宏观震害预测方法在小尺度空间上的适用性研究
|
摘要
地震灾害损失评估目前主要有两类方法，一是广泛应用的建(构)筑物、基础设施结构分类清单易损性分析法，这一方法主要给出只是建(构)筑物和基础设施的灾害损失，相对比较准确，但需要收集的资料类型和数量比较多，并且易损性存在地域差别，因此在大范围时需要收集更多的数据和资料；另一类是陈顒等(1991)提出的基于GDP的宏观易损性分析方法，该方法给出了包括建(构)筑物和基础设施在内的社会财富遭受地震灾害的总损失，它简便易行，资料更新容易，但是这种方法是一种基于大样品统计的方法，它是从全球和全国尺度上地震灾害损失过程中发展起来的，能否在县、乡级小尺度上应用还需要进一步的研究，而这一适用性问题的解决将极大地扩展宏观易损性分析方法在震害预测及震害快速评估中的应用。本论文以研究宏观易损性分析方法在小尺度上的可应用性为宗旨，通过实际震害资料的处理分析，重新建立了我国的GDP地震易损性和生命地震易损性矩阵、人口和GDP的时空分配模型等；通过在县、乡级不同空间尺度上对宏观预测方法和建筑物分类清单预测方法震害预测结果的对比分析，以及通过宏观易损性分析方法对实际地震灾害损失快速评估结果与地震现场灾害调查评估结果的对比分析，证明了宏观易损性分析方法在小尺度震害预测与震害快速评估中的可用性。本论文在震害预测研究与应用的发展过程与现状的回顾、评述基础上，在如下方面开展了研究：
1．我国新的宏观地震易损性模型建立。在对我国1989年以来的实际地震现场灾害损失调查资料以及灾区人口、社会经济资料收集处理基础上，采用地震影响烈度取代震中烈度，建立了新的GDP地震易损性模型和生命地震易损性模型。
2．县级尺度宏观震害损失预测方法适用性分析。中国地震局重点项目“2006-2020我国地震重点监视防御区确定”在山东、广东、云南和甘肃开展房屋建筑和基础设施资料的抽样统计，确定了地震易损性矩阵，并进行了县级尺度人员死亡和直接经济损失预测。同时，本论文按照基于宏观易损性分析方法对四省进行了县级尺度的震害损失预测，并对两种方法预测结果进行了对比分析，表明了基于宏观易损性分析方法的震害损失预测结果与基于建筑物易损性分类清单法进行的震害损失预测结果总体上是可比的，前者往往大于后者，而且随烈度增加，前者大于后者的幅度也随之加大。
3．乡级尺度宏观震害损失预测方法适用性分析。江西省“十五”期间开展了“赣南重点监视防御区震害预测”研究，在赣南八县(市、区)系统而全面地收集了“建筑物分类清单分析法”所需要的资料，包括建筑物抽样调查、详查、分类、结构、建筑年代、面积等各类建筑物的并进行建筑物易损性分析。本论文依据新的宏观易损性模型进行了江西省赣南重点监视区八县(市、区)乡级尺度震害损失预测，并与“赣南重点监视区震害预测项目”以建筑物实际调查和易损性分析为基础的乡级尺度震害损失预测结果进行了对比分析，结果表明，宏观震害预测方法在乡一级尺度
There are two kinds of earthquake disaster loss assessment modes widely used at present. One is the traditional inventory methodology according to which a relatively more precise assessment results can be obtained. While a detailed classified database of the facilities and structure must be available in advance. In addition, the vulnerability of facilities and structure change in region which implicates new vulnerability models should be done for a new region. This limited the application of inventory methodology to a large-scale region. Another approach is to assess the losses by employing a macroscopic indicator, gross domestic product, or GDP to represent the social wealthy which has been developed by Chen Yong et al (1991). This approach is simple and easy to apply especially in convenience of basic data update according to public regional economic annual report. The approach has been successfully been used to assess the losses due to earthquakes in global and national scales. But more researches should be done to approve if it can be used to the region in a more small space scale. It can be sure if the applicability is proved to be true, the approach will be widely used in earthquake losses prediction and quick assessment. The main aim of the paper is focused on research of macroscopic indicator vulnerability applicability to the relative small scale region through such researches on the re-establishment of new models of macroscopic indicator vulnerability and life vulnerability, the distribution models of population and GDP in space and time, the comparability of the losses estimated by both the macroscopic indicator vulnerability with inventory methodology in a relative small scale region such as a county or a town as well as comparability of the losses estimated assessed quickly after a destructive earthquake occurs with the losses determined according to the field damage investigation and losses statistics. The research results supposed the usability of the macroscopic loss assessment in a relatively small scale region. Based on the review of the development and the current status of the earthquake damage and losses assessment research and application, the innovative researches have been done as following:
1. A new macroscopic earthquake vulnerability model in mainland China are set up. Base on data collection of field earthquake disaster loss investigation, the population and social economical materials of the disaster area of earthquake event occurred since 1989, a new GDP earthquake vulnerability model and life vulnerability model are established by using earthquake intensity instead of the epicentral intensity.
2. Macroscopic vulnerability analysis method is proved to be applicable at the county scale. We comparatively analyzed the earthquake disaster loss assessment results from macroscopic-based vulnerability method and from building-based vulnerability inventory methodology (ATC-13) respectively based on the population, GDP and buildings of the counties of the Shandong, Guangdong, Yunnan and Gansu provinces. The results suggest that it is appropriate to compare the earthquake disaster prediction results from macroscopical vulnerability analysis method and inventory methodology.
3. Macroscopical vulnerability analysis method is also proved to be applicable at the more smaller scale - town. The population of different towns in Jiangxi Province and GDP are colleted. By building the relation between the population and GDP, the town with GDP data absent were predicted and assessed. In the key earthquake monitoring area in southern Jiangxi, the earthquake disaster loss and prediction of different towns in eight cities or counties were made by using macroscopy-based vulnerability analysis method, which was compared with the earthquake disaster loss and prediction results of same places based on the actual investigation and vulnerability analysis of the buildings in the project of 摇arthquake disaster and loss prediction in eight cities and counties of sounth Jiangxi province? suggesting the comparability of macroscopy-based vulnerability
1．我国新的宏观地震易损性模型建立。在对我国1989年以来的实际地震现场灾害损失调查资料以及灾区人口、社会经济资料收集处理基础上，采用地震影响烈度取代震中烈度，建立了新的GDP地震易损性模型和生命地震易损性模型。
2．县级尺度宏观震害损失预测方法适用性分析。中国地震局重点项目“2006-2020我国地震重点监视防御区确定”在山东、广东、云南和甘肃开展房屋建筑和基础设施资料的抽样统计，确定了地震易损性矩阵，并进行了县级尺度人员死亡和直接经济损失预测。同时，本论文按照基于宏观易损性分析方法对四省进行了县级尺度的震害损失预测，并对两种方法预测结果进行了对比分析，表明了基于宏观易损性分析方法的震害损失预测结果与基于建筑物易损性分类清单法进行的震害损失预测结果总体上是可比的，前者往往大于后者，而且随烈度增加，前者大于后者的幅度也随之加大。
3．乡级尺度宏观震害损失预测方法适用性分析。江西省“十五”期间开展了“赣南重点监视防御区震害预测”研究，在赣南八县(市、区)系统而全面地收集了“建筑物分类清单分析法”所需要的资料，包括建筑物抽样调查、详查、分类、结构、建筑年代、面积等各类建筑物的并进行建筑物易损性分析。本论文依据新的宏观易损性模型进行了江西省赣南重点监视区八县(市、区)乡级尺度震害损失预测，并与“赣南重点监视区震害预测项目”以建筑物实际调查和易损性分析为基础的乡级尺度震害损失预测结果进行了对比分析，结果表明，宏观震害预测方法在乡一级尺度
There are two kinds of earthquake disaster loss assessment modes widely used at present. One is the traditional inventory methodology according to which a relatively more precise assessment results can be obtained. While a detailed classified database of the facilities and structure must be available in advance. In addition, the vulnerability of facilities and structure change in region which implicates new vulnerability models should be done for a new region. This limited the application of inventory methodology to a large-scale region. Another approach is to assess the losses by employing a macroscopic indicator, gross domestic product, or GDP to represent the social wealthy which has been developed by Chen Yong et al (1991). This approach is simple and easy to apply especially in convenience of basic data update according to public regional economic annual report. The approach has been successfully been used to assess the losses due to earthquakes in global and national scales. But more researches should be done to approve if it can be used to the region in a more small space scale. It can be sure if the applicability is proved to be true, the approach will be widely used in earthquake losses prediction and quick assessment. The main aim of the paper is focused on research of macroscopic indicator vulnerability applicability to the relative small scale region through such researches on the re-establishment of new models of macroscopic indicator vulnerability and life vulnerability, the distribution models of population and GDP in space and time, the comparability of the losses estimated by both the macroscopic indicator vulnerability with inventory methodology in a relative small scale region such as a county or a town as well as comparability of the losses estimated assessed quickly after a destructive earthquake occurs with the losses determined according to the field damage investigation and losses statistics. The research results supposed the usability of the macroscopic loss assessment in a relatively small scale region. Based on the review of the development and the current status of the earthquake damage and losses assessment research and application, the innovative researches have been done as following:
1. A new macroscopic earthquake vulnerability model in mainland China are set up. Base on data collection of field earthquake disaster loss investigation, the population and social economical materials of the disaster area of earthquake event occurred since 1989, a new GDP earthquake vulnerability model and life vulnerability model are established by using earthquake intensity instead of the epicentral intensity.
2. Macroscopic vulnerability analysis method is proved to be applicable at the county scale. We comparatively analyzed the earthquake disaster loss assessment results from macroscopic-based vulnerability method and from building-based vulnerability inventory methodology (ATC-13) respectively based on the population, GDP and buildings of the counties of the Shandong, Guangdong, Yunnan and Gansu provinces. The results suggest that it is appropriate to compare the earthquake disaster prediction results from macroscopical vulnerability analysis method and inventory methodology.
3. Macroscopical vulnerability analysis method is also proved to be applicable at the more smaller scale - town. The population of different towns in Jiangxi Province and GDP are colleted. By building the relation between the population and GDP, the town with GDP data absent were predicted and assessed. In the key earthquake monitoring area in southern Jiangxi, the earthquake disaster loss and prediction of different towns in eight cities or counties were made by using macroscopy-based vulnerability analysis method, which was compared with the earthquake disaster loss and prediction results of same places based on the actual investigation and vulnerability analysis of the buildings in the project of 摇arthquake disaster and loss prediction in eight cities and counties of sounth Jiangxi province? suggesting the comparability of macroscopy-based vulnerability
引文
陈汉尧．1992．地震危险性分析中不确定性的概率分析与估计．[博士学位论文]，国家地震局地球物理研究所
陈棋福．1 997．大尺度地震灾害损失预测评估方法研究．[博士学位论文]，国家地震局地球物理研究所
陈棋福，陈顒，陈凌．1997．利用国内生产总值和人口数据进行地震灾害损失预测评估，地震学报，19(6)：640～649
陈棋福，陈顒，陈凌，等．1999．全球地震灾害预测，科学通报，44(1)：21～25
陈棋福主编．2002a．中国震例(1992～1994)．北京：地震出版社
陈棋福主编．2002b．中国震例(1995～1996)．北京：地震出版社
陈棋福主编．2003a．中国震例(1997～1999)．北京：地震出版社
陈棋福主编．2003b．中国震例(1997～1999)．北京：地震出版社
陈一君，林映光，杨厚学．2004．基于不确定性信息的专家综合评价方法．知识丛林，(12)：156-157
陈顒．1992．中国的地震灾害损失预测，自然灾害学报，(1)：
陈顒，陈棋福，陈凌．1999．地震损失预测评估中的易损性分析．中国地震，15(2)：97～105
陈顒，陈棋福，黄静，等．2003．减轻地震灾害．地震学报，25(6)：621～629
陈顒，陈鑫连，傅征祥．1995．十年尺度中国地震灾害损失预测研究．北京：地震出版社
陈顒，李革平，陈棋福，等．1998．地理信息系统在地震破坏和损失评估中的应用．地震学报，20(6)：640～646
陈顒，刘杰，陈棋福，等．1999．地震危险性分析和震害预测．北京：地震出版社
陈顒，朱宏任．1991．地震灾害定量化研究．国际地震动态，(5)：
邓聚龙．1985．灰色系统(社会·经济)．北京：国防工业出版社
地震工程委员会地震损失估计专家小组(编)．(国家地震局灾害防御司译)．1989．未来地震的损失估计．北京：地震出版社
傅征祥，李革平1993．地震生命损失研究．北京：地震出版社
高玉峰，谢康和．1999．潜在震源区范围的不确定性对地震危险性分析结果的影响规律．科技通报，15(4)：258-262
国家地震局，国家统计局．1996．中国大陆地震灾害损失评估汇编(1990～1995年)．北京：地震出版社
国家地震局．1990．中国地震烈度区划图(1／400万)说明书．北京：地震出版社
国家地震局灾害防御司编译．1991．未来地震的损失估计方法．北京：地震出版社
国家地震局震害防御司编．1993．地震灾害预测和评估工作手册．北京：地震出版社
国家地震局震害防御司未来地震灾害损失预测研究组．1990．中国地震灾害预测研究．北京：地震出版社
哈奇森·特伦斯W．(李小弥，妾洪章等译)．1992．经济学的革命与发展．北京：北京大学出版社
胡聿贤．1988．地震工程学．北京：地震出版社
霍俊荣．1989．近场强地面运动衰减规律的研究．[博士学位论文]．中国地震局地球物理研究所．吉安市统计局．2003．吉安市统计年鉴-2003．北京：中国统计出版社
江西省统计局．2003．江西农村经济年鉴-2003．北京：中国统计出版社
江西省统计局．2004．江西统计年鉴-2004．北京：中国统计出版社
江西省统计局．2005．江西统计年鉴-2005．北京：中国统计出版社
江西省统计局．2006．江西统计年鉴-2006。北京：中国统计出版社
江西省民政厅．2003．江西省行政区划简册(内部资料)
九江市统计局．2003．九江市统计年鉴-2003．北京：中国统计出版社
李树桢编著．1996．地震震害评估．北京：地震出版社
刘恢先主编．1985．唐山大地震震害(一)．北京：地震出版社
刘吉夫，王晓青，陈顒，等．2006．中国大陆地震速报定位与宏观震中偏离的分区研究．地震学报，28(1)：37-41
刘杰，陈顒，陈凌，等．1999．全球地震危险性评估的简化方法。科学通报。44(1)：92～96
刘开第，吴和琴，等．1997．未确知数学．武汉：华中理工大学出版社
刘开第，等．1999．不确定性信息数学处理及应用．北京：科学出版社
楼宝堂主编．1996．中国古今地震灾情总汇(公元前2221年至公元1994年)．北京：地震出版
美国应用技术委员会编，(曹新玲等译)．1991．加利福尼亚未来地震的损失估计．北京：地震出版社
孟玉梅，赵永，王斌．2001．中国地震观测台网地震速报定位偏差的分析．地震，21(3)：65-69
孟玉梅．1994．中国速报震级与国际通用震级的初步对比分析．地震，14(6)：61-68
米道生，陈天然，等．1983．数学分支巡礼．北京：中国青年出版社
米宏亮．2002．地震灾害宏观易损性研究与震害快速评估的网络实现．[硕士学位米素婷，陈国星，吴昊，等．2004．地震危险性分析中潜在震源区范围与震级上限的不确定性分析．地震，24(3)：87-94
聂永安，陈宇坤 1998．不确定性校正对地震危险性分析结果的影响。灾害学，13(4)：12-16
潘华．2000．概率地震危险性分析中参数不确定性研究．[博士学位论文]．中国地震局地球物理研究所
潘华，黄玮琼 2003．地震统计区划分不确定性对场点地震危险性计算的影响．地震学报，25(2)：199-204
邵锦瑛，赵凤新．1996．地震危险性分析中专家意见的评定．地震工程与工程振动，16(4)：15-20
沈建文，蔡长青1992．地震危险性分析的不确定性及其对策．中国地震，8(4)：12-15
沈建文，赵鹏君．1994．地震危险性分析衰减不确定性校正中的主观不确定性．地震，(2)：64-72
十年尺度中国地震灾害损失预测研究组．1995．中国地震灾害损失预测图集．北京：科学出版社
史培军，2005．四论灾害系统研究的理论与实践．自然灾害学报，14(6)：1-7
史培军．2002．三论灾害研究的理论与实践．自然灾害学报，11(3)1-9
史培军，王静爱，杨明川．2003．中国自然灾害系统地图集．北京：科学出版社
史培军．1991．灾害研究的理论与实践．南京大学学报(自然科学版)，自然灾害研究专辑．史培军．1996．再论灾害研究的理论与实践．自然灾害学报，5(4)：6-17
汪梦甫，章在墉．2000．地震危险性分析方法的改进及其应用．湖南大学学报：自然科学版，27(5)：78-84
汪培庄．1 983．模糊集合论及其应用．上海：上海科学技术出版社
王清印，等．2001．预测与决策的不确定性数学模型．北京：冶金工业出版社
王光远．1990．未确知信息及其数学处理．哈尔滨建筑工程学院学报，(4)：1-9
王时标，王光远．1994．地震危险性分析中的不确定性因素及其数学处理．哈尔滨建筑工程学院学报，27(6)：7-12
王晓青，高孟潭．1995．中长期地震预测方案综合信度评价的层次分析法．中国地震，11(3)：257～265
王晓青，丁香．1998．地震灾害损失现场评估系统，见中国地震局编，地震现场工作大纲和技术指南．北京：地震出版社
王晓青，傅征祥，丁香．2000．地震灾害损失预测系统计算原理与主要功能．地震(增刊)
王晓青，丁香．2002．地震现场灾害损失预测地理信息系统．北京：地震出版社
王晓青，邵辉成，丁香．2003．地震速报参数不确定性的应急灾害损失快速评估模型．地震工程与工程振动，23(6)：198-201
王晓青，丁香．2005．基于GIS的地震灾害损失预测系统使用手册(内部)．
威洛比S S．(刘秀芳等译)．1982．概率与统计．北京：文化教育出版社
谢毓寿，蔡美彪主编．1987．中国地震历史资料汇编，第三卷(上、下)．北京：科学出版社
杨萍，刘卫东．2002．一种考虑不确定性信息的专家综合评价方法．控制与决策，17(2)：236-242
尹之潜．1995．地震灾害及损失预测方法，中国地震灾害损失预测研究专集之四．北京：地震出版社
尹之潜．1994．地震灾害预测的动态分析模型．自然灾害学报，3(2)：72-80
尹之潜，李树桢．1991．地震灾害预测与地震灾害等级．中国地震，7(1)：9-19
尹之潜，杨淑文．2005．地震损失分析与设防标准．北京：地震出版社
张令心，江近仁．2002．多层住宅砖房的地震易损性分析．地震工程与工程振动，22 (1)：49-55
张耀国，雷建成．1991．考虑不确定性的地震危险性分析方法及其应用．四川地震，(4)：20-24
张肇诚主编．2000．中国震例(1989～1991)．北京：地震出版社
赵荣国，李卫平．1998．从震级偏差看震级问题．国际地震动态，(4)：10-16
郑广芬，陶夏新．1991．地震危险性分析中对烈度衰减的不确定性校正．地震工程与工程振动，11(2)：48-52
郑文瑞，吴丹阳，等．2002．模糊随机方法在震灾风险评价中的应用．吉林大学学报(地球科学版)，32(2)：199-202
中国地震局．2000．地震灾害损失评估工作补充规定(内部)
中国地震局．1997．地震灾害损失评估工作规定(试行)(内部)
中国地震局，国家质量技术监督局．GB／T 18208．3-2000．地震现场工作第三部分：调查规范．北京：中国标准出版社，2000
中国地震局，国家质量技术监督局．GB 18306-2001．中国地震动参数区划图．北京：中国标准出版社，2001中国地震局监测预报司．2001．中国大陆地震灾害损失评估汇编(1996～2000年)．北京：地震出版社
周克森，吴鹏．1992．地震危险性分析不确定性的复合概率模型(Ⅱ)．地震工程与工程振动，12(3)：41-47
周克森，吴鹏．1991．地震危险性分析多维不确定性的复合概率模型(Ⅰ)．地震工程与工程振动，11(1)：19-29
ATC(Applied Technology Council). 1985. Earthquake Damage Evaluation Data for California(ATC-13), Redwood City, California, Applied Technology Commission
Chen Qi-fu, Chen Yong, Chen Ling, et al. 1999. Estimation of Earthquake Loss By Using Macroeconomic Approach. Chinese Science Bulletin, 44(3): 199-204.
Chen Qi-fu, Chen Yong, LIU Jie, et al. 1997. Quick and approximate estimation of earthquake loss based on macroscopic index of exposure and population distribution, Natural Hazards, (15): 217-229
Chen Yong, Chen Q. F., Frolova N., et al. 2001. Decision Support Tool for Disaster Management in the Case of Strong Earthquakes. Information and Technology for Disaster Management, 94-105
Chen Yong, Chen Q. F., Frolova N., et al. 2001. Ugarov A. Web based decision support tool in order to response to stong earthquakes. Proc. of TIEMS2001, Oslo, Norway
Chen Yong, Chen Qi-fu, Chen Ling, 2001. Vulnerability Analysis in Earthquake Loss Estimate, Natural Hazards, (16): 1-16
Chen Yong, Chen Qi-fu, Chen Ling. 1998. Vulnerability Analysis in Earthquake Loss Estimate. Earthquake Research in China, 12(4): 331-339
Chen Yong, Chen Qi-fu, Chen Ling. 1997. Worldwide seismic riskanalysis based on limited data, First International Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop. 281-290, Seeheim, Germany, Sept. 1-4
Chen Yong, Chen Qi-fu, Liu Jie, et al. 2002. Chen Ling, Li Juan. Seismic hazard and risk analysis: a simplified approach. Science Press, Beijing
CHEN Yong, CHEN Qi-fu, HUANG Jing et al. 2003a. Reduction of earthquake disasters. ACTA Seismologica SINICA. 16(6): 646-655
CHEN Yong, CHEN Qi fu, HUANG Jing, et al. 2003b. Reduction Of Earthquake Disasters, in 1999-2002 CHINA NATIONAL REPORT on Seismology and Physics of the Earth' s Interior for the 23rd General Assembly of IUGG, Sapporo, Japan, June 30-July 11, 2003 (edit by Chinese National Committee for the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics). Beijing: China Meteorological Press, 130-141.
Cornell C. h. 1968. Engineering Seismic Risk Analysis. BSSA, 58(5): 1583-1606
E. R. Engdahl, Rob van der Hilst, Raymond Buland. 1998. Global Teleseismic Earthquake Relocation with Improved Travel Times and Procedures for Depths Determination. BSSA, 88(3): 722-743
Freeman, J. R, 1932. Earthquake Damage and Earthquake Isurance. McGraw-Hill, New YorkG．M．Atkinson．(薛径译)．2002．北美东部地震危险性分析中随机法地震动衰减关系的一种替代．世界地震译丛，(6)：6-13
Hwang，H．，刘晶波．2004．地震作用下钢筋混凝土桥梁结构易损性分析．土木工程学报，37(6)：47-52
Kiureghian A. Der, Ang. A. H-S. 1977. A Fault—Rupture Model for Seismic Risk Analysis. BSSA, 67(4): 1173-1194
Kulkarni R. B., Youngs R. R., Copersmith K. J. 1984. Assessment of confidence intervals fo results of seismic hazard analysis. In: Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs. (1): 263～270
L. S. CHAN, Y. CHEN, Q. CHEN, L., et al. 1998. Assessment of Global Seismic Loss Based on Macroeconomic Indicators. Natural Hazards, (17): 269-283
Liu Jifu, Wang Xiaoqing, Chen Yong, et al. 2006. The Regional Study on Deviation of the Epicenters Obtained from Rapid Determination of Earthquakes Location and Relevant Macroscopic Epicenters in Chinese Mainland. ACTA SEISMOLOGICA SINNICA, 19(1): 39-43
Liu Jie, Chen Yong, Chen Ling, et al. 1999. A simplified approach to the global seismic hazard assessment. Chinese Science Bulletin, 44(3): 246-250.
McGuire R. K. 1976. Fortran Computer Program for Seismic Risk Analysis. USGS Open File Report
McGuire, R. K., Shedlock, K. M. 1981. Statistical Uncertainties in seismic hazard evaluations in the United States. Bull. Seism. Soc. Ammer., (71): 1287-1321
McGuire, R. K. 1987. Seismic hazard uncertainty and its effects on design earthquake ground motions, Proc. International Seminar on Seismic Zonation, 351-359, Guangzhou, China
McGuire, R. K. 1986. Seismic Hazard Methodology for the Central and Eastern United States. Vol. 1 Methodology, Final Report, EPRI Research Prejects, July
Qi-fu Chen, Hongliang Mi, Jing Huang. 2005. A Simplified Approach to Earthquake Risk in Mainland China, Pure Appl. geophys., 162(10): 1255 -1269
Qi-fu CHEN, gong CHEN, Ling CHEN. 1997. Earthquake Loss Estimation with GDP and Population Data. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 10(6): 791-800
Reiter, L. 1990. Earthquake Hazard Analysis. Columbia University Press, New York
Rogers, A. M., Algermissen, S. T., Hayes, W. W., et al. 1976. A Study of Earthquakes Losses in the Salt Lake City, Utah Srea. U. S. Geological Survey Open-file Report, 76-89
Sakagami, Y., Kuribayashi, E., Ueda, O. et al. 1980. Fundamental factor in optimizing earthquake disaster mitigation investment, Proceedings of the 12th Joint Meeting of the U. S.—Japan Panel on Wind and Seismic Effects, UJNR, Washongton, D. C., May 19-22.
Shafer. G. L. 1976. A mathematical theory of evidence, 1-25. Princeton,??Princeton University Press
Steinbrugge, K. V., Algermissen, S. T., Lagorio, H. J., et al. 1981. Metropolitan San Francisco and Los Angeles Earthquake Loss Studies: 1980 Assessment. US geological Survey Open-File Report, 81-113
Steinbrugge, K. V. 1982. Earthquakes, Volcanoes and Tsunamis, An Anatomy of Hazard. Skandia Amenica group, New York
Steinbrugge, K. V., McGuire, F. E., Snow, A. J. 1969. Studies inseismicity and earthquake damage statistics, Appendix A, US department of Commerce, Coast and Geodetic Survey, Washington, D. C..
Toro，G．R(陈光译)．1989．美国东部地震危险性分析及其不确定性的计算方法．世界地震译从，(1)：18-22
Wang Xiaoqing, Gao Mengtan. 1996. The Confidence Evaluation of Medium- and Long-Term Earthquake Prediction by Making Use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Earthquake Research in China, 10(2): 183～193
Whitman, R. V. 1973. Damage Probability Matrices for Prototype Buildings, Massachusetts Institue of Technology Department of Civil Engineering Rearch Report R73-57. Cambridge, Massachusetts
World Bank. 1995. World Development Report 1994: Infrastructure for Development. Oxford university Press
Y. CHEN, J. LIU, L. CHEN, et al. 1998. Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Based on Area Source Model and Seismicity Data,. Natural Hazards, (17): 251-267
Yong Chen, Ge-ping Li, Qi-fu Chen, et al. 1998. Earthquake Damage and Loss Estimation with Geographic Information System. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 11(6): 751-758
Zadeh, L. A. 1978. Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility. Fussy sets and systems, (1): 3-28
陈棋福．1 997．大尺度地震灾害损失预测评估方法研究．[博士学位论文]，国家地震局地球物理研究所
陈棋福，陈顒，陈凌．1997．利用国内生产总值和人口数据进行地震灾害损失预测评估，地震学报，19(6)：640～649
陈棋福，陈顒，陈凌，等．1999．全球地震灾害预测，科学通报，44(1)：21～25
陈棋福主编．2002a．中国震例(1992～1994)．北京：地震出版社
陈棋福主编．2002b．中国震例(1995～1996)．北京：地震出版社
陈棋福主编．2003a．中国震例(1997～1999)．北京：地震出版社
陈棋福主编．2003b．中国震例(1997～1999)．北京：地震出版社
陈一君，林映光，杨厚学．2004．基于不确定性信息的专家综合评价方法．知识丛林，(12)：156-157
陈顒．1992．中国的地震灾害损失预测，自然灾害学报，(1)：
陈顒，陈棋福，陈凌．1999．地震损失预测评估中的易损性分析．中国地震，15(2)：97～105
陈顒，陈棋福，黄静，等．2003．减轻地震灾害．地震学报，25(6)：621～629
陈顒，陈鑫连，傅征祥．1995．十年尺度中国地震灾害损失预测研究．北京：地震出版社
陈顒，李革平，陈棋福，等．1998．地理信息系统在地震破坏和损失评估中的应用．地震学报，20(6)：640～646
陈顒，刘杰，陈棋福，等．1999．地震危险性分析和震害预测．北京：地震出版社
陈顒，朱宏任．1991．地震灾害定量化研究．国际地震动态，(5)：
邓聚龙．1985．灰色系统(社会·经济)．北京：国防工业出版社
地震工程委员会地震损失估计专家小组(编)．(国家地震局灾害防御司译)．1989．未来地震的损失估计．北京：地震出版社
傅征祥，李革平1993．地震生命损失研究．北京：地震出版社
高玉峰，谢康和．1999．潜在震源区范围的不确定性对地震危险性分析结果的影响规律．科技通报，15(4)：258-262
国家地震局，国家统计局．1996．中国大陆地震灾害损失评估汇编(1990～1995年)．北京：地震出版社
国家地震局．1990．中国地震烈度区划图(1／400万)说明书．北京：地震出版社
国家地震局灾害防御司编译．1991．未来地震的损失估计方法．北京：地震出版社
国家地震局震害防御司编．1993．地震灾害预测和评估工作手册．北京：地震出版社
国家地震局震害防御司未来地震灾害损失预测研究组．1990．中国地震灾害预测研究．北京：地震出版社
哈奇森·特伦斯W．(李小弥，妾洪章等译)．1992．经济学的革命与发展．北京：北京大学出版社
胡聿贤．1988．地震工程学．北京：地震出版社
霍俊荣．1989．近场强地面运动衰减规律的研究．[博士学位论文]．中国地震局地球物理研究所．吉安市统计局．2003．吉安市统计年鉴-2003．北京：中国统计出版社
江西省统计局．2003．江西农村经济年鉴-2003．北京：中国统计出版社
江西省统计局．2004．江西统计年鉴-2004．北京：中国统计出版社
江西省统计局．2005．江西统计年鉴-2005．北京：中国统计出版社
江西省统计局．2006．江西统计年鉴-2006。北京：中国统计出版社
江西省民政厅．2003．江西省行政区划简册(内部资料)
九江市统计局．2003．九江市统计年鉴-2003．北京：中国统计出版社
李树桢编著．1996．地震震害评估．北京：地震出版社
刘恢先主编．1985．唐山大地震震害(一)．北京：地震出版社
刘吉夫，王晓青，陈顒，等．2006．中国大陆地震速报定位与宏观震中偏离的分区研究．地震学报，28(1)：37-41
刘杰，陈顒，陈凌，等．1999．全球地震危险性评估的简化方法。科学通报。44(1)：92～96
刘开第，吴和琴，等．1997．未确知数学．武汉：华中理工大学出版社
刘开第，等．1999．不确定性信息数学处理及应用．北京：科学出版社
楼宝堂主编．1996．中国古今地震灾情总汇(公元前2221年至公元1994年)．北京：地震出版
美国应用技术委员会编，(曹新玲等译)．1991．加利福尼亚未来地震的损失估计．北京：地震出版社
孟玉梅，赵永，王斌．2001．中国地震观测台网地震速报定位偏差的分析．地震，21(3)：65-69
孟玉梅．1994．中国速报震级与国际通用震级的初步对比分析．地震，14(6)：61-68
米道生，陈天然，等．1983．数学分支巡礼．北京：中国青年出版社
米宏亮．2002．地震灾害宏观易损性研究与震害快速评估的网络实现．[硕士学位米素婷，陈国星，吴昊，等．2004．地震危险性分析中潜在震源区范围与震级上限的不确定性分析．地震，24(3)：87-94
聂永安，陈宇坤 1998．不确定性校正对地震危险性分析结果的影响。灾害学，13(4)：12-16
潘华．2000．概率地震危险性分析中参数不确定性研究．[博士学位论文]．中国地震局地球物理研究所
潘华，黄玮琼 2003．地震统计区划分不确定性对场点地震危险性计算的影响．地震学报，25(2)：199-204
邵锦瑛，赵凤新．1996．地震危险性分析中专家意见的评定．地震工程与工程振动，16(4)：15-20
沈建文，蔡长青1992．地震危险性分析的不确定性及其对策．中国地震，8(4)：12-15
沈建文，赵鹏君．1994．地震危险性分析衰减不确定性校正中的主观不确定性．地震，(2)：64-72
十年尺度中国地震灾害损失预测研究组．1995．中国地震灾害损失预测图集．北京：科学出版社
史培军，2005．四论灾害系统研究的理论与实践．自然灾害学报，14(6)：1-7
史培军．2002．三论灾害研究的理论与实践．自然灾害学报，11(3)1-9
史培军，王静爱，杨明川．2003．中国自然灾害系统地图集．北京：科学出版社
史培军．1991．灾害研究的理论与实践．南京大学学报(自然科学版)，自然灾害研究专辑．史培军．1996．再论灾害研究的理论与实践．自然灾害学报，5(4)：6-17
汪梦甫，章在墉．2000．地震危险性分析方法的改进及其应用．湖南大学学报：自然科学版，27(5)：78-84
汪培庄．1 983．模糊集合论及其应用．上海：上海科学技术出版社
王清印，等．2001．预测与决策的不确定性数学模型．北京：冶金工业出版社
王光远．1990．未确知信息及其数学处理．哈尔滨建筑工程学院学报，(4)：1-9
王时标，王光远．1994．地震危险性分析中的不确定性因素及其数学处理．哈尔滨建筑工程学院学报，27(6)：7-12
王晓青，高孟潭．1995．中长期地震预测方案综合信度评价的层次分析法．中国地震，11(3)：257～265
王晓青，丁香．1998．地震灾害损失现场评估系统，见中国地震局编，地震现场工作大纲和技术指南．北京：地震出版社
王晓青，傅征祥，丁香．2000．地震灾害损失预测系统计算原理与主要功能．地震(增刊)
王晓青，丁香．2002．地震现场灾害损失预测地理信息系统．北京：地震出版社
王晓青，邵辉成，丁香．2003．地震速报参数不确定性的应急灾害损失快速评估模型．地震工程与工程振动，23(6)：198-201
王晓青，丁香．2005．基于GIS的地震灾害损失预测系统使用手册(内部)．
威洛比S S．(刘秀芳等译)．1982．概率与统计．北京：文化教育出版社
谢毓寿，蔡美彪主编．1987．中国地震历史资料汇编，第三卷(上、下)．北京：科学出版社
杨萍，刘卫东．2002．一种考虑不确定性信息的专家综合评价方法．控制与决策，17(2)：236-242
尹之潜．1995．地震灾害及损失预测方法，中国地震灾害损失预测研究专集之四．北京：地震出版社
尹之潜．1994．地震灾害预测的动态分析模型．自然灾害学报，3(2)：72-80
尹之潜，李树桢．1991．地震灾害预测与地震灾害等级．中国地震，7(1)：9-19
尹之潜，杨淑文．2005．地震损失分析与设防标准．北京：地震出版社
张令心，江近仁．2002．多层住宅砖房的地震易损性分析．地震工程与工程振动，22 (1)：49-55
张耀国，雷建成．1991．考虑不确定性的地震危险性分析方法及其应用．四川地震，(4)：20-24
张肇诚主编．2000．中国震例(1989～1991)．北京：地震出版社
赵荣国，李卫平．1998．从震级偏差看震级问题．国际地震动态，(4)：10-16
郑广芬，陶夏新．1991．地震危险性分析中对烈度衰减的不确定性校正．地震工程与工程振动，11(2)：48-52
郑文瑞，吴丹阳，等．2002．模糊随机方法在震灾风险评价中的应用．吉林大学学报(地球科学版)，32(2)：199-202
中国地震局．2000．地震灾害损失评估工作补充规定(内部)
中国地震局．1997．地震灾害损失评估工作规定(试行)(内部)
中国地震局，国家质量技术监督局．GB／T 18208．3-2000．地震现场工作第三部分：调查规范．北京：中国标准出版社，2000
中国地震局，国家质量技术监督局．GB 18306-2001．中国地震动参数区划图．北京：中国标准出版社，2001中国地震局监测预报司．2001．中国大陆地震灾害损失评估汇编(1996～2000年)．北京：地震出版社
周克森，吴鹏．1992．地震危险性分析不确定性的复合概率模型(Ⅱ)．地震工程与工程振动，12(3)：41-47
周克森，吴鹏．1991．地震危险性分析多维不确定性的复合概率模型(Ⅰ)．地震工程与工程振动，11(1)：19-29
ATC(Applied Technology Council). 1985. Earthquake Damage Evaluation Data for California(ATC-13), Redwood City, California, Applied Technology Commission
Chen Qi-fu, Chen Yong, Chen Ling, et al. 1999. Estimation of Earthquake Loss By Using Macroeconomic Approach. Chinese Science Bulletin, 44(3): 199-204.
Chen Qi-fu, Chen Yong, LIU Jie, et al. 1997. Quick and approximate estimation of earthquake loss based on macroscopic index of exposure and population distribution, Natural Hazards, (15): 217-229
Chen Yong, Chen Q. F., Frolova N., et al. 2001. Decision Support Tool for Disaster Management in the Case of Strong Earthquakes. Information and Technology for Disaster Management, 94-105
Chen Yong, Chen Q. F., Frolova N., et al. 2001. Ugarov A. Web based decision support tool in order to response to stong earthquakes. Proc. of TIEMS2001, Oslo, Norway
Chen Yong, Chen Qi-fu, Chen Ling, 2001. Vulnerability Analysis in Earthquake Loss Estimate, Natural Hazards, (16): 1-16
Chen Yong, Chen Qi-fu, Chen Ling. 1998. Vulnerability Analysis in Earthquake Loss Estimate. Earthquake Research in China, 12(4): 331-339
Chen Yong, Chen Qi-fu, Chen Ling. 1997. Worldwide seismic riskanalysis based on limited data, First International Earthquakes and Megacities Workshop. 281-290, Seeheim, Germany, Sept. 1-4
Chen Yong, Chen Qi-fu, Liu Jie, et al. 2002. Chen Ling, Li Juan. Seismic hazard and risk analysis: a simplified approach. Science Press, Beijing
CHEN Yong, CHEN Qi-fu, HUANG Jing et al. 2003a. Reduction of earthquake disasters. ACTA Seismologica SINICA. 16(6): 646-655
CHEN Yong, CHEN Qi fu, HUANG Jing, et al. 2003b. Reduction Of Earthquake Disasters, in 1999-2002 CHINA NATIONAL REPORT on Seismology and Physics of the Earth' s Interior for the 23rd General Assembly of IUGG, Sapporo, Japan, June 30-July 11, 2003 (edit by Chinese National Committee for the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics). Beijing: China Meteorological Press, 130-141.
Cornell C. h. 1968. Engineering Seismic Risk Analysis. BSSA, 58(5): 1583-1606
E. R. Engdahl, Rob van der Hilst, Raymond Buland. 1998. Global Teleseismic Earthquake Relocation with Improved Travel Times and Procedures for Depths Determination. BSSA, 88(3): 722-743
Freeman, J. R, 1932. Earthquake Damage and Earthquake Isurance. McGraw-Hill, New YorkG．M．Atkinson．(薛径译)．2002．北美东部地震危险性分析中随机法地震动衰减关系的一种替代．世界地震译丛，(6)：6-13
Hwang，H．，刘晶波．2004．地震作用下钢筋混凝土桥梁结构易损性分析．土木工程学报，37(6)：47-52
Kiureghian A. Der, Ang. A. H-S. 1977. A Fault—Rupture Model for Seismic Risk Analysis. BSSA, 67(4): 1173-1194
Kulkarni R. B., Youngs R. R., Copersmith K. J. 1984. Assessment of confidence intervals fo results of seismic hazard analysis. In: Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs. (1): 263～270
L. S. CHAN, Y. CHEN, Q. CHEN, L., et al. 1998. Assessment of Global Seismic Loss Based on Macroeconomic Indicators. Natural Hazards, (17): 269-283
Liu Jifu, Wang Xiaoqing, Chen Yong, et al. 2006. The Regional Study on Deviation of the Epicenters Obtained from Rapid Determination of Earthquakes Location and Relevant Macroscopic Epicenters in Chinese Mainland. ACTA SEISMOLOGICA SINNICA, 19(1): 39-43
Liu Jie, Chen Yong, Chen Ling, et al. 1999. A simplified approach to the global seismic hazard assessment. Chinese Science Bulletin, 44(3): 246-250.
McGuire R. K. 1976. Fortran Computer Program for Seismic Risk Analysis. USGS Open File Report
McGuire, R. K., Shedlock, K. M. 1981. Statistical Uncertainties in seismic hazard evaluations in the United States. Bull. Seism. Soc. Ammer., (71): 1287-1321
McGuire, R. K. 1987. Seismic hazard uncertainty and its effects on design earthquake ground motions, Proc. International Seminar on Seismic Zonation, 351-359, Guangzhou, China
McGuire, R. K. 1986. Seismic Hazard Methodology for the Central and Eastern United States. Vol. 1 Methodology, Final Report, EPRI Research Prejects, July
Qi-fu Chen, Hongliang Mi, Jing Huang. 2005. A Simplified Approach to Earthquake Risk in Mainland China, Pure Appl. geophys., 162(10): 1255 -1269
Qi-fu CHEN, gong CHEN, Ling CHEN. 1997. Earthquake Loss Estimation with GDP and Population Data. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 10(6): 791-800
Reiter, L. 1990. Earthquake Hazard Analysis. Columbia University Press, New York
Rogers, A. M., Algermissen, S. T., Hayes, W. W., et al. 1976. A Study of Earthquakes Losses in the Salt Lake City, Utah Srea. U. S. Geological Survey Open-file Report, 76-89
Sakagami, Y., Kuribayashi, E., Ueda, O. et al. 1980. Fundamental factor in optimizing earthquake disaster mitigation investment, Proceedings of the 12th Joint Meeting of the U. S.—Japan Panel on Wind and Seismic Effects, UJNR, Washongton, D. C., May 19-22.
Shafer. G. L. 1976. A mathematical theory of evidence, 1-25. Princeton,??Princeton University Press
Steinbrugge, K. V., Algermissen, S. T., Lagorio, H. J., et al. 1981. Metropolitan San Francisco and Los Angeles Earthquake Loss Studies: 1980 Assessment. US geological Survey Open-File Report, 81-113
Steinbrugge, K. V. 1982. Earthquakes, Volcanoes and Tsunamis, An Anatomy of Hazard. Skandia Amenica group, New York
Steinbrugge, K. V., McGuire, F. E., Snow, A. J. 1969. Studies inseismicity and earthquake damage statistics, Appendix A, US department of Commerce, Coast and Geodetic Survey, Washington, D. C..
Toro，G．R(陈光译)．1989．美国东部地震危险性分析及其不确定性的计算方法．世界地震译从，(1)：18-22
Wang Xiaoqing, Gao Mengtan. 1996. The Confidence Evaluation of Medium- and Long-Term Earthquake Prediction by Making Use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Earthquake Research in China, 10(2): 183～193
Whitman, R. V. 1973. Damage Probability Matrices for Prototype Buildings, Massachusetts Institue of Technology Department of Civil Engineering Rearch Report R73-57. Cambridge, Massachusetts
World Bank. 1995. World Development Report 1994: Infrastructure for Development. Oxford university Press
Y. CHEN, J. LIU, L. CHEN, et al. 1998. Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Based on Area Source Model and Seismicity Data,. Natural Hazards, (17): 251-267
Yong Chen, Ge-ping Li, Qi-fu Chen, et al. 1998. Earthquake Damage and Loss Estimation with Geographic Information System. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 11(6): 751-758
Zadeh, L. A. 1978. Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility. Fussy sets and systems, (1): 3-28