## Rapid Visual Screening
### Turkish RVS (EMPI)  
Turkish RVS approach was developed in Istanbul called an Earthquake Master Plan of Istanbul (EMPI) [35] by four leading universities in two teams. In this project, only RC structures have been considered (1-7 stories shall be explained further). It also follows a 3 stage assessment; RVS falls under the first stage of assessment, which provides different initial scores depending on Peak Ground Velocity (PGV), and the number of stories. The parameters used are the soft story, heavy, apparent building quality, overhangs, short column, topographic effect, and bounding effect. The second stage required a further detailed investigation with access into the building, followed by the final stage, where the structure is subjected to a highly sophisticated computational assessment procedure. The approach developed by Bogazici University (BU) and Istanbul Technical University (ITU) used a ratio of roof displacement capacity to the roof displacement demand determined for life safety performance criteria and collapse prevention performance criteria. The procedure was further modified by [PERSON] et al. in 2007 [36]. Parameters such as short columns, bounding, and topographical effects were included in the original method but were not considered in the revision. Table 3 shows the values of score modifiers referring to Reference [36].  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l} \hline \hline
**Rapid Visual Screening Score** & **Damage Potential** \\ \hline \(S<0.3\) & High probability of Grade 5 damage; \\  & Very high probability of Grade 4 damage \\ \hline \(0.3<S<0.7\) & High probability of Grade 4 damage; \\  & Very high probability of Grade 3 damage \\ \hline \(0.7<S<2.0\) & High probability of Grade 3 damage; \\  & Very high probability of Grade 2 damage \\ \hline \(2.0<S<2.5\) & High probability of Grade 1 damage \\ \hline \(S>2.5\) & Probability of Grade 1 damage \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Damage state classification and structural scores [34].  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Seismicity Region** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Range of Response Values for** \\ **Each Region** \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Median Response Values for** \\ **Each Region** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Values for** \\ **Each Region** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \cline{2-5}  & \(S_{s}(g)\) & \(S_{1}(g)\) & \(S_{s,avg}(g)\) & \(S_{1,avg}(g)\) \\ \hline Low(L) & \(S_{s}<0.25\) g & \(S_{1}<0.1\) g & 0.2 & 0.08 \\ \hline Moderate (M) & \(0.25\) g \(\leq S_{s}<0.5\) g & \(0.1\) g \(\leq S_{1}<0.2\) g & 0.4 & 0.16 \\ \hline Moderately High (M) & \(0.5\) g \(\leq S_{s}<1\) g & \(0.2\) g \(\leq S_{1}<0.4\) g & 0.8 & 0.32 \\ \hline High (H) & \(1\) g \(\leq S_{s}<1.5\) g & \(0.4\) g \(\leq S_{1}<0.6\) g & 1.2 & 0.48 \\ \hline Very High (VH) & \(S_{s}\geq 1.5\) g & \(S_{1}\geq 0.6\) g & 2.25 & 0.9 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Range and Median Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) Spectral Response Acceleration Values in Each Seismic Region [16].  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l} \hline \hline
**Vulnerability Feature** & **Vulnerability Score Modifiers** \\ \hline Soft Story & Does not exist = 0 ; Exists = \(-1\) \\ \hline Apparent Quality & Good = 1 ; Moderate = 0 ; Poor = \(-1\) \\ \hline Heavy Overhangs & Does not exist = 0 ; Exists = \(-1\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Vulnerability score modifiers for concrete structures [36].