Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

An assessment of multivariate and bivariate approaches in landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study of Duzkoy district

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Landslide susceptibility maps are valuable sources for disaster mitigation works and future investments of local authorities in unstable hazard-prone areas. However, there are limitations and uncertainties inherent in landslide susceptibility assessment. For this purpose, many methods have been suggested and applied in the literature, which are generally categorized as bivariate and multivariate. Here, in this paper, the most popular and widely used multivariate [support vector regression (SVR), logistic regression (LR) and decision tree (DT)] and bivariate methods [frequency ratio (FR), weight of evidence (WOE) and statistical index (SI)] were compared with respect to their performances in landslide susceptibility modeling problem. Duzkoy district of Trabzon Province was selected due to its unique topographical and lithological characteristics, magnifying shallow landslide risk potential. Slope, lithology, land cover, aspect, normalized difference vegetation index, soil thickness, drainage density, topographical wetness index and elevation were employed as landslide occurrence factors. Accuracy measures based on confusion matrix (i.e., overall accuracy and Kappa coefficient) and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were employed to compare the performances of the methods. Furthermore, McNemar’s test was employed to analyze the statistical significance of differences in method performances. The results indicated that multivariate approaches (i.e., SVR, LR and DT) outperformed the bivariate methods (i.e., FR, SI and WOE) by about 13 %. Within the multivariate approaches, SVR method performed the best with the highest accuracy, while FR method was the most effective and accurate bivariate method. Interpretation of AUC values and the McNemar’s statistical test results revealed that the SVR method was superior in modeling landslide susceptibility compared with the other multivariate and bivariate methods.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdallah C (2010) Spatial distribution of block falls using volumetric GIS-decision-tree models. Int J Appl Earth Obs 12:393–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akgun A (2012) A comparison of landslide susceptibility maps produced by logistic regression, multi-criteria decision, and likelihood ratio methods: a case study at Izmir. Turkey. Landslides 9(1):93–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akgun A, Dag S, Bulut F (2008) Landslide susceptibility mapping for a landslide-prone area (Findikli, NE of Turkey) by likelihood-frequency ratio and weighted linear combination models. Environ Geol 54:1127–1143

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alparslan E (2011) Landslide susceptibility mapping in Yalova, Turkey, by remote sensing and GIS. Environ Eng Geosci 17:255–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Althuwaynee OF, Pradhan B, Park HJ, Lee JH (2014) A novel ensemble bivariate statistical evidential belief function with knowledge-based analytical hierarchy process and multivariate statistical logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping. Catena 114:21–36

  • Armas I (2012) Weights of evidence method for landslide susceptibility mapping. Prahova Subcarpathians. Romania. Nat Hazards 60:937–950

    Article  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 65:15–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayalew L, Yamagishi H, Ugawa N (2004) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS-based weighted linear combination, the case in Tsugawa area of Agano River, Niigata Prefecture, Japan. Landslides 1:73–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballabio C, Sterlacchini S (2012) Support vector machines for landslide susceptibility mapping: the Staffora River Basin case study, Italy. Math Geosci 44:47–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beven KJ, Kirkby MJ (1979) A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology. Hydrol Sci Bull 24:43–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonham-Carter GF (1994) Geographic information systems for geoscientists: modelling with GIS. Pergamon, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Breiman L (1996) Bagging predictors. Mach Learn 24:123–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Breiman L, Friedman JH, Olshen RA, Stone CJ (1984) Classification and regression trees. Wadsworth, Belmont

    Google Scholar 

  • Bui DT, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick O (2011) Landslide susceptibility analysis in the Hoa Binh province of Vietnam using statistical index and logistic regression. Nat Hazards 59:1413–1444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bui DT, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I (2012) Landslide susceptibility assessment in Vietnam using support vector machines, decision tree, and naive Bayes models. Math Probl Eng. vol. 2012, Article ID 974638, doi:10.1155/2012/974638

  • Burges CJC, Schölkopf B (1997) Improving the accuracy and speed of support vector learning machine. In: Mozer MC, Jordan MI, Petsche T (ed) Advances in neural information processing systems 9. Cambridge, MIT Press, pp 375–381

  • Cevik E, Topal T (2003) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping for a problematic segment of the natural gas pipeline, Hendek (Turkey). Environ Geol 44:949–962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang YL, Liang LS, Han CC, Fang JP, Liang WY, Chen KS (2007) Multisource data fusion for landslide classification using generalized positive Boolean functions. IEEE T Geosci Remote 45(6):1697–1708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanzo D, Rotigliano E, Irigaray C, Jimenez-Peralvarez JD, Chacon J (2012) Factors selection in landslide susceptibility modelling on large scale following the GIS matrix method: application to the river Beiro basin (Spain). Nat Hazard Earth Sys 12:327–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cristianini N, Shawe-Taylor J (2000) An introduction to support vector machines. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahal RK, Hasegawa S, Nonomura A, Yamanaka M, Masuda T, Nishino K (2008) GIS-based weights-of-evidence modelling of rainfall-induced landslides in small catchments for landslide susceptibility mapping. Environ Geol 54:311–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dai FC, Lee CF, Li J, Xu ZW (2001) Assessment of landslide susceptibility on the natural terrain of Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Environ Geol 40:381–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demir G, Aytekin M, Akgun A, Ikizler SB, Tatar O (2013) A comparison of landslide susceptibility mapping of the eastern part of the North Anatolian Fault Zone (Turkey) by likelihood-frequency ratio and analytic hierarchy process methods. Nat Hazards 65:1481–1506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devkota KC, Regmi AD, Pourghasemi HR, Yoshida K, Pradhan B, Ryu IC, Dhital MR, Althuwaynee OF (2013) Landslide susceptibility mapping using certainty factor, index of entropy and logistic regression models in GIS and their comparison at Mugling-Narayanghat road section in Nepal Himalaya. Nat Hazards 65(1):135–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durbha SS, King RL, Younan NH (2007) Support vector machines regression for retrieval of leaf area index from multiangle imaging spectroradiometer. Remote Sens Environ 107:348–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoglu M (2005) Landslide susceptibility assessment of SE Bartin (West Black Sea region, Turkey) by artificial neural networks. Nat Hazard Earth Sys 5(6):979–992

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fall M, Azzam R, Noubactep C (2006) A multi-method approach to study the stability of natural slopes and landslide susceptibility mapping. Eng Geol 82:241–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray DH, Leiser AT (1982) Biotechnical slope protection and erosion control. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Grozavu A, Pleşcan S, Patriche CV, Mărgărint MC, Roşca B (2013) Landslide susceptibility assessment: GIS application to a complex mountainous environment. In: Kozak J et al (eds) The carpathians: integrating nature and society towards sustainability, environmental science and engineering. Springer, Berlin, pp 31–44

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • 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 31:181–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho JY, Lee KT, Chang TC, Wang ZY, Liao YH (2012) Influences of spatial distribution of soil thickness on shallow landslide prediction. Eng Geol 124:38–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang S, Guevarra IF, Yu B (2009) Slope failure prediction using a decision tree: a case of engineered slopes in South Korea. Eng Geol 104:126–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ito K, Nakano R (2003) Optimizing Support Vector regression hyperparameters based on cross-validation. Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Neural Networks 1–4:2077–2082

    Google Scholar 

  • Japkowicz N, Shah M (2011) Evaluating learning algorithms: a classification perspective. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kanungo DP, Arora MK, Sarkar S, Gupta RP (2009) Landslide susceptibility zonation (LSZ) mapping: a review. J South Asia Disaster Stud 2:81–105

    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 11:425–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kouli M, Loupasakis C, Soupios P, Vallianatos F (2010) Landslide hazard zonation in high risk areas of Rethymno Prefecture, Crete Island, Greece. Nat Hazards 52:599–621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menard S (2001) Applied logistic regression analysis, 2nd edn. Sage Publication, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Nandi A, Shakoor A (2009) A GIS based landslide susceptibility evaluation using bivariate and multivariate statistical analyses. Eng Geol 110:11–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nefeslioglu HA, Duman TY, Durmaz S (2008) Landslide susceptibility mapping for a part of tectonic Kelkit Valley (Eastern Black Sea region of Turkey). Geomorphology 94(3–4):401–418

  • Nefeslioglu HA, Sezer E, Gokceoglu C, Bozkir AS, Duman TY (2010) Assessment of landslide susceptibility by decision trees in the metropolitan area of Istanbul. Math Probl Eng, Turkey

    Google Scholar 

  • Niuniu X, Yuxun L (2010) Review of decision trees. Computer science and information technology (ICCSIT), 2010 3rd IEEE International Conference, pp. 105–109

  • Pal M, Mather PM (2003) An assessment of the effectiveness of decision tree methods for land cover classification. Remote Sens Environ 86:554–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng L, Niu RQ, Huang B, Wu XL, Zhao YN, Ye RQ (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping based on rough set theory and support vector machines: a case of the Three Gorges area, China. Geomorphology 204:287–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pourghasemi HR, Jirandeh AG, Pradhan B, Xu C, Gokceoglu C (2013) Landslide susceptibility mapping using support vector machine and GIS at the Golestan Province, Iran. J Earth SystSci 122(2):349–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B (2013) A comparative study on the predictive ability of the decision tree, support vector machine and neuro-fuzzy models in landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS. Comput Geosci 51:350–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Lee S (2010) Landslide susceptibility assessment and factor effect analysis: backpropagation artificial neural networks and their comparison with frequency ratio and bivariate logistic regression modelling. Environ Modell Softw 25:747–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Oh HJ, Buchroithner M (2010) Weights-of-evidence model applied to landslide susceptibility mapping in a tropical hilly area. Geomat Nat Hazards Risk 3:199–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinlan JR (1993) C4.5: programs for machine learning. Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo

    Google Scholar 

  • Regmi NR, Giardino JR, Vitek JD (2010) Modeling susceptibility to landslides using the weight of evidence approach: western Colorado, USA. Geomorphology 115:172–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rokach L, Maimon O (2008) Data mining with decision trees: theory and applications. World Scientific Publishing, Singapore, Series in Machine Perception and Artificial Intelligence

    Google Scholar 

  • Rupke J, Cammeraat E, Seijmonsbergen AC, Vanwesten CJ (1988) Engineering geomorphology of the widentobel catchment, appenzell and sankt-gallen, gallen, Switzerland: a geomorphological inventory system applied to geotechnical appraisal of slope stability. Eng Geol 26:33–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting. Resource allocation, McGraw-Hill

    Google Scholar 

  • Santacana N, Baeza B, Corominas J, De Paz A, Marturia J (2003) A GIS-based multivariate statistical analysis for shallow landslide susceptibility mapping in La Pobla de Lillet area (Eastern Pyrenees, Spain). Nat Hazards 30:281–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar S, Kanungo DP (2004) An integrated approach for landslide susceptibility mapping using remote sensing and GIS. Photogramm Eng Rem S 70:617–625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar S, Kanungo DP, Mehrotra GS (1995) Landslide Hazard Zonation: a case Study in Garhwal Himalaya. India, Mountain Research and Development 15:301–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schicker R, Moon V (2012) Comparison of bivariate and multivariate statistical approaches in landslide susceptibility mapping at a regional scale. Geomorphology 161:40–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schölkopf B, Smola AJ (2002) Learning with kernels: support vector machines, regularization, optimization and beyond. MIT Press, Cambridge

  • Segoni S, Rossi G, Catani F (2012) Improving basin-scale shallow landslides modelling using reliable soil thickness maps. Nat Hazards 61:85–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singhal PK, Srivastava P (2004) Challenges in sustainable development. Anmol publication, India

    Google Scholar 

  • Smola AJ, Scholkopf B (2004) A tutorial on support vector regression. Stat Comput 14(3):199–222

  • Soeters R, Van Westen CJ (1996) Slope instability recognition analysis and zonation. In: Turner KT, Schuster RL, editors. Landslides: investigation and mitigation. Transportation Research Board National Research Council, Special Report No 247, Washington, DC, pp. 129–177

  • Suzen ML, Doyuran V (2004) Data driven bivariate landslide susceptibility assessment using geographical information systems: a method and application to Asarsuyu catchment, Turkey. Eng Geol 71:303–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swets JA (1988) Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 240:1285–1293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thiery Y, Malet JP, Sterlacchini S, Puissant A, Maquaire O (2007) Landslide susceptibility assessment by bivariate methods at large scales: application to a complex mountainous environment. Geomorphology 92:38–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Westen CJ (1997) Statistical landslide hazard analysis ILWIS 2.1 for windows application guide. ITC Publication, Enschede

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Westen CJ, Rengers N, Soeters R (2003) Use of geomorphological information in indirect landslide susceptibility assessment. Nat Hazards 30:399–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vapnik VN (2000) The nature of statistical learning theory, 2nd edn. Springer-Verlag, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vivas L (1992) Los andes venezolanos. Academia Nacional de la Historia, Caracas

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu KP, Wang SD (2009) Choosing the kernel parameters for support vector machines by the inter-cluster distance in the feature space. Pattern Recogn 42(5):710–717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu M, Watanachaturaporn P, Varshney PK, Arora MK (2005) Decision tree regression for soft classification of remote sensing data. Remote Sens Environ 97:322–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yalcin A (2008) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping using analytical hierarchy process and bivariate statistics in Ardesen (Turkey): comparisons of results and confirmations. Catena 72:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yalcin A, Reis S, Aydinoglu AC, Yomralioglu T (2011) A GIS-based comparative study of frequency ratio, analytical hierarchy process, bivariate statistics and logistics regression methods for landslide susceptibility mapping in Trabzon. NE Turkey. Catena 85(3):274–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yao X, Tham LG, Dai FC (2008) Landslide susceptibility mapping based on support vector machine: a case study on natural slopes of Hong Kong, China. Geomorphology 101:572–582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeh CY, Huang CW, Lee SJ (2011) A multiple-kernel support vector regression approach for stock market price forecasting. Expert Syst Appl 38:2177–2186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz I (2009) Landslide susceptibility mapping using frequency ratio, logistic regression, artificial neural networks and their comparison: a case study from Kat landslides (Tokat-Turkey). Comput Geosci 35:1125–1138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz I (2010) Comparison of landslide susceptibility mapping methodologies for Koyulhisar, Turkey: conditional probability, logistic regression, artificial neural networks, and support vector machine. Environ Earth Sci 61:821–836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz C, Topal T, Suzen ML (2012) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping using bivariate statistical analysis in Devrek (Zonguldak-Turkey). Environ Earth Sci 65:2161–2178

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geodetic and Photogrammetric Engineering, Gebze Institute of Technology, Cayirova Campus, Gebze, 41400, Kocaeli, Turkey

    Taskin Kavzoglu, Emrehan Kutlug Sahin & Ismail Colkesen

Authors
  1. Taskin Kavzoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emrehan Kutlug Sahin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ismail Colkesen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Taskin Kavzoglu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kavzoglu, T., Kutlug Sahin, E. & Colkesen, I. An assessment of multivariate and bivariate approaches in landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study of Duzkoy district. Nat Hazards 76, 471–496 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1506-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1506-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation