This article summarizes recent work investigating the sensitivity of loss estimates for the northern Marmara region to various representations of ground-motion variability. Issues that are discussed include the partitioning of the total ground-motion variability into inter- and intra-event components, macrospatial correlations among ground motions, and the propagation of the ground-motion variability into damage and loss calculations. The issue of whether an earthquake loss model can be validated using field observations is also considered. Recent findings suggest that, regardless of how one treats the ground-motion variability when conducting loss estimation analyses, unless a close network of accelerograms and a high spatial resolution of exposure data exists, the ground-motion variability precludes the validation of loss models.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Crowley et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: