Landslide susceptibility assessment using SVM machine learning algorithm

Engineering Geology

Volumn 123, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 225-234

  Marjanović, Miloš ^a   Kovačević, Miloš ^b   Bajat, Branislav ^b   Voženílek, Vít ^a  

^a PALACKÝ UNIVERSITY   (Czech Republic)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BELGRADE   (Serbia)

Author keywords

Analytical Hierarchy Process; Classification; Decision Tree; Landslide susceptibility; Logistic Regression; Support Vector Machines

Indexed keywords

AHP APPROACH; ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS; CLASSIFICATION RULES; DATA PREPARATION; EVALUATION METRICS; FALSE POSITIVE RATES; LANDSLIDE SUSCEPTIBILITY; LOGISTIC REGRESSION; LOGISTIC REGRESSIONS; MACHINE-LEARNING; MODELING PROCEDURE; ROC CURVES; SPATIAL MODELING; SPECIFIC AREAS; SUPPORT VECTOR; SVM CLASSIFIERS;

DECISION TREES; LANDSLIDES; PLANT EXTRACTS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINES;

LEARNING ALGORITHMS;

ALGORITHM; ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS; LANDSLIDE; NUMERICAL MODEL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

FRUSKA GORA; SERBIA;

EID: 80054680799     PISSN: 00137952     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2011.09.006     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Aleotti P., Chowdhury R. Landslide hazard assessment: summary review and new perspectives. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment 1999, 58:21-44.
2. Bai S.B., Wang J., Lü G.N., Zhou P.G., Hou S.S., Xu S.N. GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping of the Zhoungxian segment in the Three Gorges area, China. Geomorphology 2010, 115:23-31.
3. Belousov A.I., Verzakov S.A., Von Frese J. Applicational aspects of support vector machines. Journal of Chemometrics 2002, 16:482-489.
4. SAGA - Analysis and Modelling Applications 2006, Vol.115. Göttinger Geographische Abhandlungen, Göttinger, 130pp. J. Böhner, K.R. McCloy, J. Strobl (Eds.).
5. Bonham-Carter G. Geographic Information System for Geosciences - Modeling with GIS 1994, Pergamon, New York, 398pp.
6. Brenning A. Spatial prediction models for landslide hazards: review, comparison and evaluation. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 2005, 5:853-862.
7. Brenning A. Statistical geocomputing combining R and SAGA: the example of landslide susceptibility analysis with generalized additive models. SAGA - Second Out 2008, vol. 19:23-32. Institut für Geographie der Universität, Hamburg.
8. Burges C.J.C. A tutorial on support vector machines for pattern recognition. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 1998, 2(1):121-167.
9. Carrara A., Pike R. GIS technology and models for assessing landslide hazard and risk. Geomorphology 2008, 94:257-260.
10. Carrara A., Bitelli G., Carla R. Comparison of techniques for generating digital terrain models from contour lines. International Journal of GIS 1997, 11(5):451-473.
11. Chacón J., Irigaray C., Fernández T., El Hamdouni R. Engineering geology maps: landslides and geographical information systems. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment 2006, 65:341-411.
12. Cristiani N., Shawe-Taylor J. An Introduction to Support Vector Machines and Other Kernel-Based Learning Methods 2000, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 189pp.
13. Falaschi F., Giacomelli F., Fedrici P.R., Pucinelli A., Avato G.D'A., Pochini A., Ribolini A. Logistic regression versus artificial neural networks: landslide susceptibility evaluation in a sample area of the Serchio River valley, Italy. Natural Hazards 2009, 50:551-569.
14. Fawcett T. An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recognition Letters 2006, 27:861-874.
15. Fielding A.H., Bell J.F. A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models. Environmental Conservation 1997, 24:38-49.
16. Frattini P., Crosta G., Carrara A. Techniques for evaluating performance of landslide susceptibility models. Engineering Geology 2010, 111:62-72.
17. Glenn E.P., Huete A.R., Nagler P.L., Nelson S.G. Relationship between remotely-sensed Vegetation Indices, canopy attributes and plant physiological processes: what Vegetation Indices can and cannot tell us about the landscape. Sensors 2008, 8:2136-2160.
18. Gokceoglu C., Sezer E. A statistical assessment on international landslide literature (1945-2008). Landslides 2009, 6:345-351.
19. Gruber S., Huggel C., Pike R. Modelling mass movements and landslide susceptibility. Geomorphometry: Concepts, Software, Applications 2009, 527-550. ch. 23, Elsevier, Amsterdam. T. Hengl, H.I. Reuter (Eds.).
20. Guzzetti F., Carrara A., Cardinali M., Reichenbach P. Landslide hazard evaluation: a review of current techniques and their application in a multi-scale study, Central Italy. Geomorphology 1999, 31:181-216.
21. Hall M., Frank E., Holmes G., Pfahringer B., Reutemann P., Witten I.H. The WEKA data mining software: an update. SIGKDD Explorations 2009, 11(1):10-18.
22. Hosmer D.W., Lemeshow S. Applied Logistic Regression 2000, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 375pp.
23. Janjić M. Engineering geology Characteristics of Terrains of National Republic of Serbia (in Serbian) 1962, Belgrade, Nučna knjiga, 352pp.
24. Kanevski M., Pozdnoukhov A., Timonin V. Machine Learning for Spatial Environmental Data: Theory, Applications and Software 2009, EPFL Press, Lausanne, 368pp.
25. Kanungo D.P., Arora M.K., Sarkar S., Gupta R.P. A comparative study of conventional, ANN black box, fuzzy and combined neural and fuzzy weighting procedures for landslide susceptibility zonation in Darjeeling Himalayas. Engineering Geology 2006, 85:347-366.
26. Kecman V. Support vector machines - an introduction. Support Vector Machines: Theory and Applications 2005, 1-48. Springer, Berlin. L. Wang (Ed.).
27. Komac M. A landslide susceptibility model using the Analytical Hierarchy Process method and multivariate statistics in perialpine Slovenia. Geomorphology 2006, 74:17-28.
28. Landis J.R., Koch G.G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977, 33(1):159-174.
29. Mitchell T.M. Machine Learning 1997, McGraw Hill, New York, 414pp.
30. Nadim F., Kjekstad O., Peduzzi P., Herold C., Jaedicke C. Global landslide and avalanche hotspots. Landslides 2006, 3:159-173.
31. Ohlemacher G.C. Plan curvature and landslide probability in regions dominated by earth flows and earth slides. Engineering Geology 2007, 91:117-134.
32. Pavlović, R., Lokin, P. and Trivić, B., 2005. Geological conditions of racional usage and preservation of the Fruška Gora Mountain area (in Serbian), unpublished, Department for Remote Sensing and Structural Geology, University of Belgrade.
33. Quinlan J.R. C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning 1993, Morgan Caufman, San Mateo, 302pp.
34. Saaty T.L. Analytical Hierarchy Process 1980, McGraw-Hill, New York, 287pp.
35. Saito H., Nakayama D., Matsuyama H. Comparison of landslide susceptibility based on a decision-tree model and actual landslide occurrence: the Akaishi Mountains, Japan. Geomorphology 2009, 109:108-121.
36. Vapnik V.N. The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory 1995, Springer, New York, 316pp.
37. Varnes D.J. Landslide Hazard Zonation: A Review of Principles and Practice 1984, International Association for Engineering Geology, Paris, 63pp.
38. Voženílek V. Landslide modeling for natural risk/hazard assessment with GIS. Acta Universitas Carolinae, Geographica 2000, 35:145-155.
39. Yao X., Dai F.C. Support vector machine modeling of landslide susceptibility using GIS: a case study. 10th IAEG Conference Proceedings, Nottingham, 6-10th September, 2006 2006, 1-12. IAEG, Nottingham.
40. Yao X., Tham L.G., Dai F.C. Landslide susceptibility mapping based on support vector machine: a case study on natural slopes of Hong Kong, China. Geomorphology 2008, 101:572-582.
41. Yeon Y.K., Han J.G., Ryu K.H. Landslide susceptibility mapping in Injae, Korea, using a decision tree. Engineering Geology 2010, 116:274-283.
42. Yilmaz I. Comparison of landslide susceptibility mapping methodologies for Koyulhisar, Turkey: conditional probability, logistic regression, artificial neural networks, and support vector machine. Environmental Earth 2009, 61(4):821-836.
43. Yuan L., Zhang Y. Debris flow hazard assessment based on support vector machine. Wuhan University Journal of Natural Sciences 2006, 14(4):897-900.