滑坡易感性预测的不确定性:不同空间分辨率、机器学习模型和训练与测试数据集比例的影响

Faming Huang , Zuokui Teng , Zizheng Guo , Filippo Catani , Jinsong Huang
{"title":"滑坡易感性预测的不确定性:不同空间分辨率、机器学习模型和训练与测试数据集比例的影响","authors":"Faming Huang ,&nbsp;Zuokui Teng ,&nbsp;Zizheng Guo ,&nbsp;Filippo Catani ,&nbsp;Jinsong Huang","doi":"10.1016/j.rockmb.2023.100028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study aims to reveal the impacts of three important uncertainty issues in landslide susceptibility prediction (LSP), namely the spatial resolution, proportion of model training and testing datasets and selection of machine learning models. Taking Yanchang County of China as example, the landslide inventory and 12 important conditioning factors were acquired. The frequency ratios of each conditioning factor were calculated under five spatial resolutions (15, 30, 60, 90 and 120 ​m). Landslide and non-landslide samples obtained under each spatial resolution were further divided into five proportions of training and testing datasets (9:1, 8:2, 7:3, 6:4 and 5:5), and four typical machine learning models were applied for LSP modelling. The results demonstrated that different spatial resolution and training and testing dataset proportions induce basically similar influences on the modeling uncertainty. With a decrease in the spatial resolution from 15 ​m to 120 ​m and a change in the proportions of the training and testing datasets from 9:1 to 5:5, the modelling accuracy gradually decreased, while the mean values of predicted landslide susceptibility indexes increased and their standard deviations decreased. The sensitivities of the three uncertainty issues to LSP modeling were, in order, the spatial resolution, the choice of machine learning model and the proportions of training/testing datasets.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101137,"journal":{"name":"Rock Mechanics Bulletin","volume":"2 1","pages":"Article 100028"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Uncertainties of landslide susceptibility prediction: Influences of different spatial resolutions, machine learning models and proportions of training and testing dataset\",\"authors\":\"Faming Huang ,&nbsp;Zuokui Teng ,&nbsp;Zizheng Guo ,&nbsp;Filippo Catani ,&nbsp;Jinsong Huang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rockmb.2023.100028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This study aims to reveal the impacts of three important uncertainty issues in landslide susceptibility prediction (LSP), namely the spatial resolution, proportion of model training and testing datasets and selection of machine learning models. Taking Yanchang County of China as example, the landslide inventory and 12 important conditioning factors were acquired. The frequency ratios of each conditioning factor were calculated under five spatial resolutions (15, 30, 60, 90 and 120 ​m). Landslide and non-landslide samples obtained under each spatial resolution were further divided into five proportions of training and testing datasets (9:1, 8:2, 7:3, 6:4 and 5:5), and four typical machine learning models were applied for LSP modelling. The results demonstrated that different spatial resolution and training and testing dataset proportions induce basically similar influences on the modeling uncertainty. With a decrease in the spatial resolution from 15 ​m to 120 ​m and a change in the proportions of the training and testing datasets from 9:1 to 5:5, the modelling accuracy gradually decreased, while the mean values of predicted landslide susceptibility indexes increased and their standard deviations decreased. The sensitivities of the three uncertainty issues to LSP modeling were, in order, the spatial resolution, the choice of machine learning model and the proportions of training/testing datasets.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rock Mechanics Bulletin\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 100028\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rock Mechanics Bulletin\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S277323042300001X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rock Mechanics Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S277323042300001X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

本研究旨在揭示滑坡易发性预测中三个重要的不确定性问题的影响,即空间分辨率、模型训练和测试数据集的比例以及机器学习模型的选择。以中国延长县为例,得到了滑坡的清单和12个重要的制约因素。在五种空间分辨率(15、30、60、90和120​m) 。将在每个空间分辨率下获得的滑坡和非滑坡样本进一步划分为五个比例的训练和测试数据集(9:1、8:2、7:3、6:4和5:5),并将四个典型的机器学习模型应用于LSP建模。结果表明,不同的空间分辨率、训练和测试数据集比例对建模不确定性的影响基本相似。空间分辨率从15降低​m至120​m以及训练和测试数据集的比例从9:1到5:5的变化,建模精度逐渐降低,而预测滑坡易感指数的平均值增加,其标准差降低。三个不确定性问题对LSP建模的敏感性依次为空间分辨率、机器学习模型的选择和训练/测试数据集的比例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Uncertainties of landslide susceptibility prediction: Influences of different spatial resolutions, machine learning models and proportions of training and testing dataset

This study aims to reveal the impacts of three important uncertainty issues in landslide susceptibility prediction (LSP), namely the spatial resolution, proportion of model training and testing datasets and selection of machine learning models. Taking Yanchang County of China as example, the landslide inventory and 12 important conditioning factors were acquired. The frequency ratios of each conditioning factor were calculated under five spatial resolutions (15, 30, 60, 90 and 120 ​m). Landslide and non-landslide samples obtained under each spatial resolution were further divided into five proportions of training and testing datasets (9:1, 8:2, 7:3, 6:4 and 5:5), and four typical machine learning models were applied for LSP modelling. The results demonstrated that different spatial resolution and training and testing dataset proportions induce basically similar influences on the modeling uncertainty. With a decrease in the spatial resolution from 15 ​m to 120 ​m and a change in the proportions of the training and testing datasets from 9:1 to 5:5, the modelling accuracy gradually decreased, while the mean values of predicted landslide susceptibility indexes increased and their standard deviations decreased. The sensitivities of the three uncertainty issues to LSP modeling were, in order, the spatial resolution, the choice of machine learning model and the proportions of training/testing datasets.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Viscoelastic plastic interaction of tunnel support and strain-softening rock mass considering longitudinal effect Shear behavior and dilatancy of an artificial hard-matrix bimrock: An experimental study focusing on the role of blocky structure Effects of joint persistence and testing conditions on cyclic shear behavior of en-echelon joints under CNS conditions Discontinuous deformation analysis for subsidence of fractured formations under seepage: A case study Experimental behavior and fracture prediction of a novel high-strength and high-toughness steel subjected to tension and shear loading tests
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1