<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>Maria Limongelli</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>Mehmet Celebi</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2022</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;Seismic structural health monitoring (S&lt;/span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;span&gt;HM) has advanced significantly in the last three decades. However, currently there is no consensus on the need for real-time processing of data acquired during an earthquake. Numerous applications exist whereby S&lt;/span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;span&gt;HM-equipped systems record valuable seismic response data. A delayed use of the seismic data prohibits timely discovery of hidden damages in a structure which, in turn, possibly increases its vulnerability during events to follow – with increased risk to occupants. Such risks are of particular concern when, for example, there are long-distance/long period effects e.g. for tall buildings and long-span bridges that are significantly affected by events that originate at far distances. These phenomena necessitate near real-time monitored data to make timely data-based informed decisions on the health or performance of the affected structure. The paper discusses criteria for functionality and occupiability thresholds in actual applications.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1007/978-3-030-64594-6_2</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:title>S2HM must be real-time or not?</dc:title>
  <dc:type>text</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>