A deep learning-based meteorological factors forecast and dynamic risk assessment approach for built cultural heritage
Source abstract
Abstract
Built cultural heritage is a vital testimony to human technological evolution and civilization transmission, yet its preservation increasingly faces challenges from environmental change and intrinsic material degradation. Traditional restoration approaches are often constrained by delayed responses and high costs. To address this, the study proposes a comprehensive risk assessment framework that integrates deep learning-based meteorological forecasting with dynamic vulnerability and exposure analysis. First, high-precision time-series predictions of meteorological factors are achieved using data science and deep learning techniques. Based on these predictions, a multidimensional assessment method is constructed to evaluate environmental variability, heritage vulnerability, and exposure. Dynamic risk maps are then generated to visually present evolving risk trends, highlighting temporal sensitivity and spatial heterogeneity. Application in the Yangtze River Delta demonstrates strong performance. The framework provides spatiotemporal coupling analysis, offering a scientific basis for differentiated protection strategies, optimized allocation of restoration resources, advancing heritage conservation toward data-driven and precise management.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Conservation Techniques and Studies · Archaeological Research and Protection · Building materials and conservation
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (44)
Show source-provided references
1. UNESCO. International Day for Monuments and Sites 2022: Heritage and Climate. https://whc.unesco.org/en/news/2408 (2022).
2. Ortiz, P. et al. Approach to environmental risk analysis for the main monuments in a historical city. J. Cult. Herit. 15, 432–440 (2014).10.1016/j.culher.2013.07.009 ↗
3. Godts, S. et al. NaCl-related weathering of stone: the importance of kinetics and salt mixtures in environmental risk assessment. Herit. Sci. 9, 1–13 (2021).10.1186/s40494-021-00514-3 ↗
4. Du, Y. et al. Study on the linear absent section ratio (L-ASR) of earthen sites and anthropogenic influence from the perspective of population density. Herit. Sci. 9, 1–17 (2021).10.1186/s40494-021-00582-5 ↗
5. Oh, J. J. et al. Assessment of the effects of projected climate change on the potential risk of wood decay in Korea. J. Cult. Herit. 55, 43–47 (2022).10.1016/j.culher.2022.02.004 ↗
6. Richards, J. & Brimblecombe, P. Moisture as a driver of long-term threats to timber heritage—Part I: Changing heritage climatology. Heritage 5, 1929–1946 (2022).10.3390/heritage5030100 ↗
7. Cheng, P. Pathological study on chapped and surface decay of wood-based cultural relics in wet environment—analysis on prevention and control of cultural relics and construction diseases in southeast coastal cities. Archit. Cult. 8, 238–239 (2020).
8. Liu, S. The impact of meteorological parameters on salt efflorescence damage of historic architecture in cold regions. Archit. J. 2, 15–17 (2017).
9. Massimiliano, L. et al. Environmental data acquisition, elaboration and integration: preliminary application to a vulnerable mountain landscape and village (Novalesa, NW Italy). Eng. Sci. 5, 635–642 (2018).
10. Shen, S. et al. Ancient building health monitoring technology based on wireless sensor network. China Meas. Test 11, 64–69 (2017).
11. Lee, W. & Lee, D. H. Cultural heritage and the intelligent Internet of Things. J. Comput. Cult. Herit. 12, 1–14 (2019).
12. Wang, Y. et al. A meteorological element prediction algorithm based on GRU network. Comput. Simul. 38, 419–423 (2021).
13. Chen, P., Liu, W. & Zheng, W. Prediction method of related meteorological indexes of Kunming climate comfort based on LSTM and FNN. J. Comput. Appl. 41, 113–117 (2021).
14. Hochreiter, S. & Schmidhuber, J. Long short-term memory. Neural Comput. 9, 1735–1780 (1997).10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735 ↗
15. Naresh, B. B. The difficulty of learning long-term dependencies with gradient flow in recurrent nets. Eng. Int. 8, 127–138 (2020).10.18034/ei.v8i2.570 ↗
16. Panahi, M. et al. Deep learning neural networks for spatially explicit prediction of flash flood probability. Geosci. Front. 12, 101076 (2021).10.1016/j.gsf.2020.09.007 ↗
17. Fang, Z. et al. A comparative study of heterogeneous ensemble-learning techniques for landslide susceptibility mapping. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 35, 321–347 (2021).10.1080/13658816.2020.1808897 ↗
18. Yuan, H. et al. PM2.5 forecast based on a multiple attention long short-term memory (MAT-LSTM) neural networks. Anal. Lett. 54, 935–946 (2021).10.1080/00032719.2020.1788050 ↗
19. Yang, Y. et al. A CFCC-LSTM model for sea surface temperature prediction. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 15, 207–211 (2017).10.1109/LGRS.2017.2780843 ↗
20. Gao, S. et al. A nowcasting model for the prediction of typhoon tracks based on a long short term memory neural network. Acta Oceanol. Sin. 37, 8–12 (2018).10.1007/s13131-018-1219-z ↗
21. Dilantha, H. & Adeesha, W. Short-term traffic forecasting using LSTM-based deep learning models. In Proc. Moratuwa Engineering Research Conference (MERCon) (2021).
22. Zou, M. et al. Bayesian CNN-BiLSTM and Vine-GMCM based probabilistic forecasting of hour-ahead wind farm power outputs. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 13, 1169–1187 (2022).10.1109/TSTE.2022.3148718 ↗
23. Wang, Q. et al. Earthquake prediction based on spatio-temporal data mining: an LSTM network approach. IEEE Trans. Emerg. Top. Comput. 8, 148–158 (2020).10.1109/TETC.2017.2699169 ↗
24. Zaytar, M. A. & El Amrani, C. Sequence to sequence weather forecasting with long short-term memory recurrent neural networks. Int. J. Comput. Appl. 143, 7–11 (2016).
25. Gaddi, R., Cacace, C. & di Bucchianico, A. D. M. The risk assessment of surface recession damage for architectural buildings in Italy. J. Cult. Herit. 57, 118–130 (2022).10.1016/j.culher.2022.08.002 ↗
26. Galán, E. & Aparicio, P. The environmental risk assessment applied to cultural heritage. A methodological approach. In Proc. Conference Built Heritage 2013 Monitoring Conservation Management, 1405–1409 (2013).
27. Bahtiyar, T. B. & Dişli, G. Risk management and preventive conservation of historic buildings: the case of Karatay Madrasah (museum). Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 77, 103079 (2022).10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.103079 ↗
28. Fu, L., Ding, M. & Zhang, Q. Flood risk assessment of urban cultural heritage based on PSR conceptual model with game theory and cloud model—a case study of Nanjing. J. Cult. Herit. 58, 1–11 (2022).10.1016/j.culher.2022.09.017 ↗
29. Sardella, A. et al. Risk mapping for the sustainable protection of cultural heritage in extreme changing environments. Atmosphere 11, 700 (2020).10.3390/atmos11070700 ↗
30. Wu, P. S., Hsieh, C. M. & Hsu, M. F. Using heritage risk maps as an approach to estimating the threat to materials of traditional buildings in Tainan (Taiwan). J. Cult. Herit. 15, 441–447 (2014).10.1016/j.culher.2013.10.005 ↗
31. Accardo, G., Giani, E. & Giovagnoli, A. The risk map of Italian cultural heritage. J. Archit. Conserv. 9, 41–57 (2003).
32. Mesanza-Moraza, A., García-Gómez, I. & Azkarate, A. Machine learning for the built heritage archaeological study. J. Comput. Cult. Herit. 14, 1–21 (2020).10.1145/3422993 ↗
33. Zhang, X. Climate Change and the Practice of Preventive Protection of Ancient Buildings in the Forbidden City (in Chinese). http://www.icomoschina.org.cn/content/details78_10841.html (2022).
34. Yangtze River Delta Science Data Center, National Earth System Science Data Sharing Infrastructure, National Science & Technology Infrastructure of China. Natural Geography Yangtze River Delta Regional Boundary Dataset. http://geodata.nnu.edu.cn/ (2018).
35. Ministry of Urban and Rural Construction and Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China. Standard for Building Meteorological Parameters. https://max.book118.com/html/2017/0328/97500994.shtm (1987).
36. Dong, J. & Liu, X. Application of improved enzyme induced calcium carbonate precipitation (EICP) technology in surface protection of earthen sites. J. Cult. Herit. 54, 146–154 (2022).10.1016/j.culher.2022.01.016 ↗
37. Wood, J. D. et al. Reconstruction of historical temperature and relative humidity cycles within Knole House, Kent. J. Cult. Herit. 39, 212–220 (2019).10.1016/j.culher.2019.04.006 ↗
38. Bülbül Bahtiyar, T. & Dişli, G. Risk management and preventive conservation of historic buildings: the case of Karatay Madrasah (museum). Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 77, 103079 (2022).10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.103079 ↗
39. Pavlova, I. et al. Global overview of the geological hazard exposure and disaster risk awareness at world heritage sites. J. Cult. Herit. 28, 151–157 (2017).10.1016/j.culher.2015.11.001 ↗
40. Hatır, M. E. Determining the weathering classification of stone cultural heritage via the analytic hierarchy process and fuzzy inference system. J. Cult. Herit. 44, 120–134 (2020).10.1016/j.culher.2020.02.011 ↗
41. Zhao, J., Wen, R. & Mei, W. Systematic method for monitoring and early-warning of garden heritage ontology used in the Suzhou classical garden heritage. J. Environ. Eng. Landsc. Manag. 28, 157–173 (2020).10.3846/jeelm.2020.13785 ↗
42. Ortiz, R. & Ortiz, P. Vulnerability index: a new approach for preventive conservation of monuments. Int. J. Archit. Herit. 10, 1078–1100 (2016).10.1080/15583058.2016.1186758 ↗
43. De Ruiter, M. C., Ward, P. J., Daniell, J. E. & Aerts, J. C. J. H. Review article: A comparison of flood and earthquake vulnerability assessment indicators. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 17, 1231–1251 (2017).10.5194/nhess-17-1231-2017 ↗
44. Agliata, R., Bortone, A. & Mollo, L. Indicator-based approach for the assessment of intrinsic physical vulnerability of the built environment to hydro-meteorological hazards: review of indicators and example of parameters selection for a sample area. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 58, 102199 (2021).10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102199 ↗