Abstract

This study validated the robust performances of the recently proposed comprehensive landslide susceptibility index model (CLSI) for landslide susceptibility mapping (LSM) by comparing it to the logistic regression (LR) and the analytical hierarchy process information value (AHPIV) model. Zhushan County in China, with 373 landslides identified, was used as the study area. Eight conditioning factors (lithology, slope structure, slope angle, altitude, distance to river, stream power index, slope length, distance to road) were acquired from digital elevation models (DEMs), field survey, remote sensing imagery, and government documentary data. Results indicate that the CLSI model has the highest accuracy and the best classification ability, although all three models can produce reasonable landslide susceptibility (LS) maps. The robust performance of the CLSI model is due to its weight determination by a back-propagation neural network (BPNN), which successfully captures the nonlinear relationship between landslide occurrence and the conditioning factors.

Highlights

  • In terms of economic and death impact, landslides rank seventh globally [1]; they cause damage to roads, railways, power lines, and even tourism and historical sites [2,3].China is a mountainous country, with its development severely restricted by landslides.Many efforts have been made to prevent and alleviate landslides

  • It can be seen that all the minimum difference value (D-value) fall into the analytical hierarchy process information value (AHPIV) and logistic regression (LR) model, while there are two maximum D-values that fall into the comprehensive landslide susceptibility index model (CLSI) model

  • This result indicates that, in addition to the accuracy, the CLSI model performs the best in classification ability. This is to be expected because the CLSI uses the trained back-propagation neural network (BPNN) to calculate the weights, and this captures the nonlinear relationship between the conditioning factors (CFs) and the occurrence of landslides, leading to more objective and scientific

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In terms of economic and death impact, landslides rank seventh globally [1]; they cause damage to roads, railways, power lines, and even tourism and historical sites [2,3]. To confirm that different sampling methods can affect the accuracy of LSM, Nefeslioglu et al [38] compared the LR method and back-propagation neural network (BPNN) model. Bui et al [15] found that the LSM results obtained by a support vector machine (SVM) have the best performance, compared to the decision tree and Naïve Bayes They further explored some new sophisticated machine learning techniques [41], such as multi-layer perceptron neural networks, kernel LR method, etc. LR represents the traditional statistical method, and AHPIV represents an integrated method that combines prior knowledge and subjective weight determination With these methods, the landslide susceptibility (LS) maps of the study region were produced, respectively, and their performances were evaluated in terms of prediction accuracy and classification ability. The verification methods included the area under the receiver operating feature curve (AUC), seed cell area index (SCAI), and the cumulative number of landslide points

LR Model
AHPIV Model
AHP Method
IV Method
BPNN Method
FR Method
Description of Study Area
Landslide Inventory
Conditioning Factors
Lithology
Slope Structure
Slope Angle
Altitude
Distance to River
3.10. Slope Length
3.11. Distance to Road
LSM Using LR Model
LSM Using AHPIV Model
Non-Landslide Area Selection
Weight Determination for Each Factor
Method
Landslide Susceptibility Map
Validation and Analysis
Validation Based on AUC Accuracy
Validation Based on Seed Cell Area Index
Validation Based on Landslide Points
Findings
Discussion and Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call