Tsunami fragility modeling plays a central role in probabilistic coastal risk assessment; however, representing structural vulnerability under near-field tsunami conditions remains challenging due to complex hydrodynamic loading, strong spatial variability, and the presence of pre-existing earthquake damage. This paper advances near-field tsunami fragility modeling through three specific contributions, each bridging simulation-based methods and empirical damage survey observations. First, it demonstrates how a successive earthquake–tsunami simulation framework can generate conditional fragility surfaces that explicitly account for pre-existing seismic damage without relying on statistically intractable probabilistic decompositions. Second, it develops and validates a distance-dependent intensity-shifting approach—derived from analysis of the 2011 Great East Japan tsunami survey dataset—that adapts baseline fragility curves to near-field and near-coast conditions in a physically interpretable and practically deployable manner. Third, it establishes an explicit cross-validation pathway between simulation-derived fragility surfaces and empirical damage observations through machine-learning-assisted feature importance analysis, a connection largely absent from prior literature. Together, these contributions provide a physically consistent and data-informed foundation for near-field tsunami fragility modeling that is directly applicable—as a methodological framework—to loss and resilience estimation platforms such as IN-CORE and HAZUS and to risk-informed coastal infrastructure design in subduction-zone regions, subject to typology-specific calibration; the simulation results are demonstrated for a US Reinforced Concrete (RC) moment-frame archetype and the empirical results for Japanese wood-frame construction, so direct quantitative application to other structural typologies requires recalibration of the respective model components.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Harati et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: