Accounting for end-user preferences in earthquake early warning systems

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Thomas Le Guenan ; Farid Smai ; Annick Loschetter&#8230
• 关键词：Earthquake early warning (EEW) ; Decision making ; End ; user preferences ; Bridges ; Thresholds ; Multi ; attribute utility theory (MAUT)
• 刊名：Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：January 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：14
• 期：1
• 页码：297-319
• 全文大小：2,619 KB
• 参考文献：Akkar S, Bommer JJ (2010) Empirical equations for the prediction of PGA, PGV and spectral accelerations in Europe, the Mediterranean region and the Middle East. Seismol Res Lett 81(2):195鈥?06CrossRef
  Allen RM (2011) Earthquakes, early and strong motion warning. In: Gupta H (ed) Encyclopedia of solid earth geophysics. Springer, Berlin, pp 226鈥?33CrossRef
  Allen RM, Kanamori H (2003) The potential for earthquake early warning in southern California. Science 300:786CrossRef
  Auclair S, Goula X, Jara JA, Colom Y (2015) Feasibility and interest in earthquake early warning systems for areas of moderate seismicity: case study for the Pyrenees. Pure appl Geophys. doi:10.鈥?007/鈥媠00024-014-0957-x
  Castelletti A, Soncini-Sessa R (2006) A procedural approach to strengthening integration and participation in water resource planning. Environ Model Softw 21(10):1455鈥?470CrossRef
  Cua G, Heaton T (2007) The virtual seismologist (VS) method: a Bayesian approach to earthquake early warning. In: Gasparini P, Manfredi G, Zschau J (eds) Earthquake early warning systems. Springer, Berlin, pp 97鈥?32CrossRef
  Douglas J, Woo G, Auclair S, Le Guenan T (2012), Critical review of participatory decision making in fields other than earthquake risk reduction. Report BRGM/RP-61480-FR. http://鈥媤ww.鈥媌rgm.鈥媏u/鈥媍ontent/鈥媝ublic-reports
  FEMA (2003) Multi-hazard loss estimation earthquake model HAZUS-MH MR3 technical manual
  Giardini D, Woessner J, Danciu L, Crowley H, Cotton F, Gr眉nthal G, Pinho R, Valensise G, Akkar S, Arvidsson R, Basili R, Cameelbeeck T, Campos-Costa A, Douglas J, Demircioglu MB, Erdik M, Fonseca J, Glavatovic B, Lindholm C, Makropoulos K, Meletti F, Musson R, Pitilakis K, Sesetyan K, Stromeyer D, Stucchi M, Rovida A (2013) Seismic hazard harmonization in Europe (SHARE): Online Data Resource. doi:10.鈥?2686/鈥婼ED-00000001-SHARE
  Iervolino I, Massimiliano G, Manfredi G (2007) Expected loss-based alarm threshold set for earthquake early warning systems. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 36(9):1151鈥?168. doi:10.鈥?002/鈥媏qe.鈥?75 CrossRef
  Iervolino I, Giorgio M, Galasso C, Manfredi G (2009) Uncertainty in early warning predictions of engineering ground motion parameters: what really matters? Geophys Res Lett. doi:10.鈥?029/鈥?008GL036644
  Kailiponi P (2010) Analysing evacuation decisions using multi-attribute utility theory (MAUT). Proc Eng 3:163鈥?74. doi:10.鈥?016/鈥媕.鈥媝roeng.鈥?010.鈥?7.鈥?16 CrossRef
  Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1993) Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. Wiley, New YorkCrossRef
  Le Guenan T, Smai F, Loschetter A, Auclair S, Douglas J (2014) Proposed participatory decision-making framework of REAKT and application to test cases. Deliverable D6.7, REAKT (Strategies and tools for Real Time EArthquake RisK ReducTion). http://鈥媤ww.鈥媟eaktproject.鈥媏u/鈥媎eliverables/鈥婻EAKT-D6.鈥?.鈥媝df
  Nakamura Y, Saita J (2007) UrEDAS, the earthquake warning system: today and tomorrow. In: Gasparini P, Manfredi G, Zschau J (eds) Earthquake early warning systems. Springer, Berlin, pp. 249鈥?81
  Neapolitan RE (2004) Learning bayesian networks, vol 38. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River
  Satriano C, Elia L, Martino C, Lancieri M, Zollo A, Iannaccone G (2011) PRESTo, the earthquake warning system for southern Italy: concepts, capabilities and future perspectives. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 31(2):137鈥?53. doi:10.鈥?016/鈥媕.鈥媠oildyn.鈥?010.鈥?6.鈥?08 CrossRef
  Taillefer N, Monfort-Climent D, Bastone V (2014) Loss estimation for co-seismic risk assessment through an EWS. Report BRGM/RP-63614-FR. http://鈥媤ww.鈥媌rgm.鈥媏u/鈥媍ontent/鈥媝ublic-reports
  Von Neumann J, Morgenstern O (1953) Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton University Press, Princeton
  Wang JP, Wu YM, Lin TL, Brant L (2012) The uncertainties of a PD36PGV onsite earthquake early warning system. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 36:32鈥?7CrossRef
  Wu S, Beck JL, Heaton TH (2013) ePAD: earthquake probability-based automated decision-making framework for earthquake early warning. Comput Aided Civ Infrastruct Eng 28:737鈥?52CrossRef
  Wurman G, Allen RM, Lombard P (2007) Toward earthquake early warning in northern California. J Geophys Res 112:B08311. doi:10.鈥?029/鈥?006JB004830
  Zollo A, Amoroso O, Lancieri M, Wu YM, Kanamori H (2010) A threshold-based earthquake early warning using dense accelerometer networks. Geophys J Int 183:963鈥?74CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：Thomas Le Guenan (1)
  Farid Smai (1)
  Annick Loschetter (1)
  Samuel Auclair (1)
  Daniel Monfort (1)
  Nicolas Taillefer (1)
  John Douglas (2)
  
  1. Risks and Prevention Division (DRP), BRGM, 3 Avenue C. Guillemin, BP 36009, 45060, Orleans Cedex 2, France
  2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Level 5, 75 Montrose Street, Glasgow, G1 1XJ, UK
  
• 刊物类别：Earth and Environmental Science
• 刊物主题：Earth sciences
  Geotechnical Engineering
  Civil Engineering
  Geophysics and Geodesy
  Hydrogeology
  Structural Geology
  
• 出版者：Springer Netherlands
• ISSN：1573-1456

文摘

Earthquake early warning systems (EEWSs) that rapidly trigger risk-reduction actions after a potentially-damaging earthquake is detected are an attractive tool to reduce seismic losses. One brake on their implementation in practice is the difficulty in setting the threshold required to trigger pre-defined actions: set the level too high and the action is not triggered before potentially-damaging shaking occurs and set the level too low and the action is triggered too readily. Balancing these conflicting requirements of an EEWS requires a consideration of the preferences of its potential end users. In this article a framework to define these preferences, as part of a participatory decision making procedure, is presented. An aspect of this framework is illustrated for a hypothetical toll bridge in a seismically-active region, where the bridge owners wish to balance the risk to people crossing the bridge with the loss of toll revenue and additional travel costs in case of bridge closure. Multi-attribute utility theory (MAUT) is used to constrain the trigger threshold for four owners with different preferences. We find that MAUT is an appealing and transparent way of aiding the potentially controversial decision of what level of risk to accept in EEW. Keywords Earthquake early warning (EEW) Decision making End-user preferences Bridges Thresholds Multi-attribute utility theory (MAUT)