A Machine Learning Framework for Assessing Seismic Hazard Safety of Reinforced Concrete Buildings
Source abstract
Abstract
Although averting a seismic disturbance and its physical, social, and economic disruption is practically impossible, using the advancements in computational science and numerical modeling shall equip humanity to predict its severity, understand the outcomes, and equip for post-disaster management. Many buildings exist amidst the developed metropolitan areas, which are senile and still in service. These buildings were also designed before establishing national seismic codes or without the introduction of construction regulations. In that case, risk reduction is significant for developing alternatives and designing suitable models to enhance the existing structure’s performance. Such models will be able to classify risks and casualties related to possible earthquakes through emergency preparation. Thus, it is crucial to recognize structures that are susceptible to earthquake vibrations and need to be prioritized for retrofitting. However, each building’s behavior under seismic actions cannot be studied through performing structural analysis, as it might be unrealistic because of the rigorous computations, long period, and substantial expenditure. Therefore, it calls for a simple, reliable, and accurate process known as Rapid Visual Screening (RVS), which serves as a primary screening platform, including an optimum number of seismic parameters and predetermined performance damage conditions for structures. In this study, the damage classification technique was studied, and the efficacy of the Machine Learning (ML) method in damage prediction via a Support Vector Machine (SVM) model was explored. The ML model is trained and tested separately on damage data from four different earthquakes, namely Ecuador, Haiti, Nepal, and South Korea. Each dataset consists of varying numbers of input data and eight performance modifiers. Based on the study and the results, the ML model using SVM classifies the given input data into the belonging classes and accomplishes the performance on hazard safety evaluation of buildings.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring · Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Smart Agriculture and AI
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Institute of Structural Mechanics (ISM), Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, 99423 Weimar, Germany
Research Group Theoretical Computer Science/Formal methods, School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Universität Kassel, Wilhelmshöher Allee 73, 34131 Kassel, Germany
References (63)
Show source-provided references
1. Seismic risk in historical centers10.1016/S0267-7261(01)00027-6 ↗
2. A proposed rapid visual screening procedure for seismic evaluation of RC-frame buildings in India10.1193/1.3456711 ↗
3. A Proposed Rapid Visual Screening Procedure for Developing Countries10.4018/IJGEE.2018070103 ↗
4. Sinha, R., and Goyal, A. (2004). A National Policy for Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Buildings and Procedure for Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Potential Seismic Vulnerability, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. Report to Disaster Management Division.
5. FEMA P-154 (2015). Third Edition, Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Potential Seismic Hazards: A Handbook, Homeland Security Department, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
6. Harirchian, E. (2015). Constructability Comparison Between IBS and Conventional Construction. [Ph.D. Thesis, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia].
7. Rai, D.C. (2005). Seismic Evaluation and Strengthening of Existing Buildings, IIT Kanpur and Gujarat State Disaster Mitigation Authority.
8. Vallejo, C.B. (2010, January 8–12). Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings in the City of Manila, Philippines. Proceedings of the 5th Civil Engineering Conference in the Asian Region and Australasian Structural Engineering Conference 2010, Sydney, Australia.
9. Mishra, S. (2014). Guide book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Seismic Hazard, TARU Leading Edge Private Ltd.
10. Luca, F., and Verderame, G. (2014). Seismic Vulnerability Assessment: Reinforced Concrete Structures, Springer.
11. Rapid Visual Screening Procedure of Existing Building Based on Statistical Analysis10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.01.033 ↗
12. Rapid Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Low- to Mid-Rise Reinforced Concrete Buildings Using Bingöl’s Regional Data10.1193/1.4000065 ↗
13. Harirchian, E., Lahmer, T., and Rasulzade, S. (2020). Earthquake Hazard Safety Assessment of Existing Buildings Using Optimized Multi-Layer Perceptron Neural Network. Energies, 13.10.3390/en13082060 ↗
14. An ANN approaches on estimating earthquake performances of existing RC buildings10.14311/NNW.2012.22.027 ↗
15. Earthquake induced damage classification for reinforced concrete buildings10.1016/j.strusafe.2009.10.002 ↗
16. Improved Rapid Assessment of Earthquake Hazard Safety of Structures via Artificial Neural Networks
17. Harirchian, E., Lahmer, T., Kumari, V., and Jadhav, K. (2020). Application of Support Vector Machine Modeling for the Rapid Seismic Hazard Safety Evaluation of Existing Buildings. Energies, 13.10.3390/en13133340 ↗
18. Harirchian, E., and Harirchian, A. (2018). Earthquake Hazard Safety Assessment of Buildings via Smartphone App: An Introduction to the Prototype Features- 30. Forum Bauinformatik: Von jungen Forschenden für junge Forschende: September 2018, Informatik im Bauwesen, Professur Informatik im Bauwesen, Bauhaus-Universität Weimar.
19. Harirchian, E., Jadhav, K., Mohammad, K., Aghakouchaki Hosseini, S.E., and Lahmer, T. (2020). A Comparative Study of MCDM Methods Integrated with Rapid Visual Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Existing RC Structures. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app10186411 ↗
20. Uncertainty and fuzzy decisions in earthquake risk evaluation of buildings10.4186/ej.2019.23.5.89 ↗
21. Seismic assessment of buildings by rapid visual screening procedures10.2495/ERES070391 ↗
22. Seismic vulnerability assessment of reinforced concrete buildings using hierarchical fuzzy rule base modeling10.1193/1.3280115 ↗
23. Rapid visual earthquake hazard evaluation of existing buildings by fuzzy logic modeling10.1016/j.eswa.2010.02.046 ↗
24. Developing a hierarchical type-2 fuzzy logic model to improve rapid evaluation of earthquake hazard safety of existing buildings10.1016/j.istruc.2020.09.048 ↗
25. Harirchian, E., and Lahmer, T. (2020). Improved Rapid Visual Earthquake Hazard Safety Evaluation of Existing Buildings Using a Type-2 Fuzzy Logic Model. Appl. Sci., 10.10.20944/preprints202003.0236.v1 ↗
26. Evaluation of Change Detection Techniques using Very High Resolution Optical Satellite Imagery
27. Valentijn, T., Margutti, J., van den Homberg, M., and Laaksonen, J. (2020). Multi-Hazard and Spatial Transferability of a CNN for Automated Building Damage Assessment. Remote. Sens., 12.10.3390/rs12172839 ↗
28. Seismic parameters’ combinations for the optimum prediction of the damage state of R/C buildings using neural networks10.1016/j.advengsoft.2017.01.001 ↗
29. Sucuoglu, H., Yazgan, U., and Yakut, A. (2007). A Screening Procedure for Seismic Risk Assessment in Urban Building Stocks. Earthq. Spectra-Earthq Spectra, 23.10.1193/1.2720931 ↗
30. Jain, S., Mitra, K., Kumar, M., and Shah, M. (2010, January 29). A rapid visual seismic assessment procedure for RC frame buildings in India. Proceedings of the 9th US National and 10th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Toronto, ON, Canada.
31. Rapid screening method for the determination of seismic vulnerability assessment of RC building stocks10.1007/s10518-019-00751-9 ↗
32. Probabilistic methods for the estimation of potential seismic damage: Application to reinforced concrete buildings in Turkey10.1016/j.strusafe.2010.04.001 ↗
33. Morfidis, K.E., and Kostinakis, K.G. (2019, January 24–26). Use Of Artificial Neural Networks in the R/C Buildings’ Seismic Vulnerabilty Assessment: The Practical Point. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Crete, Greece.10.7712/120119.7316.19299 ↗
34. Dritsos, S., and Moseley, V. (2013). A fuzzy logic rapid visual screening procedure to identify buildings at seismic risk. Beton Stahlbetonbau, 136–143. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295594396_A_fuzzy_logic_rapid_visual_screening_procedure_to_identify_buildings_at_seismic_risk.
35. Zhang, Z., Hsu, T.Y., Wei, H.H., and Chen, J.H. (2019). Development of a Data-Mining Technique for Regional-Scale Evaluation of Building Seismic Vulnerability. Appl. Sci., 9.10.3390/app9071502 ↗
36. A cyberplatform for sharing scientific research data at DataCenterHub10.1109/MCSE.2017.3301213 ↗
37. Sim, C., Villalobos, E., Smith, J.P., Rojas, P., Pujol, S., Puranam, A.Y., and Laughery, L.A. (2020, June 10). Performance of Low-rise Reinforced Concrete Buildings in the 2016 Ecuador Earthquake, Purdue University Research Repository, United States. Available online: https://purr.purdue.edu/publications/2727/1.
38. Vera-Grunauer, X. (2017, January 9–13). Geer-Atc Mw7.8 Ecuador 4/16/16 Earthquake Reconnaissance Part II: Selected Geotechnical Observations. Proceedings of the 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (WCEE), Santiago, Chile.
39. Measures of the Seismic Vulnerability of Reinforced Concrete Buildings in Haiti10.1193/1.3637034 ↗
40. (2017). NEES: The Haiti Earthquake Database, DEEDS, Purdue University Research Repository. Available online: https://datacenterhub.org/resources/263.
41. Flexible soils amplified the damage in the 2010 Haiti earthquake
42. (2010). U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 2010.
43. Shah, P., Pujol, S., Puranam, A., and Laughery, L. (2015). Database on Performance of Low-Rise Reinforced Concrete Buildings in the 2015 Nepal Earthquake, DEEDS, Purdue University Research Repository. Available online: https://datacenterhub.org/resources/238.
44. Site amplification in the Kathmandu Valley during the 2015 M7. 6 Gorkha, Nepal earthquake10.1007/s10518-016-0003-8 ↗
45. Sim, C., Laughery, L., Chiou, T.C., and Weng, P.W. (2018). 2017 Pohang Earthquake—Reinforced Concrete Building Damage Survey, DEEDS, Purdue University Research Repository. Available online: https://datacenterhub.org/resources/14728.
46. Kim, H.S., Sun, C.G., and Cho, H.I. (2018). Geospatial assessment of the post-earthquake hazard of the 2017 Pohang earthquake considering seismic site effects. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf., 7.10.3390/ijgi7090375 ↗
47. A seismic intensity survey of the April 16, 2016 Mw 7.8 Muisne, Ecuador earthquake, and a comparison with strong motion data
48. (2015). U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 2015.
49. (2017). U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 2017.
50. Stone, H. (2018). Exposure and Vulnerability for Seismic Risk Evaluations. [Ph.D. Thesis, University College London].
51. Earthquake Hazard Safety Assessment of Buildings via Smartphone App: A Comparative Study10.1088/1757-899X/652/1/012069 ↗
52. Yakut, A., Aydogan, V., Ozcebe, G., and Yucemen, M. (2003). Preliminary Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Existing Reinforced Concrete Buildings in Turkey. Seismic Assessment and Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, Springer.10.1007/978-94-010-0021-5_4 ↗
53. Seismic vulnerability assessment of low-rise buildings in regions with infrequent earthquakes
54. Herrero-Lopez, S. (2011). Multiclass support vector machine. GPU Computing Gems Emerald Edition, Elsevier.10.1016/B978-0-12-384988-5.00020-6 ↗
55. Han, J., Kamber, M., and Pei, J. (2012). 6-mining frequent patterns, associations, and correlations: Basic concepts and methods. Data Mining, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.. [3rd ed.].10.1016/B978-0-12-381479-1.00006-X ↗
56. Machine learning from imbalanced data sets 101
57. Prediction of potential damage due to severe earthquakes10.1016/j.strusafe.2003.09.002 ↗
58. Support-vector networks10.1007/BF00994018 ↗
59. Wang, J., Yao, Y., and Liu, Z. (2007, January 14–17). A new multi-class classification based on non-linear svm and decision tree. Proceedings of the 2007 Second International Conference on Bio-Inspired Computing: Theories and Applications, Harbin, China.10.1109/BICTA.2007.4806431 ↗
60. Weston, J., Mukherjee, S., Chapelle, O., Pontil, M., Poggio, T., and Vapnik, V. (2001). Feature selection for SVMs. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, MIT Press.
61. The 16 April 2016 Ecuador Earthquake Damage Assessment Survey10.1193/060217EQS106M ↗
62. The 2015 Gorkha Nepal earthquake: Insights from earthquake damage survey10.3389/fbuil.2015.00008 ↗
63. The November 2017 Mw 5.5 Pohang earthquake: A possible case of induced seismicity in South Korea10.1126/science.aat2010 ↗