{"title":"A comparative study of various combination strategies for landslide susceptibility mapping considering landslide types","authors":"Lanbing Yu , Biswajeet Pradhan , 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.
Geoscience frontiersEarth 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.