Skip to main content
. 2022 Aug 11;12:13665. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-17878-6

Figure 8.

Figure 8

Violin plots showing the statistical distribution of the vulnerability index in earthquake-affected areas. Statistical details are provided in Supplementary Table S11. The vertical black line indicates the range (maximum and minimum) of the vulnerability index. The width of water-drop pink areas indicates the density distribution of the vulnerability index; a wider width means more spatial units (SA1s) concentrate in that vulnerability index. The red dot indicates the mean of the vulnerability index and the vertical red line represents 95% confidence intervals. X axis presents the ACT as urban space together with seven states which were divided into urban and rural space. In New South Wales and West Australia, the range of the vulnerability index in earthquake-affected rural areas is much wider than that in urban areas, while oppositely in Victoria, South Australia and Northern Territory. In particular, the vulnerability index in earthquake-affected areas ranges low in Adelaide (− 30.417 to 12.997) compared to other capital cities and rural areas (lowest to − 19.224 in ACT and highest to 59.575 in rural areas of New South Wales). Violin plots showing the statistical distribution of the vulnerability index in flood- and wildfire-affected areas (similar to Fig. 8) are displayed in Supplementary Figs. S10 and S11 with descriptions provided in Supplementary Note 5.