Top

Fire Technology

Published in:

22-01-2023

Predicting and Assessing Wildfire Evacuation Decision-Making Using Machine Learning: Findings from the 2019 Kincade Fire

Authors: Ningzhe Xu, Ruggiero Lovreglio, Erica D. Kuligowski, Thomas J. Cova, Daniel Nilsson, Xilei Zhao

Published in: Fire Technology | Issue 2/2023

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

To develop effective wildfire evacuation plans, it is crucial to study evacuation decision-making and identify the factors affecting individuals’ choices. Statistic models (e.g., logistic regression) are widely used in the literature to predict household evacuation decisions, while the potential of machine learning models has not been fully explored. This study compared seven machine learning models with logistic regression to identify which approach is better for predicting a householder’s decision to evacuate. The machine learning models tested include the naïve Bayes classifier, K-nearest neighbors, support vector machine, neural network, classification and regression tree (CART), random forest, and extreme gradient boosting. These models were calibrated using the survey data collected from the 2019 Kincade Fire. The predictive performance of the machine learning models and the logistic regression was compared using F1 score, accuracy, precision, and recall. The results indicate that all the machine learning models performed better than the logistic regression. The CART model has the highest F1 score among all models, with a statistically significant difference from the logistic regression model. This CART model shows that the most important factor affecting the decision to evacuate is pre-fire safety perception. Other important factors include receiving an evacuation order, household risk perception (during the event), and education level.

previous article Influence of Wind Speeds and Heating Exposures on the Thermal Insulation of Intumescent Fire-Retardant Coatings

next article Flame Spread Transition to Regression of Thick Fuel in Oxygen-Limited Concurrent Flow

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

Risk perception (and other ‘latent’ variables) are not necessarily an independent variable per se, but instead, a mediator variable when estimating evacuation decisions and movement. In future work, we hope to create a model which is ‘dependent’ only on the factors that can be obtained from any given affected area (e.g., population, environmental, and place-based variables)—to then model threat and risk perceptions and then the evacuation decision.

Bagloee SA, Johansson KH, Asadi M (2019) A hybrid machine-learning and optimization method for contraflow design in post-disaster cases and traffic management scenarios. Expert Syst Appl 124:67–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.01.042CrossRef

Bandini S, Manzoni S, Mauri G, et al (2008) Gp generation of pedestrian behavioral rules in an evacuation model based on sca. In: International Conference on Cellular Automata, Springer, pp 409–416, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-79992-4_53

Benight C, Gruntfest E, Sparks K (2004) Colorado wildfires 2002. Quick response rep. 167. Natural Hazards Center, University of Colorado Boulder.

Boustras G, Ronchi E, Rein G (2017) Fires: fund research for citizen safety. Nature 551(7680):300–301. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-017-06020-6CrossRef

Bowman D, Williamson G, Yebra M et al (2020) Wildfires: Australia needs national monitoring agency. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02306-4CrossRef

Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45(1):5–32. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324CrossRefMATH

Bzdok D, Krzywinski M, Altman N (2018) Machine learning: supervised methods. Nat Methods 15(1):5. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4551CrossRef

Chen H, Chen H, Liu Z et al (2020) Analysis of factors affecting the severity of automated vehicle crashes using XGBoost model combining POI data. J Adv Trans. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8881545CrossRef

Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, pp 785–794, https://doi.org/10.1145/2939672.2939785

10.

Chen T, He T, Benesty M et al (2019) Package ‘xgboost’. R version 90. https://doi.org/10.1145/2939672.2939785

11.

Cheng L, Chen X, De Vos J et al (2019) Applying a random forest method approach to model travel mode choice behavior. Travel Behav Soc 14:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2018.09.002CrossRef

12.

Chinchor N (1992) Muc-4 evaluation metrics in proc. of the fourth message understanding conference. pp. 22–29

13.

Devos O, Ruckebusch C, Durand A et al (2009) Support vector machines (svm) in near infrared (nir) spectroscopy: focus on parameters optimization and model interpretation. Chemometrics Intell Lab Syst 96(1):27–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemolab.2008.11.005CrossRef

14.

Eriksen C, Gill N, Head L (2010) The gendered dimensions of bushfire in changing rural landscapes in Australia. J Rural Stud 26(4):332–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2010.06.001CrossRef

15.

Fischer HW, Stine GF, Stoker BL, et al (1995) Evacuation behaviour: Why do some evacuate, while others do not? A case study of the Ephrata, Pennsylvania (USA) evacuation. Disaster Prevent Mana: Int J https://doi.org/10.1108/09653569510093414

16.

Fix E, Hodges JL (1989) Discriminatory analysis. Nonparametric discrimination: consistency properties. Int Stat Rev/Revue Internationale de Statistique 57(3):238–247. https://doi.org/10.2307/1403797CrossRefMATH

17.

Folk LH, Kuligowski ED, Gwynne S et al (2019) A provisional conceptual model of human behavior in response to wildland-urban interface fires. Fire Technol 55(5):1619–1647. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-019-00821-zCrossRef

18.

Forcael E, González V, Orozco F et al (2014) Ant colony optimization model for tsunamis evacuation routes. Comput Aided Civil Inf Eng 29(10):723–737. https://doi.org/10.1111/mice.12113CrossRef

19.

Hagenauer J, Helbich M (2017) A comparative study of machine learning classifiers for modeling travel mode choice. Expert Syst Appl 78:273–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2017.01.057CrossRef

20.

Inkoom S, Sobanjo J, Barbu A et al (2019) Pavement crack rating using machine learning frameworks: Partitioning, bootstrap forest, boosted trees, naïve bayes, and k-nearest neighbors. J Trans Eng B Pavements 145(3):04019,031. https://doi.org/10.1061/JPEODX.0000126CrossRef

21.

James G, Witten D, Hastie T et al (2013) An introduction to statistical learning, vol 112. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-1418-1_1CrossRefMATH

22.

Komura D, Ishikawa S (2018) Machine learning methods for histopathological image analysis. Comput Struct Biotechnol J 16:34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csbj.2018.01.001CrossRef

23.

Kuhn M (2008) Building predictive models in R using the caret package. J Stat Softw 28:1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v028.i05CrossRef

24.

Kuligowski ED, Walpole EH, Lovreglio R et al (2020) Modelling evacuation decision-making in the 2016 Chimney Tops 2 fire in Gatlinburg. TN. Int J Wildland Fire 29(12):1120–1132. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF20038CrossRef

25.

Kuligowski ED, Zhao X, Lovreglio R et al (2022) Modeling evacuation decisions in the 2019 Kincade fire in California. Saf Sci 146(105):541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105541CrossRef

26.

Lamounier E, Soares A, Andrade A, et al (2002) A virtual prosthesis control based on neural networks for emg pattern classification. In: Proceedings of the Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing, Citeseer

27.

Lewis RJ (2000) An introduction to classification and regression tree (cart) analysis. In: Annual meeting of the society for academic emergency medicine in San Francisco, California, Citeseer

28.

Lhéritier A, Bocamazo M, Delahaye T et al (2019) Airline itinerary choice modeling using machine learning. J Choice Modell 31:198–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocm.2018.02.002CrossRef

29.

Liaw A, Wiener M et al (2002) Classification and regression by randomforest. R News 2(3):18–22

30.

Lindell MK, Perry RW (2012) The protective action decision model: theoretical modifications and additional evidence. Risk Anal: Int J 32(4):616–632. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01647.xCrossRef

31.

Liu M, Lo SM (2011) The quantitative investigation on people’s pre-evacuation behavior under fire. Autom Constr 20(5):620–628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2010.12.004CrossRef

32.

Lo S, Liu M, Zhang P et al (2009) An artificial neural-network based predictive model for pre-evacuation human response in domestic building fire. Fire Technol 45(4):431–449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-008-0064-6CrossRef

33.

Lopez C, Marti JR, Sarkaria S (2018) Distributed reinforcement learning in emergency response simulation. IEEE Access 6:67,261-67,276. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2878894CrossRef

34.

Lovreglio R, Kuligowski E, Gwynne S et al (2019) A modelling framework for householder decision-making for wildfire emergencies. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 41(101):274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101274CrossRef

35.

Lovreglio R, Kuligowski E, Walpole E et al (2020) Calibrating the wildfire decision model using hybrid choice modelling. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 50(101):770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101770CrossRef

36.

McCaffrey S, Wilson R, Konar A (2018) Should I stay or should I go now? or should I wait and see? Influences on wildfire evacuation decisions. Risk Anal 38(7):1390–1404. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12944CrossRef

37.

McCaffrey SM, Winter G (2011) Understanding homeowner preparation and intended actions when threatened by a wildfire. Proceedings of the Second Conference on the Human Dimensions of Wildland Fire

38.

McCallum A, Nigam K, et al (1998) A comparison of event models for naive bayes text classification. In: AAAI-98 workshop on learning for text categorization, Citeseer, pp 41–48

39.

McLennan J (2014) Capturing community members’ bushfire experiences: Interviews with residents following the 12 January 2014 Parkerville (WA) fire

40.

McLennan J, Elliott G, Omodei M (2011) Issues in community bushfire safety: analyses of interviews conducted by the 2009 Victorian bushfires research task force. Bundoora, AU

41.

McLennan J, Elliott G, Omodei M (2012) Householder decision-making under imminent wildfire threat: stay and defend or leave? Int J Wildland Fire 21(7):915–925. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF11061CrossRef

42.

McLennan J, Elliott G, Omodei M et al (2013) Householders’ safety-related decisions, plans, actions and outcomes during the 7 February 2009 Victorian (Australia) wildfires. Fire Saf J 61:175–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2013.09.003CrossRef

43.

McLennan J, Paton D, Beatson R (2015) Psychological differences between south-eastern australian householders’ who intend to leave if threatened by a wildfire and those who intend to stay and defend. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 11:35–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2014.11.008CrossRef

44.

McNeill IM, Dunlop PD, Skinner TC et al (2016) A value-and expectancy-based approach to understanding residents’ intended response to a wildfire threat. Int J Wildland Fire 25(4):378–389. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF15051CrossRef

45.

Meyer D, Dimitriadou E, Hornik K, et al (2019) Package ‘e1071’. The R Journal

46.

Molnar C (2020) Interpretable machine learning. Lulu. com, https://christophm.github.io/interpretable-ml-book/

47.

Mozumder P, Raheem N, Talberth J et al (2008) Investigating intended evacuation from wildfires in the wildland-urban interface: application of a bivariate probit model. For Policy Econ 10(6):415–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2008.02.002CrossRef

48.

Nakagawa S (2004) A farewell to Bonferroni: the problems of low statistical power and publication bias. Behav Ecol 15(6):1044–1045. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arh107CrossRef

49.

National Interagency Fire Center (2022) Wildland fire statistics. https://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/fireInfo_statistics.html. Accessed March 10, 2022

50.

Ng A, Jordan M (2001) On discriminative vs. generative classifiers: a comparison of logistic regression and naive Bayes. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 14

51.

Paveglio T, Prato T, Dalenberg D et al (2014) Understanding evacuation preferences and wildfire mitigations among Northwest Montana residents. Int J Wildland Fire 23(3):435–444. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF13057CrossRef

52.

Perneger T (2014) What’s wrong with Bonferroni adjustments. BMJ 316(7139):1236–1238. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.316.7139.1236CrossRef

53.

Radeloff VC, Helmers DP, Kramer HA et al (2018) Rapid growth of the us wildland-urban interface raises wildfire risk. Proc Natl Acad Sci 115(13):3314–3319. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1718850115CrossRef

54.

Ripley B, Ripley MB (2016) Package ‘tree’. Classification and Regression Trees Version. pp. 1–0

55.

Ripley B, Venables W, Ripley MB (2015) Package ‘class’. The Comprehensive R Archive Network. p 11

56.

Ripley B, Venables W, Ripley M (2016) Package ‘nnet’r package version, 7:3–12

57.

Rudin C (2019) Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nat Mach Intell 1(5):206–215CrossRef

58.

Şahin C, Rokne J, Alhajj R (2019) Human behavior modeling for simulating evacuation of buildings during emergencies. Phys A: Stat Mech Appl 528(121):432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2019.121432CrossRef

59.

Sharma S, Singh H, Prakash A (2008) Multi-agent modeling and simulation of human behavior in aircraft evacuations. IEEE Trans Aerospace Electron Syst 44(4):1477–1488. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAES.2008.4667723CrossRef

60.

Song X, Zhang Q, Sekimoto Y, et al (2013) Modeling and probabilistic reasoning of population evacuation during large-scale disaster. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp 1231–1239, https://doi.org/10.1145/2487575.2488189

61.

Song YY, Ying L (2015) Decision tree methods: applications for classification and prediction. Shanghai Arch Psychiatr 27(2):130

62.

Stasiewicz AM, Paveglio TB (2021) Preparing for wildfire evacuation and alternatives: exploring influences on residents’ intended evacuation behaviors and mitigations. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 58(102):177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102177CrossRef

63.

Strahan KW, Whittaker J, Handmer J (2019) Predicting self-evacuation in Australian bushfire. Environ Hazards 18(2):146–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/17477891.2018.1512468CrossRef

64.

Strawderman L, Salehi A, Babski-Reeves K et al (2012) Reverse 911 as a complementary evacuation warning system. Nat Hazards Rev 13(1):65–73. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000059CrossRef

65.

Sutton RS, Barto AG (2018) Reinforcement learning: an introduction. MIT press, CambridgeMATH

66.

Tang P, Shen GQ (2015) Decision-making model to generate novel emergency response plans for improving coordination during large-scale emergencies. Knowl Based Syst 90:111–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2015.09.027CrossRef

67.

Toledo T, Marom I, Grimberg E et al (2018) Analysis of evacuation behavior in a wildfire event. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 31:1366–1373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.03.033CrossRef

68.

Wang K, Shi X, Goh APX et al (2019) A machine learning based study on pedestrian movement dynamics under emergency evacuation. Fire Saf J 106:163–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2019.04.008CrossRef

69.

Whittaker J, Handmer J (2010) Review of key bushfire research findings. Report Number WIT 3007:0041

70.

Whittaker J, Eriksen C, Haynes K (2015) More men die in bushfires: how gender affects how we plan and respond. The Conversation

71.

Whittaker J, Eriksen C, Haynes K (2016) Gendered responses to the 2009 black saturday bushfires in Victoria, Australia. Geograph Res 54(2):203–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-5871.12162CrossRef

72.

Wong SD (2020) Compliance, congestion, and social equity: tackling critical evacuation challenges through the sharing economy, joint choice modeling, and regret minimization. University of California, Berkeley

73.

Wong SD, Broader JC, Shaheen SA (2020) Review of California wildfire evacuations from 2017 to 2019. https://doi.org/10.7922/G29G5K2R

74.

Wong SD, Broader JC, Walker JL et al (2022) Understanding California wildfire evacuee behavior and joint choice making. Transportation. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-022-10275-yCrossRef

75.

Wu A, Yan X, Kuligowski E et al (2022) Wildfire evacuation decision modeling using GPS data. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 83:103373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.103373CrossRef

76.

Xie C, Lu J (1854) Parkany E (2003) Work travel mode choice modeling with data mining: decision trees and neural networks. Transport Res Record 1:50–61. https://doi.org/10.3141/1854-06CrossRef

77.

Xu Y, Yan X, Liu X et al (2021) Identifying key factors associated with ridesplitting adoption rate and modeling their nonlinear relationships. Trans Res A: Policy Prac 144:170–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2020.12.005CrossRef

78.

Zhao X, Lovreglio R, Nilsson D (2020) Modelling and interpreting pre-evacuation decision-making using machine learning. Autom Constr 113:103140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2020.103140CrossRef

79.

Zhao X, Lovreglio R, Kuligowski E et al (2021) Using artificial intelligence for safe and effective wildfire evacuations. Fire Technol 57(2):483–485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-020-00979-xCrossRef

80.

Zhao X, Xu N, Yang K et al (2021) Modeling evacuation behavior in the 2019 Kincade Fire, Sonoma County, California. Natural Hazards Center Quick Response Grant Report Series, 326. Boulder, CO: Natural Hazards Center, University of Colorado Boulder. Available at: https://hazards.colorado.edu/quick-response-report/modeling-evacuation-behavior-in-the-2019-kincade-fire-sonoma-county-california

81.

Zhao X, Xu Y, Lovreglio R et al (2022) Estimating wildfire evacuation decision and departure timing using large-scale GPS data. Trans Res D: Trans Environ 107:103277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103277CrossRef

Title: Predicting and Assessing Wildfire Evacuation Decision-Making Using Machine Learning: Findings from the 2019 Kincade Fire
Authors: Ningzhe Xu
Ruggiero Lovreglio
Erica D. Kuligowski
Thomas J. Cova
Daniel Nilsson
Xilei Zhao
Publication date: 22-01-2023
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Fire Technology / Issue 2/2023
Print ISSN: 0015-2684
Electronic ISSN: 1572-8099
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-023-01363-1

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Other articles of this Issue 2/2023

Experimental Investigation on Post-fire Response of Concrete-Filled Steel Tube Column Subjected to Elevated Temperature

Comprehensive Failure Analysis in Tehran Refinery Fire Accident: Application of Accimap Methodology and Quantitative Domino Effect Analysis

Influence of Wind Speeds and Heating Exposures on the Thermal Insulation of Intumescent Fire-Retardant Coatings

Experimental Study of the Effect of Opening Factor on Self-Extinguishing and Blue Ghosting Flame in Under-Ventilated Compartment Fire

Experimental Study on Flame Extension and Pattern Analysis of Jet Fire Impinging Wood Plates

Study on the Reversible and Irreversible Heat Generation of the Lithium-Ion Battery with LiFePO4 Cathode