, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 947–960 | Cite as

Method for prediction of landslide movements based on random forests

  • Martin Krkač
  • Drago Špoljarić
  • Sanja Bernat
  • Snježana Mihalić ArbanasEmail author
Original Paper


Prediction of landslide movements with practical application for landslide risk mitigation is a challenge for scientists. This study presents a methodology for prediction of landslide movements using random forests, a machine learning algorithm based on regression trees. The prediction method was established based on a time series consisting of 2 years of data on landslide movement, groundwater level, and precipitation gathered from the Kostanjek landslide monitoring system and nearby meteorological stations in Zagreb (Croatia). Because of complex relations between precipitations and groundwater levels, the process of landslide movement prediction is divided into two separate models: (1) model for prediction of groundwater levels from precipitation data and (2) model for prediction of landslide movements from groundwater level data. In a groundwater level prediction model, 75 parameters were used as predictors, calculated from precipitation and evapotranspiration data. In the landslide movement prediction model, 10 parameters calculated from groundwater level data were used as predictors. Model validation was performed through the prediction of groundwater levels and prediction of landslide movements for the periods from 10 to 90 days. The validation results show the capability of the model to predict the evolution of daily displacements, from predicted variations of groundwater levels, for the period up to 30 days. Practical contributions of the developed method include the possibility of automated predictions, updated and improved on a daily basis, which would be an important source of information for decisions related to crisis management in the case of risky landslide movements.


Landslide Movement prediction Random forests Monitoring Groundwater level Precipitation 


  1. Baird KJ, Maddock T III (2005) Simulating riparian evapotranspiration: a new methodology and application for groundwater models. J Hydrol 312(1–4):176–190. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.02.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45:5–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brenning A (2005) Spatial prediction models for landslide hazards: review, comparison and evaluation. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5:853–862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Calvello M, Cascini L, Sorbino G (2008) A numerical procedure for predicting rainfall-induced movements of active landslides along pre-existing slip surfaces. Int J Numer Anal Meth Geomech 32(4):327–351. doi: 10.1002/nag.624 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caruana R, Niculescu-Mizil A (2006) An empirical comparison of supervised learning algorithms. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Machine Learning, pp 161–168. doi: 10.1145/1143844.1143865
  6. Cascini L, Calvello M, Grimaldi G (2010) Groundwater modeling for the analysis of active slow-moving landslides. J Geotech Geoenviron 136(9):1220–1230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Catani F, Lagomarsino D, Segoni S, Tofani V (2013) Landslide susceptibility estimation by random forests technique: sensitivity and scaling issues. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 13:2815–2831. doi: 10.5194/nhess-13-2815-2013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen X-W, Liu M (2005) Prediction of protein-protein interactions using random decision forest framework. Bioinformatics 21(24):4394–4400Google Scholar
  9. Corominas J, Moya J, Ledesma A, Lloret A, Gili JA (2005) Prediction of ground displacements and velocities from groundwater level changes at the Vallcebre landslide (Eastern Pyrenees, Spain). Landslides 2:83–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crosta GB, Agliardi F (2003) Failure forecast for large rock slide by surface displacement measurements. Can Geotech J 40(1):176–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crosta G, Di Prisco C (1999) On slope instability induced by seepage erosion. Can Geotech J 36:1056–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cruden DM, Varnes DJ (1996) Landslide types and processes. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Landslide investigation and mitigation (Special Report/Transportation Research Board, National Research Council; 247). National Academy Press, Washington DC Chapter 3, pp. 36–75Google Scholar
  13. Díaz-Uriarte R, de Andrés SA (2006) Gene selection and classification of microarray data using random forest. BMC Bioinformatics 7:1471–2105Google Scholar
  14. Federico A, Popescu M, Elia G, Fidelibus C, Internò G, Murianni A (2012) Prediction of time to slope failure: a general framework. Environ Earth Sci 66:245–256. doi: 10.1007/s12665-011-1231-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fukuzono T (1985) A new method for predicting the failure time of a slope. Proc 4th Int Conf and Field Workshop on Landslides, Tokyo (Japan), pp 145–150Google Scholar
  16. Gajić-Čapka M, Zaninović K (2008) Climate of Croatia. In: Zaninović K (ed) Climate atlas of Croatia, 1961–1990 and 1971–2000. Croatian Meteorological and Hydrological Service, Zagreb, pp. 15–17Google Scholar
  17. Ghiassian H, Ghareh S (2008) Stability of sandy slopes under seepage conditions. Landslides 5:397–406. doi: 10.1007/s10346-008-0132-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gislason PO, Benediktsson JA, Sveinsson JR (2006) Random forests for land cover classification. Pattern Recogn Lett 27(4):294–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Godt JW, Baum RL, Lu N (2009) Landsliding in partially saturated materials. Geophys Res Lett 36(2). doi: 10.1029/2008GL035996
  20. Goetz JN, Brenning A, Petschko H, Leopold P (2015) Evaluating machine learning and statistical prediction techniques for landslide susceptibility modeling. Comput Geosci 81:1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2015.04.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ham J, Chen Y, Crawford M, Ghosh J (2005) Investigation of the random forest framework for classification of hyperspectral data. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 43:492–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hodgson FDI (1978) The use of multiple linear regression in simulating ground-water level responses. Ground Water 16(4):249–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hong Y-M, Wan S (2011) Forecasting groundwater level fluctuations for rainfall-induced landslide. Nat Hazards 57:167–184. doi: 10.1007/s11069-010-9603-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Iverson RM (2000) Landslide triggering by rain infiltration. Water Resour Res 36(7):1897–1910Google Scholar
  25. James G, Witten D, Hastie T, Tibshirani R (2014) An introduction to statistical learning with applications in R. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Jan C-D , Chen T-H, Lo W-C (2007) Effect of rainfall intensity and distribution on groundwater level fluctuations. J Hydrol 332(3-4):348–360Google Scholar
  27. Krkač M (2015) A phenomenological model of the Kostanjek landslide movement based on the landslide monitoring parameters. Dissertation, University of Zagreb (in Croatian)Google Scholar
  28. Krkač M, Mihalić Arbanas S, Arbanas Ž, Bernat S, Špehar K, Watanabe N, Nagai O, Sassa K, Marui H, Furuya G, Wang C, Rubinić J, Matsunami K (2014a) Review of monitoring parameters of the Kostanjek Landslide (Zagreb, Croatia). In: Sassa K, Canuti P, Yin Y (eds) Proceedings of the 3rd World Landslide Forum ‘Landslide Science for a Safer Geoenvironment’, volume 2 ‘Methods of Landslide Studies’. Springer, Netherlands, pp. 637–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Krkač M, Mihalić Arbanas S, Nagai O, Arbanas Ž, Špehar K (2014b) The Kostanjek landslide—monitoring system development and sensor network. In: Mihalić Arbanas S, Arbanas Ž (eds) Proceedings of the 1st Regional Symposium on Landslides in the Adriatic-Balkan Region: Landslide and Flood Hazard Assessment. Croatian Landslide Group, Zagreb, pp. 27–32Google Scholar
  30. Lebedev AV, Westman B, Van Westenc GJP, Kramberger MG, Lundervold A, Aarsland D, Soininen H, Kłoszewska I, Mecocci P, Tsolaki M, Vellas B, Lovestone S, Simmons A (2014) Random Forest ensembles for detection and prediction of Alzheimer’s disease with a good between-cohort robustness. NeuroImage: Clin 6:115–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lee LJE, Lawrence DSL, Price M (2006) Analysis of water-level response to rainfall and implications for recharge pathways in the Chalk aquifer, SE England. J Hydrol 330:604–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mansour MF, Morgenstern NR, Martin CD (2011) Expected damage from displacement of slow-moving slides. Landslides 8(1):117–131. doi: 10.1007/s10346-010-0227-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Martelloni G, Segoni S, Fanti R, Catani F (2011) Rainfall thresholds for the forecasting of landslide occurrence at regional scale. Landslides 9:485–495. doi: 10.1007/s10346-011-0308-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Massey CI, Petley DN, McSaveney MJ (2013) Patterns of movement in reactivated landslides. Eng Geol 159:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Matsuura S, Asano S, Okamoto T (2008) Relationship between rain and/or meltwater, pore-water pressure and displacement of a reactivated landslide. Eng Geol 101:49–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Micheletti N, Foresti L, Robert S, Leuenberger M, Pedrazzini A, Jaboyedoff M, Kanevski M (2014) Machine learning feature selection methods for landslide susceptibility mapping. Math Geosci 46:33–57. doi: 10.1007/s11004-013-9511-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mihalić Arbanas S, Arbanas Ž, Krkač M (2013) Comprehensive landslide monitoring system: the Kostanjek Landslide case study, Croatia. In: Sassa K, He B, McSaveney M, Osamu N (eds) ICL Landslide Teaching Tools. International Consortium on Landslides, Kyoto, pp. 158–168Google Scholar
  38. Ortolan Ž (1996) Development of 3D engineering geological model of deep landslide with multiple sliding surffaces (Example of the Podsused Landslide). Disertation, University of Zagreb (in Croatian)Google Scholar
  39. Ortolan Ž, Pleško J (1992) Repeated photogrammetric measurements at shaping geotechnical models of multi-layer landslides. Rudarsko-geološko-naftni zbornik 4:51–58Google Scholar
  40. Pal M (2005) Random forest classifier for remote sensing classification. Int J Remote Sens 26:217–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pauly O (2012) Random forests for medical applications. Dissertation, Technische Universität MünchenGoogle Scholar
  42. Peters J, De Baets B, Verhoest NCA, Samson R, Degroeve S, De Becker P, Huybrechts W (2007) Random forests as a tool for ecohydrological distribution modelling. Ecol Model 207:304–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pourghasemi HR, Kerle N (2016) Random forests and evidential belief function-based landslide susceptibility assessment in Western Mazandaran Province, Iran. Environ Earth Sci 75(185):1–17. doi: 10.1007/s12665-015-4950-1 Google Scholar
  44. Prasad AM, Iverson LR, Liaw A (2006) Newer classification and regression tree techniques: bagging and random forests for ecological prediction. Ecosystems 9(2):181–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Saito M (1965) Forecasting the time of occurrence of a slope failure. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, vol 2. Montreal, pp 573–541Google Scholar
  46. Sassa K, Osamu N, Solidum R, Yamazaki Y, Ohta H (2010) An integrated model simulating the initiation and motion of earthquake and rain induced rapid landslides and its application to the 2006 Leyte landslide. Landslides 7:219–236. doi: 10.1007/s10346-010-0230-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schilling KE (2009) Investigating local variation in groundwater recharge along a topographic gradient, Walnut Creek, Iowa, USA. Hydrogeol J 17:397–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Segoni S, Lagomarsino D, Fanti R, Moretti S, Casagli N (2014) Integration of rainfall thresholds and susceptibility maps in the Emilia Romagna (Italy) regional-scale landslide warning system. Landslides 12(4):773–785. doi: 10.1007/s10346-014-0502-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Simoni A, Berti M, Generali M, Elmi C, Ghirotti M (2004) Preliminary result from pore pressure monitoring on an unstable clay slope. Eng Geol 73:117–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Skempton AW (1985) Residual strength of clays in landslide, folded strata and the laboratory. Geotechnique 35(1):3–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Stanić B, Nonveiller E (1996) The Kostanjek landslide in Zagreb. Eng Geol 42:269–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stumpf A, Kerle N (2011) Object-oriented mapping of landslides using random forests. Remote Sens Environ 115:2564–2577. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2011.05.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Trigila A, Iadanza C, Esposito C, Scarascia-Mugnozza G (2015) Comparison of logistic regression and random forests techniques for shallow landslide susceptibility assessment in Giampilieri (NE Sicily, Italy. Geomorphology 249:119–136. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2015.06.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Van Asch TWJ, Van Beek LPH, Bogaard TA (2007) Problems in predicting the mobility of slow-moving landslides. Eng Geol 91:46–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Venables W N, Smith D M (2014) An introduction to R: a programming environment for data analysis and graphics version 3.1.2. Accessed 17 Dec 2015
  56. Vorpahl P, Elsenbeer H, Märker M, Schröder B (2012) How can statistical models help to determine driving factors of landslides? Ecol Model 239:27–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Weinheimer A, Biondi F (2003) Varves. In: Holton JR, Curry JA, Pyle JA (eds) Encyclopedia of atmospheric sciences, vol vol 4. Academic Press, Oxford, pp. 1680–1685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wieczorek GF (1996) Landslide triggering mechanism. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Landslides investigation and mitigation, special report. Transportation Research Board. National Academy Press, Washington 247(4): 76–89Google Scholar
  59. Wu J, Zhang R, Yang J (1996) Analysis of precipitation-recharge relationships. J Hydrol 177:143–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Yoon H, Jun S-C, Hyun Y, Bae G-O, Lee K-K (2011) A comparative study of artificial neural networks and support vector machines for predicting groundwater levels in a coastal aquifer. J Hydrol 396:128–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Youssef AM, Pourghasemi HR, Pourtaghi ZS, Al-Katheeri MM (2015) Landslide susceptibility mapping using random forest, boosted regression tree, classification and regression tree, and general linear models and comparison of their performance at Wadi Tayyah Basin, Asir Region, Saudi Arabia. Landslides:1–18. doi: 10.1007/s10346-015-0614-1

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Krkač
    • 1
  • Drago Špoljarić
    • 2
  • Sanja Bernat
    • 1
  • Snježana Mihalić Arbanas
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Faculty of Mining, Geology and Petroleum EngineeringUniversity of ZagrebZagrebCroatia
  2. 2.PLIVA Croatia LtdZagrebCroatia

Personalised recommendations