Abstract

To more effectively prevent and manage the scourge of gully erosion in arid and semi-arid regions, we present a novel-ensemble intelligence approach—bagging-based alternating decision-tree classifier (bagging-ADTree)—and use it to model a landscape’s susceptibility to gully erosion based on 18 gully-erosion conditioning factors. The model’s goodness-of-fit and prediction performance are compared to three other machine learning algorithms (single alternating decision tree, rotational-forest-based alternating decision tree (RF-ADTree), and benchmark logistic regression). To achieve this, a gully-erosion inventory was created for the study area, the Chah Mousi watershed, Iran by combining archival records containing reports of gully erosion, remotely sensed data from Google Earth, and geolocated sites of gully head-cuts gathered in a field survey. A total of 119 gully head-cuts were identified and mapped. To train the models’ analysis and prediction capabilities, 83 head-cuts (70% of the total) and the corresponding measures of the conditioning factors were input into each model. The results from the models were validated using the data pertaining to the remaining 36 gully locations (30%). Next, the frequency ratio is used to identify which conditioning-factor classes have the strongest correlation with gully erosion. Using random-forest modeling, the relative importance of each of the conditioning factors was determined. Based on the random-forest results, the top eight factors in this study area are distance-to-road, drainage density, distance-to-stream, LU/LC, annual precipitation, topographic wetness index, NDVI, and elevation. Finally, based on goodness-of-fit and AUROC of the success rate curve (SRC) and prediction rate curve (PRC), the results indicate that the bagging-ADTree ensemble model had the best performance, with SRC (0.964) and PRC (0.978). RF-ADTree (SRC = 0.952 and PRC = 0.971), ADTree (SRC = 0.926 and PRC = 0.965), and LR (SRC = 0.867 and PRC = 0.870) were the subsequent best performers. The results also indicate that bagging and RF, as meta-classifiers, improved the performance of the ADTree model as a base classifier. The bagging-ADTree model’s results indicate that 24.28% of the study area is classified as having high and very high susceptibility to gully erosion. The new ensemble model accurately identified the areas that are susceptible to gully erosion based on the past patterns of formation, but it also provides highly accurate predictions of future gully development. The novel ensemble method introduced in this research is recommended for use to evaluate the patterns of gullying in arid and semi-arid environments and can effectively identify the most salient conditioning factors that promote the development and expansion of gullies in erosion-susceptible environments.

Highlights

  • Gullies are common features in arid and semi-arid regions, and they are major causes of sediment erosion; they supply from 10 to 94% of the total sediment yield in some watersheds [1]

  • The findings agree with those of Arabameri et al [13], Arabameri et al [19], and Chaplot et al [107] stating that low values of NDVI have a positive association with gully erosion and that it is easier for a gully to develop in areas with lower NDVI values

  • Because gully erosion depends on the lithological properties of materials at Earth’s surface, lithology is a vital factor in gullying [104]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Gullies are common features in arid and semi-arid regions, and they are major causes of sediment erosion; they supply from 10 to 94% of the total sediment yield in some watersheds [1]. Studying and predicting gully erosion is difficult [2,3,4]. In terms of the ecosystem effects and environmental damages from gully erosion, studies have focused on the influential factors and on identification of susceptible areas using geographic information systems (GIS) and remote sensing (RS) [5,6,7,8]. This study develops a new model to detect and predict gully locations with high spatial accuracy to reduce gully erosion damages. One method that many have used is gully-erosion susceptibility mapping (GESM). This approach can provide useful and easy-to-understand information to planners and hazard managers [9], but there is no standard procedure for producing these maps. Researchers have devised and experimented with many GESM techniques and various traditional data-driven approaches, including logistic regression (LR) [10,11], weights of evidence (WoE) [12,13], conditional analysis (CA) [14,15], certainty factor (CF) [16], index or entropy (IOE) [17], analytical hierarchy process (AHP) [18,19], and frequency ratio (FR) [12]

Objectives
Methods
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