## 1 Background  
Robustness of infrastructures is a basic requirement for communities to be resilient to seismic events. Infrastructures interact with each other and a problem to one of them, may be diffused to the others that they are interdependent with, intensifying the severity and damages, as described in [1]. In this way, interdependencies consist of the mutual effects that the behavior and reliability of one network has on the other networks. In addition, infrastructure systems need to remain functional during and after earthquake events to deliver services [2]. In this regard, modern cities and communities considerably depend on many critical components, especially when the different infrastructures are interdependent. In literature, quantitative methods for assessing infrastructure seismic resilience have been proposed. For example, [PERSON]. [3] reviewed the state of the art in the transportation network field emphasizing the importance of cross-disciplinary research. More recently, [PERSON]. [4] proposed the analysis of perturbations caused by climate and hazard-induced loss in Vietnam. Moreover, [PERSON]. [5; 6] proposed methodologies to assess the seismic resilience of bridges and infrastructures. In particular, the importance of considering indirect losses was also considered in [7]. Other studies considered agent-based methods to model the flow of people and goods after events along transportation networks (e.g., [8; 9]). More recently, Ref. [10] considered the supply chain disruptions in Tanzania from flooding hazards by identifying multiple priorities using input-output economic models resulting from agent (firm) behaviors. Moreover, Ref. [11] analyzed the perturbation effects on the delivery of and/or access to specific services using a least-cost travel model by considering economic and health facilities in Cambodia. The previous literature allowed to assess that the interconnectivity of infrastructures may affect delivery of the services. Therefore, their failure may result in cascade effects with severe consequences. Few contributions have considered the role of interdependencies, such as [12]. Recently, Ref. [13] proposed a method that applies drop-link analysis to show the interconnectivity of service delivery and road networks. They considered three services (water, power and people) in order to define the critical cascade effects on the supply of important services (such as potable water supply, seaport materials and patient access to hospitals). Moreover, [PERSON]. [14] considered that the functionality of infrastructures may suffer the severe consequences of cascading failures. As shown in [15], an example of interdependent networks may consist of a power grid that relies on a telecommunications network for control and at same time the telecommunications network relies on the power grid for electricity supply. In literature (i.e., [16; 17]) interdependency matrices have been proposed to study the propagation of targeted attacks between the two networks. As shown in [5], interdependencies need to be considered when for either geographical proximity or shared operations, there are interactions between the impacts on the various lifeline systems. For example, a problem or failure in the original system may compromise the product or the service delivered by the second infrastructures. In many cases, the second system can be degraded or interrupted. In particular, the functionality of a community depends on the interdependencies among its systems or components of the system. In addition, the role of interdependencies in cascading failures has been analyzed in literature. For example, Refs. [12; 18] showed that most disasters are generally triggered by minor events demonstrating that the robustness of infrastructures is of fundamental importance for preventing system crashes. In [19], the importance of interdependencies was demonstrating by presenting a method for identifying service-oriented interdependencies in interconnected networks.