Spatial distribution of bedrock level peak ground acceleration in the National Capital Region of India using geographic information system

References

• Agrawal N, Gupta L, Dixit J. 2021. Assessment of the socioeconomic vulnerability to seismic hazards in the national capital region of India using factor analysis. Sustainability. 13(17):9652.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmad R, Singh RP. 2016. Attenuation relation predicted observed ground motion of Gorkha Nepal earthquake of April 25, 2015. Nat Hazards. 80(1):311–328.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmad RA, Singh RP, Adris A. 2017. Seismic hazard assessment of Syria using seismicity, DEM, slope, active faults and GIS. Remote Sens Appl: Soc Environ. 6:59–70.
   Google Scholar
• Aman A, Singh UK, Singh RP. 1995. A new empirical relation for strong seismic ground motion for the Himalayan region. Curr Sci. 69(9):772–777.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ambraseys NN, Bommer JJ. 1991. The attenuation of ground accelerations in Europe. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 20(12):1179–1202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anbazhagan P, Bajaj K, Matharu K, Moustafa SS, Al-Arifi NS. 2019. Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis using the logic tree approach–Patna district (India. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci. 19(10):2097–2115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anbazhagan P, Bajaj K, Patel S. 2015. Seismic hazard maps and spectrum for Patna considering region-specific seismotectonic parameters. Nat Hazards. 78(2):1163–1195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bajaj K, Anbazhagan P. 2019. Regional stochastic GMPE with available recorded data for active region–Application to the Himalayan region. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng. 126:105825.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baltay AS, Hanks TC, Abrahamson NA. 2017. Uncertainty, variability, and earthquake physics in ground‐motion prediction equations. Bull Seismol Soc Am. 107(4):1754–1772.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhukosh, Geological Survey of India 2021 [accessed: 2021 June 26] https://bhukosh.gsi.gov.in/Bhukosh/Public.
   Google Scholar
• Bommer JJ. 2002. Deterministic vs. probabilistic seismic hazard assessment: an exaggerated and obstructive dichotomy. J Earthquake Eng. 6(sup001):43–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borah N, Kumar A. 2021. Studying and comparing the declustered EQ catalogue obtained from different methods for Guwahati region NE India. In Geohazards. Singapore: Springer; p. 577–590.
   Google Scholar
• Bungum H, Lindholm CD, Mahajan AK. 2017. Earthquake recurrence in NW and central Himalaya. J Asian Earth Sci. 138:25–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Census of India 2011. Provisional population totals. New Delhi: Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner
   Google Scholar
• Chhabra A, Manjunath KR, Panigrahy S. 2010. Non-point source pollution in Indian agriculture: Estimation of nitrogen losses from rice crop using remote sensing and GIS. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf . 12(3):190–200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chouhan RKS. 1975. Seismotectonics of Delhi region. Proc. Indian Nat. Sci. Acad. 41:429–447.
   Google Scholar
• Cornell CA. 1968. Engineering seismic risk analysis. Bull Seismol Soc Am. 58(5):1583–1606.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornell CA, Banon H, Shakal AF. 1979. Seismic motion and response prediction alternatives. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 7(4):295–315.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crowley H, Bommer JJ, Pinho R, Bird J. 2005. The impact of epistemic uncertainty on an earthquake loss model. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. 34(14):1653–1685.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Das R, Wason HR, Sharma ML. 2012. Magnitude conversion to unified moment magnitude using orthogonal regression relation. J Asian Earth Sci. 50:44–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deligiannakis G, Papanikolaou ID, Roberts G. 2018. Fault specific GIS based seismic hazard maps for the Attica region, Greece. Geomorphology. 306:264–282.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dixit J, Dewaikar DM, Jangid RS. 2012. Soil liquefaction studies at Mumbai city. Nat Hazards. 63(2):375–390.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dixit J, Dewaikar DM, Jangid RS. 2012. Assessment of liquefaction potential index for Mumbai city. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci. 12(9):2759–2768.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erdik M. 2017. Earthquake risk assessment. Bull Earthquake Eng. 15(12):5055–5092.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ESRI 2016. ArcGIS Release 10.5. Redlands (CA): Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI).
   Google Scholar
• GSI 2008. Seismotectonic Atlas of India and its environs. Geological Survey of India.
   Google Scholar
• Gupta ID. 2002. The state of the art in seismic hazard analysis. ISET J Earthquake Technol. 39(4):311–346.
   Google Scholar
• Gupta H, Gahalaut VK. 2014. Seismotectonics and large earthquake generation in the Himalayan region. Gondwana Res. 25(1):204–213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gutenberg B, Richter CF. 1944. Frequency of earthquakes in California. Bull Seismol Soc Am. 34(4):185–188.
   Google Scholar
• IS-1893 2016. Earthquake resistant design and construction of buildings code of practice.
   Google Scholar
• ISC, International Seismological Centre, ISC-GEM Earthquake Catalogue 2021. [accessed 2021 June 26] https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31905/d808b825.
   Google Scholar
• Iyengar RN, Ghosh S. 2004. Microzonation of earthquake hazard in greater Delhi area. Curr Sci. 87(9):1193–1202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joshi A, Kumar A, Lomnitz C, Castaños H, Akhtar S. 2012. Applicability of attenuation relations for regional studies. GeofInt. 51(4):349–363.
   Google Scholar
• Keshri CK, Mohanty WK, Ranjan P. 2020. Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for some parts of the Indo-Gangetic plains, India. Nat Hazards. 103(1):815–843.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan MM, Kumar GK. 2018. Statistical completeness analysis of seismic data. J Geol Soc India. 91(6):749–753.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kramer SL. 1996. Geotechnical earthquake engineering. Pearson Education India, New Delhi.
   Google Scholar
• Kumar L, Narayan JP. 2020. Computation of ground motion amplification scenario in NCT Delhi for earthquake engineering purposes and seismic microzonation. Pure Appl Geophys. 177(8):3797–3829.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindholm AC, Parvez IA, Kühn D. 2016. Probabilistic earthquake hazard assessment for Peninsular India. J Seismol. 20(2):629–653.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehta P, Thaker TP. 2020. Seismic hazard analysis of Vadodara Region, Gujarat, India: Probabilistic & deterministic approach. J Earthquake Eng. 13:1–23.
   Google Scholar
• Mittal H, Kumar A, Singh SK. 2013. Estimation of site effects in Delhi using standard spectral ratio. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng. 50:53–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohanty WK, Walling MY, Nath SK, Pal I. 2007. First order seismic microzonation of Delhi, India using geographic information system (GIS). Nat Hazards. 40(2):245–260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naha K, Mukhopadhyay DK, Mohanty R, Mitra SK, Biswal TK. 1984. Significance of contrast in the early stages of the structural history of the Delhi and the pre-Delhi rock groups in the Proterozoic of Rajasthan, western India. Tectonophysics. 105(1-4):193–206.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nath SK, Thingbaijam KKS. 2012. Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment of India. Seismol Res Lett. 83(1):135–149.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NCS-MoES, National Center for Seismology, Ministry of Earth Sciences, Government of India 2021. [accessed 2021 June 26] https://seismo.gov.in/MIS/riseq/earthquake.
   Google Scholar
• NCS-MoES, National Center for Seismology, Ministry of Earth Sciences, Government of India 2021. [accessed 2021 June 26] https://seismo.gov.in/seismological-data.
   Google Scholar
• NCS-MoES 2016. A report on seismic hazard microzonation of NCT Delhi on 1:10,000 scale. National Center for Seismology, Ministry of Earth Sciences, Government of India. [accessed 2021 June 26] https://www.moes.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Delhi_microzonation_report.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• NDMA 2010. Development of probabilistic seismic hazard map of India; Technical Report by National Disaster Management Authority. Government of India, New Delhi.
   Google Scholar
• Oldham T. 1883. A catalogue of Indian earthquakes from the earliest to the end of 1869. Mem Geol Surv India. 19(3):1–53.
   Google Scholar
• Parvez IA, Vaccari F, Panza GF. 2003. A deterministic seismic hazard map of India and adjacent areas. Geophys J Int. 155(2):489–508.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prakash R, Shrivastava JP. 2012. A review of the seismicity and seismotectonics of Delhi and adjoining areas. J Geol Soc India. 79(6):603–617.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raghukanth STG. 2010. Estimation of seismicity parameters for India. Seismol Res Lett. 81(2):207–217.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raghukanth STG, Dixit J, Dash SK. 2011. Ground motion for scenario earthquakes at Guwahati city. Acta Geodaet Geophys Hungarica. 46(3):326–346.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raghukanth STG, Iyengar RN. 2006. Seismic hazard estimation for Mumbai city. Curr Sci. 91(11):1486–1494.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raghukanth STG, Kavitha B. 2014. Ground motion relations for active regions in India. Pure Appl Geophys. 171(9):2241–2275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rao KS, Rathod GW. 2014. Seismic microzonation of Indian megacities: a case study of NCR Delhi. Indian Geotech J. 44(2):132–148.
   Google Scholar
• Reasenberg P. 1985. Second‐order moment of central California seismicity, 1969–1982. J Geophys Res. 90(B7):5479–5495.
   Google Scholar
• Sarkar S, Shanker D. 2017. Estimation of seismic hazard using PSHA in and around National Capital Region (NCR) of India. Geosciences.7(4):109–116.
   Google Scholar
• Sharma ML. 1998. Attenuation relationship for estimation of peak ground horizontal acceleration using data from strong-motion arrays in India. Bull Seismol Soc Am. 88(4):1063–1069.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharma ML, Wason HR. 2004. Estimation of seismic hazard and seismic zonation at bed rock level for Delhi region, India. In Proceedings of the 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, August.
   Google Scholar
• Sharma ML, Wason HR, Dimri R. 2003. Seismic zonation of the Delhi region for bedrock ground motion. Pure Appl Geophys. 160(12):2381–2398.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh RP, Aman A, Prasad YJJ. 1996. Attenuation relations for strong seismic ground motion in the Himalayan region. PAGEOPH. 147(1):161–180.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh SK, Suresh G, Dattatrayam RS, Shukla HP, Martin S, Havskov J, Perez-Campos X, Iglesias A. 2013. The Delhi 1960 earthquake: epicentre, depth and magnitude. Curr Sci. 105(8):1155–1165.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinha R, Sarkar R. 2020. Seismic Hazard assessment of Dhanbad City, India, by deterministic approach. Nat Hazards. 103(2):1857–1880.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sitharam TG, Anbazhagan P. 2007. Seismic hazard analysis for the Bangalore region. Nat Hazards. 40(2):261–278.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sitharam TG, Kolathayar S. 2013. Seismic hazard analysis of India using areal sources. J Asian Earth Sci . 62:647–653.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sitharam TG, Sil A. 2014. Comprehensive seismic hazard assessment of Tripura and Mizoram states. J Earth Syst Sci. 123(4):837–857.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Srivastava HN, Verma M, Bansal BK. 2018. Fault rupture directivity of large earthquakes in Himalaya. J Geol Soc India. 91(1):9–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stepp JC. 1972. Analysis of completeness of the earthquake sample in the Puget Sound area and its effect on statistical estimates of earthquake hazard. Proc 1st Int Conf Microz Seattle 1972. 2:897–910.
   Google Scholar
• Stepp JC, Wong I, Whitney J, Quittmeyer R, Abrahamson N, Toro G, Youngs R, Coppersmith K, Savy J, Sullivan T, Yucca Mountain PSHA Project Members 2001. Probabilistic seismic hazard analyses for ground motions and fault displacement at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Earthquake Spectra. 17(1):113–151.
   Google Scholar
• Telesca L, Lovallo M, Aggarwal SK, Khan PK, Rastogi BK. 2016. Visibility graph analysis of the 2003–2012 earthquake sequence in the Kachchh Region of Western India. Pure Appl Geophys. 173(1):125–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thakur VC. 2013. Active tectonics of Himalayan frontal fault system. Int J Earth Sci (Geol Rundsch)). 102(7):1791–1810.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• USGS NEIC. US Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center 2021. [accessed 2021 June 26] http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes.
   Google Scholar
• Vipin KS, Sitharam TG, Kolathayar S. 2013. Assessment of seismic hazard and liquefaction potential of Gujarat based on probabilistic approaches. Nat Hazards. 65(2):1179–1195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Z. 2011. Seismic hazard assessment: Issues and alternatives. Pure Appl Geophys. 168(1-2):11–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiemer S, Wyss M. 2000. Minimum magnitude of completeness in earthquake catalogs: Examples from Alaska, the western United States, and Japan. Bull Seismol Soc Am. 90(4):859–869.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiemer SA. 2001. software package to analyse seismicity: ZMAP. Seismol Res Lett. 72(3):373–382.
   Google Scholar
• Zhuang J, Ogata Y, Vere-Jones D. 2002. Stochastic declustering of space-time earthquake occurrences. J Am Stat Assoc. 97(458):369–380.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar