Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/96561
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of Land Surveying and Geo-Informatics-
dc.contributorResearch Institute for Land and Space-
dc.creatorShahzad, Nen_US
dc.creatorDing, Xen_US
dc.creatorAbbas, Sen_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-12-07T02:55:26Z-
dc.date.available2022-12-07T02:55:26Z-
dc.identifier.issn2076-3417en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/96561-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherMolecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI)en_US
dc.rights© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).en_US
dc.rightsThe following publication Shahzad, N., Ding, X., & Abbas, S. (2022). A comparative assessment of machine learning models for landslide susceptibility mapping in the rugged terrain of northern Pakistan. Applied Sciences, 12(5), 2280 is available at https://doi.org/10.3390/app12052280.en_US
dc.subjectGradient-boosting machineen_US
dc.subjectLandslide susceptibilityen_US
dc.subjectMachine learningen_US
dc.subjectMaximum entropyen_US
dc.subjectPakistanen_US
dc.subjectRandom foresten_US
dc.subjectRugged terrainen_US
dc.subjectSupport vector machineen_US
dc.titleA comparative assessment of machine learning models for landslide susceptibility mapping in the rugged terrain of northern Pakistanen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.volume12en_US
dc.identifier.issue5en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/app12052280en_US
dcterms.abstractThis study investigated the performances of different techniques, including random forest (RF), support vector machine (SVM), maximum entropy (maxENT), gradient-boosting machine (GBM), and logistic regression (LR), for landslide susceptibility mapping (LSM) in the rugged terrain of northern Pakistan. Initially, a landslide inventory of 200 samples was produced along with an additional 200 samples indicating nonlandslide areas and divided into training (70%) and validation (30%) groups using a stratified loop-based random sampling approach. Then, a geospatial database of 12 possible landslide influencing factors (LIFs) was generated, including elevation, slope, aspect, topographic wetness index (TWI), topographic position index (TPI), distance to drainage, distance to fault, distance to road, normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), rainfall, land cover/land use (LCLU), and a geological map of the study area. None of the LIFs were redundant for the modeling, as indicated by the multicollinearity test (tolerance > 0.1) and information gain ratio (IGR > 0). We extended the evaluation measures of each algorithm from area-under-the-curve (AUC) analysis to the calculation of performance overall (POA) with the help of precision, recall, F1 score, accuracy (ACC), and Matthew’s correlation coefficient (MCC). The results showed that the SVM was the most promising model (AUC = 0.969, POA = 2669) for the LSM, followed by RF (AUC = 0.967, POA = 2656), GBM (AUC = 0.967, POA = 2623), maxENT (AUC = 0.872, POA = 1761), and LR (AUC = 0.836, POA = 1299). It is important to note that the SVM, RF, and GBM were the top performers, with almost similar accuracy. Thus, each of these could be equally effective for LSM and can be used for risk reduction and mitigation measures in the rugged terrain of Pakistan and other regions with similar topography.-
dcterms.accessRightsopen accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationApplied sciences, Mar. 2022, v. 12, no. 5, 2280en_US
dcterms.isPartOfApplied sciencesen_US
dcterms.issued2022-03-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85125423662-
dc.identifier.artn2280en_US
dc.description.validate202212 bckw-
dc.description.oaVersion of Recorden_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumberOA_Scopus/WOS-
dc.description.pubStatusPublisheden_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
applsci-12-02280-v2.pdf18.2 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Version of Record
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page views

61
Last Week
2
Last month
Citations as of May 12, 2024

Downloads

32
Citations as of May 12, 2024

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

26
Citations as of May 17, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

23
Citations as of May 16, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.