Next Article in Journal
Accuracy Comparison on Culvert-Modified Digital Elevation Models of DSMA and BA Methods Using ALS Point Clouds
Next Article in Special Issue
Assessing Influential Factors on Inland Property Damage from Gulf of Mexico Tropical Cyclones in the United States
Previous Article in Journal
Mapping Coastal Flood Susceptible Areas Using Shannon’s Entropy Model: The Case of Muscat Governorate, Oman
Previous Article in Special Issue
Landslide Susceptibility Mapping and Assessment Using Geospatial Platforms and Weights of Evidence (WoE) Method in the Indian Himalayan Region: Recent Developments, Gaps, and Future Directions
Article

Comparison of Machine Learning Methods for Potential Active Landslide Hazards Identification with Multi-Source Data

1
Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100094, China
2
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
3
China Aero Geophysical Survey & Remote Sensing Center for Natural Resources, Beijing 100083, China
4
Key Laboratory of Earth Observation Hainan Province, Sanya 572029, China
5
Sanya Institute of Remote Sensing, Sanya 572029, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Academic Editors: Wolfgang Kainz, Gerardo Grelle and Dean Kyne
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10(4), 253; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijgi10040253
Received: 28 February 2021 / Revised: 21 March 2021 / Accepted: 6 April 2021 / Published: 9 April 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Disaster Management and Geospatial Information)
The early identification of potential landslide hazards is of great practical significance for disaster early warning and prevention. The study used different machine learning methods to identify potential active landslides along a 15 km buffer zone on both sides of Jinsha River (Panzhihua-Huize section), China. The morphology and texture features of landslides were characterized with InSAR deformation monitoring data and high-resolution optical remote sensing data, combined with 17 landslide influencing factors. In the study area, 83 deformation accumulation areas of potential landslide hazards and 54 deformation accumulation areas of non-potential landslide hazards were identified through spatial overlay analysis with 64 potential active landslides, which have been confirmed by field verification. The Naive Bayes (NB), Decision Tree (DT), Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Random Forest (RF) algorithms were trained and tested through attribute selection and parameter optimization. Among the 17 landslide influencing factors, Drainage Density, NDVI, Slope and Weathering Degree play an indispensable role in the machine learning and recognition of landslide hazards in our study area, while other influencing factors play a certain role in different algorithms. A multi-index (Precision, Recall, F1) comparison shows that the SVM (0.867, 0.829, 0.816) has better recognition precision skill for small-scale unbalanced landslide deformation datasets, followed by RF (0.765, 0.756, 0.741), DT (0.755, 0.756, 0.748) and NB (0.659, 0.659, 0.659). Different from the previous study on landslide susceptibility and hazard mapping based on machine learning, this study focuses on how to find out the potential active landslide points more accurately, rather than evaluating the landslide susceptibility of specific areas to tell us which areas are more sensitive to landslides. This study verified the feasibility of early identification of landslide hazards by using different machine learning methods combined with deformation information and multi-source landslide influencing factors rather than by relying on human–computer interaction. This study shows that the efficiency of potential hazard identification can be increased while reducing the subjective bias caused by relying only on human experts. View Full-Text
Keywords: multi-source data; landslide; potential geological hazards; machine learning multi-source data; landslide; potential geological hazards; machine learning
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Zheng, X.; He, G.; Wang, S.; Wang, Y.; Wang, G.; Yang, Z.; Yu, J.; Wang, N. Comparison of Machine Learning Methods for Potential Active Landslide Hazards Identification with Multi-Source Data. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 253. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijgi10040253

AMA Style

Zheng X, He G, Wang S, Wang Y, Wang G, Yang Z, Yu J, Wang N. Comparison of Machine Learning Methods for Potential Active Landslide Hazards Identification with Multi-Source Data. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information. 2021; 10(4):253. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijgi10040253

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zheng, Xiangxiang; He, Guojin; Wang, Shanshan; Wang, Yi; Wang, Guizhou; Yang, Zhaoying; Yu, Junchuan; Wang, Ning. 2021. "Comparison of Machine Learning Methods for Potential Active Landslide Hazards Identification with Multi-Source Data" ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 10, no. 4: 253. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijgi10040253

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop