Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Landslide Susceptibility Mapping Using Remotely Sensed Data through Conditional Probability Analysis Using Seed Cell and Point Sampling Techniques

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Rapid urbanization, intense infra-structure development and increased tourism related activities have resulted in the change of landscape of the Kodaikkanal town and its surrounding, a popular hill town in Tamilnadu, South India. As an after effect, the numbers of landslides and rock-falls have increased steadily in the past decade. Landslide susceptibility analysis is carried out for this area using conditional probability analysis. The geo-spatial database for mapping landslide susceptibility consists of the factors - Relief, Slope, Aspect, Curvature, Weathering, Land use, Topographic Wetness Index and Proximity to road. Two sampling strategies – point and seed-cell are compared for landslide susceptibility mapping. The Landslide Susceptibility map developed using conditional probability method is verified using R index for both sampling strategies. The study shows that both the sampling strategies perform with good accuracy, seed cell technique excels slightly over point sampling. 86.11% of the landslides fall in the high and critical susceptible zones. The results show that conditional probability technique provides a simple tool for susceptibility analysis. The method can be used at regional scale and is a valuable input for planning purpose.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aleotti, P., & Chowdhury, R. (1999). Landslide hazard assessment: summary, review and new perspectives. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 58(1), 21–44.

    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(1/2), 15–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baeza, C., & Corominas, J. (2001). Assessment of shallow landslide susceptibility by means of multivariate statistical techniques. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 26, 1251–1263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bai, S., Lü, G., Wang, J., Zhou, P., & Ding, L. (2010). GIS-based rare events logistic regression for landslide-susceptibility mapping of Lianyungang, China. Environmental Earth Sciences. doi:10.1007/s12665-010-0509-3.

  • Clerici, A., Perego, S., Tellini, C., & Vescovi, P. (2002). A procedure for landslide susceptibility zonation by the conditional analysis method. Geomorphology, 48, 349–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duman, T. Y., Can, T., Gokceoglu, C., & Nefeslioglu, H. A. (2005). Landslide susceptibility mapping of Cekmece area (Istanbul, Turkey) by conditional probability. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 2, 155–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoglu, M. (2005). Landslide susceptibility assessment of SE Bartin (West Black Sea region, Turkey) by artificial neural networks. Natural Hazards and Earth System Science, 5, 979–992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ermini, L., Catani, F., & Casagli, N. (2005). Artificial Neural Networks applied to landslide susceptibility assessment. Geomorphology, 66, 327–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gokeceoglu, C., & Aksoy, H. (1996). Landslide susceptibility mapping of the slopes in the residual soils of the Mengen region (Turkey) by deterministic stability analysis and image processing techniques. Engineering Geology, 44(1–4), 147–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez, H., & Kavzoglu, T. (2005). Assessment of shallow landslide susceptibility using artificial neural network in Jabonosa River basin, Venezuela. Engineering Geology, 78, 11–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzetti, F., Carrara, A., Cardinali, M., & Reichenbach, P. (1999). Landslide hazard evaluation: a review of current techniques and their application in a multiscale study, Central Italy. Geomorphology, 31, 181–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irigaray, C., Fernández, T., El Hamdouni, R., & Chacón, J. (2007). Evaluation and validation of landslide-susceptibility maps obtained by a GIS matrix method: examples from the Betic Cordillera (southern Spain). Natural Hazards, 41, 61–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keefer, D. K., & Larsen, M. C. (2007). Assessing landslide hazards. Sciences, 316, 1136–1137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., & Pradhan, B. (2006). Landslide hazard mapping at Selangor, Malaysia using frequency ratio and logistic regression models. Landslides, 4, 33–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magliulo, P., Di Lisio, A., Russo, F., & Zelano, A. (2008). Geomorphology and landslide susceptibility assessment using GIS and bivariate statistics: a case study in southern Italy. Natural Hazards, 47, 411–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naranjo, J. L., van Western, C. J., & Soeters, R. (1994). Evaluating the use of training areas in bivariate statistical landslide hazard analysis: a case study in Colombia. Journal of Institute of Aerospace Survey and Earth Sciences, 1994–3, 292–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nefeslioglu, H. A., Sezer, E., Gokceoglu, C., Bozkir, A. S., & Duman, T. Y. (2010). Assessment of landslide susceptibility by decision trees in the metropolitan area of Istanbul, Turkey. Mathematical Problems in Engineering. doi:10.1155/2010/901095.

  • Negnevitsky, M. (2002). Artificial intelligence: a guide to intelligent systems. Great Britain: Addison-Wesley. 394 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan, B., & Lee, S. (2009). Landslide risk analysis using artificial neural network model focusing on different training sites. International Journal of Physical Sciences, 3(11), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan, B., & Lee, S. (2010). Delineation of landslide hazard areas using frequency ratio, logistic regression and artificial neural network model at Penang Island, Malaysia. Environmental Earth Sciences, 60(5), 1037–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan, B., Lee, S., & Buchroithner, M. F. (2010). A GIS-based back-propagation neural network model and its cross application and validation for landslide susceptibility analyses. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 34, 216–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shou, K. J., & Wang, C. F. (2003). Analysis of the Chiufengershan landslide triggered by the 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake in Taiwan. Engineering Geology, 68, 237–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sujatha, E. R., & Rajamanickam, V. (2011). Landslide Susceptibility Mapping Of Tevankarai Ar Sub-Watershed, Kodaikkanal Taluk, India, Using Weighted Similar Choice Fuzzy Model. Natural Hazards. doi:10.1007/S11069-011-9763-2.

  • Süzen, M. L., & Doyuran, V. (2004). A comparison of the GIS based landslide susceptibility assessment methods: multivariate versus bivariate. Environmental Geology, 45, 665–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yesilnacar, E., & Topal, T. (2005). Landslide susceptibility mapping: A comparison of logistic regression and neural networks in a medium scale study, Hendek region (Turkey). Engineering Geology, 79(3–4), 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz, I. (2010). The effect of the sampling strategies on the landslide susceptibility mapping by conditional probability and artificial neural networks. Environmental Earth Sciences, 60(5), 505–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Evangelin Ramani Sujatha.

About this article

Cite this article

Ramani Sujatha, E., Kumaravel, P. & Rajamanickam G, V. Landslide Susceptibility Mapping Using Remotely Sensed Data through Conditional Probability Analysis Using Seed Cell and Point Sampling Techniques. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 40, 669–678 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-011-0192-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-011-0192-1

Keywords

Navigation