{"id":9,"date":"2014-04-05T08:57:54","date_gmt":"2014-04-05T08:57:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.metu.edu.tr\/aaskan\/?page_id=9"},"modified":"2023-03-29T21:28:43","modified_gmt":"2023-03-29T21:28:43","slug":"publications","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/blog.metu.edu.tr\/aaskan\/publications\/","title":{"rendered":"Publications"},"content":{"rendered":"

Journal Articles:<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Blind study site assessment of shear-wave velocity at Kumamoto City, Japan, using direct-fitting SPAC methods (2023). M Asten, A Askan, S Karimzadeh, Earth, Planets and Space 75 (1), 40.<\/li>\n
  2. Comparison of machine learning tools for damage classification: the case of L\u2019Aquila 2009 earthquake (2023). F Di Michele, E Stagnini, D Pera, B Rubino, R Aloisio, A.Askan<\/u>, P Marcati, Natural Hazards, 1-26.<\/li>\n
  3. Impact of local site effects on seismic risk assessment of reinforced concrete bridges (2023). V Ozsarac, M Ricardo, A.Askan<\/u>, GM Calvi, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 164, 107624.<\/li>\n
  4. Predictive kappa (\u03ba) models for Turkey: Regional effects and uncertainty analysis (2022). A Altindal,\u00a0 A.Askan<\/u>, Earthquake Spectra, 87552930221116651<\/li>\n
  5. Seismic demands of bare and base-isolated steel frames for real against simulated records of a past earthquake (2022). V Ozsarac, S Karimzadeh, A.Askan<\/u>, MA Erberik, Structure and Infrastructure Engineering 18 (9), 1266-1281.<\/li>\n
  6. Introduction to the special issue of the Consortium of Organizations for Strong Motion Observation Systems (COSMOS) international guidelines for applying noninvasive geophysical techniques to characterize seismic site conditions (2022). A Yong, A.Askan<\/u>, J Cassidy, S D\u2019Amico, S Parolai, M Pilz, W Stephenson, Journal of Seismology, 1-10.<\/li>\n
  7. A review of inverse methods in seismic site characterization (2022). JM Gosselin, SE Dosso, A.Askan<\/u>, M Wathelet, A Savvaidis, JF Cassidy, Journal of Seismology, 1-41.<\/span><\/li>\n
  8. An evaluation of seismic hazard and potential damage in Gaziantep, Turkey using site specific models for sources, velocity structure and building stock (2022). AA Kelam, S Karimzadeh, K Yousefibavil, H Akg\u00fcn, A.Askan<\/u>, MA Erberik, …, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 154, 107129.<\/li>\n
  9. Predictive performance of current ground motion models for recorded strong motions in 2020 Samos Earthquake (2022). Z G\u00fclerce, B Akba\u015f, AA \u00d6zacar, E Sopac\u0131, FM \u00d6nder, B Uzel, G Can, …A.Askan <\/u>...<\/span><\/u>Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 152, 107053\/<\/li>\n
  10. The site effects in Izmir Bay of October 30 2020, M7. 0 Samos Earthquake (2022), KO Cetin, S Altun, A.Askan<\/u>, M Akg\u00fcn, A Sezer, C K\u0131ncal, \u00d6C \u00d6zda\u011f, …Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 152, 107051.<\/li>\n
  11. The Samos Island (Aegean Sea) M7. 0 Earthquake: Analysis and engineering implications of strong motion data (2021). A Askan, Z G\u00fclerce, Z Roumelioti, D Sotiriadis, NS Melis, A Altindal, … Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 1-26\/<\/li>\n
  12. The role of site effects on elevated seismic demands and corollary structural damage during the October 30, 2020, M7. 0 Samos Island (Aegean Sea) Earthquake (2022). KO Cetin, AG Papadimitriou, S Altun, P Pelekis, B Unutmaz, E Rovithis, ...<\/span>A.Askan<\/u>...<\/span>Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 1-30.<\/li>\n
  13. An assessment of the 3 February 2002 Cay (Turkey) earthquake (Mw= 6.6): Modeling of ground motions and felt intensity distribution (2021). G Can, A.Askan<\/u>, S Karimzadeh, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 150, 106832.<\/li>\n
  14. Comparison of real and simulated records using ground motion intensity measures (2021). S Karimzadeh, K Kadas, A.Askan<\/u>, A Yakut, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 147, 106796\/<\/li>\n
  15. A case study for probabilistic seismic risk assessment of earthquake-prone old urban centers (2021). A Altindal, S Karimzadeh, MA Erberik, A.Askan<\/u>, O Anil, MK Kockar, …International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 61, 102376.<\/li>\n
  16. Geotechnical aspects of reconnaissance findings after 2020 January 24th, M6. 8 Sivrice\u2013Elazig\u2013Turkey earthquake (2021). KO Cetin, E Cakir, M Ilgac, G Can, B Soylemez, A Elsaid, F Cuceoglu, …A.Askan<\/u>.<\/span>..<\/span>Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 19 (9), 3415-3459.<\/li>\n
  17. Collection of microseismic intensity data: a model for Turkey (2021). S Karimzadeh and A.Askan<\/u>\n
    Arabian Journal of Geosciences 14 (5), 1-9\/<\/div>\n<\/li>\n
  18. Seismic demands of bare and base-isolated steel frames for real against simulated records of a past earthquake (2021).\u00a0 V Ozsarac, S Karimzadeh, A.Askan<\/u>, MA Erberik, Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 1-16.<\/li>\n
  19. Prediction of potential seismic damage using classification and regression trees: a case study on earthquake damage databases from Turkey, F. Yerlikaya-\u00d6zkurt and A.Askan<\/u> (2020). Natural Hazards, 103, 3163\u20133180 (DOI: 10.1007\/s11069-020-04125-2)<\/li>\n
  20. Broadband ground motion simulation within the city of D\u00fczce (Turkey) and building response simulation, E. Ozmen, S. Karimzadeh,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u> (2020). Pure and Applied Geophysics, 177, 2353\u20132373 (DOI: 10.1007\/s00024-019-02267-4<\/span>)<\/li>\n
  21. Derivation of analytical fragility curves using SDOF models of masonry structures in Erzincan (Turkey),\u00a0<\/a>S. Karimzadeh, K. Kadas, A.Askan<\/u>, M.A. Erberik, A. Yakut (2020). Earthquakes and Structures, 18 (2), 249-261. (DOI: 10.12989\/eas.2020.18.2.249)<\/li>\n
  22. A simulated strong ground motion database for potential earthquake scenarios on North Anatolian Fault Zone,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u> and S. Karimzadeh (2019).\u00a0 Turkish Journal of Earthquake Research 1, 76-97. (In Turkish)<\/li>\n
  23. Use of simulated ground motions for the evaluation of energy response of simple structural systems,\u00a0S. Karimzadeh,V. Ozsarac, A.Askan,<\/u>\u00a0M. A. Erberik (2019).\u00a0Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 123, 525-542. (DOI: 10.1016\/j.soildyn.2019.05.024)<\/span><\/li>\n
  24. \n
    \n
    The 2014 seismic hazard model of the Middle East: overview and results,\u00a0 K. \u015ee\u015fetyan, L. Danciu…A.Askan<\/u>…et al. (2018).\u00a0Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 16(8),\u00a03535-3566 (DOI: 10.1007\/s10518-018-0346-4)<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/li>\n
  25. Seismic response of base isolated liquid storage tanks to real and simulated near fault pulse type ground motions,\u00a0E. Uckan, O. Umut, F. N. Sisman, S. Karimzadeh and\u00a0A.Askan\u00a0<\/u>(2018). Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 112, 58-68.\u00a0 (DOI: 10.1016\/j.soildyn.2018.04.030)<\/li>\n
  26. Seismic damage assessment based on regional synthetic ground motion dataset: a case study for Erzincan, Turkey,\u00a0 S. Karimzadeh,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>, M.A. Erberik,\u00a0 A.Yakut (2018)\u00a0. Natural Hazards,\u00a092(<\/span>3),\u00a0<\/span>1371-1397\u00a0<\/span> (DOI: 10.1007\/s11069-018-3255-6)<\/li>\n
  27. \n
    Modeling of a historical earthquake in Erzincan, Turkey (Ms similar to 7.8, in 1939) using regional seismological information obtained from a recent event, S. Karimzadeh and\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>\u00a0(2018). Acta Geophysica, 66 (3), 293-304. (DOI: 10.1007\/s11600-018-0147-9)<\/u><\/div>\n<\/li>\n
  28. \n
    The effect of structural variability and local site conditions on building fragility functions, A. Azari Sisi, M. A. Erberik and\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>\u00a0(2018). Earthquakes and Structures, 14 (4), 285-295.\u00a0 (DOI:<\/span>\u00a010.12989\/eas.2018.14.4.285)<\/div>\n<\/li>\n
  29. Evaluation of Site Response with Alternative Methods: A Case Study for Engineering Implications, F.N. Sisman,\u00a0\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>, M. Asten (2018).\u00a0Pure and Applied Geophysics,\u00a0175 (1):\u00a0<\/span>257\u2013273 (DOI: 10.1007\/s00024-017-1685-9)<\/span><\/li>\n
  30. Assessment of Simulated Ground Motions in Earthquake Engineering Practice: A Case Study for Duzce (Turkey),\u00a0S. Karimzadeh,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>, A.Yakut (2017). Pure and Applied Geophysics,\u00a0\u00a0174 (9):\u00a0<\/span>3589\u20133607<\/span> (DOI: 10.1007\/s00024-017-1602-2)<\/li>\n
  31. Assessment of Alternative Simulation Techniques in Nonlinear Time History Analyses of Multi-Story Frame Buildings: A Case Study, S. Karimzadeh, A.Askan<\/u>, A.Yakut and G. Ameri (2017). Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 98: 38-53. (DOI: 10.1016\/j.soildyn.2017.04.004)<\/li>\n
  32. Site-Specific Uniform Hazard Spectrum in Eastern Turkey Based on Simulated Ground Motions Including Near-field Directivity and Detailed Site Effects, A.Azari Sisi, A.Askan<\/u> and A. Erberik (2017). Acta Geophysica, 65:309\u2013330. (DOI: 10.1007\/s11600-017-0032-y)<\/li>\n
  33. Development of mean site-dependent response spectra for new bridge designs in Turkey, G. Mestav, A.Askan<\/u> and A. Caner (2017). Structure and Infrastructure Engineering,\u00a013 (8): 1002\u20131012. (DOI: 10.1080\/15732479.2016.1229799)<\/li>\n
  34. Simulation of large earthquakes and its implications on earthquake insurance rates: a case study in Bursa region (Turkey), B. Unal, A.Askan<\/u> and A. S. Selcuk-Kestel (2017). Natural Hazards, 85:215\u2013236. (DOI: 10.1007\/s11069-016-2578-4)<\/li>\n
  35. A hybrid computational method based on convex optimization for outlier problems: application to earthquake ground motion prediction,\u00a0F. Yerlikaya-\u00d6zkurt,\u00a0A.Askan\u00a0<\/u>and G.-W. Weber (2016). Informatica, 27 (4), 893\u2013910. (DOI: 10.15388\/Informatica.2016.116)<\/li>\n
  36. Hybrid-Empirical ground motion estimations\u00a0for Georgia, N. Tsereteli, A.Askan<\/u>, H. Hamzehloo (2016). Acta Geophysica, 64 (5), 1225-1256. (DOI: 10.1515\/acgeo-2016-0048)<\/li>\n
  37. Development of integrated earthquake simulation system for Istanbul, A. Sahin, R. Sisman, A.Askan<\/u> and M. Hori (2016). Earth Planets and Space, (2016) 68:115, 1-21. (DOI 10.1186\/s40623-016-0497-y)<\/li>\n
  38. Assessment of seismic hazard in Erzincan (Turkey) region: construction of local velocity models and evaluation of potential ground motions,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>, S. Karimzadeh, M.\u00a0Asten, N. K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7, F.N. \u015ei\u015fman, C. Erkmen (2015). Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences,\u00a024, 529-565. (DOI: 10.3906\/yer-1503-8)<\/li>\n
  39. Vehicle effects on seismic response of a simple-span bridge during shake tests, N.Shaban, A. Caner, A. Yakut,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>, A. Karimzadeh Naghshineh, A. Domanic and G. Can (2015). Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 44, 889\u2013905. (DOI: 10.1002\/eqe.2491)<\/li>\n
  40. Performance Assessment of Turkish Residential Buildings for Seismic Damage and Loss Estimation, E. Un, M. A. Erberik, and\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>(2015). Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 29(2), 04014063. (DOI: 10.1061\/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000547)<\/li>\n
  41. A regional near-surface high frequency spectral attenuation (kappa) model for Northwestern Turkey,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>, F.N. Sisman, O. Pekcan (2014). Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 65, 113\u2013125. (DOI:\u00a010.1016\/j.soildyn.2014.06.007)<\/li>\n
  42. Relationships between Felt Intensity and Recorded Ground-Motion Parameters for Turkey, M.Bilal and\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>(2014). Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 104 (1),\u00a0484\u2013496. (DOI: 10.1785\/0120130093)<\/li>\n
  43. An alternative approach to the ground motion prediction problem by a non-parametric adaptive regression method, F. Yerlikaya-\u00d6zkurt,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>and G.-W. Weber (2014). Engineering Optimization, 46 (12), 1651\u20131668. (DOI:10.1080\/0305215X.2013.858141)<\/li>\n
  44. The 23 October 2011 Mw 7.0 Van (Eastern Turkey) Earthquake: Interpretations of Recorded Strong Ground Motions and Post Earthquake Conditions of Nearby Structures, V. Akansel, G. Ameri,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>, A. Caner, B. Erdil, \u00d6. Kale and D. Okuyucu (2014). Earthquake Spectra, 30 (2), 657\u2013682. (DOI: 10.1193\/012912EQS020M)<\/li>\n
  45. Evaluation of Successful Seismic Bridge Design Practice in Turkey, D. Okuyucu, \u00d6. Kale, B. Erdil, A. Caner,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>and V. Akansel (2014). Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 28, 4-12. (DOI: 10.1061\/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000377)<\/li>\n
  46. Site characterisation in north-western Turkey based on SPAC and HVSR analysis of microtremor noise,\u00a0Asten, M. W.,A. Askan<\/u>., Ekincioglu, E. ,\u00a0Sisman, F. N.,\u00a0and\u00a0Ugurhan, B. (2014). Exploration Geopyhsics,\u00a0<\/em>doi:\u00a010.1071\/EG12026<\/li>\n
  47. Stochastic strong ground motion simulations in sparsely-monitored regions: A validation and sensitivity study on the 13 March 1992 Erzincan (Turkey) earthquake,\u00a0A. Askan<\/u>, F. N. Sisman and B. Ugurhan (2013). Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 55, 170-181. (DOI: 10.1016\/j.soildyn.2013.09.014)<\/li>\n
  48. Fault Process and Broadband Ground-Motion Simulations of the 23 October 2011 Van (Eastern Turkey) Earthquake, F. Gallovi\u010d, G. Ameri, J. Zahradn\u00edk, J. Jansk\u00fd, V. Plicka, E. Sokos,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>, and M. Pakzad (2013). Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 103 (6), 3164-3178. (DOI: 10.1785\/0120130044)<\/li>\n
  49. Strong-Ground-Motion Simulation of the 6 April 2009 L\u2019Aquila, Italy, Earthquake, B. Ugurhan,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>, A. Akinci, and L. Malagnini (2012). Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 102 (4), pp. 1429\u20131445. (DOI: 10.1785\/0120110060)<\/li>\n
  50. A Methodology for Seismic Loss Estimation in Urban Regions Based on Ground Motion Simulations, B. Ugurhan,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>and M.A. Erberik (2011). Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 101 (2), 710\u2013725. (DOI: 10.1785\/0120100159)<\/li>\n
  51. 8 March 2010 Elaz\u0131\u011f-Kovanc\u0131lar (Turkey) Earthquake: Observations on ground motions and building damage, S. Akkar,\u00a0 A. Aldemir,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>, S. Bak\u0131r, E. Canbay, I.O. Demirel, M.A. Erberik, Z. G\u00fclerce, P. G\u00fclkan, E. Kalkan, S. Prakash, M. A. Sand\u0131kkaya, V. Sevilgen, B. Ugurhan, E. Yenier (2011).\u00a0Seismological Research Letters, 82, 42-58. (DOI: 10.1785\/gssrl.82.1.42)<\/li>\n
  52. Stochastic Strong Ground Motion Simulation of the 12 November 1999 D\u00fczce (Turkey) Earthquake Using a Dynamic Corner Frequency Approach, B. Ugurhan and\u00a0A. Askan<\/u>(2010). Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 100 (4), 1498-1512. (DOI: 10.1785\/0120090358)<\/li>\n
  53. Probabilistic Methods for the Estimation of Potential Seismic Damage: Application to Reinforced Concrete Buildings in Turkey,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>and M. S. Y\u00fccemen (2010). Structural Safety, 32(4), 262-271. (DOI: 10.1016\/j.strusafe.2010.04.001)<\/li>\n
  54. Parameter Sensitivity Analysis of a Nonlinear Least-squares Optimization-based Anelastic Full Waveform Inversion Method,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>, V. Ak\u00e7elik, J. Bielak, O. Ghattas (2010). Comptes Rendus M\u00e9canique, 338 (7-8), 364-376. (DOI: 10.1016\/j.crme.2010.07.002)<\/li>\n
  55. Full Anelastic Waveform Tomography Including Model Uncertainty,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>and J. Bielak (2008). Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 98-6, 2975-2989. (DOI: 10.1785\/0120080138)<\/li>\n
  56. Full Waveform Inversion for Seismic Velocity and Anelastic Losses in Heterogeneous Structures,\u00a0A.Askan<\/u>, V. Akcelik, J. Bielak, O. Ghattas (2007). Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 97, 1990-2008. (DOI: 10.1785\/0120070079)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Journal Articles: Blind study site assessment of shear-wave velocity at Kumamoto City, Japan, using direct-fitting SPAC methods (2023). M Asten, A Askan, S Karimzadeh, Earth, Planets and Space 75 (1), 40. Comparison of machine learning tools for damage classification: the case of L\u2019Aquila 2009 earthquake (2023). F Di Michele, E …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1105,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":1,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"class_list":["post-9","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry","column","twocol"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.metu.edu.tr\/aaskan\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/9","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.metu.edu.tr\/aaskan\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.metu.edu.tr\/aaskan\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.metu.edu.tr\/aaskan\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1105"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.metu.edu.tr\/aaskan\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blog.metu.edu.tr\/aaskan\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/9\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.metu.edu.tr\/aaskan\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}