Seismic Risk Assessment of Multiple Cities: Biases in the Vulnerability Derivation Methods for Urban Areas With Different Hazard Levels

Previously, it has been shown that probabilistic seismic risk assessments (PSRAs) at urban scale present important discrepancies when compared with analyses conducted using methodologies from regional or national PSRA. However, conducting site-specific urban-scale for a considerable number of cities may not be feasible due to limitations in time, resources, and some cases availability information, thus more general models are used. This brings into the picture importance identifying quantifying possible biases, discrepancies, uncertainties different methods, both hazard vulnerability components. Regarding latter, several sources uncertainty biases have identified 1) selection ground motion records, either by pool records such as ones FEMA P695 performing site- hazard-specific analysis requires significant effort, especially areas poor history instrumentation even regions no evidence previous PSRA all; 2) fragility derivation nonlinear dynamic methods: incremental [IDA], cloud [CA], multi-stripe Analysis [MSA], among others. Focusing on these bias, challenge bring solutions places scarce this study, we aim explore use assumptions three principal Colombia: Bogota, Medellin, Cali, where most economic growth is concentrated. considers levels tectonic environment contributions each city. Afterward, comparison between results without record one city performed establish which former applicable adding process.