Skip to main content

Review of Recommendations for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis Guidance on Uncertainty and Use of Experts (1997) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Pages 57-62

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 57...
... But the primary focus of the report is not on how to create an assessment from the inputs; only in Chapter 2, in an introductory fashion in Chapter 6, and in Appendix ~ is a methodology for calculating the hazard estimates and their uncertainties addressed. Instead, the central theme of SSHAC is guidance on the process of eliciting and aggregating expert opinion on seismic sources, seismicity within these sources, and ground motion attenuation, as well as the associated uncertainties and final estimates of the hazard.
Read the entire page →
From page 58...
... SSHAC's Executive Summary will be useful to administrators and project sponsors who are not specialists in hazard analysis methodology, but it includes nothing about the excellent earth science materials that are in the report and its appendixes. SSHAC provides an up-to-date procedure for obtaining stable results from the application of PSHA principles that have been established in past practice.
Read the entire page →
From page 59...
... Although the SSHAC report states that its conclusions are based on a thorough review of a number of such studies, the requested details are not offered and no previous PSHA analyses other than He Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Electric Power Research Institute studies are referenced. The panel's evaluation of SSHAC's treatment of uncertainty is presented in detail in Chapter 3 of this report.
Read the entire page →
From page 60...
... recommends that the quantitative methods of Appendix ~ be used as examples and not be regarded as prescriptive procedures. Given the current state of the art in formal expert aggregation and the difficulties specific to the earthquake hazard problem, the panel suggests that judgmental combination rules may be at least as valid as quantitative procedures.
Read the entire page →
From page 61...
... Considering the broad consensus on ground motion modeling that was reached at He end of Workshop IT, the pane! believes that a real opportunity exists now to formulate, with further work to fill in necessary details, a ground motion model that can be used as a standard in the eastern United States for PSHA until new data or future theoretical developments warrant a reevaluation.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • hazard analysis
  • ground motion
  • seismic hazard
  • expert opinion
  • hazard assessment

  • simpler methods
  • recommended procedures
  • probabilistic hazard
  • report offers
  • noncritical facilities

  • excellent earth
  • sshac procedures
  • analysis methodology
  • motion attenuation
  • theoretical developments

  • panel urged
  • sshac explicitly
  • effort required
  • requires careful
  • favorably impressed

  • explicitly excludes
  • workshops conducted
  • procedures recommended
  • motion input
  • final estimates

  • requested details
  • uncertainty separation
  • thorough review
  • separation procedures
  • developments warrant


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.