English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

It might seem odd to be writing about confirmation of the validity of probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (PSHA) in 2011, given that the method has been successfully applied in countless studies worldwide over the last 40 years. However, the fact that papers still occasionally find their way into print attacking the method as mathematically invalid seems to indicate that there is still some requirement, if small, to demonstrate the soundness of the method. A number of mathematical arguments have been advanced over the last few years purporting to show mathematical or logical flaws in the standard PSHA methodology that invalidate the results. A comprehensive summary of these objections can be found in Klügel (2008). \ud\u

PSHA Validated by Quasi Observational Means