Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Debris Flow Susceptibility Evaluation—A Review

  • Review Paper
  • Published:
Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transactions of Civil Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Debris flows are the most dangerous geological hazard in steep terrain. For systematic debris flow mitigation and management, debris flow evaluation is required. Over the past few decades, several methods for figuring out a debris flow's susceptibility have been created. The current study was carried out to examine the global debris flow susceptibility from 2003–July 2022. The findings demonstrated a growth in the number of papers published during the investigation period that dealt with the susceptibility of debris flows. From the study, it has been seen that China has the highest number of debris flow study as of now. This article discusses the most often used models with their advantage and disadvantage. There are 96 causative factors responsible for the occurrence of the debris flow, among which the top five are slope, aspect, curvature, lithology and rainfall. In 14.5 per cent of the publications, the slope is regarded as the most significant causative factor for the occurrence of debris flows. In comparison, the support-vector machine (SVM) has been utilised as the most popular approach for assessing debris flow susceptibility in 8.5 per cent of the articles. Lastly, it is determined that new advances in technology in the areas of geographic information systems (GIS), remote sensing and computing, and the expansion of data accessibility are important considerations in boosting interest in research in debris flow susceptibility.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Achour Y, Garçia S, Cavaleiro V (2018) GIS-based spatial prediction of debris flows using logistic regression and frequency ratio models for Zêzere River basin and its surrounding area, Northwest Covilhã. Port Arabian J Geosci 11(18):1–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Aditian A, Kubota T, Shinohara Y (2018) Comparison of GIS-based landslide susceptibility models using frequency ratio, logistic regression, and artificial neural network in a tertiary region of Ambon, Indonesia. Geomorphology 318:101–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Aleotti P, Chowdhury R (1999) Landslide hazard assessment: summary review and new perspectives. Bull Eng Geol Env 58(1):21–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Angillieri MYE (2020) Debris flow susceptibility mapping using frequency ratio and seed cells, in a portion of a mountain international route. Dry Central Andes Argent Catena 189:104504

    Google Scholar 

  • Arabameri A, Chandra Pal S, Rezaie F, Chakrabortty R, Saha A, Blaschke T, Di Napoli M, Ghorbanzadeh O, Thi Ngo PT (2021) Decision tree based ensemble machine learning approaches for landslide susceptibility mapping. Geocarto Int 37:1–35

    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 Geomorphol 65(1–2):15–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee P, Ghose MK, Pradhan R (2018) Analytic hierarchy process and information value method-based landslide susceptibility mapping and vehicle vulnerability assessment along a highway in Sikkim Himalaya. Arab J Geosci 11(7):1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Baum RL, Savage WZ, Godt JW (2008) TRIGRS—a Fortran program for transient rainfall infiltration and grid-based regional slope-stability analysis, version 2.0 Open-File Report.

  • Blahut J, van Westen CJ, Sterlacchini S (2010) Analysis of landslide inventories for accurate prediction of debris-fow source areas. Geomorphol 119:36–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Bui DT, Tuan TA, Klempe H et al (2016) Spatial prediction models for shallow landslide hazards: a comparative assessment of the efficacy of support vector machines, artificial neural networks, kernel logistic regression, and logistic model tree. Landslides 13:361–378

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen HX, Zhang LM (2015) EDDA 1.0: integrated simulation of debris flow erosion, deposition and property changes. Geosci Model Develop 8(3):829–844

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Li W, Hou E, Zhao Z, Deng N, Bai H, Wang D (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping based on GIS and information value model for the Chencang district of Baoji. China Arabian J Geosci 7(11):4499–4511

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen X, Chen H, You Y, Chen X, Liu J (2016) Weights-of-evidence method based on GIS for assessing susceptibility to debris flows in Kangding county, Sichuan province. China Environ Earth Sci 75(1):1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Xie X, Peng J, Wang J, Duan Z, Hong H (2017) GIS-based landslide susceptibility modelling: a comparative assessment of kernel logistic regression, Naïve Bayes tree, and alternating decision tree models. Geomat Nat Haz Risk 8(2):950–973

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Xie XS, Peng JB et al (2018) GIS-based landslide susceptibility evaluation using a novel hybrid integration approach of bivariate statistical based random forest method. CATENA 164:135–149

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Shahabi H, Shirzadi A, Hong H, Akgun A, Tian Y, Liu J, Zhu AX, Li S (2019) Novel hybrid artificial intelligence approach of bivariate statistical methods-based kernel logistic regression classifier for landslide susceptibility modeling. Bull Eng Geol Env 78(6):4397–4419

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen Y, Qin S, Qiao S, Dou Q, Che W, Su G, Yao J, Nnanwuba UE (2020) Spatial predictions of debris flow susceptibility mapping using convolutional neural networks in Jilin province. China Water 12(8):2079

    Google Scholar 

  • Chowdhury M, Sadek AW (2012) Advantages and limitations of artificial intelligence. Artif Intell Appl Crit Transp Issues 6(3):360–375

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciurleo M, Mandaglio MC, Moraci N (2018) Landslide susceptibility assessment by TRIGRS in a frequently affected shallow instability area. Landslides 16:175–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Dash R, Falae P, Kanungo D (2022) Debris flow susceptibility zonation using statistical models in parts of Northwest Indian Himalayas—implementation, validation, and comparative evaluation. Nat Hazards 111(2):2011–2058

    Google Scholar 

  • Demir G (2019) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping for a part of the North Anatolian Fault zone between Reşadiye and Koyulhisar (Turkey). CATENA 183:104211

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietrich WE, Wilson CJ, Montgomery DR, McKean J (1993) Analysis of erosion thresholds, channel networks, and landscape morphology using a digital terrain model. J Geol 101:259–278

    Google Scholar 

  • Dou Q, Qin S, Zhang Y, Ma Z, Chen J, Qiao S, Hu X, Liu F (2019) A method for improving controlling factors based on information fusion for debris flow susceptibility mapping: a case study in Jilin province. China Entropy 21(7):695

    Google Scholar 

  • Du G, Zhang Y, Yang Z, Guo C, Yao X, Sun D (2019) Landslide susceptibility mapping in the region of eastern Himalayan syntaxis, Tibetan plateau, China: a comparison between analytical hierarchy process information value and logistic regression-information value methods. Bull Eng Geol Env 78(6):4201–4215

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkadiri R, Sultan M, Youssef AM, Elbayoumi T, Chase R, Bulkhi AB, Al-Katheeri MM (2014) A remote sensing-based approach for debris-flow susceptibility assessment using artificial neural networks and logistic regression modeling. IEEE J Sel Topics Appl Earth Obs Remote Sens 7(12):4818–4835

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewen J, Parkin G, O’Connell PE (2000) SHETRAN: distributed river basin fow and transport modeling system. J Hydrol Eng 5(3):250–258

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao RY, Wang CM, Liang Z (2021) 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 watersheds. J Mt Sci 18(6):1476–1488

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomes R, Guimarães R, de Carvalho JO, Fernandes N, do Amaral Júnior E (2013) Combining spatial models for shallow landslides and debris-flows prediction. Remote Sens 5:2219–2237

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorsevski, P. 2001. Statistical modeling of landslide hazard using GIS, Proceedings of the Seventh Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference, March 25 to 29, 2001, Reno, Nevada.: 103–109.

  • Hammond CJ, Prellwitz RW, Miller SM, Bell D (1992) Landslide hazard assessment using monte carlo simulation christchurch. N. z. Rotterdam Neth. AA 10:959–964

    Google Scholar 

  • He S, Pan P, Dai L, Wang H, Liu J (2012) Application of kernel-based fsher discriminant analysis to map landslide susceptibility in the Qinggan river delta. Three Gorges China Geomorphol 171–172:30–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckerman D (1986) Probabilistic interpretation of MYCIN’s certainty factors. In: Kanal LN, Lemmer JF (eds) Uncertainty in artificial intelligence. Elsevier, New York, pp 298–311

    Google Scholar 

  • Hungr O, Evans SG, Hutchinson IN (2001) A review of the classification of landslides of the flow type. Environ Eng Geosci 7:221–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Intarawichian N, Dasananda S (2011) Frequency ratio model-based landslide susceptibility mapping in lower Mae Chaem watershed. North Thail Environ Earth Sci 64(8):2271–2285

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang H, Zou Q, Zhou B, Hu Z, Li C, Yao S, Yao H (2022) Susceptibility assessment of debris flows coupled with ecohydrological activation in the Eastern Qinghai-Tibet plateau. Remote Sens 14(6):1444

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin T, Hu X, Liu B, Xi C, He K, Cao X, Luo G, Han M, Ma G, Yang Y, Wang Y (2022) Susceptibility prediction of post-fire debris flows in Xichang, China, using a logistic regression model from a spatiotemporal perspective. Remote Sens 14(6):1306

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang S, Lee S (2018) Debris flow susceptibility assessment based on an empirical approach in the central region of South Korea. Geomorphology 308:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanungo DP, Arora MK, Sarkar S, Gupta RP (2009) Landslide susceptibility zonation (LSZ) mapping—a review. J South Asia Disaster Stud 2:81–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanungo DP, Sarkar S, Sharma S (2011) Combining neural network with fuzzy, certainty factor and likelihood ratio concepts for spatial prediction of landslides. Nat Hazards 59(3):1491–1512

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurilla LJ, Fubelli G (2022) Global debris flow susceptibility based on a comparative analysis of a single global model versus a continent-by-continent approach. Nat Hazards 113(1):1–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Pradhan B (2007) Landslide hazard mapping at Selangor, Malaysia using frequency ratio and logistic regression models. Landslides 4(1):33–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Y, Wang H, Chen J, Shang Y (2017) Debris flow susceptibility assessment in the Wudongde dam area, China based on rock engineering system and fuzzy C-means algorithm. Water 9(9):669

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Y, Chen J, Tan C, Li Y, Gu F, Zhang Y, Mehmood Q (2021a) Application of the borderline-SMOTE method in susceptibility assessments of debris flows in Pinggu district, Beijing. China Nat Hazards 105(3):2499–2522

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Z, Chen J, Tan C, Zhou X, Li Y, Han M (2021b) Debris flow susceptibility assessment based on topo-hydrological factors at different unit scales: a case study of Mentougou district. Beijing Environ Earth Sci 80(9):1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang Z, Wang CM, Zhang ZM (2020) A comparison of statistical and machine learning methods for debris flow susceptibility mapping. Stoch Env Res Risk Assess 34(11):1887–1907

    Google Scholar 

  • Melo R, Vieira G, Caselli A, Ramos M (2012) Susceptibility modelling of hummocky terrain distribution using the information value method (Deception Island, Antarctic Peninsula). Geomorphology 155–156:88–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Merghadi A, Yunus AP, Dou J et al (2020) Machine learning methods for landslide susceptibility studies: a comparative overview of algorithm performance. Earth Sci Rev 207:103225

    Google Scholar 

  • Nettleton IM, Martin S, Hencher S, Moore R (2005) Debris flow types and mechanisms In: Scottish Road Network Landslides Study (August), The Scottish Executive, Edinburgh, pp. 1–119.

  • Pack RT, Tarboton DG, Goodwin CN (2001) Assessing terrain stability in a GIS using SINMAP.

  • Pardeshi SD, Autade SE, Pardeshi SS (2013) Landslide hazard assessment: recent trends and techniques. Springer plus 2:1–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Park DW, Lee SR, Vasu NN, Kang SH, Park JY (2016) Coupled model for simulation of landslides and debris flows at local scale. Nat Hazards 81:1653–1682

    Google Scholar 

  • Pawley S, Hartman G, Chao D (2017) Landslide susceptibility modelling of Alberta, Canada: comparative results from multiple statistical and machine learning prediction method. Geol Soc Am. https://doi.org/10.1130/abs/2017AM-304456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pham BT, Pradhan B, Bui DT, Prakash I, Dholakia MB (2016) A comparative study of different machine learning methods for landslide susceptibility assessment: a case study of Uttarakhand area (India). Environ Model Softw 84:240–250

    Google Scholar 

  • Polat A, Erik D (2020) Debris flow susceptibility and propagation assessment in West Koyulhisar. Turk J Mountain Sci 17(11):2611–2623

    Google Scholar 

  • Qiao S, Qin S, Chen J, Hu X, Ma Z (2019) The application of a three-dimensional deterministic model in the study of debris flow prediction based on the rainfall-unstable soil coupling mechanism. Process 7(2):99

    Google Scholar 

  • Qiao SS, Qin SW, Sun JB, Che WC, Yao JY, Su G, Chen Y, Nnanwuba UE (2021) Development of a region-partitioning method for debris flow susceptibility mapping. J Mt Sci 18(5):1177–1191

    Google Scholar 

  • Qin S, Lv J, Cao C, Ma Z, Hu X, Liu F, Qiao S, Dou Q (2019) Mapping debris flow susceptibility based on watershed unit and grid cell unit: a comparison study. Geomat Nat Haz Risk 10(1):1648–1666

    Google Scholar 

  • Qing F, Zhao Y, Meng X, Su X, Qi T, Yue D (2020) Application of machine learning to debris flow susceptibility mapping along the China-Pakistan Karakoram highway. Remote Sensing 12(18):2933

    Google Scholar 

  • Qiu C, Su L, Zou Q, Geng X (2022) A hybrid machine-learning model to map glacier-related debris flow susceptibility along Gyirong Zangbo watershed under the changing climate. Sci Total Environ 818:151752

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty T (2008) Decision making with the analytical hierarchy process. Int J Services Sci 1(1):83–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Saha A, Saha S (2021) Application of statistical probabilistic methods in landslide susceptibility assessment in Kurseong and its surrounding area of Darjeeling Himalayan, India: RS-GIS approach. Environ Dev Sustain 23:4453–4483

    Google Scholar 

  • Saha AK, Gupta RP, Sarkar I, Arora MK, Csaplovics E (2005) An approach for GIS-based statistical landslide susceptibility zonation—with a case study in the Himalayas. Landslides 2(1):61–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar S, Kanungo DP, Patra AK, Kumar P (2008) GIS based spatial data analysis for landslide susceptibility mapping. J Mt Sci 5(1):52–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassa K, Fukuoka H, Wang F, Wang G (2007) Progress in landslide science. Springer Verlag, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannon CE (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Labs Tech J 27(4):379–423

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw S, Johnson D (1995) Slope morphology model derived from digital elevation data Northwest Arc/Info Users Conference.

  • Shen P, Zhang L, Chen H, Fan R (2018) EDDA 2.0: integrated simulation of debris fow initiation and dynamics considering two initiation mechanisms. Geosci Model Develop 11:2841–2856

    Google Scholar 

  • Shortliffe EH, Buchanan BG (1975) A model of inexact reasoning in medicine; math. Biosci 23(3):351–379

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sujatha ER, Sridhar V (2017) Mapping debris flow susceptibility using analytical network process in Kodaikkanal hills, Tamil Nadu (India). J Earth Syst Sci 126(8):1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Sujatha ER, Kumaravel P, Rajamanickam GV (2014) Assessing landslide susceptibility using Bayesian probability-based weight of evidence model. Bull Eng Geol Env 73(1):147–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun J, Qin S, Qiao S, Chen Y, Su G, Cheng Q, Zhang Y, Guo X (2021) Exploring the impact of introducing a physical model into statistical methods on the evaluation of regional scale debris flow susceptibility. Nat Hazards 106(1):881–912

    Google Scholar 

  • Varnes DJ (1978) Slope movement types and processes. Spec Rep 176:11–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Vlčko J, Wagner P, Rychlíková Z (1980) Evaluation of regional slope stability. Mineralia Slovacal 2(3):275–283

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Q, Li W, Chen W, Bai H (2015) GIS-based assessment of landslide susceptibility using certainty factor and index of entropy models for the Qianyang county of Baoji city. China J Earth Syst Sci 124(7):1399–1415

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu S, Chen J, Zhou W, Iqbal J, Yao L (2019) A modified Logit model for assessment and validation of debris-flow susceptibility. Bull Eng Geol Env 78(6):4421–4438

    Google Scholar 

  • Wubalem A (2021) Landslide susceptibility mapping using statistical methods in Uatzau catchment area, northwestern Ethiopia. Geoenviron Disasters 8(1):1–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiong K, Adhikari BR, Stamatopoulos CA, Zhan Y, Wu S, Dong Z, Di B (2020) Comparison of different machine learning methods for debris flow susceptibility mapping: a case study in the Sichuan Province. China Remote Sens 12(2):295

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu C, Dai F, Xu X et al (2012) GIS-based support vector machine modeling of earthquake-triggered landslide susceptibility in the Jianjiang river watershed, China. Geomorphology 145:70–80

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu W, Yu W, Jing S, Zhang G, Huang J (2013) Debris flow susceptibility assessment by GIS and information value model in a large-scale region, Sichuan province (China). Nat Hazards 65(3):1379–1392

    Google Scholar 

  • Yalcin A, Reis S, Aydinoglu AC, Yomralioglu T (2011) A GIS-based comparative study of frequency ratio, analytical hierarchy process, bivariate statistics and logistics regression methods for landslide susceptibility mapping in Trabzon. NE Tur Catena 85(3):274–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang Y, Yang J, Xu C, Xu C, Song C (2019) Local-scale landslide susceptibility mapping using the B-Geo SVC model. Landslides 16:1301–1312

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin KL, Yan TZ (1988) Statistical prediction model for slope instability of metamorphosed rocks. In: Bonnard C (ed) Proceeding’s 5th International Symposium in Landslides, Lausanne, 2. Balkema, Rotterdam, Netherlands, pp 1269–1272

    Google Scholar 

  • Youssef AM, Pourghasemi HR, El-Haddad BA, Dhahry BK (2016) Landslide susceptibility maps using different probabilistic and bivariate statistical models and comparison of their performance at Wadi Itwad basin, Asir region, Saudi Arabia. Bull Eng Geol Env 75(1):63–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang S, Yang H, Wei F, Jiang Y, Liu D (2014) A model of debris flow forecast based on the water-soil coupling mechanism. J Earth Sci 25:757–763

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Y, Ge T, Tian W, Liou YA (2019) Debris flow susceptibility mapping using machine-learning techniques in Shigatse area. China Remote Sens 11(23):2801

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Y, Chen J, Wang Q, Tan C, Li Y, Sun X, Li Y (2022) Geographic information system models with fuzzy logic for susceptibility maps of debris flow using multiple types of parameters: a case study in Pinggu district of Beijing, China. Nat Hazard 22(7):2239–2255

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Delhi Technological University, Shahbad Daulatpur, Delhi, 110042, India

    Ankit Kumar & Raju Sarkar

Authors
  1. Ankit Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Raju Sarkar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raju Sarkar.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kumar, A., Sarkar, R. Debris Flow Susceptibility Evaluation—A Review. Iran J Sci Technol Trans Civ Eng 47, 1277–1292 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-022-01000-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-022-01000-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation