Seismic hazard assessment for the Caucasus test area

The GSHAP CAUCAS test area was established under the INTAS Ct.94-1644 (Test Area for sismic Hazard Assessment in the Caucasus) and NATO ARW Ct.95-1521 (Historical and Prehistorical Earthquakes in the Caucasus), with the initial support of IASPEI, UNESCO and ILP. The high tectonic interest and seismicity rate of the whole area, the availability of abundant multi-disciplinary data and the long established tradition in hazard assessment provide a unique opportunity to test different methodologies in a common test area and attempt to establish some consensus in the scientific community. Starting from the same input data (historical and instrumental seismic catalogue, lineament and homogeneous seismic source models) six independent approaches to seismic hazard assessment have been used, ranging from pure historical deterministic to seismotectonic probabilistic and areal assessment methodologies. The results are here compared

Retrospective analysis of the Spitak earthquake

Based on the retrospective analysis of numerous data and studies of the Spitak earthquake the present work at- tempts to shed light on different aspects of that catastrophic seismic event which occurred in Northern Arme- nia on December 7, 1988. The authors follow a chronological order of presentation, namely: changes in geo- sphere, atmosphere, biosphere during the preparation of the Spitak earthquake, foreshocks, main shock, after- shocks, focal mechanisms, historical seismicity; seismotectonic position of the source, strong motion records, site effects; the macroseismic effect, collapse of buildings and structures; rescue activities; earthquake conse- quences; and the lessons of the Spitak earthquake

Seismic hazard assessment for the Caucasus test area

The GSHAP CAUCAS test area was established under the INTAS Ct.94-1644 (Test Area for sismic Hazard Assessment in the Caucasus) and NATO ARW Ct.95-1521 (Historical and Prehistorical Earthquakes in the Caucasus), with the initial support of IASPEI, UNESCO and ILP. The high tectonic interest and seismicity rate of the whole area, the availability of abundant multi-disciplinary data and the long established tradition in hazard assessment provide a unique opportunity to test different methodologies in a common test area and attempt to establish some consensus in the scientific community. Starting from the same input data (historical and instrumental seismic catalogue, lineament and homogeneous seismic source models) six independent approaches to seismic hazard assessment have been used, ranging from pure historical deterministic to seismotectonic probabilistic and areal assessment methodologies. The results are here compared