Use of Technical Expert Panels: Applications to Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis

Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) is a methodology that estimates the likelihood that various levels of earthquake‐caused ground motions will be exceeded at a given location in a given future time period. Due to large uncertainties in all of the geosciences data and in their modeling, mul...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inRisk analysis Vol. 18; no. 4; pp. 463 - 469
Main Authors Budnitz, Robert J., Apostolakis, George, Boore, David M., Cluff, Lloyd S., Coppersmith, Kevin J., Cornell, C. Allin, Morris, Peter A.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.08.1998
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) is a methodology that estimates the likelihood that various levels of earthquake‐caused ground motions will be exceeded at a given location in a given future time period. Due to large uncertainties in all of the geosciences data and in their modeling, multiple model interpretations are often possible. This leads to disagreements among the experts, which in the past has led to disagreement on the selection of a ground motion for design at a given site. This paper reports on a project, co‐sponsored by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the Electric Power Research Institute, that was undertaken to review the state‐of‐the‐art and improve on the overall stability of the PSHA process, by providing methodological guidance on how to perform a PSHA. The project reviewed past studies and examined ways to improve on the present state‐of‐the‐art. In analyzing past PSHA studies, the most important conclusion is that differences in PSHA results are commonly due to process rather than technical differences. Thus, the project concentrated heavily on developing process recommendations, especially on the use of multiple experts, and this paper reports on those process recommendations. The problem of facilitating and integrating the judgments of a diverse group of experts is analyzed in detail. The authors believe that the concepts and process principles apply just as well to non‐earthquake fields such as volcanic hazard, flood risk, nuclear‐plant safety, and climate change.
Bibliography:ark:/67375/WNG-3J97P2FF-B
istex:AE70302C158CE2AAD5C0F228A65E577F5540A64E
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any third party's use or the results of such use, of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed in this report, or represents that its use by such third party would not infringe privately owned rights. The views expressed in this paper are not necessarily those of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ArticleID:RISA463
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0272-4332
1539-6924
DOI:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1998.tb00361.x