Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Effect of time and space partitioning strategies of samples on regional landslide susceptibility modelling

  • Technical Note
  • Published:
Landslides Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 02 March 2021

This article has been updated

Abstract

Assessment of the spatial probability of future landslide occurrences for disaster risk reduction is done through landslide susceptibility modelling. In this study, we investigated the effect of time and space partitioning strategies of samples on the performance of regional landslide susceptibility models on macro-scale mapping in the state of Mizoram, India, covering 21,087 km2 area. We used landslide inventory data of 2014 and 2017 periods consisting of 1205 and 2265 landslides, respectively, to train and test the models with four sampling strategies such as spatial, temporal, temporal (size constrained) and temporal (geographic constrained). We used five commonly inherited models such as multiclass weighted overlay (MCWO), information value (IV), weights of evidence (WoE), logistic regression (LR) and artificial neural network (ANN) to evaluate the effect of sampling strategies on the model performance for regional landslide susceptibility mapping. Validation of model performance was done using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Traditional spatial sampling strategy applied to landslides in 2014 with a random split in 70:30 proportion provided a high performance of all the five models but failed to predict landslides in 2017. The landslide incidences in 2017, when used for model validation either entirely or in different split conditions (both size and geographic constrained), provided consistent performance, even though the testing sample size is large or have a different spatial disposition, if the training was carried out with non-linear susceptibility models such as LR and ANN using landslide incidences in 2014. Results show the importance of sample selection during validation of landslide susceptibility models on a regional scale.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Change history

References

  • Aleotti P, Chowdhury R (1999) Landslide hazard assessment: summary review and new perspectives. Bull Eng Geol Environ 58:21–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayalew L, Yamagishi H (2005) The application of GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Kakuda-Yahiko Mountains, Central Japan. Geomorphology 65(1-2):15–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Basheer IA, Hajmeer M (2000) Artificial neural networks: fundamentals, computing, design and application. J Microbiol Methods 43:3–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop C (1995) Neural networks for pattern recognition. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Blahut J, Van Westen CJ, Sterlacchini S (2010) Analysis of landslide inventories for accurate prediction of debris-flow source areas. Geomorphology 119(1-2):36–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2010.02.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonham-Carter GF (1994) Geographic information systems for geoscientists: modelling with GIS. Computer Methods in Geosciences, vol. 13. Pergamon Press, Oxford, p 398

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrara A, Cardinali M, Detti R, Guzzetti F, Pasqui V, Reichenbach P (1991) GIS techniques and statistical models in evaluating landslide hazard. Earth Surf Process Landf 16:427–445

    Google Scholar 

  • Cevasco A, Pepe G, Brandolini P (2014) The influences of geological and land-use settings on shallow landslides triggered by an intense rainfall event in a coastal terraced environment. Bull Eng Geol Environ 73(3):859–875

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung CJ, Fabbri AG (2003) Validation of spatial prediction models for landslide hazard mapping. Nat Hazards 30:451–472

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Napoli M, Carotenuto F, Cevasco A, Confuorto P, Di Martire D, Firpo M, Pepe G, Raso E, Calcaterra D (2020) Machine learning ensemble modelling as a tool to improve landslide susceptibility mapping reliability. Landslides 17(8):1897–1914

    Google Scholar 

  • EM-DAT (2019) www.emdat.be

  • Ermini L, Catani F, Casagli N (2005) Artificial neural networks applied to landslide susceptibility assessment. Geomorphology 66:327–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Fawcett T (2006) An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recogn Lett 27:861–874

    Google Scholar 

  • Frattini P, Crosta G, Carrara A (2010) Techniques for evaluating the performance of landslide susceptibility models. Eng Geol 111:62–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Froude MJ, Petley D (2018) Global fatal landslide occurrence from 2004 to 2016. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 18:2161–2181

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh S, Carranza EJM, Van Westen CJ, Jetten VG, Bhattacharya DN (2011) Selecting and weighting spatial predictors for empirical modelling of landslide susceptibility in the Darjeeling Himalayas (India). Geomorphology 131:35–56

    Google Scholar 

  • GSI (2020) www.bhukosh.gsi.gov.in, Geology 50K map of Mizoram, Accessed on 13 February 2020

  • Guzzetti F, Carrara A, Cardinali M, Reichenbach P (1999) Landslide hazard evaluation: a review of current techniques and their application in a multi-scale study, Central Italy. Geomorphology 31(1-4):181–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P, Cardinali M, Galli M, Ardizzone F (2005) Probabilistic landslide hazard assessment at the basin scale. Geomorphology 72:272–299

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P, Ardizzone F, Cardinali M, Galli M (2006) Estimating the quality of landslide susceptibility models. Geomorphology 81(1-2):166–184

    Google Scholar 

  • Gόmez H, Kavzoglu T (2005) Assessment of shallow landslide susceptibility using artificial neural networks in Jabonosa River Basin, Venezuela. Eng Geol 78:11–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson JN (1995) Keynote paper: landslide hazard assessment. In: Bell (ed) Landslides. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 1805–1841

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanungo DP, Arora MK, Sarkar S, Gupta RP (2006) A comparative study of conventional, ANN black box, fuzzy and combined neural and fuzzy weighting procedures for landslide susceptibility zonation in Darjeeling Himalayas. Eng Geol 85(3-4):347–366

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanungo D, Arora M, Sarkar S, Gupta R (2009) Landslide susceptibility zonation (LSZ) mapping - a review. J S Asia Disast Stud 2(1):81–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Kavzoglu T, Sahin EK, Colkesen I (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis, support vector machines, and logistic regression. Landslides 11(3):425–439

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee S (2005) Application of logistic regression model and its validation for landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS and remote sensing data. Int J Remote Sens 26(7):1477–1491

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Sambath T (2006) Landslide susceptibility mapping in the Damrei Romel area, Cambodia using frequency ratio and logistic regression models. Environ Geol 50:847–855

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Choi J, Min K (2002) Landslide susceptibility analysis and verification using the Bayesian probability model. Environ Geol 43(12):120–131

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Choi J, Min K (2004) Probabilistic landslide hazard mapping using GIS and remote sensing data at Boun, Korea. Int J Remote Sens 25(11):2037–2052. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160310001618734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Ryu J-H, Won J-S, Park H-J (2004) Determination and application of the weights for landslide susceptibility mapping using artificial neural network. Eng Geol 71:289–302

  • Lombardo L, Opitz T, Ardizzone F, Guzzetti F, Huser R (2020) Space-time landslide predictive modelling. Earth Sci Rev 209:103318

    Google Scholar 

  • Martha TR, Kerle N, Jetten V, van Westen CJ, Kumar KV (2010) Characterising spectral, spatial and morphometric properties of landslides for semi-automatic detection using object-oriented methods. Geomorphology 116(1-2):24–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Martha TR, Kerle N, van Westen CJ, Jetten V, Kumar KV (2011) Segment optimisation and data-driven thresholding for knowledge-based landslide detection by object-based image analysis. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 49(12):4928–4943

    Google Scholar 

  • Martha TR, Kamala P, Jose J, Kumar KV, Sankar GJ (2016) Identification of new landslides from high resolution satellite data covering a large area using object-based change detection methods. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 44(4):515–524

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathew J, Jha VK, Rawat GS (2007) Weights of evidence modelling for landslide hazard zonation mapping in part of Bhagirathi valley, Uttarakhand. Curr Sci 92(5):628–638

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathew J, Babu DG, Kundu S, Vinod Kumar K, Pant CC (2014) Integrating intensity–duration-based rainfall threshold and antecedent rainfall-based probability estimate towards generating early warning for rainfall-induced landslides in parts of the Garhwal Himalaya, India. Landslides 11(4):575–588

    Google Scholar 

  • Montrasio L, Valentino R, Corina A, Rossi L, Rudari R (2014) A prototype system for space-time assessment of rainfall-induced shallow landslides in Italy. Nat Hazards 74(2):1263–1290

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuhäuser B, Terhorst B (2007) Landslide susceptibility assessment using “weightsof-evidence” applied to a study area at the Jurassic escarpment (SW-Germany). Geomorphology 86:12–24

    Google Scholar 

  • NRSC (2012) NRSC Technical Document: manual for geomorphologyand lineament mapping. Document reference number: NRSC-RSAA-ERG-G&GD-SEP' 12-TR-445

  • NRSC (2014) Land use/land cover database on 1:50,000 scale, Natural Resources Census Project, LUCMD, LRUMG, RSAA. Hyderabad, National Remote Sensing Centre, ISRO

    Google Scholar 

  • Paola JD, Schowengerdt RA (1995) A review and analysis of back propagation neural networks for classification of remotely sensed multi-spectral imagery. Int J Remote Sens 16:3033–3058

    Google Scholar 

  • Pardeshi SD, Autade SE, Pardeshi SS (2013) Landslide hazard assessment: recent trends and techniques. SpringerPlus 2(1):523. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-2-523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellicani R, Argentiero I, Spilotro G (2017) GIS-based predictive models for regional-scale landslide susceptibility assessment and risk mapping along road corridors. Geomat Nat Haz Risk 8(2):1012–1033

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Youssef A, Varathrajo R (2010) Approaches for delineating landslide hazard areas using different training sites in an advanced artificial neural network model. Geo-spatial Inf Sci 13(2):93–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11806-010-0236-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pudi R, Roy P, Martha TR, Kumar KV, Rao PR (2018) Spatial potential analysis of earthquakes in the western Himalayas using b-value and thrust association. J Geol Soc India 91(6):664–670

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichenbach P, Rossi M, Malamud BD, Mihir M, Guzzetti F (2018) A review of statistically-based landslide susceptibility models. Earth Sci Rev 180:60–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Remondo J, González A, De Terán JRD, Cendrero A, Fabbri A, Chung C-JF (2003) Validation of landslide susceptibility maps; examples and applications from a case study in Northern Spain. Nat Hazards 30:437–449. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:NHAZ.0000007201.80743.fc

  • Sarkar S, Roy AK, Martha TR (2013) Landslide susceptibility assessment using information value method in parts of the Darjeeling Himalayas. J Geol Soc India 82(4):351–362

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawatzky DL, Raines GL, Bonham-Carter GF, Looney CG (2009) Spatial data modeller (SDM): ArcMAP 9.3 geoprocessing tools for spatial data modelling using weights of evidence, logistic Regression, fuzzy logic and neural networks. http://arcscripts.esri.com/details.asp?dbid=15341

  • Segoni S, Pappafico G, Luti T, Catani F (2020) Landslide susceptibility assessment in complex geological settings: sensitivity to geological information and insights on its parameterisation. Landslides. 17:2443–2453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-019-01340-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sepe C, Confuorto P, Angrisani AC, Di Martire D, Di Napoli M, Calcaterra D (2019) Application of a statistical approach to landslide susceptibility map generation in urban settings. In: Shakoor A, Cato K (eds) IAEG/AEG Annual meeting proceedings, San Francisco, California, 2018 - Volume 1. Springer, Cham, pp 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93124-1_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • SPSS (2017) SPSS for Windows, Version 23, 2017. SPSS Inc., Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Taalab K, Cheng T, Zhang Y (2018) Mapping landslide susceptibility and types using random forest. Big Earth Data 2(2):159–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Vahidnia NH, Alesheikh AA, Mohommad A, Hosseinalli F (2010) A GIS based neuro-fuzzy procedure for integrating knowledge and data in landslide susceptibility mapping. Comput Geosci 36(9):1101–1114

    Google Scholar 

  • Vakhshoori V, Pourghasemi HR, Zare M, Blaschke T (2019) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS-based data mining algorithms. Water 11(11):2292

    Google Scholar 

  • Valdiya KS (2016) The making of India: geodynamic evolution. Society of Earth Scientists Series. Springer, Cham 924p

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Westen CJ (1993) Application of geographic information systems landslide hazard zonation. ITC Publication 15

  • Van Westen CJ, Rengers N, Terlien MTJ, Soeters R (1997) Prediction of the occurrence of slope instability phenomenal through GIS-based hazard zonation. Geol Rundsch 86(2):404–414

    Google Scholar 

  • Varnes DJ (1984) IAEG Commission on landslides and other mass-movements landslide hazard zonation: a review of principles and practice. UNESCO Press, Paris, 63 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiao T, Segoni S, Chen L, Yin K. Casagli N (2020) A step beyond landslide susceptibility maps: a simple method to investigate and explain the different outcomes obtained by different approaches. Landslides 17(3): 627-640.

  • Yesilnacar E, Topal T (2005) Landslide susceptibility mapping: a comparison of logistic Regression and neural networks methods in a medium scale study, Hendek region (Turkey). Eng Geol 79:251–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin KL, Yan TZ (1988) Statistical prediction models for slope instability of metamorphosed rocks. In: Bonnard C (ed) Proc 5th INternational Symposium on landslides, Pub Rotterdam: A Blakema, Lausanne, pp 1269–1272

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Shri Santanu Chowdhury, Director, National Remote Sensing Centre (NRSC), and Dr. P. V. N. Rao, Deputy Director (Remote Sensing Applications Area), NRSC, for their support and encouragement. Critical comments of two anonymous reviewers have helped us to improve the study, and we are grateful to them. We are thankful to the Geological Survey of India (GSI) and Mizoram Remote Sensing Application Centre (MIRSAC) for providing the Geological and Soil map, respectively, of the state.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Geosciences Group, National Remote Sensing Centre, Indian Space Research Organisation, Hyderabad, 500 037, India

    Kirti Khanna, Tapas R. Martha, Priyom Roy & K. Vinod Kumar

Authors
  1. Kirti Khanna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tapas R. Martha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Priyom Roy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. K. Vinod Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tapas R. Martha.

Additional information

The original online version of this article was revised: This article has an error that was introduced during the publishing process. In this paper, Eq. 3 is mistakenly presented and Table 4 was incorrectly laid out. The correct Eq. 3and Table 4 are provided here.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khanna, K., Martha, T.R., Roy, P. et al. Effect of time and space partitioning strategies of samples on regional landslide susceptibility modelling. Landslides 18, 2281–2294 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-021-01627-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-021-01627-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation