PSI - Issue 84

N. Kheirkhahan et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 84 (2026) 33–40 N. Kheirkhahan et al./ Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2026) 000–000

39 7

30 km as the optimum search radius, as the distribution of criticality and efficiency metrics stabilizes at this scale with no significant changes observed across the R40, R50, and R60 scenarios. These results underscore the need for hybrid resilience-oriented network design with recovery planning. Although the proposed framework offers a scalable, data-driven approach, its reliance on topology alone is a limitation, as it does not model dynamic flows. Future work should integrate flow- and congestion-aware models to better represent recovery processes and user behaviour. Also, they could include a more in-depth, hazard-specific analysis of the road network. For earthquakes, this could include considering induced effects such as landslides, liquefaction, and permanent ground displacement. To enable a comprehensive risk analysis, the framework could also evaluate the vulnerability of road edges to the hazards considered. These findings provide guidance for policymakers and help them prioritize vulnerable roads and allocate resources efficiently, consistently with Fang et al. (2025). 6. Conclusions This study proposes a framework for resilience assessment by combining topological global efficiency with multi-hazard indicators. The case study of Messina reveals that motorways and primary roads are the most critical, with failures resulting in the greatest systemic losses. The A-link (a link that integrates endogenous network properties with multi-hazard assessment) ranking identifies segments where high hazard exposure coincides with topological importance, offering a transparent, reproducible, and scalable tool for informed decision-making in prioritizing vulnerable edges. The framework uses open-access data, enabling broad applicability across urban contexts and supporting evidence-based infrastructure resilience planning aligned with the European CER Directive. Acknowledgements This research has been supported by the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP), Mission 4 Component 2 Investment 1.4 - Call for tender No. 3138 of 16 Dec. 2021 of the Italian Ministry of University and Research, funded by the European Union - NextGenerationEU; Project code: CN00000013, Concession Decree No. 1031 of 17 Feb. 2022 adopted by the Italian Ministry of University and Research, CUP: H93C22000450007, Project title: National Centre for HPC, Big Data and Quantum Computing. Part of the computing resources used for this work have been provided by CRESCO/ENEAGRID High Performance Computing infrastructure (Iannone et al., 2019). Data availability Codes and datasets supporting this study are openly accessible at: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.30188524. References Arduin, M., Tofani, A., D’Agostino, G., Pollino, M. (2025). Multicriteria GIS Spatial Analysis for Multi-hazard Assessment of Infrastructures in Case of Natural Events. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 15549. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-84260-3_19. Argyroudis, S., Selva, J., Gehl, P., Pitilakis, K., 2015. Systemic seismic risk assessment of road networks considering interactions with the built environment. Comput.-Aided Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. 30, 524–540. https://doi.org/10.1111/mice.12136. Artime, O., Grassia, M., De Domenico, M., et al., 2024, Robustness and resilience of complex networks. Nat. Rev. Phys. 2024, 6, 114–131. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2509.19867. Bera, S., Guru, B., Chatterjee, R., & Shaw, R. (2020). Geographic variation of resilience to landslide hazard: A household-based comparative studies in Kalimpong hilly region, India. Int. Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 46, 101456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101456. Byun, J.-E., D’Ayala, D., 2022. Urban seismic resilience mapping: A transportation network in Istanbul, Turkey. Sci Rep 12, 8188 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-11991-2. Cappucci, S., Pollino, M., Farrace, M.G., et al., (2024). Infrastructure Impact Assessment through Multi-Hazard Analysis at Different Scales: The 26 November 2022 Flood Event on the Island of Ischia and Debris Management. Land, 13(4), 500. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13040500. Cavalieri, F., & Franchin, P. (2020). Seismic Risk of Infrastructure Systems with Treatment of and Sensitivity to Epistemic Uncertainty. Infrastructures, 5(11), 103. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures5110103. D’Angelo, M.P., Civera, M., Giordano, P.F., et al., 2025. Bridge Collapses in Italy across the 21st Century: Survey and Statistical Analysis. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2025.2483500. Dong, S., Mostafizi, A., Wang, H., Gao, J., Li, X., 2020, Measuring the topological robustness of transportation networks to disaster-induced failures: A percolation approach. J. Infrastruct. Syst. 2020, 26, 04020009. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.0000533.