journal article·2024-10-11Open access

Comparison of Different Negative-Sample Acquisition Strategies Considering Sample Representation Forms for Debris Flow Susceptibility Mapping

Ruiyuan Gao, Di Wu, Hailiang Liu, Xiaoyang Liu

Applied Sciences· Volume 14· Issue 20

Abstract

The lack of reliable negative samples is an important factor limiting the quality of machine learning-based debris flow susceptibility mapping (DFSM). The purpose of this paper is to propose multiple negative-sample acquisition strategies for DFSM considering different sample representation forms. The sample representation forms mainly include a single grid, multi-grid, and watershed unit, and the negative-sample acquisition strategies are based on support vector machine (SVM), spy technique, and isolation forest (IF) methods, respectively. These three strategies can assign a value to all the samples based on different assumptions, and reliable, negative samples can be generated from samples with values below a predefined threshold. Combining different sample representation forms with negative sample acquisition strategies, nine datasets were then involved in random forest (RF) modeling. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and related statistical results were used to evaluate the models. The results show that the strategy based on the spy technique is suitable for multiple datasets, while the IF-based strategy is well-adapted to the watershed unit datasets. This study can provide more options for improving the quality of datasets in DFSM, which can further improve the performance of machine learning models.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Landslides and related hazards · Dam Engineering and Safety · Rock Mechanics and Modeling

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Civil Engineering and Construction Center, Huanghe Science and Technology University, Zhengzhou 450063, China

College of Construction Engineering, Jilin University, Changchun 130012, China

Funding

Research Foundation for Doctors of Huanghe Science and Technology University

References (32)

Show source-provided references
1. Tien Bui, D., Shirzadi, A., Shahabi, H., Geertsema, M., Omidvar, E., Clague, J.J., Thai Pham, B., Dou, J., Asl, D.T., and Bin Ahmad, B. (2019). New Ensemble Models for Shallow Landslide Susceptibility Modeling in a Semi-Arid Watershed. Forests, 10.10.3390/f10090743 ↗
2. Huang, H., Wang, Y., Li, Y., Zhou, Y., and Zeng, Z. (2022). Debris Flow Susceptibility Assessment in China: A Comparison between Traditional Statistical and Machine Learning Methods. Remote Sens., 14.10.3390/rs14184475 ↗
3. Hybrid integration of Multilayer Perceptron Neural Networks and machine learning ensembles for landslide susceptibility assessment at Himalayan area (India) using GIS10.1016/j.catena.2016.09.007 ↗
4. Recommendations for the quantitative analysis of landslide risk
5. Landslide susceptibility mapping based on support vector machine: A case study on natural slopes of Hong Kong, China10.1016/j.geomorph.2008.02.011 ↗
6. An artificial neural network application to produce debris source areas of Barla, Besparmak, and Kapi Mountains (NW Taurids, Turkey)10.5194/nhess-7-557-2007 ↗
7. Spatial prediction of landslide hazard at the Luxi area (China) using support vector machines10.1007/s12665-015-4866-9 ↗
8. GIS-based landslide susceptibility modelling: A comparative assessment of kernel logistic regression, Naive-Bayes tree, and alternating decision tree models. Geomat10.1080/19475705.2017.1289250 ↗
9. Liang, Z., Wang, C., Duan, Z., Liu, H., Liu, X., and Khan, K.U.J. (2021). A Hybrid Model Consisting of Supervised and Unsupervised Learning for Landslide Susceptibility Mapping. Remote Sens., 13.10.3390/rs13081464 ↗
10. Comparison of Logistic Regression and Random Forests tech-niques for shallow landslide susceptibility assessment in Giampilieri (NE Sicily, Italy)10.1016/j.geomorph.2015.06.001 ↗
11. Coupling RBF neural network with ensemble learning techniques for landslide susceptibility mapping10.1016/j.catena.2020.104805 ↗
12. Landslide susceptibility mapping using machine learning algorithms and comparison of their performance at Abha Basin, Asir Region, Saudi Arabia10.1016/j.gsf.2020.05.010 ↗
13. Landslide susceptibility assessment in Lianhua County (China): A comparison between a random forest data mining technique and bivariate and multivariate statistical models10.1016/j.geomorph.2016.02.012 ↗
14. A Similarity-based Approach to Sampling Absence Data for Landslide Susceptibility Mapping Using Data-driven Methods10.1016/j.catena.2019.104188 ↗
15. Reliable assessment approach of landslide susceptibility in broad areas based on optimal slope units and negative samples involving priori knowledge10.1080/17538947.2022.2159549 ↗
16. Spatial prediction of landslide susceptibility using GIS-based statistical and machine learning models in Wanzhou County, Three Gorges Reservoir, China10.1007/s11631-019-00341-1 ↗
17. Gao, R., Wang, C., Han, S., Liu, H., Liu, X., and Wu, D. (2022). A Research on Cross-Regional Debris Flow Susceptibility Mapping Based on Transfer Learning. Remote Sens., 14.10.3390/rs14194829 ↗
18. Comparison of different sampling strategies for debris flow susceptibility mapping: A case study using the centroids of the scarp area, flowing area and accumulation area of debris flow watersheds10.1007/s11629-020-6471-y ↗
19. A formation model for debris flows in the Chenyulan River Watershed, Taiwan10.1007/s11069-013-0646-6 ↗
20. A review of statistically-based landslide susceptibility models10.1016/j.earscirev.2018.03.001 ↗
21. Extracting more features from rainfall data to analyze the conditions triggering debris flows10.1007/s10346-022-01893-9 ↗
22. Spatial prediction of landslide hazard at the Yihuang area (China) using two-class kernel logistic regression, alternating decision tree and support vector machines10.1016/j.catena.2015.05.019 ↗
23. Application of a neuro-fuzzy model to landslide-susceptibility mapping for shallow landslides in a tropical hilly area10.1016/j.cageo.2010.10.012 ↗
24. Landslide susceptibility mapping using support vector machine and GIS at the Golestan Province, Iran10.1007/s12040-013-0282-2 ↗
25. Effects of frequent debris flows on barrier lake formation, sedimentation and vegetation disturbance, Palongzangbo River, Tibetan Plateau10.1016/j.catena.2022.106697 ↗
26. Gao, R., Wang, C., Liang, Z., Han, S., and Li, B. (2021). A Research on Susceptibility Mapping of Multiple Geological Hazards in Yanzi River Basin, China. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf., 10.10.3390/ijgi10040218 ↗
27. Application of Support Vector Machine with Posterior Probability Estimates in Debris Flow Hazard Assessment
28. Learning from positive and unlabeled data: A survey10.1007/s10994-020-05877-5 ↗
29. Sparse random projection isolation forest for outlier detection10.1016/j.patrec.2022.09.015 ↗
30. A comparative study of random forests and multiple linear regression in the prediction of landslide velocity10.1007/s10346-020-01476-6 ↗
31. Recommendations for using the relative operating characteristic (ROC)10.1007/s10980-013-9984-8 ↗
32. Landslide identification using machine learning10.1016/j.gsf.2020.02.012 ↗