Abstract

The article presents a comparison of different probabilistic methods for ground motion hazard assessments that include site effects. The approaches examined here were selected and refined during the different phases of the S2-Project, which this journal volume is addressed to. Different procedures characterized by different levels of sophistication, from the simpler one based on the use of standard ground motion predictive equations for specific ground types to the more complex one based on the convolution of a site-specific amplification function (and its variability) with the hazard curve for reference rock, are compared and contrasted with the aim of pointing out strengths and weaknesses of each of them. In addition, a fully non-ergodic approach that separates the epistemic contribution (i.e., the epistemic uncertainty affecting the soil properties) from the total variability in site amplification is presented. To fulfill the scope of the work, the study focuses on three test sites in Italy characterized by different geological conditions and seismicity levels: Mirandola and Soncino in the Po Plain (northern Italy) and Peglio in central Italy.