Landslide susceptibility assessment in Western Henan Province based on a comparison of conventional and ensemble machine learning

被引:11
作者
Cao, Wen-geng [1 ,2 ]
Fu, Yu [3 ]
Dong, Qiu-yao [1 ]
Wang, Hai-gang [4 ]
Ren, Yu [1 ]
Li, Ze-yan [1 ]
Du, Yue-ying [3 ]
机构
[1] Chinese Acad Geol Sci, Inst Hydrogeol & Environm Geol, China Geol Survey, Minist Nat Resources, Shijiazhuang 050061, Peoples R China
[2] Minist Nat Resources, Key Lab Groundwater Sci & Engn, Shijiazhuang 050061, Peoples R China
[3] North China Univ Water Resources & Elect Power, Zhengzhou 450011, Peoples R China
[4] China Inst Geoenvironm Monitoring, Beijing 100081, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Landslide susceptibility model; Risk assessment; Machine learning; Support vector machines; Logistic regression; Random forest; Extreme gradient boosting; Linear discriminant analysis; Ensemble modeling; Factor analysis; Geological disaster survey engineering; Middle mountain area; Yellow River Basin; CLASSIFICATION; HAZARDS;
D O I
10.31035/cg2023013
中图分类号
P [天文学、地球科学];
学科分类号
07 ;
摘要
Landslide is a serious natural disaster next only to earthquake and flood, which will cause a great threat to people 's lives and property safety. The traditional research of landslide disaster based on experience driven or statistical model and its assessment results are subjective , difficult to quantify, and no pertinence. As a new research method for landslide susceptibility assessment, machine learning can greatly improve the landslide susceptibility model's accuracy by constructing statistical models. Taking Western Henan for example, the study selected 16 landslide influencing factors such as topography, geological environment, hydrological conditions, and human activities, and 11 landslide factors with the most significant influence on the landslide were selected by the recursive feature elimination (RFE) method. Five machine learning methods [Support Vector Machines (SVM), Logistic Regression (LR), Random Forest (RF), Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), and Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA)] were used to construct the spatial distribution model of landslide susceptibility. The models were evaluated by the receiver operating characteristic curve and statistical index. After analysis and comparison, the XGBoost model (AUC 0.8759) performed the best and was suitable for dealing with regression problems. The model had a high adaptability to landslide data. According to the landslide susceptibility map of the five models, the overall distribution can be observed. The extremely high and high susceptibility areas are distributed in the Funiu Mountain range in the southwest, the Xiaoshan Mountain range in the west, and the Yellow River Basin in the north. These areas have large terrain fluctuations, complicated geological structural environments and frequent human engineering activities. The extremely high and highly prone areas were 12043.3 km2 and 3087.45 km2, accounting for 47.61% and 12.20% of the total area of the study area, respectively. Our study reflects the distribution of landslide susceptibility in western Henan Province, which provides a scientific basis for regional disaster warning, prediction, and resource protection. The study has important practical significance for subsequent landslide disaster management. (c) 2023 China Geology Editorial Office.
引用
收藏
页码:409 / 419
页数:11
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]   The use of digital technologies for landslide disaster risk research and disaster risk management: progress and prospects [J].
Bao, Haijun ;
Zeng, Canying ;
Peng, Yi ;
Wu, Shaohua .
ENVIRONMENTAL EARTH SCIENCES, 2022, 81 (18)
[2]   Characterising performance of environmental models [J].
Bennett, Neil D. ;
Croke, Barry F. W. ;
Guariso, Giorgio ;
Guillaume, Joseph H. A. ;
Hamilton, Serena H. ;
Jakeman, Anthony J. ;
Marsili-Libelli, Stefano ;
Newham, Lachlan T. H. ;
Norton, John P. ;
Perrin, Charles ;
Pierce, Suzanne A. ;
Robson, Barbara ;
Seppelt, Ralf ;
Voinov, Alexey A. ;
Fath, Brian D. ;
Andreassian, Vazken .
ENVIRONMENTAL MODELLING & SOFTWARE, 2013, 40 :1-20
[3]  
Brabb EE, 1984, Innovative approaches to landslide hazard and risk mapping, DOI [10.1016/0148-9062(87)91363-5, DOI 10.1016/0148-9062(87)91363-5]
[4]   Random forests [J].
Breiman, L .
MACHINE LEARNING, 2001, 45 (01) :5-32
[5]   Spatial prediction models for landslide hazards: review, comparison and evaluation [J].
Brenning, A .
NATURAL HAZARDS AND EARTH SYSTEM SCIENCES, 2005, 5 (06) :853-862
[6]   A systematic review of landslide probability mapping using logistic regression [J].
Budimir, M. E. A. ;
Atkinson, P. M. ;
Lewis, H. G. .
LANDSLIDES, 2015, 12 (03) :419-436
[7]   A ROC analysis-based classification method for landslide susceptibility maps [J].
Cantarino, Isidro ;
Angel Carrion, Miguel ;
Goerlich, Francisco ;
Martinez Ibanez, Victor .
LANDSLIDES, 2019, 16 (02) :265-282
[8]  
Causes L., 2001, Landslide types and processes, P10
[9]   XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System [J].
Chen, Tianqi ;
Guestrin, Carlos .
KDD'16: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 22ND ACM SIGKDD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON KNOWLEDGE DISCOVERY AND DATA MINING, 2016, :785-794
[10]   Landslide risk assessment and management: an overview [J].
Dai, FC ;
Lee, CF ;
Ngai, YY .
ENGINEERING GEOLOGY, 2002, 64 (01) :65-87