Sun, Z et al. Earth Artificial Intelligence Review. Calculate. Geography. 159105034 (2022).
Google Scholar
Zhao, T. et al. Artificial intelligence for geosciences: advances, challenges, and prospects. innovation (2024).
Zhang, W. et al. Applications of machine learning, deep learning, and optimization algorithms to geoengineering and geosciences: A comprehensive review and future work. Gondwana Institute 1091–17 (2022).
Google Scholar
Monsalvo-Franco, IE et al. Earthquake fragility curves with unconventional ground motion intensities measured from physics-based simulations. Bull. earth q. engineering twenty three(5), 1885-1915 (2025).
Google Scholar
Rossetto, T., Ioannou, I., Grant, D., Maqsood, T. Guidelines for Empirical Vulnerability Assessment (X, GEM Technical Report, 2014).
Google Scholar
Del Gaudio, C. et al. Empirical fragility curves derived from damage data of RC buildings after the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake. Bull. earth q. engineering 151425–1450 (2017).
Google Scholar
Mangalathu, S., Sun, H., Nweke, CC, Yi, Z., H. V. Burton Seismic damage classification of buildings using machine learning. earth q. spectrum 36(1), 183–208 (2020).
Google Scholar
Roeslin, S., Ma, Q., Juárez-Garcia, H., Gómez-Bernal, A., Wicker, J., Wotherspoon, L. Machine learning damage prediction model for the 2017 Puebla-Morelos, Mexico earthquake. earth q. spectrum 36(2_suppl), 314–339 (2020).
Harirchian, E. et al. A comprehensive study based on machine learning approach for rapid classification of seismic damage class of RC buildings. applied science. 11(16), 7540 (2021).
Google Scholar
Stojadinović, Z., Kovačević, M., Marinković, D. & Stojadinović, B. Rapid seismic loss assessment based on machine learning and representative sampling. earth q. spectrum 38(1), 152–177 (2021).
Google Scholar
Di Michele, F. Comparison of other machine learning tools for damage classification: the case of the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake. nut. danger 1163521–3546 (2023).
Google Scholar
Di Michele, F. Machine learning for damage classification, risk reduction, and post-earthquake management. in Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology. ICEES 2023. Civil Engineering Lecture Notes. Vol. 401. 181–190 (2023).
Di Michele, F., Stagnini, E., Pera, D., Aloisio, R. & Marcati, P. Random forest-based estimation for assessing future earthquake damage: Preliminary results. Ann. Geophysics. 66 (2024).
Faenza, L., Michelini, A., Crowley, H., Borzi, B. & Faravelli, M. Shakedado: Data collection combining earthquake building damage and shakemap parameters in Italy. Artif. intelligence. Geography. 136–51 (2020).
Google Scholar
A. Cirella, A. Piatanesi, M. Cocco, E. Tinti, L. Scognamiglio, A. Michelini, A. Lomax, E. Boschi. rupture history. L’Aquila (Italy) earthquake due to nonlinear combination inversion of strong motion and GPS data. Geophysics. resolution let. 36(19), 2009 (2009).
Google Scholar
Chiarabba, C. et al. 2009 L’Aquila (Central Italy) MW6. 3 Earthquakes: Main shock and aftershocks. Geophysics. resolution let. 36(18) (2009).
Giaccio, B. et al. Fault and basin hypocenter migration over the past 2 million years in the L’Aquila 2009 earthquake region, central Apennines, Italy. Quat. Science. pastor 5669–88 (2012).
Google Scholar
S. Azzoli, I. Hunstad, M. Cini, S. Salvi, C. Tolomei, C. Binami, SE Stramond, E. Trasatti, A. Antonioli, E. Boschi. Finite fault inversion of DInSAR aftershock displacements. L’Aquila earthquake (central Italy). Geophysics. resolution let. 36(15), 2009 (2009).
Google Scholar
Ameri, G., Gallovič, F. & Pacor, F. Complexity of the 2009 L’Aquila (Central Italy) earthquake Mw 6.3: 2. Broadband strong motion modeling. J. Geophys. resolution solid earth 117(B4) (2012).
Amelie, G. et al. April 6, 2009 Mw 6.3 L’Aquila (Central Italy) Earthquake: Strong motion observation. earthquake. resolution let. 80(6), 951–966 (2009).
Pucci, S. and others. Aftershock rupture of the August 24, 2016 mw 6.0 Amatrice earthquake (central Italy). Geophysics. resolution let. 44(5), 2138–2147 (2017).
Google Scholar
Huang, MH et al. Aftershock deformation and landslide triggering from the 2016 magnitude 6.2 Amatrice earthquake in Italy. Geophysics. resolution let. 44(3), 1266–1274 (2017).
Google Scholar
Lavecchia, G. et al. We investigated the ground deformation and epicenter geometry of the August 24, 2016 Amatrice earthquake (central Italy) through analytical and numerical modeling of dinosaur measurements and structural geological data. Geophysics. resolution let. 43(24), 12–389 (2016).
Google Scholar
Chiaraluce, L. et al. 2016 central Italy earthquake sequence: A first look at the main shock, aftershocks, and source model. Seismol. resolution let. 88(3), 757–771 (2017).
Google Scholar
Liu, C., Zheng, Y., Xie, Z., Xiong, X. 2016 rupture characteristics of the mw 6.2 Norcia earthquake and its possible relationship with strong seismic hazard. Geophysics. resolution let. 44(3), 1320–1328 (2017).
Google Scholar
Villani, F. et al. Database of earthquake impacts after the Norcia earthquake in central Italy on October 30, 2016. Science. data 5(1), 1–11 (2018).
Google Scholar
Mazzieri, I., Stupazzini, M., Guidotti, R. & Smerzini, C. SPEED: SPectral Elements in Elastic Mechanics using Discontinuous Galerkins: A Non-Conformist Approach to 3D Multiscale Problems. internal. J. Number. method engineering 95(12), 991–1010 (2013).
Google Scholar
Lanzano, G. et al. Revised seismic motion prediction model for shallow crustal earthquakes in Italy. Bull. Seismol. Social morning. 109(2), 525–540 (2019).
Google Scholar
Michaeli, A., Faenza, L., Lauciani, V., Malagnini, L. Implementation of Shakemap in Italy. Seismol. resolution let. 79(5), 688–697 (2008).
Google Scholar
Wald, DJ et al. Trinet “Shakemap”: Rapid generation of peak ground motion and intensity maps for Southern California earthquakes. earth q. spectrum 15(3), 537–555 (1999).
Google Scholar
May, J.B., Pera, D., Di Michele, F., Aloisio, R., Rubino, B. & Marcati, P. A fast cubit-Python tool for high-precision topography generation and hierarchical domain reconstruction. in Minutes of the 29th International Messing Roundtable (2021).
Tarquini, S. et al. TINITALY/01: New Italian triangular irregular network. Ann. Geophysics. 50(3), 407–425 (2007).
Google Scholar
Tarquini, S. et al. Release of a 10 meter resolution DEM for the Italian territory: comparison with a DEM with worldwide coverage and anaglyph mode exploration via the web. Calculate. Geography. 38(1), 168–170 (2012).
Google Scholar
Tarquini, S. & Nannipieri, L. 10 m resolution TINITALY DEM as an interdisciplinary basis for Italian territorial analysis: current trends and new perspectives. topography 281108–115 (2017).
Google Scholar
Evangelista, L. Physics-based seismic inputs for other engineering applications: A case study in the Aterno River Valley, central Italy. Bull. earth q. engineering 15(7), 2645–2671 (2017).
Google Scholar
Di Michele, F. et al. Spectral element numerical simulation of the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake in a detailed reconstructed domain. Geophysics. J. Int. 230(1), 29–49 (2022).
Google Scholar
Rosti, A., Smerzini, C., Paolucci, R., Penna, A. & Rota, M. Validation of physics-based ground shaking scenarios for empirical vulnerability studies: The case of the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake. Bull. earth q. engineering twenty one(1), 95–123 (2023).
Google Scholar
Smerzini, C. & Villani, M. Broadband numerical simulation in complex near-field geological configurations: the case of the 2009 mw 6.3 L’Aquila earthquake. Bull. Seismol. Social morning. 102(6), 2436–2451 (2012).
Google Scholar
Akira Iwaki, Tetsu Maeda, Nao Morikawa, Hiroshi Miyake, Hiroshi Fujiwara Verification of recipes for broadband ground motion simulation of crustal earthquakes in Japan. Bull. Seismol. Social morning. 106(5), 2214–2232 (2016).
Google Scholar
Graves, RW & Pitarka, A. Broadband ground motion simulation using a hybrid approach. Bull. Seismol. Social morning. 100(5A), 2095–2123 (2010).
Google Scholar
Mai, PM, Imperatori, W. & Olsen, KB Hybrid broadband ground motion simulation: Combining long-period deterministic synthesis with high-frequency multiple s-to-s backscattering. Bull. Seismol. Social morning. 100(5A), 2124–2142 (2010).
Google Scholar
Paolucci, R. et al. Broadband ground motion from 3D physics-based numerical simulation using artificial neural networks.Broadband ground motion from 3D PBSS using anns. Bull. Seismol. Social morning. 108(3A), 1272–1286 (2018).
Google Scholar
You Center Foundation. Da.DO (Danno Osservart’s database).
TK Horandum Determination Forest. in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition.. Vol. 1. 278–282 (1995).
Rashka, S., Mirjalili, V. Python Machine Learning: Machine learning and deep learning using Python. Scikit-Learn, and TensorFlow. 2nd edition (Packt Publishing Limited, 2017).
Chawla, NV, Bowyer, KW, Hall, LO, Kegelmeyer, WP Smote: Synthetic minority oversampling techniques. J. Artif. intelligence. resolution 16321–357 (2002).
Google Scholar
Annibale, Roberta et al. Earthquake damage mapping: An overall evaluation of ground investigation and VHR image change detection after the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake. Remote sensory environment. 210166–178 (2018).
Google Scholar
Harati, M. & Van de Lindt, JW A methodology for generating earthquake-tsunami vulnerability surfaces for community resilience modeling. Engineering structures. 305117700 (2024).
Google Scholar
