Spatial earthquake vulnerability assessment by using multi-criteria decision making and probabilistic neural network techniques in Odisha, India

References

• Alizadeh M, Alizadeh E, Asadollahpour Kotenaee S, Shahabi H, Beiranvand Pour A, Panahi M, Bin Ahmad B, Saro L. 2018b. Social vulnerability assessment using artificial neural network (ann) model for earthquake hazard in Tabriz city, Iran. Sustainability. 10(10):3376.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alizadeh M, Ngah I, Hashim M, Pradhan B, Pour AB. 2018a. A hybrid analytic network process and artificial neural network (anp-ann) model for urban earthquake vulnerability assessment. Remote Sens. 10(6):975.
   Google Scholar
• Bankoff G, Frerks G, Hilhorst D. 2013. Mapping vulnerability:" Disasters, development and people. New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor and Francis, Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Baruah S, Boruah GK, Sharma S, Hoque WA, Chetia T, Dey C, Gogoi D, Das PK, Baruah S, Basumatari D, et al. 2020. Seismic vulnerability assessment of earthquake-prone mega-city shillong, india using geophysical mapping and remote sensing. Georisk: Assessment and Manage Risk for Engineered Syst Geohazards. 14(2):112–127.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bathrellos GD, Skilodimou HD, Chousianitis K, Youssef AM, Pradhan B. 2017. Suitability estimation for urban development using multi-hazard assessment map. Sci Total Environ. 575:119–134.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birkmann J. 2006. Measuring vulnerability to promote disaster-resilient societies: Conceptual frameworks and definitions. Measuring vulnerability to natural hazards: Towards disaster resilient societies, 1:9–54.
   Google Scholar
• Biswas R, Baruah S, Bora DK, Kalita A, Baruah S. 2013. The effects of attenuation and site on the spectra of microearthquakes in the shillong region of northeast india. Pure Appl Geophys. 170(11):1833–1848.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bjarnadottir S, Li Y, Stewart MG. 2011. Social vulnerability index for coastal communities at risk to hurricane hazard and a changing climate. Nat Hazards. 59(2):1055–1075.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brooks N. 2003. Vulnerability, risk and adaptation: A conceptual framework. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Res Working Paper. 38(38):1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell KW, Bozorgnia Y. 2010. A ground motion prediction equation for the horizontal component of cumulative absolute velocity (cav) based on the peer-nga strong motion database. Earthquake Spectra. 26(3):635–650.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caterino N, Cosenza E. 2018. A multi-criteria approach for selecting the seismic retrofit intervention for an existing structure accounting for expected losses and tax incentives in Italy. Eng Struct. 174:840–850.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen W, Cutter SL, Emrich CT, Shi P. 2013. Measuring social vulnerability to natural hazards in the Yangtze river delta region, China. Int J Disaster Risk Sci. 4(4):169–181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chousianitis K, Del Gaudio V, Pierri P, Tselentis GA. 2018. Regional ground‐motion prediction equations for amplitude‐, frequency response‐, and duration‐based parameters for Greece. Earthquake Engng Struct Dyn. 47(11):2252–2274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark GE, Moser SC, Ratick SJ, Dow K, Meyer WB, Emani S, Jin W, Kasperson JX, Kasperson RE, Schwarz HE. 1998. Assessing the vulnerability of coastal communities to extreme storms: The case of Revere, MA, USA. Mitigation Adapt Strategies Global Change. 3(1):59–82.
   Google Scholar
• Collins TW, Grineski SE, Aguilar MDLR. 2009. Vulnerability to environmental hazards in the Ciudad Juárez (Mexico)–El Paso (USA) metropolis: A model for spatial risk assessment in transnational context. Appl Geogr. 29(3):448–461.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cutter SL, Boruff BJ, Shirley WL. 2003. Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. Soc Sci Quarterly. 84(2):242–261.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cutter SL, Mitchell JT, Scott MS. 2000. Revealing the vulnerability of people and places: A case study of Georgetown county, South Carolina. Ann Assoc Am Geographers. 90(4):713–737.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dhar S, Rai A, Nayak P. 2017. Estimation of seismic hazard in Odisha by remote sensing and GIS techniques. Nat Hazards. 86(2):695–709.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fan X, Scaringi G, Korup O, West AJ, van Westen CJ, Tanyas H, Hovius N, Hales TC, Jibson RW, Allstadt KE, Zhang L. 2019. Earthquake-induced chains of geologic hazards: Patterns, mechanisms, and impacts. Rev Geophys. 57(2):421–503.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farahani S, Tahershamsi A, Behnam B. 2020. Earthquake and post-earthquake vulnerability assessment of urban gas pipelines network. Nat Hazards. 101(2):327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flanagan BE, Gregory EW, Hallisey EJ, Heitgerd JL, Lewis B. 2011. A social vulnerability index for disaster management. J Homeland Security Emerg Manage. 8(1):1–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flint CG, Luloff AE. 2005. Natural resource-based communities, risk, and disaster: An intersection of theories. Soc Nat Resour. 18(5):399–412.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foulser‐Piggott R, Goda K. 2015. Ground‐motion prediction models for arias intensity and cumulative absolute velocity for Japanese earthquakes considering single‐station sigma and within‐event spatial correlation. Bull Seismol Soc Am. 105(4):1903–1918.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goh AT. 2002. Probabilistic neural network for evaluating seismic liquefaction potential. Can Geotech J. 39(1):219–232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta S. 2012. Strain localization, granulite formation and geodynamic setting of ‘hot orogens’: A case study from the Eastern Ghats province, India. Geol J. 47(2–3):334–351.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta S, Mohanty WK, Mandal A, Misra S. 2014. Ancient terrane boundaries as probable seismic hazards: A case study from the northern boundary of the Eastern Ghats belt, India. Geosci Front. 5(1):17–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hahn MB, Riederer AM, Foster SO. 2009. The livelihood vulnerability index: A pragmatic approach to assessing risks from climate variability and change—a case study in Mozambique. Global Environ Change. 19(1):74–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jena R, Pradhan B, Alamri AM. 2020a. Susceptibility to seismic amplification and earthquake probability estimation using recurrent neural network (RNN) model in Odisha, India. Appl Sci. 10(15):5355.
   Google Scholar
• Jena R, Pradhan B, Beydoun G. 2020b. Earthquake vulnerability assessment in northern Sumatra province by using a multi-criteria decision-making model. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. 46:101518.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jena R, Pradhan B, Beydoun G, Alamri AM, Sofyan H. 2020c. Earthquake hazard and risk assessment using machine learning approaches at Palu, Indonesia. Sci Total Environ. 749:141582.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jena R, Pradhan B, Beydoun G, Sofyan H, Affan M. 2020d. Integrated model for earthquake risk assessment using neural network and analytic hierarchy process: Aceh province, Indonesia. Geosci Front. 11(2):613–634.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karpouza M, Chousianitis K, Bathrellos GD, Skilodimou HD, Kaviris G, Antonarakou A. 2021. Hazard zonation mapping of earthquake-induced secondary effects using spatial multi-criteria analysis. Nat Hazards. 109:637–669.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee S, Panahi M, Pourghasemi HR, Shahabi H, Alizadeh M, Shirzadi A, Khosravi K, Melesse AM, Yekrangnia M, Rezaie F, et al. 2019. Sevucas: A novel GIS-based machine learning software for seismic vulnerability assessment. Appl Sci. 9(17):3495.
   Google Scholar
• Mahalik N. 1994. Geology of the contact between the Eastern Ghats belt and North Orissa Craton, India. J Geol Soc India (Online Archive from Vol 1 to Vol 78). 44(1):41–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mardani A, Jusoh A, Nor K, Khalifah Z, Zakwan N, Valipour A. 2015. Multiple criteria decision-making techniques and their applications–a review of the literature from 2000 to 2014. Econ Res-Ekonomska Istraživanja. 28(1):516–571.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meisel WS. 1972. Computer-oriented approaches to pattern recognition. New York: Academic Press. Technology Service Corp Santa Monica Calif.
   Google Scholar
• Mohanty WK, Walling MY, Vaccari F, Tripathy T, Panza GF. 2009. Modeling of SH-and P-SV-wave fields and seismic microzonation based on response spectra for Talchir Basin, India. Eng Geol. 104(1–2):80–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohebbi Tafreshi G, Nakhaei M, Lak R. 2020. Subsidence risk assessment based on a novel hybrid form of a tree-based machine learning algorithm and an index model of vulnerability. Geocarto Int:1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2020.1841835.
   Google Scholar
• Narula P, Acharyya S, Banerjee J. 2000. Seismotectonic Atlas of India and its Environs. Geological survey of India.
   Google Scholar
• Nath S. 2016. Seismic hazard, vulnerability and risk microzonation atlas of kolkata. Open File Report, Geoscience Division, Ministry of Earth Sciences, Government of India.
   Google Scholar
• Notaro M, Lorenz D, Hoving C, Schummer M. 2014. Twenty-first-century projections of snowfall and winter severity across central-eastern North America. J Climate. 27(17):6526–6550.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panahi M, Rezaie F, Meshkani S. 2014. Seismic vulnerability assessment of school buildings in Tehran city based on AHP and GIS. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci. 14(4):969–979.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parzen E. 1962. On estimation of a probability density function and mode. Ann Math Statist. 33(3):1065–1076.
   Google Scholar
• Pathak J, Bharali R, Deka B, Pathak S, Ahmed IJ, Lang DH, Meslem A. 2015. Building classification scheme and vulnerability model for the city of guwahati, assam. EQRisk Project Report, Report, (15-014).
   Google Scholar
• Peng Y. 2015. Regional earthquake vulnerability assessment using a combination of MCDM methods. Ann Oper Res. 234(1):95–110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rathje EM, Abrahamson NA, Bray JD. 1998. Simplified frequency content estimates of earthquake ground motions. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. 124(2):150–159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rezaie F, Panahi M. 2015. GIS modeling of seismic vulnerability of residential fabrics considering geotechnical, structural, social and physical distance indicators in Tehran using multi-criteria decision-making techniques. Nat Hazards & Earth Syst Sci. 15(3):461–474.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarkar S, Saha A. 1983. Structure and tectonics of the Singhbhum-Orissa iron ore craton, eastern India. In Structure and Tectonics of Precambrian Rocks of India. India: Hindustan Publications; p. 1–25.
   Google Scholar
• Sarvar H, Amini J, Laleh-Poor M. 2011. Assessment of risk caused by earthquake in region 1 of Tehran using the combination of radius, topsis and AHP models. J Civil Engin Urbanism. 1(1):39–48.
   Google Scholar
• Sinha R, Adarsh N. 1999. A postulated earthquake damage scenario for Mumbai. ISET J Earthquake Technol. 36(2–4):169–183.
   Google Scholar
• Sinha R, Goyal A. 2004. A national policy for seismic vulnerability assessment of buildings and procedure for rapid visual screening of buildings for potential seismic vulnerability. Report to Disaster Management Division, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, Hindistan.
   Google Scholar
• Specht DF. 1990. Probabilistic neural networks. Neural Netw. 3(1):109–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thieken A, Olschewski A, Kreibich H, Kobsch S, Merz B. 2008. Development and evaluation of flemops–a new flood loss estimation model for the private sector. WIT Trans Ecol Environ. 118:315–324.
   Google Scholar
• Thiri MA. 2017. Social vulnerability and environmental migration: The case of Miyagi prefecture after the great east japan earthquake. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. 25:212–226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood NJ, Burton CG, Cutter SL. 2010. Community variations in social vulnerability to cascadia-related tsunamis in the us pacific northwest. Nat Hazards. 52(2):369–389.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yariyan P, Ali Abbaspour R, Chehreghan A, Karami M, Cerdà A. 2021. GIS-based seismic vulnerability mapping: A comparison of artificial neural networks hybrid models. Geocarto Int:1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2021.1892208.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang W, Xu X, Chen X. 2017. Social vulnerability assessment of earthquake disaster based on the catastrophe progression method: A Sichuan province case study. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct. 24:361–372.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar