==================== Vulnerability Models ==================== Introduction ------------ Vulnerability functions quantify the economic loss ratio—the repair cost of damaged structural components normalised by their replacement cost—over a range of intensity measure (IM) levels. They are generated by combining damage state probabilities from fragility functions with damage-to-loss ratios through the total probability theorem. Expected Loss Ratio ------------------- The vulnerability function expresses the expected loss ratio as a function of an intensity measure level (IM), obtained by convolving fragility functions with damage-to-loss ratios associated with each damage state. Let :math:`P(DS = ds_i | IM)` denote the probability of the structure being in damage state :math:`ds_i` at a given intensity measure level IM, and let :math:`\mu_{LR,i}` be the mean loss ratio associated with that damage state. The expected loss ratio is: .. math:: E[LR | IM] = \sum_{i=1}^{N_{DS}} P(DS = ds_i | IM) \cdot \mu_{LR,i} where: * :math:`N_{DS}` is the total number of discrete damage states * :math:`P(DS = ds_i | IM)` is derived from the fragility functions * :math:`\mu_{LR,i}` is the mean loss ratio associated with damage state :math:`ds_i` Damage-to-Loss Ratios --------------------- The damage-to-loss ratios for structural components are: .. list-table:: Damage-to-Loss Ratios :header-rows: 1 :widths: 30 30 40 * - Damage State - Mean Loss Ratio - Description * - Slight (DS1) - 0.05 - Minor repairs, cosmetic damage * - Moderate (DS2) - 0.15 - Moderate repairs needed * - Extensive (DS3) - 0.60 - Major structural repairs * - Complete (DS4) - 1.00 - Full replacement required Damage State Probabilities -------------------------- Fragility functions are expressed in terms of probabilities of exceedance. The probability of being in a specific damage state is computed as: .. math:: P(DS = ds_i | IM) = \begin{cases} P(DS \ge ds_i | IM) - P(DS \ge ds_{i+1} | IM), & i < N_{DS} \\ P(DS \ge ds_{N_{DS}} | IM), & i = N_{DS} \end{cases} Uncertainty in Loss Estimation ------------------------------ Method 1: Silva (2019) Semi-Empirical ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ When uncertainty in the damage-to-loss relationship is not explicitly modelled, the dispersion of the loss ratio can be estimated using the formulation proposed by Silva (2019): .. math:: \sigma_{LR|IM} = 0.5 \sqrt{\overline{LR}_{|IM} \left(-0.7 \cdot 2 \overline{LR}_{|IM} - \sqrt{6.8 \overline{LR}_{|IM} + 0.5}\right)} where :math:`\overline{LR}_{|IM}` is the mean loss ratio conditional on IM. The coefficient of variation is: .. math:: COV(LR | IM) = \frac{\sigma_{LR|IM}}{E[LR | IM]} Method 2: Explicit Statistical Propagation ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Alternatively, uncertainty can be quantified by explicitly propagating uncertainty through the convolution. Using the law of total variance: .. math:: Var(LR | IM) = \sum_{i=1}^{N_{DS}} P(DS = ds_i | IM) \left[\sigma_{LR,i}^2 + \left(\mu_{LR,i} - E[LR | IM]\right)^2\right] This formulation captures both: * Uncertainty **within damage states** due to variability in damage-to-loss ratios * Uncertainty due to **damage-state mixing** as intensity varies Beta Distribution Interpretation -------------------------------- The loss ratio conditional on IM can be modelled as a **Beta distribution** due to its bounded support on [0, 1]: .. math:: LR | IM \sim Beta(\alpha(IM), \beta(IM)) The Beta parameters are computed from the mean and variance: .. math:: \kappa(IM) = \frac{\mu(IM)[1-\mu(IM)]}{\sigma^2(IM)} - 1 .. math:: \alpha(IM) = \mu(IM) \cdot \kappa(IM), \quad \beta(IM) = [1-\mu(IM)] \cdot \kappa(IM) Interactive Viewer ------------------ Use the interactive viewer below to explore vulnerability functions for different building classes. All decision variables are displayed in stacked plots. .. raw:: html
Click map to select region
5.0
1.0
Average Annual Loss Ratio ------------------------- In performance-based earthquake engineering, the **Average Annual Loss Ratio (AALR)** quantifies the expected loss ratio due to earthquake-induced damage over one year: .. math:: AALR = \int_0^{\infty} LR(IM) \cdot \frac{d\lambda(IM)}{dIM} \, dIM where: * :math:`LR(IM)` is the loss ratio from the vulnerability function * :math:`\lambda(IM)` is the annual frequency of exceedance from the hazard curve In practice, AALR is approximated using discrete intensity levels: .. math:: AALR \approx \sum_{i=1}^{N} LR(IM_i) \cdot [\lambda(IM_i) - \lambda(IM_{i+1})] Regional Variations ------------------- Vulnerability functions account for regional variations in: * Construction practices and material quality * Seismic design code adoption and enforcement * Building maintenance and age distributions * Economic factors affecting repair costs References ---------- * Silva V. (2019). Uncertainty and Correlation in Seismic Vulnerability Functions of Building Classes. Earthquake Spectra. * Martins L. et al. (2016). Development and assessment of damage-to-loss models for moment-frame reinforced concrete buildings. Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics. * Di Pasquale G. et al. (2005). New developments in seismic risk assessment in Italy. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering.