Assessment of the effects of training data selection on the landslide susceptibility mapping: a comparison between support vector machine (SVM), logistic regression (LR) and artificial neural…

By Bahareh Kalantar, Biswajeet Pradhan, Seyed Amir Naghibi, A. Motevalli, Shattri Mansor. 2018

479 citations recorded by the source corpus.

ABSTRACT Landslide is a natural hazard that results in many economic damages and human losses every year. Numerous researchers have studied landslide susceptibility mapping (LSM), each attempting to improve the accuracy of the final outputs. However, few studies have been published on the training data selection effects on the LSM. Thus, this study assesses the training landslides random selection effects on support vector machine (SVM) accuracy, logistic regression (LR) and artificial neural networks (ANN) models for LSM in a catchment at the Dodangeh watershed, Mazandaran province, Iran. A 160 landslide locations inventory was collected by Geological Survey of Iran for this investigation. Different methods were implemented to define the landslide locations, such as inventory reports, satellite images and field survey. Moreover, 14 landslide conditioning factors were considered in the analysis of landslide susceptibility. These factors include curvature, plan curvature, profile curvature, altitude, slope angle, slope aspect, distance to faults, distance to stream, topographic wetness index, stream power index, terrain roughness index, sediment transport index, lithology and land use. The results show that the random landslide training data selection affected the parameter estimations of the SVM, LR and ANN algorithms. The results also show that the training samples selection had an effect on the accuracy of the susceptibility model because landslide conditioning factors vary according to the geographic locations in the study area. The LR model was found to be less sensitive than the SVM and ANN models to the training samples selection. Validation results showed that SVM and LR models outperformed the ANN model for all scenarios. The average overall accuracy of LR, SVM and ANN models are 81.42%, 79.82% and 70.2%, respectively.

Subfields: Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law, Mechanical Engineering, Soil Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c86f78f7a9979aac24ea1591164d7366e9107ec4

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

  1. Alireza Arabameri
  2. Thomas Blaschke
  3. Romulus Costache

In Mechanical Engineering

  1. Alireza Arabameri
  2. Thomas Blaschke

In Soil Science

  1. Thomas Blaschke

Citations in the corpus