The Experts below are selected from a list of 321 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Dominiki Asimaki - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
prenolin international benchmark on 1d nonlinear site response analysis Validation Phase exercise
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2018Co-Authors: Julie Régnier, Luis Fabian Bonilla, P.-y. Bard, Etienne Bertrand, Fabrice Hollender, Hiroshi Kawase, Deborah Sicilia, Pedro Arduino, Angelo Amorosi, Dominiki AsimakiAbstract:This article presents the main results of the Validation Phase of the PRENOLIN project. PRENOLIN is an international benchmark on 1D nonlinear (NL) site‐response analysis. This project involved 19 teams with 23 different codes tested. It was divided into two Phases; with the first Phase verifying the numerical solution of these codes on idealized soil profiles using simple signals and real seismic records. The second Phase described in this article referred to code Validation for the analysis of real instrumented sites. This Validation Phase was performed on two sites (KSRH10 and Sendai) of the Japanese strong‐motion networks KiK‐net and Port and Airport Research Institute (PARI), respectively, with a pair of accelerometers at surface and depth. Extensive additional site characterizations were performed at both sites involving in situ and laboratory measurements of the soil properties. At each site, sets of input motions were selected to represent different peak ground acceleration (PGA) and frequency content. It was found that the code‐to‐code variability given by the standard deviation of the computed surface‐response spectra is around 0.1 (in log10 scale) regardless of the site and input motions. This indicates a quite large influence of the numerical methods on site‐effect assessment and more generally on seismic hazard. Besides, it was observed that site‐specific measurements are of primary importance for defining the input data in site‐response analysis. The NL parameters obtained from the laboratory measurements should be compared with curves coming from the literature. Finally, the lessons learned from this exercise are synthesized, resulting also in a few recommendations for future benchmarking studies, and the use of 1D NL, total stress site‐response analysis.
-
Prenolin: International benchmark on 1D nonlinear: Site-response analysis—Validation Phase exercise
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2018Co-Authors: Julie Régnier, Luis Fabian Bonilla, P.-y. Bard, Etienne Bertrand, Fabrice Hollender, Hiroshi Kawase, Deborah Sicilia, Pedro Arduino, Angelo Amorosi, Dominiki AsimakiAbstract:This article presents the main results of the Validation Phase of the PRENOLIN project. PRENOLIN is an international benchmark on 1D nonlinear (NL) site‐response analysis. This project involved 19 teams with 23 different codes tested. It was divided into two Phases; with the first Phase verifying the numerical solution of these codes on idealized soil profiles using simple signals and real seismic records. The second Phase described in this article referred to code Validation for the analysis of real instrumented sites. This Validation Phase was performed on two sites (KSRH10 and Sendai) of the Japanese strong‐motion networks KiK‐net and Port and Airport Research Institute (PARI), respectively, with a pair of accelerometers at surface and depth. Extensive additional site characterizations were performed at both sites involving in situ and laboratory measurements of the soil properties. At each site, sets of input motions were selected to represent different peak ground acceleration (PGA) and frequency content. It was found that the code‐to‐code variability given by the standard deviation of the computed surface‐response spectra is around 0.1 (in log10 scale) regardless of the site and input motions. This indicates a quite large influence of the numerical methods on site‐effect assessment and more generally on seismic hazard. Besides, it was observed that site‐specific measurements are of primary importance for defining the input data in site‐response analysis. The NL parameters obtained from the laboratory measurements should be compared with curves coming from the literature. Finally, the lessons learned from this exercise are synthesized, resulting also in a few recommendations for future benchmarking studies, and the use of 1D NL, total stress site‐response analysis.
Julie Régnier - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
prenolin international benchmark on 1d nonlinear site response analysis Validation Phase exercise
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2018Co-Authors: Julie Régnier, Luis Fabian Bonilla, P.-y. Bard, Etienne Bertrand, Fabrice Hollender, Hiroshi Kawase, Deborah Sicilia, Pedro Arduino, Angelo Amorosi, Dominiki AsimakiAbstract:This article presents the main results of the Validation Phase of the PRENOLIN project. PRENOLIN is an international benchmark on 1D nonlinear (NL) site‐response analysis. This project involved 19 teams with 23 different codes tested. It was divided into two Phases; with the first Phase verifying the numerical solution of these codes on idealized soil profiles using simple signals and real seismic records. The second Phase described in this article referred to code Validation for the analysis of real instrumented sites. This Validation Phase was performed on two sites (KSRH10 and Sendai) of the Japanese strong‐motion networks KiK‐net and Port and Airport Research Institute (PARI), respectively, with a pair of accelerometers at surface and depth. Extensive additional site characterizations were performed at both sites involving in situ and laboratory measurements of the soil properties. At each site, sets of input motions were selected to represent different peak ground acceleration (PGA) and frequency content. It was found that the code‐to‐code variability given by the standard deviation of the computed surface‐response spectra is around 0.1 (in log10 scale) regardless of the site and input motions. This indicates a quite large influence of the numerical methods on site‐effect assessment and more generally on seismic hazard. Besides, it was observed that site‐specific measurements are of primary importance for defining the input data in site‐response analysis. The NL parameters obtained from the laboratory measurements should be compared with curves coming from the literature. Finally, the lessons learned from this exercise are synthesized, resulting also in a few recommendations for future benchmarking studies, and the use of 1D NL, total stress site‐response analysis.
-
Prenolin: International benchmark on 1D nonlinear: Site-response analysis—Validation Phase exercise
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2018Co-Authors: Julie Régnier, Luis Fabian Bonilla, P.-y. Bard, Etienne Bertrand, Fabrice Hollender, Hiroshi Kawase, Deborah Sicilia, Pedro Arduino, Angelo Amorosi, Dominiki AsimakiAbstract:This article presents the main results of the Validation Phase of the PRENOLIN project. PRENOLIN is an international benchmark on 1D nonlinear (NL) site‐response analysis. This project involved 19 teams with 23 different codes tested. It was divided into two Phases; with the first Phase verifying the numerical solution of these codes on idealized soil profiles using simple signals and real seismic records. The second Phase described in this article referred to code Validation for the analysis of real instrumented sites. This Validation Phase was performed on two sites (KSRH10 and Sendai) of the Japanese strong‐motion networks KiK‐net and Port and Airport Research Institute (PARI), respectively, with a pair of accelerometers at surface and depth. Extensive additional site characterizations were performed at both sites involving in situ and laboratory measurements of the soil properties. At each site, sets of input motions were selected to represent different peak ground acceleration (PGA) and frequency content. It was found that the code‐to‐code variability given by the standard deviation of the computed surface‐response spectra is around 0.1 (in log10 scale) regardless of the site and input motions. This indicates a quite large influence of the numerical methods on site‐effect assessment and more generally on seismic hazard. Besides, it was observed that site‐specific measurements are of primary importance for defining the input data in site‐response analysis. The NL parameters obtained from the laboratory measurements should be compared with curves coming from the literature. Finally, the lessons learned from this exercise are synthesized, resulting also in a few recommendations for future benchmarking studies, and the use of 1D NL, total stress site‐response analysis.
-
PRENOLIN PROJECT: RESULTS OF THE Validation Phase AT SENDAI SITE
2017Co-Authors: Julie Régnier, Luis Fabian Bonilla, Etienne Bertrand, Fabrice Hollender, Hiroshi Kawase, Deborah Sicilia, Pierre-yves Bard, Atsushi NozuAbstract:One of the objectives of the PRENOLIN project is the assessment of uncertainties associated with non-linear simulation of 1D site effects. An international benchmark is underway to test several numerical codes, including various non-linear soil constitutive models, to compute the non-linear seismic site response. The preliminary verification Phase (i.e. comparison between numerical codes on simple, idealistic cases) is now followed by the Validation Phase, which compares predictions of such numerical estimations with actual strong motion data recorded from well-known sites. The benchmark presently involves 21 teams and 21 different non-linear computations. Extensive site characterization was performed at three sites of the Japanese KiK-net and PARI networks. This paper focuses on SENDAI site. The first results indicate that a careful analysis of the data for the lab measurement is required. The linear site response is overestimated while the non-linear effects are underestimated in the first iteration. According to these observations, a first set of recommendations for defining the non-linear soil parameters from lab measurements is proposed. PRENOLIN is part of two larger projects: SINAPS@, funded by the ANR (French National Research Agency) and SIGMA, funded by a consortium of nuclear operators (EDF, CEA, AREVA, ENL).
Simonetta Buglioni - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
elaboration of a nomogram to predict nonsentinel node status in breast cancer patients with positive sentinel node intraoperatively assessed with one step nucleic amplification retrospective and Validation Phase
Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research, 2016Co-Authors: Franco Di Filippo, Simona Di Filippo, Anna Maria Ferrari, Raffaele Antonetti, Alessandro Battaglia, Francesca Becherini, Laia Bernet, Renzo Boldorini, Catherine Bouteille, Simonetta BuglioniAbstract:Tumor-positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy results in a risk of non sentinel node metastases in micro- and macro-metastases ranging from 20 to 50%, respectively. Therefore, most patients underwent unnecessary axillary lymph node dissections. We have previously developed a mathematical model for predicting patient-specific risk of non sentinel node (NSN) metastases based on 2460 patients. The study reports the results of the Validation Phase where a total of 1945 patients were enrolled, aimed at identifying a tool that gives the possibility to the surgeon to choose intraoperatively whether to perform or not axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). The following parameters were recorded: Clinical: hospital, age, medical record number; Bio pathological: Tumor (T) size stratified in quartiles, grading (G), histologic type, lymphatic/vascular invasion (LVI), ER-PR status, Ki 67, molecular classification (Luminal A, Luminal B, HER-2 Like, Triple negative); Sentinel and non-sentinel node related: Number of NSNs removed, number of positive NSNs, cytokeratin 19 (CK19) mRNA copy number of positive sentinel nodes stratified in quartiles. A total of 1945 patients were included in the database. All patient data were provided by the authors of this paper. The discrimination of the model quantified with the area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve (AUC), was 0.65 and 0.71 in the Validation and retrospective Phase, respectively. The calibration determines the distance between predicted outcome and actual outcome. The mean difference between predicted/observed was 2.3 and 6.3% in the retrospective and in the Validation Phase, respectively. The two values are quite similar and as a result we can conclude that the nomogram effectiveness was validated. Moreover, the ROC curve identified in the risk category of 31% of positive NSNs, the best compromise between false negative and positive rates i.e. when ALND is unnecessary ( 31%). The results of the study confirm that OSNA nomogram may help surgeons make an intraoperative decision on whether to perform ALND or not in case of positive sentinel nodes, and the patient to accept this decision based on a reliable estimation on the true percentage of NSN involvement. The use of this nomogram achieves two main gools: 1) the choice of the right treatment during the operation, 2) to avoid for the patient a second surgery procedure.
Luis Fabian Bonilla - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
prenolin international benchmark on 1d nonlinear site response analysis Validation Phase exercise
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2018Co-Authors: Julie Régnier, Luis Fabian Bonilla, P.-y. Bard, Etienne Bertrand, Fabrice Hollender, Hiroshi Kawase, Deborah Sicilia, Pedro Arduino, Angelo Amorosi, Dominiki AsimakiAbstract:This article presents the main results of the Validation Phase of the PRENOLIN project. PRENOLIN is an international benchmark on 1D nonlinear (NL) site‐response analysis. This project involved 19 teams with 23 different codes tested. It was divided into two Phases; with the first Phase verifying the numerical solution of these codes on idealized soil profiles using simple signals and real seismic records. The second Phase described in this article referred to code Validation for the analysis of real instrumented sites. This Validation Phase was performed on two sites (KSRH10 and Sendai) of the Japanese strong‐motion networks KiK‐net and Port and Airport Research Institute (PARI), respectively, with a pair of accelerometers at surface and depth. Extensive additional site characterizations were performed at both sites involving in situ and laboratory measurements of the soil properties. At each site, sets of input motions were selected to represent different peak ground acceleration (PGA) and frequency content. It was found that the code‐to‐code variability given by the standard deviation of the computed surface‐response spectra is around 0.1 (in log10 scale) regardless of the site and input motions. This indicates a quite large influence of the numerical methods on site‐effect assessment and more generally on seismic hazard. Besides, it was observed that site‐specific measurements are of primary importance for defining the input data in site‐response analysis. The NL parameters obtained from the laboratory measurements should be compared with curves coming from the literature. Finally, the lessons learned from this exercise are synthesized, resulting also in a few recommendations for future benchmarking studies, and the use of 1D NL, total stress site‐response analysis.
-
Prenolin: International benchmark on 1D nonlinear: Site-response analysis—Validation Phase exercise
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2018Co-Authors: Julie Régnier, Luis Fabian Bonilla, P.-y. Bard, Etienne Bertrand, Fabrice Hollender, Hiroshi Kawase, Deborah Sicilia, Pedro Arduino, Angelo Amorosi, Dominiki AsimakiAbstract:This article presents the main results of the Validation Phase of the PRENOLIN project. PRENOLIN is an international benchmark on 1D nonlinear (NL) site‐response analysis. This project involved 19 teams with 23 different codes tested. It was divided into two Phases; with the first Phase verifying the numerical solution of these codes on idealized soil profiles using simple signals and real seismic records. The second Phase described in this article referred to code Validation for the analysis of real instrumented sites. This Validation Phase was performed on two sites (KSRH10 and Sendai) of the Japanese strong‐motion networks KiK‐net and Port and Airport Research Institute (PARI), respectively, with a pair of accelerometers at surface and depth. Extensive additional site characterizations were performed at both sites involving in situ and laboratory measurements of the soil properties. At each site, sets of input motions were selected to represent different peak ground acceleration (PGA) and frequency content. It was found that the code‐to‐code variability given by the standard deviation of the computed surface‐response spectra is around 0.1 (in log10 scale) regardless of the site and input motions. This indicates a quite large influence of the numerical methods on site‐effect assessment and more generally on seismic hazard. Besides, it was observed that site‐specific measurements are of primary importance for defining the input data in site‐response analysis. The NL parameters obtained from the laboratory measurements should be compared with curves coming from the literature. Finally, the lessons learned from this exercise are synthesized, resulting also in a few recommendations for future benchmarking studies, and the use of 1D NL, total stress site‐response analysis.
-
PRENOLIN PROJECT: RESULTS OF THE Validation Phase AT SENDAI SITE
2017Co-Authors: Julie Régnier, Luis Fabian Bonilla, Etienne Bertrand, Fabrice Hollender, Hiroshi Kawase, Deborah Sicilia, Pierre-yves Bard, Atsushi NozuAbstract:One of the objectives of the PRENOLIN project is the assessment of uncertainties associated with non-linear simulation of 1D site effects. An international benchmark is underway to test several numerical codes, including various non-linear soil constitutive models, to compute the non-linear seismic site response. The preliminary verification Phase (i.e. comparison between numerical codes on simple, idealistic cases) is now followed by the Validation Phase, which compares predictions of such numerical estimations with actual strong motion data recorded from well-known sites. The benchmark presently involves 21 teams and 21 different non-linear computations. Extensive site characterization was performed at three sites of the Japanese KiK-net and PARI networks. This paper focuses on SENDAI site. The first results indicate that a careful analysis of the data for the lab measurement is required. The linear site response is overestimated while the non-linear effects are underestimated in the first iteration. According to these observations, a first set of recommendations for defining the non-linear soil parameters from lab measurements is proposed. PRENOLIN is part of two larger projects: SINAPS@, funded by the ANR (French National Research Agency) and SIGMA, funded by a consortium of nuclear operators (EDF, CEA, AREVA, ENL).
-
PRENOLIN Project: a benchmark on numerical simulation of 1D non-linear site effect. Results of the Validation Phase
2015Co-Authors: Régnier Julie, Luis Fabian Bonilla, Etienne Bertrand, Fabrice Hollender, Hiroshi Kawase, Pierre-yves Bard, Marianne Marot, Déborah Sicillia, Atsushi NozuAbstract:One of the objectives of the PRENOLIN project is the assessment of uncertainties associated with non-linear simulation of 1D site effects. An international benchmark is underway to test several numerical codes computing the non-linear seismic site response, including various non-linear soil constitutive models. The preliminary verification Phase (i.e. comparison between numerical codes on simple, idealistic cases) is now followed by the Validation Phase, which compares predictions of such numerical estimations with actual strong motion data recorded from well-known sites. The benchmark involves 21 teams dealing with 21 different non-linear computations. Extensive site characterization was performed at three sites of the Japanese KiK-net and PARI networks. The first results indicate that the linear site response is overestimated while the non-linear effects are underestimated. At the end of this Phase, most of the epistemic uncertainty sources for non-linear site response analysis is recognized as due to the constitutive model linked to the interpretation of the soil data. PRENOLIN is part of two larger projects: SINAPS@, funded by the ANR (French National Research Agency) and SIGMA, funded by a consortium of nuclear operators (EDF, CEA, AREVA, ENL).
Etienne Bertrand - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
prenolin international benchmark on 1d nonlinear site response analysis Validation Phase exercise
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2018Co-Authors: Julie Régnier, Luis Fabian Bonilla, P.-y. Bard, Etienne Bertrand, Fabrice Hollender, Hiroshi Kawase, Deborah Sicilia, Pedro Arduino, Angelo Amorosi, Dominiki AsimakiAbstract:This article presents the main results of the Validation Phase of the PRENOLIN project. PRENOLIN is an international benchmark on 1D nonlinear (NL) site‐response analysis. This project involved 19 teams with 23 different codes tested. It was divided into two Phases; with the first Phase verifying the numerical solution of these codes on idealized soil profiles using simple signals and real seismic records. The second Phase described in this article referred to code Validation for the analysis of real instrumented sites. This Validation Phase was performed on two sites (KSRH10 and Sendai) of the Japanese strong‐motion networks KiK‐net and Port and Airport Research Institute (PARI), respectively, with a pair of accelerometers at surface and depth. Extensive additional site characterizations were performed at both sites involving in situ and laboratory measurements of the soil properties. At each site, sets of input motions were selected to represent different peak ground acceleration (PGA) and frequency content. It was found that the code‐to‐code variability given by the standard deviation of the computed surface‐response spectra is around 0.1 (in log10 scale) regardless of the site and input motions. This indicates a quite large influence of the numerical methods on site‐effect assessment and more generally on seismic hazard. Besides, it was observed that site‐specific measurements are of primary importance for defining the input data in site‐response analysis. The NL parameters obtained from the laboratory measurements should be compared with curves coming from the literature. Finally, the lessons learned from this exercise are synthesized, resulting also in a few recommendations for future benchmarking studies, and the use of 1D NL, total stress site‐response analysis.
-
Prenolin: International benchmark on 1D nonlinear: Site-response analysis—Validation Phase exercise
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2018Co-Authors: Julie Régnier, Luis Fabian Bonilla, P.-y. Bard, Etienne Bertrand, Fabrice Hollender, Hiroshi Kawase, Deborah Sicilia, Pedro Arduino, Angelo Amorosi, Dominiki AsimakiAbstract:This article presents the main results of the Validation Phase of the PRENOLIN project. PRENOLIN is an international benchmark on 1D nonlinear (NL) site‐response analysis. This project involved 19 teams with 23 different codes tested. It was divided into two Phases; with the first Phase verifying the numerical solution of these codes on idealized soil profiles using simple signals and real seismic records. The second Phase described in this article referred to code Validation for the analysis of real instrumented sites. This Validation Phase was performed on two sites (KSRH10 and Sendai) of the Japanese strong‐motion networks KiK‐net and Port and Airport Research Institute (PARI), respectively, with a pair of accelerometers at surface and depth. Extensive additional site characterizations were performed at both sites involving in situ and laboratory measurements of the soil properties. At each site, sets of input motions were selected to represent different peak ground acceleration (PGA) and frequency content. It was found that the code‐to‐code variability given by the standard deviation of the computed surface‐response spectra is around 0.1 (in log10 scale) regardless of the site and input motions. This indicates a quite large influence of the numerical methods on site‐effect assessment and more generally on seismic hazard. Besides, it was observed that site‐specific measurements are of primary importance for defining the input data in site‐response analysis. The NL parameters obtained from the laboratory measurements should be compared with curves coming from the literature. Finally, the lessons learned from this exercise are synthesized, resulting also in a few recommendations for future benchmarking studies, and the use of 1D NL, total stress site‐response analysis.
-
PRENOLIN PROJECT: RESULTS OF THE Validation Phase AT SENDAI SITE
2017Co-Authors: Julie Régnier, Luis Fabian Bonilla, Etienne Bertrand, Fabrice Hollender, Hiroshi Kawase, Deborah Sicilia, Pierre-yves Bard, Atsushi NozuAbstract:One of the objectives of the PRENOLIN project is the assessment of uncertainties associated with non-linear simulation of 1D site effects. An international benchmark is underway to test several numerical codes, including various non-linear soil constitutive models, to compute the non-linear seismic site response. The preliminary verification Phase (i.e. comparison between numerical codes on simple, idealistic cases) is now followed by the Validation Phase, which compares predictions of such numerical estimations with actual strong motion data recorded from well-known sites. The benchmark presently involves 21 teams and 21 different non-linear computations. Extensive site characterization was performed at three sites of the Japanese KiK-net and PARI networks. This paper focuses on SENDAI site. The first results indicate that a careful analysis of the data for the lab measurement is required. The linear site response is overestimated while the non-linear effects are underestimated in the first iteration. According to these observations, a first set of recommendations for defining the non-linear soil parameters from lab measurements is proposed. PRENOLIN is part of two larger projects: SINAPS@, funded by the ANR (French National Research Agency) and SIGMA, funded by a consortium of nuclear operators (EDF, CEA, AREVA, ENL).
-
PRENOLIN Project: a benchmark on numerical simulation of 1D non-linear site effect. Results of the Validation Phase
2015Co-Authors: Régnier Julie, Luis Fabian Bonilla, Etienne Bertrand, Fabrice Hollender, Hiroshi Kawase, Pierre-yves Bard, Marianne Marot, Déborah Sicillia, Atsushi NozuAbstract:One of the objectives of the PRENOLIN project is the assessment of uncertainties associated with non-linear simulation of 1D site effects. An international benchmark is underway to test several numerical codes computing the non-linear seismic site response, including various non-linear soil constitutive models. The preliminary verification Phase (i.e. comparison between numerical codes on simple, idealistic cases) is now followed by the Validation Phase, which compares predictions of such numerical estimations with actual strong motion data recorded from well-known sites. The benchmark involves 21 teams dealing with 21 different non-linear computations. Extensive site characterization was performed at three sites of the Japanese KiK-net and PARI networks. The first results indicate that the linear site response is overestimated while the non-linear effects are underestimated. At the end of this Phase, most of the epistemic uncertainty sources for non-linear site response analysis is recognized as due to the constitutive model linked to the interpretation of the soil data. PRENOLIN is part of two larger projects: SINAPS@, funded by the ANR (French National Research Agency) and SIGMA, funded by a consortium of nuclear operators (EDF, CEA, AREVA, ENL).
