Abstract

The quality of digital elevation models (DEMs), as well as their spatial resolution, are important issues in geomorphic studies. However, their influence on landslide susceptibility mapping (LSM) remains poorly constrained. This work determined the scale dependency of DEM-derived geomorphometric factors in LSM using a 5 m LiDAR DEM, LiDAR resampled 30 m DEM, and a 30 m ASTER DEM. To verify the validity of our approach, we first compiled an inventory map comprising of 267 landslides for Sihjhong watershed, Taiwan, from 2004 to 2014. Twelve landslide causative factors were then generated from the DEMs and ancillary data. Afterward, popular statistical and machine learning techniques, namely, logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), and support vector machine (SVM) were implemented to produce the LSM. The accuracies of models were evaluated by overall accuracy, kappa index and the receiver operating characteristic curve indicators. The highest accuracy was attained from the resampled 30 m LiDAR DEM derivatives, indicating a fine-resolution topographic data does not necessarily achieve the best performance. Additionally, RF attained superior performance between the three presented models. Our findings could contribute to opt for an appropriate DEM resolution for mapping landslide hazard in vulnerable areas.

Highlights

  • The results prove that entailing different digital elevation models (DEMs) scales introduced different results for the same models

  • Entailing high-resolution DEMs (5 meters Lidar) have proven to be hindered on susceptibility models as they feed a steady flow of data 36 times more than 30 meters DEMs which are supposed to theoretically produce better models

  • In reality, the data flow was treated as noise that worsens the overall resulting models instead of enhancing it, which prove that a generalized DEMs of 30 meters used for DEM-derived condition factors is much valuable than their 5 meters counterpart

Read more

Summary

Methods

We employed three popular machine learning algorithms to map landslide susceptibilities. Grows as the number of training samples increases)[19,34]. Among these two non-parametric models, RF does not need any real hyperparameters to tune, whereas SVM requires tuning for the right kernel, regularization penalties, and the slack variable[13,35]. Logistic Regression is a popular statistical modeling method which has been applied widely in many problems such as gene selection in cancer classification and crime analysis[18,36].

Results
Discussion
Conclusion
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