Abstract

This contribution exposes the relative uncertainties associated with prediction patterns of landslide susceptibility. The patterns are based on relationships between direct and indirect spatial evidence of landslide occurrences. In a spatial database constructed for the modeling, direct evidence is the presence of landslide trigger areas, while indirect evidence is the presence of corresponding multivariate context in the form of digital maps. Five mathematical modeling functions are applied to capture and integrate evidence, indirect and direct, for separating landslide-presence areas from the areas of landslide assumed absence. Empirical likelihood ratios are used first to represent the spatial relationships. These are then combined by the models into prediction scores, ordered, equal-area ranked, displayed, and synthesized as prediction-rate curves. A critical task is assessing how uncertainty levels vary across the different prediction patterns, i.e., the modeling results visualized as fixed, colored groups of ranks. This is obtained by a strategy of iterative cross validation that uses only part of the direct evidence to model the pattern and the rest to validate it as a predictor. The conducted experiments in a mountainous area in northern Italy point at a research challenge that can now be confronted with relative rank-based statistics and iterative cross-validation processes. The uncertainty properties of prediction patterns are mostly unknown nevertheless they are critical for interpreting and justifying prediction results.

Highlights

  • For the indirect supporting patterns (ISPs) units and value ranges, only the ratios ≥2 or ≈2 are shown in the table

  • The maximum values of the supportive ratios and respective units and value ranges are shown in Table 1: two land-use classes (2.29 and 4.48); eight lithology units (5.19 to 5.52); three permeability classes (1.92, 2.06 and 1.91),; one range of aspect angles; two curvature ranges (11.07 and 5.62); two elevation ranges (4.24 and 2.31); one internal relief range (5.97); and one slope angle range (4.26)

  • The relative uncertainties increase from initial lows to reach one or two maximum values between rank 190th and rank 60th. Since this is observed for all the patterns from the five models, it appears as a database property

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Our concern is that their applications to the same input data generate prediction patterns whose scores are in entirely different units, and these are considered as not interpretable or comparable except in terms of equal-area ranking. Recent analyses of the Tirano South database [16] focused on (1) credibility analysis of a fuzzy set modeled prediction pattern of landslide susceptibility and separation of well predicting from poorly predicting landslide occurrences [26] and (2) a generalized procedural strategy for comparisons of prediction patterns of active and dormant landslides by different models [27] This contribution wants to expand that procedure and strategy attempting to interpret the uncertainties associated with target patterns and their consequences for understanding the prediction patterns generated by the application of those very same models

Experimental Results
Cross-Validate the Prediction Patterns
Interpret the Cross-Validated Results
A have generated the
Considerations on Prediction Patterns as Maps
Considerations
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