Landslide susceptibility assessment is vital for landslide risk management and urban planning, and the scientific community is continuously proposing new approaches to map landslide susceptibility, especially by hybridizing state-of-the-art models and by proposing new ones. A common practice in landslide susceptibility studies is to compare (two or more) different models in terms of AUC (area under ROC curve) to assess which one has the best predictive performance. The objective of this paper is to show that the classical scheme of comparison between susceptibility models can be expanded and enriched with substantial geomorphological insights by focusing the comparison on the mapped susceptibility values and investigating the geomorphological reasons of the differences encountered. To this aim, we used four susceptibility maps of the Wanzhou County (China) obtained with four different classification methods (namely, random forest, index of entropy, frequency ratio, and certainty factor). A quantitative comparison of the susceptibility values was carried out on a pixel-by-pixel basis, to reveal systematic spatial patterns in the differences among susceptibility maps; then, those patterns were put in relation with all the explanatory variables used in the susceptibility assessments. The lithological and morphological features of the study area that are typically associated to underestimations and overestimations of susceptibility were identified. The results shed a new light on the susceptibility models, identifying systematic errors that could be probably associated either to shortcomings of the models or to distinctive morphological features of the test site, such as nearly flat low altitude areas near the main rivers, and some lithological units.

A step beyond landslide susceptibility maps: a simple method to investigate and explain the different outcomes obtained by different approaches / Xiao T.; Segoni S.; Chen L.; Yin K.; Casagli N.. - In: LANDSLIDES. - ISSN 1612-510X. - STAMPA. - 17:(2020), pp. 627-640. [10.1007/s10346-019-01299-0]

A step beyond landslide susceptibility maps: a simple method to investigate and explain the different outcomes obtained by different approaches

Segoni S.;Casagli N.
2020

Abstract

Landslide susceptibility assessment is vital for landslide risk management and urban planning, and the scientific community is continuously proposing new approaches to map landslide susceptibility, especially by hybridizing state-of-the-art models and by proposing new ones. A common practice in landslide susceptibility studies is to compare (two or more) different models in terms of AUC (area under ROC curve) to assess which one has the best predictive performance. The objective of this paper is to show that the classical scheme of comparison between susceptibility models can be expanded and enriched with substantial geomorphological insights by focusing the comparison on the mapped susceptibility values and investigating the geomorphological reasons of the differences encountered. To this aim, we used four susceptibility maps of the Wanzhou County (China) obtained with four different classification methods (namely, random forest, index of entropy, frequency ratio, and certainty factor). A quantitative comparison of the susceptibility values was carried out on a pixel-by-pixel basis, to reveal systematic spatial patterns in the differences among susceptibility maps; then, those patterns were put in relation with all the explanatory variables used in the susceptibility assessments. The lithological and morphological features of the study area that are typically associated to underestimations and overestimations of susceptibility were identified. The results shed a new light on the susceptibility models, identifying systematic errors that could be probably associated either to shortcomings of the models or to distinctive morphological features of the test site, such as nearly flat low altitude areas near the main rivers, and some lithological units.
2020
17
627
640
Goal 11: Sustainable cities and communities
Xiao T.; Segoni S.; Chen L.; Yin K.; Casagli N.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Xiao et al LANDSLIDES 2020.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: Articolo principale
Tipologia: Pdf editoriale (Version of record)
Licenza: Open Access
Dimensione 4.43 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
4.43 MB Adobe PDF

I documenti in FLORE sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificatore per citare o creare un link a questa risorsa: https://hdl.handle.net/2158/1179237
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 62
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 66
social impact