A comparative study of various combination strategies for landslide susceptibility mapping considering landslide types

IF 8.5 1区 地球科学 Q1 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Lanbing Yu , Biswajeet Pradhan , Yang Wang
{"title":"A comparative study of various combination strategies for landslide susceptibility mapping considering landslide types","authors":"Lanbing Yu ,&nbsp;Biswajeet Pradhan ,&nbsp;Yang Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.gsf.2024.101999","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Landslide susceptibility mapping (LSM) assists planners, local administrations, and decision-makers in preventing, mitigating and managing associated risks. This study proposes a novel DES-based framework that effectively captures the spatial developmental patterns of different landslide types, leading to higher precision LSM. The Wanzhou district (administrative division) of Chongqing Province, southwestern China, was selected as the test area, encompassing 881 landslides classified into rockfalls, reservoir-affected (RA) landslides, and non-reservoir-affected (NRA) landslides. Subsequently, three inventory maps and sixteen environment factors were used as inputs, with multicollinearity and importance analyses used to select the best factor combination for three types of landslides. Finally, the susceptibilities of rockfalls, RA and NRA landslides were combined by six combination strategies: Maximum, Mean, Probability, Voting, Stacking, and Dynamic Ensemble Selection (DES) models, and the optimal strategy was identified by area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC), confusion matrix, and landslide distribution statistic. For LSM of individual landslide types, ResNet consistently outperformed traditional machine learning models, achieving testing AUC values of 0.8925, 0.9427, and 0.6754 for rockfalls, RA, and NRA landslides, respectively. The evaluation of the combination strategies revealed that the DES model achieved the highest testing AUC value of 0.8779, followed by Stacking (0.8728), Maximum (0.8704), Probability (0.8669), and Voting (0.8653), whereas the widely-used Mean method performed the worst (0.8503), even lower than the non-classified LSM (0.8587). The findings offer a robust approach for mitigating future landslide risks and minimizing their adverse impacts, providing valuable insights for geohazard management and decision-making.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12711,"journal":{"name":"Geoscience frontiers","volume":"16 2","pages":"Article 101999"},"PeriodicalIF":8.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geoscience frontiers","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674987124002238","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Landslide susceptibility mapping (LSM) assists planners, local administrations, and decision-makers in preventing, mitigating and managing associated risks. This study proposes a novel DES-based framework that effectively captures the spatial developmental patterns of different landslide types, leading to higher precision LSM. The Wanzhou district (administrative division) of Chongqing Province, southwestern China, was selected as the test area, encompassing 881 landslides classified into rockfalls, reservoir-affected (RA) landslides, and non-reservoir-affected (NRA) landslides. Subsequently, three inventory maps and sixteen environment factors were used as inputs, with multicollinearity and importance analyses used to select the best factor combination for three types of landslides. Finally, the susceptibilities of rockfalls, RA and NRA landslides were combined by six combination strategies: Maximum, Mean, Probability, Voting, Stacking, and Dynamic Ensemble Selection (DES) models, and the optimal strategy was identified by area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC), confusion matrix, and landslide distribution statistic. For LSM of individual landslide types, ResNet consistently outperformed traditional machine learning models, achieving testing AUC values of 0.8925, 0.9427, and 0.6754 for rockfalls, RA, and NRA landslides, respectively. The evaluation of the combination strategies revealed that the DES model achieved the highest testing AUC value of 0.8779, followed by Stacking (0.8728), Maximum (0.8704), Probability (0.8669), and Voting (0.8653), whereas the widely-used Mean method performed the worst (0.8503), even lower than the non-classified LSM (0.8587). The findings offer a robust approach for mitigating future landslide risks and minimizing their adverse impacts, providing valuable insights for geohazard management and decision-making.

Abstract Image

考虑滑坡类型的不同滑坡敏感性填图组合策略的比较研究
滑坡易感性测绘(LSM)帮助规划者、地方政府和决策者预防、减轻和管理相关风险。本研究提出了一种新的基于des的框架,可以有效地捕捉不同滑坡类型的空间发展模式,从而实现更高精度的LSM。中国西南部重庆市万州区(行政区划)被选为试验区,包括881个滑坡,分为落石、库影响(RA)滑坡和非库影响(NRA)滑坡。随后,以3张调查图和16个环境因子为输入,通过多重共线性和重要性分析,选择了3种滑坡类型的最佳因子组合。最后,采用Maximum、Mean、Probability、Voting、Stacking和Dynamic Ensemble Selection (DES) 6种组合策略对落石、RA和NRA滑坡的易感性进行组合,并通过接收方工作特征曲线(AUC)下面积、混淆矩阵和滑坡分布统计来确定最优策略。对于单个滑坡类型的LSM, ResNet始终优于传统机器学习模型,岩崩、RA和NRA滑坡的测试AUC值分别为0.8925、0.9427和0.6754。对组合策略的评价表明,DES模型的测试AUC值最高,为0.8779,其次是Stacking(0.8728)、Maximum(0.8704)、Probability(0.8669)和Voting(0.8653),而广泛使用的Mean方法的测试AUC值最差(0.8503),甚至低于非分类LSM(0.8587)。研究结果为减轻未来滑坡风险和减少其不利影响提供了强有力的方法,为地质灾害管理和决策提供了有价值的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Geoscience frontiers
Geoscience frontiers Earth and Planetary Sciences-General Earth and Planetary Sciences
CiteScore
17.80
自引率
3.40%
发文量
147
审稿时长
35 days
期刊介绍: Geoscience Frontiers (GSF) is the Journal of China University of Geosciences (Beijing) and Peking University. It publishes peer-reviewed research articles and reviews in interdisciplinary fields of Earth and Planetary Sciences. GSF covers various research areas including petrology and geochemistry, lithospheric architecture and mantle dynamics, global tectonics, economic geology and fuel exploration, geophysics, stratigraphy and paleontology, environmental and engineering geology, astrogeology, and the nexus of resources-energy-emissions-climate under Sustainable Development Goals. The journal aims to bridge innovative, provocative, and challenging concepts and models in these fields, providing insights on correlations and evolution.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信