@article{fdi:010035619,
  title = {{T}he role of seismicity models in probabilistic seismic hazard estimation : comparison of a zoning and a smoothing approach},
  author = {{B}eauval, {C}{\'e}line and {S}cotti, {O}. and {B}onilla, {F}.},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{S}eismic hazard estimations are compared using two approaches based on two different seismicity models: one which models earthquake recurrence by applying the truncated {G}utenberg-{R}ichter law and a second one which smoothes the epicentre location of past events according to the fractal distribution of earthquakes in space ({W}oo 1996). {T}he first method requires the definition of homogeneous source zones and the determination of maximum possible magnitudes whereas the second method requires the definition of a smoothing function. {O}ur results show that the two approaches lead to similar hazard estimates in low seismicity regions. {I}n regions of increased seismic activity, on the other hand, the smoothing approach yields systematically lower estimates than the zoning method. {T}his epicentre-smoothing approach can thus be considered as a lower bound estimator for seismic hazard and can help in decision making in moderate seismicity regions where source zone definition and estimation of maximum possible magnitudes can lead to a wide variety of estimates due to lack of knowledge. {T}he two approaches lead, however, to very different earthquake scenarios. {D}isaggregation studies at a representative number of sites show that if the distributions of contributions according to source-site distance are comparable between the two approaches, the distributions of contributions according to magnitude differ, reflecting the very different seismicity models used. {T}he epicentre-smoothing method leads to scenarios with predominantly intermediate magnitudes events (5 <= {M} <= 5.5) while the zoning method leads to scenarios with magnitudes that increase with the return period from the minimum to the maximum magnitudes considered. {T}hese trends demonstrate that the seismicity model used plays a fundamental role in the determination of the controlling scenarios and ways to discriminate between the most appropriate models remains an important issue.},
  keywords = {low seismicity regions ; probabilistic methods ; seismic hazard assessment ; seismic modelling ; seismicity ; sensitivity},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{G}eophysical {J}ournal {I}nternational},
  volume = {165},
  numero = {2},
  pages = {584--595},
  ISSN = {0956-540{X}},
  year = {2006},
  DOI = {10.1111/j.1365-246{X}.2006.02945.x},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010035619},
}