Transitioning from Deterministic Active Fault Maps to Probabilistic Models for Seismic Hazard Assessment: A Global Review and the Bursa-Eskişehir Fault System (Türkiye) Case Study
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Active fault maps provide the geometric backbone for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (PSHA) and surface-fault-rupture considerations, yet what qualifies as an “active fault” varies markedly among countries and use-cases. Here we compile and compare 35 widely used mapping protocols and databases, evaluate current practice in Türkiye, and propose a harmonization framework that (i) makes the selected time window and classification logic explicit and (ii) encodes evidence quality and geometric/segmentation uncertainty in a traceable way. As a case study we apply the workflow to the multi-segment Bursa–Eskişehir Fault System (BEFS) and calculate a segment-based Cycle Ratio, CR = elapsed time since the most recent event / median recurrence interval, as a relative indicator of seismic-cycle position. In BEFS, CR spans from very low values (e.g., the Bursa segment, ~0.08) to values near or above unity (e.g., the İnegöl West segment, ~1.07), highlighting strong along-strike variability in inferred stress accumulation. We emphasize that CR is not an earthquake-timing forecast; rather, it provides an auditable prioritization layer that can be combined with slip rate, segmentation uncertainty, and event-history constraints when building time-dependent source models. The proposed workflow offers a reproducible path for incorporating Türkiye’s rapidly growing paleoseismological record into next-generation seismogenic source databases.