Canora, Riccardo Caputo, Michele Matteo Cosimo Carafa, Edward Marc Cushing, Susana Custódio, Mine Betul Demircioglu Tumsa, João C. Duarte, Athanassios Ganas, Julián García-Mayordomo, Laura Gómez de la Peña, Eulàlia Gràcia, Petra Jamšek Rupnik, Hervé Jomard, Vanja Kastelic, Francesco Emanuele Maesano, Raquel Martín-Banda, Sara Martínez-Loriente, Marta Neres, Hector Perea, Barbara Šket Motnikar, Mara Monica Tiberti, Nino Tsereteli, Varvara Tsironi, Roberto Vallone, Kris Vanneste, Polona Zupančič, and Domenico Giardini
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 3945–3976, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3945-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3945-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study presents the European Fault-Source Model 2020 (EFSM20), a dataset of 1248 geologic crustal faults and four subduction systems, each having the necessary parameters to forecast long-term earthquake occurrences in the European continent. This dataset constituted one of the main inputs for the recently released European Seismic Hazard Model 2020, a key instrument to mitigate seismic risk in Europe. EFSM20 adopts recognized open-standard formats, and it is openly accessible and reusable.
Graeme Weatherill, Fabrice Cotton, Guillaume Daniel, Irmela Zentner, Pablo Iturrieta, and Christian Bosse
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 3755–3787, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3755-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3755-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
New generations of seismic hazard models are developed with sophisticated approaches to quantify uncertainties in our knowledge of earthquake processes. To understand why and how recent state-of-the-art seismic hazard models for France, Germany, and Europe differ despite similar underlying assumptions, we present a systematic approach to investigate model-to-model differences and to quantify and visualise them while accounting for their respective uncertainties.
Athanasios N. Papadopoulos, Philippe Roth, Laurentiu Danciu, Paolo Bergamo, Francesco Panzera, Donat Fäh, Carlo Cauzzi, Blaise Duvernay, Alireza Khodaverdian, Pierino Lestuzzi, Ömer Odabaşi, Ettore Fagà, Paolo Bazzurro, Michèle Marti, Nadja Valenzuela, Irina Dallo, Nicolas Schmid, Philip Kästli, Florian Haslinger, and Stefan Wiemer
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 3561–3578, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3561-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3561-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The Earthquake Risk Model of Switzerland (ERM-CH23), released in early 2023, is the culmination of a multidisciplinary effort aiming to achieve, for the first time, a comprehensive assessment of the potential consequences of earthquakes on the Swiss building stock and population. ERM-CH23 provides risk estimates for various impact metrics, ranging from economic loss as a result of damage to buildings and their contents to human losses, such as deaths, injuries, and displaced population.
Peter Achtziger-Zupančič, Alberto Ceccato, Alba Simona Zappone, Giacomo Pozzi, Alexis Shakas, Florian Amann, Whitney Maria Behr, Daniel Escallon Botero, Domenico Giardini, Marian Hertrich, Mohammadreza Jalali, Xiaodong Ma, Men-Andrin Meier, Julian Osten, Stefan Wiemer, and Massimo Cocco
Solid Earth, 15, 1087–1112, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-15-1087-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-15-1087-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We detail the selection and characterization of a fault zone for earthquake experiments in the Fault Activation and Earthquake Ruptures (FEAR) project at the Bedretto Lab. FEAR, which studies earthquake processes, overcame data collection challenges near faults. The fault zone in Rotondo granite was selected based on geometry, monitorability, and hydro-mechanical properties. Remote sensing, borehole logging, and geological mapping were used to create a 3D model for precise monitoring.
Konstantinos Trevlopoulos, Pierre Gehl, Caterina Negulescu, Helen Crowley, and Laurentiu Danciu
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 2383–2401, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-2383-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-2383-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The models used to estimate the probability of exceeding a level of earthquake damage are essential to the reduction of disasters. These models consist of components that may be tested individually; however testing these types of models as a whole is challenging. Here, we use observations of damage caused by the 2019 Le Teil earthquake and estimations from other models to test components of seismic risk models.
Graeme Weatherill, Sreeram Reddy Kotha, Laurentiu Danciu, Susana Vilanova, and Fabrice Cotton
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 1795–1834, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1795-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1795-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The ground motion models (GMMs) selected for the 2020 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20) and their uncertainties require adaptation to different tectonic environments. Using insights from new data, local experts and developments in the scientific literature, we further calibrate the ESHM20 GMM logic tree to capture previously unmodelled regional variation. We also propose a new scaled-backbone logic tree for application to Europe's subduction zones and the Vrancea deep seismic source.
Vera D'Amico, Francesco Visini, Andrea Rovida, Warner Marzocchi, and Carlo Meletti
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 1401–1413, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1401-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1401-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We propose a scoring strategy to rank multiple models/branches of a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) model that could be useful to consider specific requests from stakeholders responsible for seismic risk reduction actions. In fact, applications of PSHA often require sampling a few hazard curves from the model. The procedure is introduced through an application aimed to score and rank the branches of a recent Italian PSHA model according to their fit with macroseismic intensity data.
Karina Loviknes, Fabrice Cotton, and Graeme Weatherill
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 1223–1247, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1223-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1223-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Earthquake ground shaking can be strongly affected by local geology and is often amplified by soft sediments. In this study, we introduce a global geomorphological model for sediment thickness as a protentional parameter for predicting this site amplification. The results show that including geology and geomorphology in site-amplification predictions adds important value and that global or regional models for sediment thickness from fields beyond engineering seismology are worth considering.
Dino Bindi, Riccardo Zaccarelli, Angelo Strollo, Domenico Di Giacomo, Andres Heinloo, Peter Evans, Fabrice Cotton, and Frederik Tilmann
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 1733–1745, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-1733-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-1733-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The size of an earthquake is often described by a single number called the magnitude. Among the possible magnitude scales, the seismic moment (Mw) and the radiated energy (Me) scales are based on physical parameters describing the rupture process. Since these two magnitude scales provide complementary information that can be used for seismic hazard assessment and for seismic risk mitigation, we complement the Mw catalog disseminated by the GEOFON Data Centre with Me values.
Maren Böse, Laurentiu Danciu, Athanasios Papadopoulos, John Clinton, Carlo Cauzzi, Irina Dallo, Leila Mizrahi, Tobias Diehl, Paolo Bergamo, Yves Reuland, Andreas Fichtner, Philippe Roth, Florian Haslinger, Frédérick Massin, Nadja Valenzuela, Nikola Blagojević, Lukas Bodenmann, Eleni Chatzi, Donat Fäh, Franziska Glueer, Marta Han, Lukas Heiniger, Paulina Janusz, Dario Jozinović, Philipp Kästli, Federica Lanza, Timothy Lee, Panagiotis Martakis, Michèle Marti, Men-Andrin Meier, Banu Mena Cabrera, Maria Mesimeri, Anne Obermann, Pilar Sanchez-Pastor, Luca Scarabello, Nicolas Schmid, Anastasiia Shynkarenko, Bozidar Stojadinović, Domenico Giardini, and Stefan Wiemer
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 583–607, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-583-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-583-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Seismic hazard and risk are time dependent as seismicity is clustered and exposure can change rapidly. We are developing an interdisciplinary dynamic earthquake risk framework for advancing earthquake risk mitigation in Switzerland. This includes various earthquake risk products and services, such as operational earthquake forecasting and early warning. Standardisation and harmonisation into seamless solutions that access the same databases, workflows, and software are a crucial component.
Irina Dallo, Michèle Marti, Nadja Valenzuela, Helen Crowley, Jamal Dabbeek, Laurentiu Danciu, Simone Zaugg, Fabrice Cotton, Domenico Giardini, Rui Pinho, John F. Schneider, Céline Beauval, António A. Correia, Olga-Joan Ktenidou, Päivi Mäntyniemi, Marco Pagani, Vitor Silva, Graeme Weatherill, and Stefan Wiemer
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 291–307, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-291-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-291-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
For the release of cross-country harmonised hazard and risk models, a communication strategy co-defined by the model developers and communication experts is needed. The strategy should consist of a communication concept, user testing, expert feedback mechanisms, and the establishment of a network with outreach specialists. Here we present our approach for the release of the European Seismic Hazard Model and European Seismic Risk Model and provide practical recommendations for similar efforts.
Max Schneider, Fabrice Cotton, and Pia-Johanna Schweizer
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 2505–2521, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-2505-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-2505-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Hazard maps are fundamental to earthquake risk reduction, but research is missing on how to design them. We review the visualization literature to identify evidence-based criteria for color and classification schemes for hazard maps. We implement these for the German seismic hazard map, focusing on communicating four properties of seismic hazard. Our evaluation finds that the redesigned map successfully communicates seismic hazard in Germany, improving on the baseline map for two key properties.
Juan Camilo Gómez Zapata, Massimiliano Pittore, Nils Brinckmann, Juan Lizarazo-Marriaga, Sergio Medina, Nicola Tarque, and Fabrice Cotton
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 2203–2228, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-2203-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-2203-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
To investigate cumulative damage on extended building portfolios, we propose an alternative and modular method to probabilistically integrate sets of single-hazard vulnerability models that are being constantly developed by experts from various research fields to be used within a multi-risk context. We demonstrate its application by assessing the economic losses expected for the residential building stock of Lima, Peru, a megacity commonly exposed to consecutive earthquake and tsunami scenarios.
John Douglas, Helen Crowley, Vitor Silva, Warner Marzocchi, Laurentiu Danciu, and Rui Pinho
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-991, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-991, 2023
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
Estimates of the earthquake ground motions expected during the lifetime of a building or the length of an insurance policy are frequently calculated for locations around the world. Estimates for the same location from different studies can show large differences. These differences affect engineering, financial and risk management decisions. We apply various approaches to understand when such differences have an impact on such decisions and when they are expected because data are limited.
Andrea Antonucci, Andrea Rovida, Vera D'Amico, and Dario Albarello
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 1805–1816, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-1805-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-1805-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The earthquake effects undocumented at 228 Italian localities were calculated through a probabilistic approach starting from the values obtained through the use of an intensity prediction equation, taking into account the intensity data documented at close localities for a given earthquake. The results showed some geographical dependencies and correlations with the intensity levels investigated.
Audrey Bonnelye, Pierre Dick, Marco Bohnhoff, Fabrice Cotton, Rüdiger Giese, Jan Henninges, Damien Jougnot, Grzegorz Kwiatek, and Stefan Lüth
Adv. Geosci., 58, 177–188, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-58-177-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-58-177-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The overall objective of the CHENILLE project is to performed an in-situ experiment in the Underground Reaserch Laboratory of Tournemire (Southern France) consisting of hydraulic and thermal stimulation of a fault zone. This experiment is monitored with extensive geophysical means (passive seismic, active seismic, distributed fiber optics for temperature measurements) in order to unravel the physical processes taking place during the stimulation for a better charactization of fault zones.
Andrea Rovida, Andrea Antonucci, and Mario Locati
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 5213–5231, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-5213-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-5213-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
EPICA is the 1000–1899 catalogue compiled for the European Seismic Hazard Model 2020 and contains 5703 earthquakes with Mw ≥ 4.0. It relies on the data of the European Archive of Historical Earthquake Data (AHEAD), both macroseismic intensities from historical seismological studies and parameters from regional catalogues. For each earthquake, the most representative datasets were selected and processed in order to derive harmonised parameters, both from intensity data and parametric catalogues.
Francesco Visini, Carlo Meletti, Andrea Rovida, Vera D'Amico, Bruno Pace, and Silvia Pondrelli
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 2807–2827, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2807-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2807-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
As new data are collected, seismic hazard models can be updated and improved. In the framework of a project aimed to update the Italian seismic hazard model, we proposed a model based on the definition and parametrization of area sources. Using geological data, seismicity and other geophysical constraints, we delineated three-dimensional boundaries and activity rates of a seismotectonic zoning and explored the epistemic uncertainty by means of a logic-tree approach.
Xiaodong Ma, Marian Hertrich, Florian Amann, Kai Bröker, Nima Gholizadeh Doonechaly, Valentin Gischig, Rebecca Hochreutener, Philipp Kästli, Hannes Krietsch, Michèle Marti, Barbara Nägeli, Morteza Nejati, Anne Obermann, Katrin Plenkers, Antonio P. Rinaldi, Alexis Shakas, Linus Villiger, Quinn Wenning, Alba Zappone, Falko Bethmann, Raymi Castilla, Francisco Seberto, Peter Meier, Thomas Driesner, Simon Loew, Hansruedi Maurer, Martin O. Saar, Stefan Wiemer, and Domenico Giardini
Solid Earth, 13, 301–322, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-13-301-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-13-301-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Questions on issues such as anthropogenic earthquakes and deep geothermal energy developments require a better understanding of the fractured rock. Experiments conducted at reduced scales but with higher-resolution observations can shed some light. To this end, the BedrettoLab was recently established in an existing tunnel in Ticino, Switzerland, with preliminary efforts to characterize realistic rock mass behavior at the hectometer scale.
Enrico Baglione, Stefano Lorito, Alessio Piatanesi, Fabrizio Romano, Roberto Basili, Beatriz Brizuela, Roberto Tonini, Manuela Volpe, Hafize Basak Bayraktar, and Alessandro Amato
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 3713–3730, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-3713-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-3713-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We investigated the seismic fault structure and the rupture characteristics of the MW 6.6, 2 May 2020, Cretan Passage earthquake through tsunami data inverse modelling. Our results suggest a shallow crustal event with a reverse mechanism within the accretionary wedge rather than on the Hellenic Arc subduction interface. The study identifies two possible ruptures: a steeply sloping reverse splay fault and a back-thrust rupture dipping south, with a more prominent dip angle.
Juan Camilo Gomez-Zapata, Nils Brinckmann, Sven Harig, Raquel Zafrir, Massimiliano Pittore, Fabrice Cotton, and Andrey Babeyko
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 3599–3628, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-3599-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-3599-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We present variable-resolution boundaries based on central Voronoi tessellations (CVTs) to spatially aggregate building exposure models and physical vulnerability assessment. Their geo-cell sizes are inversely proportional to underlying distributions that account for the combination between hazard intensities and exposure proxies. We explore their efficiency and associated uncertainties in risk–loss estimations and mapping from decoupled scenario-based earthquakes and tsunamis in Lima, Peru.
Andrea Antonucci, Andrea Rovida, Vera D'Amico, and Dario Albarello
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 2299–2311, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-2299-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-2299-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We present a probabilistic approach for integrating incomplete intensity distributions by means of the Bayesian combination of estimates provided by intensity prediction equations (IPEs) and data documented at nearby localities, accounting for the relevant uncertainties. The performance of the proposed methodology is tested at 28 Italian localities with long and rich seismic histories and for the strong 1980 and 2009 earthquakes in Italy. An application of this approach is also illustrated.
Alba Zappone, Antonio Pio Rinaldi, Melchior Grab, Quinn C. Wenning, Clément Roques, Claudio Madonna, Anne C. Obermann, Stefano M. Bernasconi, Matthias S. Brennwald, Rolf Kipfer, Florian Soom, Paul Cook, Yves Guglielmi, Christophe Nussbaum, Domenico Giardini, Marco Mazzotti, and Stefan Wiemer
Solid Earth, 12, 319–343, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-319-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/se-12-319-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The success of the geological storage of carbon dioxide is linked to the availability at depth of a capable reservoir and an impermeable caprock. The sealing capacity of the caprock is a key parameter for long-term CO2 containment. Faults crosscutting the caprock might represent preferential pathways for CO2 to escape. A decameter-scale experiment on injection in a fault, monitored by an integrated network of multiparamerter sensors, sheds light on the mobility of fluids within the fault.
Silvia Pondrelli, Francesco Visini, Andrea Rovida, Vera D'Amico, Bruno Pace, and Carlo Meletti
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 3577–3592, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-3577-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-3577-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We used 100 years of seismicity in Italy to predict the hypothetical tectonic style of future earthquakes, with the purpose of using this information in a new seismic hazard model. To squeeze all possible information out of the available data, we created a chain of criteria to be applied in the input and output selection processes. The result is a list of cases from very clear ones, e.g., extensional tectonics in the central Apennines, to completely random tectonics for future seismic events.
Camilla Rossi, Francesco Grigoli, Simone Cesca, Sebastian Heimann, Paolo Gasperini, Vala Hjörleifsdóttir, Torsten Dahm, Christopher J. Bean, Stefan Wiemer, Luca Scarabello, Nima Nooshiri, John F. Clinton, Anne Obermann, Kristján Ágústsson, and Thorbjörg Ágústsdóttir
Adv. Geosci., 54, 129–136, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-54-129-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-54-129-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate the microseismicity occurred at Hengill area, a complex tectonic and geothermal site, where the origin of earthquakes may be either natural or anthropogenic. We use a very dense broadband seismic monitoring network and apply full-waveform based method for location. Our results and first characterization identified different types of microseismic clusters, which might be associated to either production/injection or the tectonic activity of the geothermal area.
Cited articles
Abrahamson, N., Gregor, N., and Addo, K.: BC Hydro Ground Mo tion Prediction Equations for Subduction Earthquakes, Earthq. Spectra, 32, 23–44, https://doi.org/10.1193/051712EQS188MR, 2016.
Albini P., Locati M., Rovida A., and Stucchi M.: European Archive of Historical EArthquake Data (AHEAD), Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV), https://doi.org/10.6092/ingv.it-ahead, 2013.
Allen, T. I. and Hayes, G. P.: Alternative Rupture-Scaling Relationships for Subduction Interface and Other Offshore Environments, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 107, 1240–1253, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120160255, 2017.
Allen, T. I., Griffin, J. D., Leonard, M., Clark, D. J., and Ghasemi, H.: The 2018 national seismic hazard assessment of Australia: Quantifying hazard changes and model uncertainties, Earthq. Spectra, 36, 5–43, https://doi.org/10.1177/8755293019900777, 2020.
Anderson, J. G. and Luco, J. E.: Consequences of slip rate constraints on earthquake occurrence relations, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 73, 471–496, https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0730020471, 1983.
Baize, S., Cushing, E. M., Lemeille, F., and Jomard, H.: Updated seismotectonic zoning scheme of Metropolitan France, with reference to geologic and seismotectonic data, B. Soc. Geol. Fr., 184, 225–259, https://doi.org/10.2113/gssgfbull.184.3.225, 2013.
Bard, P.-Y., Danciu, L., and Beauval, C.: Hazard curves, spectral shapes, importance coefficients and return periods: insight from recent PSHA studies, Invited theme lecture, Third European Conference on earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Bucharest, 4–9 September, https://3ecees.ro/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Proceedings_3ECEES_2022.pdf (last access: August 2024), 2022.
Bard, P.-Y., Derras, B., Beauval, C., and Danciu, L.: Hazard curve exponents and importance factors for EC8-like codes: a statistical analysis of ESHM20 results throughout Europe, in preparation, 2024.
Basili, R., Kastelic, V., Demircioglu, M. B., Garcia Moreno, D., Nemser, E. S., Petricca, P., Sboras, S. P., Besana-Ostman, G. M., Cabral, J., Camelbeeck, T., Caputo, R., Danciu, L., Domaç, H., Fonseca, J. F. de B. D., García-Mayordomo, J., Giardini, D., Glavatovic, B., Gulen, L., Ince, Y., Pavlides, S., Sesetyan, K., Tarabusi, G., Tiberti, M. M., Utkucu, M., Valensise, G., Vanneste, K., Vilanova, S. P., and Wössner, J.: European Database of Seismogenic Faults (EDSF), INGV Rome, Italy [data set], https://doi.org/10.6092/INGV.IT-SHARE-EDSF, 2013.
Basili, R., Brizuela, B., Herrero, A., Iqbal, S., Lorito, S., Maesano, F. E., Murphy, S., Perfetti, P., Romano, F., Scala, A., Selva, J., Taroni, M., Tiberti, M. M., Thio, H. K., Tonini, R., Volpe, M., Glimsdal, S., Harbitz, C. B., Løvholt, F., Baptista, M. A., Carrilho, F., Matias, L. M., Omira, R., Babeyko, A., Hoechner, A., Gürbüz, M., Pekcan, O., Yalçı]ner, A., Canals, M., Lastras, G., Agalos, A., Papadopoulos, G., Triantafyllou, I., Benchekroun, S., Agrebi Jaouadi, H., Ben Abdallah, S., Bouallegue, A., Hamdi, H., Oueslati, F., Amato, A., Armigliato, A., Behrens, J., Davies, G., Di Bucci, D., Dolce, M., Geist, E., Gonzalez Vida, J. M., González, M., Macías Sánchez, J., Meletti, C., Ozer Sozdinler, C., Pagani, M., Parsons, T., Polet, J., Power, W., Sørensen, M., and Zaytsev, A.: The Making of the NEAM Tsunami Hazard Model 2018 (NEAMTHM18), Front. Earth Sci., 8, 616594, https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2020.616594, 2021.
Basili, R., Danciu, L., Beauval, C., Sesetyan, K., Vilanova, S., Adamia, S., Arroucau, P., Atanackov, J., Baize, S., Canora, C., Caputo, R., Carafa, M., Cushing, M., Custódio, S., Demircioglu Tumsa, M., Duarte, J., Ganas, A., García-Mayordomo, J., Gómez de la Peña, L., Gràcia, E., Jamšek Rupnik, P., Jomard, H., Kastelic, V., Maesano, F., Martín-Banda, R., Martínez-Loriente, S., Neres, M., Perea, H., Šket Motnikar, B., Tiberti, M., Tsereteli, N., Tsironi, V., Vallone, R., Vanneste, K., and Zupančič, P.: European Fault-Source Model 2020 (EFSM20): online data on fault geometry and activity parameters, Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV) [data set], https://doi.org/10.13127/efsm20, 2022.
Basili, R., Danciu, L., Beauval, C., Sesetyan, K., Vilanova, S. P., Adamia, S., Arroucau, P., Atanackov, J., Baize, S., Canora, C., Caputo, R., Carafa, M. M. C., Cushing, E. M., Custódio, S., Demircioglu Tumsa, M. B., Duarte, J. C., Ganas, A., García-Mayordomo, J., Gómez de la Peña, L., Gràcia, E., Jamšek Rupnik, P., Jomard, H., Kastelic, V., Maesano, F. E., Martín-Banda, R., Martínez-Loriente, S., Neres, M., Perea, H., Šket Motnikar, B., Tiberti, M. M., Tsereteli, N., Tsironi, V., Vallone, R., Vanneste, K., Zupančič, P., and Giardini, D.: The European Fault-Source Model 2020 (EFSM20): geologic input data for the European Seismic Hazard Model 2020, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss. [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2023-118, in review, 2023.
Beauval, C., Hainzl, S., and Scherbaum, F.: Probabilistic seismic hazard estimation in low-seismicity regions considering non-Poissonian seismic occurrence, Geophys. J. Int., 164, 543–550, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2006.02863.x, 2006.
Beauval, C., Yepes, H., Palacios, P., Segovia, M., Alvarado, A., Font, Y., Aguilar, J., Troncoso, L., and Vaca, S.: An Earthquake Catalog for Seismic Hazard Assessment in Ecuador, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 103, 773–786, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120120270, 2013.
Benito Oterino, M. B., Gaspar-Escribano, J., Rivas Medina, A., Ruíz Barajas, S., Rodríguez Zaloña, Ó., Martínez Solares, J. M., and Cabañas Rodríguez, L.: Actualización de mapas de peligrosidad sísmica de España, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Instituto Geográfico Nacional, Editor: Centro Nacional de Información Geográfica (CNIG), Madrid, https://doi.org/10.7419/162.05.2017, 2012.
Bisch, P.: Eurocode 8. Evolution or Revolution?, in: Recent Advances in Earthquake Engineering in Europe: 16th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering-Thessaloniki 2018, 18–21 June 2018, edited by: Pitilakis, K., Springer International Publishing, Cham, 639–660, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75741-4_27, 2018.
Bommer, J. J. and Abrahamson, N. A.: Why Do Modern Probabilistic Seismic-Hazard Analyses Often Lead to Increased Hazard Estimates?, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 96, 1967–1977, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120060043, 2006.
Bommer, J. J., Coppersmith, K. J., Coppersmith, R. T., Hanson, K. L., Mangongolo, A., Neveling, J., Rathje, E. M., Rodriguez-Marek, A., Scherbaum, F., Shelembe, R., Stafford, P. J., and Strasser, F. O.: A SSHAC Level 3 Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis for a New-Build Nuclear Site in South Africa, Earthq. Spectra, 31, 661–698, https://doi.org/10.1193/060913EQS145M, 2013.
Boore, D. M.: Orientation-Independent, Nongeometric-Mean Measures of Seismic Intensity from Two Horizontal Components of Motion, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 100, 1830–1835, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120090400, 2010.
Boore, D. M., Watson-Lamprey, J., and Abrahamson, N. A.: Orientation-Independent Measures of Ground Motion, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 96, 1502–1511, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120050209, 2006.
Böse, M., Danciu, L., Papadopoulos, A., Clinton, J., Cauzzi, C., Dallo, I., Mizrahi, L., Diehl, T., Bergamo, P., Reuland, Y., Fichtner, A., Roth, P., Haslinger, F., Massin, F., Valenzuela, N., Blagojević, N., Bodenmann, L., Chatzi, E., Fäh, D., Glueer, F., Han, M., Heiniger, L., Janusz, P., Jozinovic, D., Kästli, P., Lanza, F., Lee, T., Martakis, P., Marti, M., Meier, M.-A., Mena Cabrera, B., Mesimeri, M., Obermann, A., Sanchez-Pastor, P., Scarabello, L., Schmid, N., Shynkarenko, A., Stojadinovic, B., Giardini, D., and Wiemer, S.: Towards a Dynamic Earthquake Risk Framework for Switzerland, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1863, 2023.
Bradley, B. A.: On-going challenges in physics-based ground motion prediction and insights from the 2010–2011 Canterbury and 2016 Kaikoura, New Zealand earthquakes, Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 124, 354–364, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2018.04.042, 2019.
Bungum, H.: Numerical modelling of fault activities, Comput. Geosci., 33, 808–820, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2006.10.011, 2007.
Crowley, H., Dabbeek, J., Despotaki, V., Rodrigues, D., Martins, L., Silva, V., Romão, X., Pereira, N., Weatherill, G., and Danciu, L.: European Seismic Risk Model (ESRM20), EFEHR Technical Report 002, V1.0.1, 84 pp., https://doi.org/10.7414/EUC-EFEHR-TR002-ESRM20, 2021.
Dal Zilio, L., Giardini, D., Carbonell, R., and Wiemer, S.: Harnessing the potential of digital twins in seismology, Nat. Rev. Earth Environ., 4, 510–512, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-023-00469-y, 2023.
Dallo, I., Marti, M., Valenzuela, N., Crowley, H., Dabbeek, J., Danciu, L., Zaugg, S., Cotton, F., Giardini, D., Pinho, R., Schneider, J. F., Beauval, C., Correia, A. A., Ktenidou, O.-J., Mäntyniemi, P., Pagani, M., Silva, V., Weatherill, G., and Wiemer, S.: The communication strategy for the release of the first European Seismic Risk Model and the updated European Seismic Hazard Model, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 291–307, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-291-2024, 2024 (data available at: http://www.efehr.org/explore/Downloads-information-material/, last access: August 2024).
Danciu, L. and Giardini, D.: Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program – GSHAP legacy, Ann. Geophys., 58, 1–9, https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-6734, 2015.
Danciu, L., Wiemer, S., Haslinger, F., Kastli, P., and Giardini, D.: EFEHR – the European Facilities for Earthquake Hazard and Risk: beyond the web-platform, 17834, EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts, 17834, 2017.
Danciu, L., Kale, Ö., and Akkar, S.: The 2014 Earthquake Model of the Middle East: ground motion model and uncertainties, B. Earthq. Eng., 16, 3497–3533, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-016-9989-1, 2018a.
Danciu, L., Şeşetyan, K., Demircioglu, M., Gülen, L., Zare, M., Basili, R., Elias, A., Adamia, S., Tsereteli, N., Yalçı]n, H., Utkucu, M., Khan, M. A., Sayab, M., Hessami, K., Rovida, A. N., Stucchi, M., Burg, J.-P., Karakhanian, A., Babayan, H., Avanesyan, M., Mammadli, T., Al-Qaryouti, M., Kalafat, D., Varazanashvili, O., Erdik, M., and Giardini, D.: The 2014 Earthquake Model of the Middle East: seismogenic sources, B. Earthq. Eng., 16, 3465–3496, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0096-8, 2018b.
Danciu, L., Nandan, S., Reyes, C., Basili, R., Weatherill, G., Beauval, C., Rovida, A., Vilanova, S., Sesetyan, K., Bard, P.-Y., Cotton, F., Wiemer, S., and Giardini, D.: The 2020 update of the European Seismic Hazard Model - ESHM20: Model Overview, EFEHR, Report, 121 pp,, https://doi.org/10.12686/A15, 2021a (data available at: http://hazard.efehr.org/en/Documentation/specific-hazard-models/europe/eshm2020-overview/, https://gitlab.seismo.ethz.ch/efehr/eshm20, http://hazard.efehr.org/en/web-services/, http://www.efehr.org/explore/Downloads-information-material/, last access: August 2024).
Danciu, L., Nandan, S., Reyes, C., Basili, R., Weatherill, G., Beauval, C., Rovida, A., Vilanova, S., Sesetyan, K., Bard, P.-Y., Cotton, F., Wiemer, S., and Giardini, D.: Main Datasets of the 2020 Update of the European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20), EFEHR European Facilities of Earthquake Hazard and Risk [data set], https://doi.org/10.12686/ESHM20-MAIN-DATASETS, 2021b.
Danciu, L., Nandan, S., Reyes, C., Basili, R., Weatherill, G., Beauval, C., Rovida, A., Vilanova, S., Sesetyan, K., Bard, P.-Y., Cotton, F., Wiemer, S., and Giardini, D.: The 2020 Update of the European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20): Output Datasets, EFEHR (European Facilities of Earthquake Hazard and Risk) [data set], https://doi.org/10.12686/ESHM20-OUTPUT, 2021c.
Danciu, L., Nandan, S., Reyes, C., Wiemer, S., and Giardini, D.: OpenQuake Input Files for the 2020 Update of the European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20), EFEHR European Facilities of Earthquake Hazard and Risk [data set], https://doi.org/10.12686/ESHM20-OQ-INPUT, 2021d.
Danciu, L., Weatherill, G., Rovida, A., Basili, R., Bard, P.-Y., Beauval, C., Nandan, S., Pagani, M., Crowley, H., Sesetyan, K., Villanova, S., Reyes, C., Marti, M., Cotton, F., Wiemer, S., and Giardini, D.: The 2020 European Seismic Hazard Model: Milestones and Lessons Learned, in: Progresses in European Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, edited by: Vacareanu, R., Ionescu, C., Springer Proceedings in Earth and Environmental Sciences. Springer, Cham, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15104-0_1, 2022.
Delavaud, E., Cotton, F., Akkar, S., Scherbaum, F., Danciu, L., Beauval, C., Drouet, S., Douglas, J., Basili, R., Sandikkaya, M. A., Segou, M., Faccioli, E., and Theodoulidis, N.: Toward a ground-motion logic tree for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment in Europe, J. Seismol., 16, 451–473, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10950-012-9281-z, 2012.
Douglas, J.: Capturing Geographically-Varying Uncertainty in Earthquake Ground Motion Models or What We Think We Know May Change, in: Recent Advances in Earthquake Engineering in Europe: 16th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering–Thessaloniki 2018, edited by: Pitilakis, K., Springer International Publishing, Cham, 153–181, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75741-4_6, 2018.
Douglas, J., Ulrich, T., Bertil, D., and Rey, J.: Comparison of the Ranges of Uncertainty Captured in Different Seismic-Hazard Studies, Seismol. Res. Lett., 85, 977–985, https://doi.org/10.1785/0220140084, 2014.
Douglas, J., Crowley, H., Silva, V., Marzocchi, W., Danciu, L., and Pinho, R.: Methods for evaluating the significance and importance of differences amongst probabilistic seismic hazard results for engineering and risk analyses: A review and insights, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-991, 2023.
Field, E. H., Jordan, T. H., Page, M. T., Milner, K. R., Shaw, B. E., Dawson, T. E., Biasi, G. P., Parsons, T., Hardebeck, J. L., Michael, A. J., Weldon, R. J., II, Powers, P. M., Johnson, K. M., Zeng, Y., Felzer, K. R., van der Elst, N., Madden, C., Arrowsmith, R., Werner, M. J., and Thatcher, W. R.: A Synoptic View of the Third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF3), Seismol. Res. Lett., 88, 1259–1267, https://doi.org/10.1785/0220170045, 2017.
Folch, A., Abril, C., Afanasiev, M., Amati, G., Bader, M., Badia, R. M., Bayraktar, H. B., Barsotti, S., Basili, R., Bernardi, F., Boehm, C., Brizuela, B., Brogi, F., Cabrera, E., Casarotti, E., Castro, M. J., Cerminara, M., Cirella, A., Cheptsov, A., Conejero, J., Costa, A., de la Asunción, M., de la Puente, J., Djuric, M., Dorozhinskii, R., Espinosa, G., Esposti-Ongaro, T., Farnós, J., Favretto-Cristini, N., Fichtner, A., Fournier, A., Gabriel, A.-A., Gallard, J.-M., Gibbons, S. J., Glimsdal, S., González-Vida, J. M., Gracia, J., Gregorio, R., Gutierrez, N., Halldorsson, B., Hamitou, O., Houzeaux, G., Jaure, S., Kessar, M., Krenz, L., Krischer, L., Laforet, S., Lanucara, P., Li, B., Lorenzino, M. C., Lorito, S., Løvholt, F., Macedonio, G., Macías, J., Marín, G., Martínez Montesinos, B., Mingari, L., Moguilny, G., Montellier, V., Monterrubio-Velasco, M., Moulard, G. E., Nagaso, M., Nazaria, M., Niethammer, C., Pardini, F., Pienkowska, M., Pizzimenti, L., Poiata, N., Rannabauer, L., Rojas, O., Rodriguez, J. E., Romano, F., Rudyy, O., Ruggiero, V., Samfass, P., Sánchez-Linares, C., Sanchez, S., Sandri, L., Scala, A., Schaeffer, N., Schuchart, J., Selva, J., Sergeant, A., Stallone, A., Taroni, M., Thrastarson, S., Titos, M., Tonelllo, N., Tonini, R., Ulrich, T., Vilotte, J.-P., Vöge, M., Volpe, M., Aniko Wirp, S., and Wössner, U.: The EU Center of Excellence for Exascale in Solid Earth (ChEESE): Implementation, results, and roadmap for the second phase, Future Generation Computer Systems, 146, 47–61, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2023.04.006, 2023.
FprEN 1998–1-1: Eurocode 8: – Design of structures for earthquake resistance – Part 1-1: General rules and seismic action, N 1283, European Commitee for Standardization, CEN/TC 250/SC8, Brussels, https://eurocodes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/EN-Eurocodes/eurocode-8-design-structures-earthquake-resistance (last access: August 2024), 2024.
Fülöp, L., Mäntyniemi, P., Malm, M., Toro, G., Crespo, M. J., Schmitt, T., Burck, S., and Välikangas, P.: Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis in low-seismicity regions: an investigation of sensitivity with a focus on Finland, Nat. Hazards, 116, 111–132, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-022-05666-4, 2023.
Gardner, J. and Knopoff, L.: Is the sequence of earthquakes in southern California, with aftershocks removed, Poissonian?, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 64, 1363–1367, 1974.
Gerstenberger, M. C., Marzocchi, W., Allen, T., Pagani, M., Adams, J., Danciu, L., Field, E. H., Fujiwara, H., Luco, N., Ma, K.-F., Meletti, C., and Petersen, M. D.: Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis at Regional and National Scales: State of the Art and Future Challenges, Rev. Geophys., 58, e2019RG000653, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019RG000653, 2020.
Gerstenberger, M. C., Bora, S., Bradley, B. A., DiCaprio, C., Van Dissen, R. J., Atkinson, G. M., Chamberlain, C., Christophersen, A., Clark, K. J., Coffey, G. L., et al.: New Zealand National Seismic Hazard Model 2022 revision: model, hazard and process overview. Lower Hutt (NZ), GNS Science, 106 pp., (GNS Science report; 2022/57), https://doi.org/10.21420/TB83-7X19, 2022.
Giardini, D., Wössner, J., and Danciu, L.: Mapping Europe's Seismic Hazard, Eos T. Am. Geophys. Un., 95, 261–262, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014EO290001, 2014.
Goulet, C. A., Bozorgnia, Y., Kuehn, N., Al Atik, L., Youngs, R. R., Graves, R. W., and Atkinson, G. M.: NGA-East Ground-Motion Characterization model part I: Summary of products and model development, Earthq. Spectra, 37, 1231–1282, https://doi.org/10.1177/87552930211018723, 2021.
Graves, R., Jordan, T. H., Callaghan, S., Deelman, E., Field, E., Juve, G., Kesselman, C., Maechling, P., Mehta, G., Milner, K., Okaya, D., Small, P., and Vahi, K.: CyberShake: A Physics-Based Seismic Hazard Model for Southern California, Pure Appl. Geophys., 168, 367–381, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-010-0161-6, 2011.
Grünthal, G.: The up-dated earthquake catalogue for the German Democratic Republic and adjacent areas – statistical data characteristics and conclusions for hazard assessment, 3rd International Symposium on the Analysis of Seismicity and on Seismic Risk (Prague 1985) (Prague), https://gfzpublic.gfz-potsdam.de/pubman/item/item_232591 (last access: August 2024) 1985.
Grünthal, G. and Wahlström, R.: The European-Mediterranean Earthquake Catalogue (EMEC) for the last millennium, J. Seismol., 16, 535–570, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10950-012-9302-y, 2012.
Grünthal, G., Wahlström, R., and Stromeyer, D.: The SHARE European Earthquake Catalogue (SHEEC) for the time period 1900–2006 and its comparison to the European-Mediterranean Earthquake Catalogue (EMEC), J. Seismol., 17, 1339–1344, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10950-013-9379-y, 2013.
Grünthal, G., Stromeyer, D., Bosse, C., Cotton, F., and Bindi, D.: The probabilistic seismic hazard assessment of Germany – version 2016, considering the range of epistemic uncertainties and aleatory variability, B. Earthq. Eng., 16, 4339–4395, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0315-y, 2018.
Halldórsson, B., Kowsari, M., Bayat, F., Abril, C., Darzi, A., Bessason, B., and Snæbjörnsson, J. Þ.: The implications of the new European Seismic Hazard Model 2020 for Iceland, in: The 4th international workshop on earthquakes in North Iceland, Húsavik, Iceland, 69–74, https://iris.rais.is/en/publications/the-implications-of-the-new-european-seismic-hazard-model-2020-fo (last access: August 2024), 2022.
Haller, K. M. and Basili, R.: Developing Seismogenic Source Models Based on Geologic Fault Data, Seismol. Res. Lett., 82, 519–525, https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.82.4.519, 2011.
Haslinger, F., Basili, R., Bossu, R., Cauzzi, C., Cotton, F., Crowley, H., Custodio, S., Danciu, L., Locati, M., Michelini, A., Molinari, I., Ottemöller, L., and Parolai, S.: Coordinated and Interoperable Seismological Data and Product Services in Europe: the EPOS Thematic Core Service for Seismology, Ann. Geophys., 65, DM213–DM213, https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-8767, 2022.
Iervolino, I., Chioccarelli, E., and Cito, P.: Testing three seismic hazard models for Italy via multi-site observations, PLOS ONE, 18, e0284909, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284909, 2023.
Jiao, P. and Alavi, A. H.: Artificial intelligence in seismology: Advent, performance and future trends, Geosci. Front., 11, 739–744, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2019.10.004, 2020.
Jimenez, M. J., Giardini, D., and Grünthal, G.: The ESC-SESAME Unified Hazard Model for the European-Mediterranean region, CSEM/EMSC Newsletter, 19, 2–4, 2003.
Kagan, Y. Y. and Jackson, D. D.: Probabilistic forecasting of earthquakes, Geophys. J. Int., 143, 438–453, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-246X.2000.01267.x, 2000.
Kotha, S. R., Weatherill, G., Bindi, D., and Cotton, F.: A regionally-adaptable ground-motion model for shallow crustal earthquakes in Europe, B. Earthq. Eng., 18, 4091–4125, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00869-1, 2020.
Kotha, S. R., Weatherill, G., Bindi, D., and Cotton, F.: Near-source magnitude scaling of spectral accelerations: analysis and update of Kotha et al. (2020) model, B. Earthq. Eng., 20, 1343–1370, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-021-01308-5, 2022.
Kowsari, M., Ghasemi, S., Bayat, F., and Halldorsson, B.: A backbone seismic ground motion model for strike-slip earthquakes in Southwest Iceland and its implications for near- and far-field PSHA, B. Earthq. Eng., 21, 715–738, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-022-01556-z, 2023.
Kuehn, N. M., Abrahamson, N. A., and Walling, M. A.: Incorporating Nonergodic Path Effects into the NGA-West2 Ground-Motion Prediction Equations, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 109, 575–585, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120180260, 2019.
Labbé, P. and Paolucci, R.: Developments Relating to Seismic Action in the Eurocode 8 of Next Generation, in: Progresses in European Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, edited by: Vacareanu, R. and Ionescu, C., ECEES 2022, Springer Proceedings in Earth and Environmental Sciences, Springer,, 26–46, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15104-0_2, 2022.
Lammers, S., Weatherill, G., Grünthal, G., and Cotton, F.: EMEC-2021 – The European-Mediterranean Earthquake Catalogue – Version 2021, GFZ Data Services [data set], https://doi.org/10.5880/GFZ.EMEC.2021.001, 2023.
Lanzano, G., Sgobba, S., Luzi, L., Puglia, R., Pacor, F., Felicetta, C., D'Amico, M., Cotton, F., and Bindi, D.: The pan-European Engineering Strong Motion (ESM) flatfile: compilation criteria and data statistics, B. Earthq. Eng., 17, 561–582, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0480-z, 2019.
Lanzano, G., Luzi, L., D'Amico, V., Pacor, F., Meletti, C., Marzocchi, W., Rotondi, R., and Varini, E.: Ground motion models for the new seismic hazard model of Italy (MPS19): selection for active shallow crustal regions and subduction zones, B. Earthq. Eng., 18, 3487–3516, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00850-y, 2020.
Lavrentiadis, G., Abrahamson, N. A., Nicolas, K. M., Bozorgnia, Y., Goulet, C. A., Babič, A., Macedo, J., Dolšek, M., Gregor, N., Kottke, A. R., Lacour, M., Liu, C., Meng, X., Phung, V.-B., Sung, C.-H., and Walling, M.: Overview and introduction to development of non-ergodic earthquake ground-motion models, B. Earthq. Eng., 21, 5121–5150, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-022-01485-x, 2023.
Leonard, M.: Earthquake Fault Scaling: Self-Consistent Relating of Rupture Length, Width, Average Displacement, and Moment Release, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 100, 1971–1988, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120090189, 2010.
Leonard, M.: Self-Consistent Earthquake Fault-Scaling Relations: Update and Extension to Stable Continental Strike-Slip Faults, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 104, 2953–2965, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120140087, 2014.
Li, B., Gabriel, A.-A., Ulrich, T., Abril, C., and Halldorsson, B.: Dynamic Rupture Models, Fault Interaction and Ground Motion Simulations for the Segmented Húsavík-Flatey Fault Zone, Northern Iceland, J. Geophys. Res.-Sol. Ea., 128, e2022JB025886, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JB025886, 2023.
Locati, M., Rovida, A., Albini, P., and Stucchi, M.: The AHEAD portal: a gateway to European historical earthquake data, Seismol. Res. Lett., 85, 727–734, 2014.
Mancini, S. and Marzocchi, W.: SimplETAS: A Benchmark Earthquake Forecasting Model Suitable for Operational Purposes and Seismic Hazard Analysis, Seismol. Res. Lett., 95, 38–49, https://doi.org/10.1785/0220230199, 2023.
Manchuel, K., Traversa, P., Baumont, D., Cara, M., Nayman, E., and Durouchoux, C.: The French seismic CATalogue (FCAT-17), B. Earthqu. Eng., 16, 2227–2251, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0236-1, 2018.
Manea, E. F., Cioflan, C. O., and Danciu, L.: Ground-motion models for Vrancea intermediate-depth earthquakes, Earthq. Spectra, 38, 407–431, https://doi.org/10.1177/87552930211032985, 2022.
Marzocchi, W. and Taroni, M.: Some Thoughts on Declustering in Probabilistic Seismic-Hazard Analysis, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 104, 1838–1845, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120130300, 2014.
Marzocchi, W., Spassiani, I., Stallone, A., and Taroni, M.: How to be fooled searching for significant variations of the b-value, Geophys. J. Int., 220, 1845–1856, https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggz541, 2020.
Meletti, C., Marzocchi, W., D'Amico, V., Lanzano, G., Luzi, L., Martinelli, F., Pace, B., Rovida, A., Taroni, M., Visini, F., and Group, M. W.: The new Italian seismic hazard model (MPS19), Ann. Geophys., 64, SE112–SE112, https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-8579, 2021.
Mihaljević, J., Zupančič, P., Kuka, N., Kaluđerović, N., Koçi, R., Markušić, S., Šalić, R., Dushi, E., Begu, E., Duni, L., Živčić, M., Kovačević, S., Ivančić, I., Kovačević, V., Milutinović, Z., Vakilinezhad, M., Fiket, T., and Gülerce, Z.: BSHAP seismic source characterization models for the Western Balkan region, B. Earthq. Eng., 15, 3963–3985, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0143-5, 2017.
Milner, K. R., Shaw, B. E., Goulet, C. A., Richards-Dinger, K. B., Callaghan, S., Jordan, T. H., Dieterich, J. H., and Field, E. H.: Toward Physics-Based Nonergodic PSHA: A Prototype Fully Deterministic Seismic Hazard Model for Southern California, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 111, 898–915, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120200216, 2021.
Mizrahi, L., Nandan, S., and Wiemer, S.: The Effect of Declustering on the Size Distribution of Mainshocks, Seismol. Res. Lett., 92, 2333–2342, https://doi.org/10.1785/0220200231, 2021.
Mosca, I., Sargeant, S., Baptie, B., Musson, R. M. W., and Pharaoh, T. C.: The 2020 national seismic hazard model for the United Kingdom, B. Earthq. Eng., 20, 633–675, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-021-01281-z, 2022.
Nandan, S., Kamer, Y., Ouillon, G., Hiemer, S., and Sornette, D.: Global models for short-term earthquake forecasting and predictive skill assessment, Eur. Phys. J.-Spec. Top., 230, 425–449, https://doi.org/10.1140/epjst/e2020-000259-3, 2021.
Nasir, A., Lenhardt, W., Hintersberger, E., and Decker, K.: Assessing the completeness of historical and instrumental earthquake data in Austria and the surrounding areas, Austrian J. Earth Sc., 116, 1–15, 2013.
OECD: Artificial Intelligence in Science: Challenges, Opportunities and the Future of Research, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, 2023.
Pagani, M., Monelli, D., Weatherill, G., Danciu, L., Crow- ley, H., Silva, V., Henshaw, P., Butler, L., Nastasi, M., Panzeri, L., Simionato, M., and Vigano, D.: OpenQuake Engine: An Open Hazard (and Risk) Software for the Global Earthquake Model, Seismol. Res. Lett., 85, 692–702, https://doi.org/10.1785/0220130087, 2014.
Pagani, M., Garcia-Pelaez, J., Gee, R., Johnson, K., Poggi, V., Silva, V., Simionato, M., Styron, R., Viganò, D., Danciu, L., Monelli, D., and Weatherill, G.: The 2018 version of the Global Earthquake Model: Hazard component, Earthq. Spectra, 36, 226–251, https://doi.org/10.1177/8755293020931866, 2020.
Paolucci, R., Smerzini, C., and Vanini, M.: BB-SPEEDset: A Validated Dataset of Broadband Near-Source Earthquake Ground Motions from 3D Physics-Based Numerical Simulations, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 111, 2527–2545, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120210089, 2021.
Papadopoulos, A. N. and Danciu, L.: A critical look into the discretization of epistemic variables and treatment of their correlation in seismic hazard and risk assessment, in: 3rd European Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (3ECEES 2022), Bucharest, Romania, September 4–9, https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000593649, 2022.
Papadopoulos, A. N., Roth, P., Danciu, L., Bergamo, P., Panzera, F., Fäh, D., Cauzzi, C., Duvernay, B., Khodaverdian, A., Lestuzzi, P., Odabaşi, Ö., Fagà, E., Bazzurro, P., Marti, M., Valenzuela, N., Dallo, I., Schmid, N., Kästli, P., Haslinger, F., and Wiemer, S.: The Earthquake Risk Model of Switzerland ERM-CH23, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1504, 2023.
Pavel, F., Vacareanu, R., Douglas, J., Radulian, M., Cioflan, C., and Barbat, A.: An Updated Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for Romania and Comparison with the Approach and Outcomes of the SHARE Project, Pure Appl. Geophys., 173, 1881–1905, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-015-1223-6, 2016.
Petersen, M. D., Shumway, A. M., Powers, P. M., Mueller, C. S., Moschetti, M. P., Frankel, A. D., Rezaeian, S., McNamara, D. E., Luco, N., Boyd, O. S., Rukstales, K. S., Jaiswal, K. S., Thompson, E. M., Hoover, S. M., Clayton, B. S., Field, E. H., and Zeng, Y.: The 2018 update of the US National Seismic Hazard Model: Overview of model and implications, Earthq. Spectra, 36, 5–41, https://doi.org/10.1177/8755293019878199, 2020.
Reasenberg, P.: Second-order moment of central California seismicity, 1969–1982, J. Geophys. Res.-Sol. Ea., 90, 5479–5495, https://doi.org/10.1029/JB090iB07p05479, 1985.
Renault, P., Heuberger, S., and Abrahamson, N. A.: PEGASOS Refinement Project: An improved PSHA for Swiss nuclear power plants, in: 14th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering 2010, Ohrid, Republic of Macedonia, 30 August–3 September 2010, Paper ID 991, 2010.
Rivas-Medina, A., Benito, B., and Gaspar-Escribano, J. M.: Approach for combining fault and area sources in seismic hazard assessment: application in south-eastern Spain, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2809–2823, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2809-2018, 2018.
Rovida, A. and Antonucci, A.: EPICA – European PreInstrumental Earthquake CAtalogue, version 1.1 (1.1), INGV [data set], https://doi.org/10.13127/EPICA.1.1, 2021.
Rovida, A. and Locati, M.: Archive of historical earthquake data for the european-mediterranean area, Geot. Geol. Earthquake, 39, 359–369, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16964-4_14, 2015.
Rovida, A., Antonucci, A., and Locati, M.: The European Preinstrumental Earthquake Catalogue EPICA, the 1000–1899 catalogue for the European Seismic Hazard Model 2020, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 5213–5231, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-5213-2022, 2022.
Santarsiero, V.: Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions – A European policy on the seismic requalification of buildings and infrastructure, Official Journal of the European Union, C54/62, EUR-Lex – European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.C_.2018.054.01.0062.01.ENG&toc=OJ:C:2018:054:TOC (last access: August 2024), 2018.
Sesetyan, K., Demircioglu, M. B., Duman, T. Y., Çan, T., Tekin, S., Azak, T. E., and Fercan, Ö. Z.: A probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the Turkish territory – part I: the area source model, B. Earthq. Eng., 16, 3367–3397, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-016-0005-6, 2018.
Şeşetyan, K., Danciu, L., Demircioğlu Tümsa, M. B., Giardini, D., Erdik, M., Akkar, S., Gülen, L., Zare, M., Adamia, S., Ansari, A., Arakelyan, A., Askan, A., Avanesyan, M., Babayan, H., Chelidze, T., Durgaryan, R., Elias, A., Hamzehloo, H., Hessami, K., Kalafat, D., Kale, Ö., Karakhanyan, A., Khan, M. A., Mammadli, T., Al-Qaryouti, M., Sayab, M., Tsereteli, N., Utkucu, M., Varazanashvili, O., Waseem, M., Yalçı]n, H., and Yı]lmaz, M. T.: The 2014 seismic hazard model of the Middle East: overview and results, B. Earthq. Eng., 16, 3535–3566, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0346-4, 2018.
Šket Motnikar, B., Zupančič, P., Živčić, M., Atanackov, J., Jamšek Rupnik, P., Čarman, M., Danciu, L., and Gosar, A.: The 2021 seismic hazard model for Slovenia (SHMS21): overview and results, B. Earthq. Eng., 20, 4865–4894, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-022-01399-8, 2022.
Solakov, D., Simeonova, S., Ardeleanu, L., Aleksandrova, I., Trifonova, P., and Cioflan, C.: Hazard assessment for Romania-Bulgaria cross-border region, C. R. Acad. Bulg. Sc., 67, 835–842, 2014.
Spassiani, I., Falcone, G., Murru, M., and Marzocchi, W.: Operational Earthquake Forecasting in Italy: validation after 10 yr of operativity, Geophys. J. Int., 234, 2501–2518, https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggad256, 2023.
Stucchi, M., Meletti, C., Montaldo, V., Crowley, H., Calvi, G. M., and Boschi, E.: Seismic Hazard Assessment (2003–2009) for the Italian Building Code, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 101, 1885–1911, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120100130, 2011.
Stucchi, M., Rovida, A., Gomez Capera, A. A., Alexandre, P., Camelbeeck, T., Demircioglu, M. B., Gasperini, P., Kouskouna, V., Musson, R. M. W., and Radulian, M.: The SHARE European earthquake catalogue (SHEEC) 1000–1899, J. Seismol., 17, 523–544, 2013.
Taroni, M. and Akinci, A.: Good practices in PSHA: declustering, b-value estimation, foreshocks and aftershocks inclusion; a case study in Italy, Geophys. J. Int., 224, 1174–1187, https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggaa462, 2021.
Trevlopoulos, K., Gehl, P., Negulescu, C., Crowley, H., and Danciu, L.: Testing the 2020 European Seismic Hazard and Risk Models using data from the 2019 Le Teil (France) earthquake, EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1740, 2023.
Uhrhammer, R.: Characteristics of northern and southern California seismicity, Earthquake Notes, 21, 1986.
Vacareanu, R., Aldea, A., Lungu, D., Pavel, F., Neagu, C., Arion, C., Demetriu, S., and Iancovici, M.: Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for Romania, in: Earthquakes and Their Impact on Society, edited by: D'Amico, S., Springer International Publishing, Cham, 137–169, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21753-6_5, 2016.
Visini, F., Meletti, C., Rovida, A., D'Amico, V., Pace, B., and Pondrelli, S.: An updated area-source seismogenic model (MA4) for seismic hazard of Italy, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 2807–2827, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2807-2022, 2022.
Weatherill, G. and Cotton, F.: A ground motion logic tree for seismic hazard analysis in the stable cratonic region of Europe: regionalisation, model selection and development of a scaled backbone approach, B. Earthq. Eng., 18, 6119–6148, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00940-x, 2020.
Weatherill, G., Kotha, S. R., and Cotton, F.: A regionally-adaptable “scaled backbone” ground motion logic tree for shallow seismicity in Europe: application to the 2020 European seismic hazard model, B. Earthq. Eng., 18, 5087–5117, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-020-00899-9, 2020.
Weatherill, G., Cotton, F., Daniel, G., Zentner, I., Iturrieta, P., and Bosse, C.: Strategies for Comparison of Modern Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Models and Insights from the Germany and France Border Region, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss. [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2023-98, in review, 2023.
Weatherill, G., Kotha, S. R., Danciu, L., Vilanova, S., and Cotton, F.: Modelling seismic ground motion and its uncertainty in different tectonic contexts: challenges and application to the 2020 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20), Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 1795–1834, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1795-2024, 2024.
Wiemer, S. and Wyss, M.: Minimum Magnitude of Completeness in Earthquake Catalogs: Examples from Alaska, the Western United States, and Japan, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 90, 859–869, 2000.
Wiemer, S., Danciu, L., Edwards, B., Marti, M., Fäh, D., Hiemer, S., Wössner, J., Cauzzi, C., Kästli, P., and Kremer, K.: Seismic Hazard Model 2015 for Switzerland (SUIhaz2015), Technical Report, Swiss Seismological Service (SED) at ETH Zurich, https://doi.org/10.12686/A2, 2016.
Woessner, J. and Wiemer, S.: Assessing the Quality of Earthquake Catalogues: Estimating the Magnitude of Completeness and Its Uncertainty, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 95, 684–698, https://doi.org/10.1785/0120040007, 2005.
Woessner, J., Danciu, L., Giardini, D., Crowley, H., Cotton, F., Grünthal, G., Valensise, G., Arvidsson, R., Basili, R., Demircioglu, M. B., Hiemer, S., Meletti, C., Musson, R. W., Rovida, A. N., Sesetyan, K., Stucchi, M., and The SHARE Consortium: The 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model: key components and results, B. Earthq. Eng., 13, 3553–3596, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-015-9795-1, 2015.
Zaliapin, I., Gabrielov, A., Keilis-Borok, V., and Wong, H.: Clustering Analysis of Seismicity and Aftershock Identification, Phys. Rev. Lett., 101, 018501, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.018501, 2008.
Executive editor
The 2020 update of the European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20) is the most recent and up-to-date assessment of seismic hazard for the Euro-Mediterranean region.
The 2020 update of the European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20) is the most recent and up-to-date...
Short summary
The 2020 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20) is the latest seismic hazard assessment update for the Euro-Mediterranean region. This state-of-the-art model delivers a broad range of hazard results, including hazard curves, maps, and uniform hazard spectra. ESHM20 provides two hazard maps as informative references in the next update of the European Seismic Design Code (CEN EC8), and it also provides a key input to the first earthquake risk model for Europe.
The 2020 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM20) is the latest seismic hazard assessment update...
Special issue
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint