No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The large uncertainty associated with the prediction of future earthquakes is usually regarded as the main reason for increased hazard estimates which have resulted from some recent large scale probabilistic seismic hazard analysis studies (e.g. the PEGASOS study in Switzerland and the Yucca Mountain study in the USA). It is frequently overlooked that such increased hazard estimates are characteristic for a single specific method of probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA): the traditional (CornellMcGuire) PSHA method which has found its highest level of sophistication in the SSHAC probability method. Based on a review of the SSHAC probability model and its application in the PEGASOS project, it is shown that the surprising results of recent PSHA studies can be explained to a large extent by the uncertainty model used in traditional PSHA, which deviates from the state of the art in mathematics and risk analysis. This uncertainty model, the Ang-Tang uncertainty model, mixes concepts of decision theory with probabilistic hazard assessment methods leading to an overestimation of uncertainty in comparison to empirical evidence. Although expert knowledge can be a valuable source of scientific information, its incorporation into the SSHAC probability method does not resolve the issue of inflating uncertainties in PSHA results. Other, more data driven, PSHA approaches in use in some European countries are less vulnerable to this effect. The most valuable alternative to traditional PSHA is the direct probabilistic scenariobased approach, which is closely linked with emerging neo-deterministic methods based on waveform modelling.