Environmental Earth Sciences

, 77:800 | Cite as

Evaluation of ANFIS and LR models for seismic rockfalls’ susceptibility mapping: a case study of Firooz Abad-Kojour, Iran, Earthquake (2004)

  • Vahid Bagheri
  • Ali UromeihyEmail author
  • Seyed Mahmood Fatemi Aghda
Original Article


Seismic rockfall is one of the prevalent geohazards that cause huge losses in the earthquake-stricken areas. In the present research, a model is developed to map susceptibility (occurrence probability) of seismic rockfalls in a regional scale using Logistic Regression (LR) and Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS) techniques. In this research, Firooz Abad-Kojour earthquake of 2004 was introduced as the benchmark and the model base. The susceptible zones predicted by LR and ANFIS methods were compared with the database (distribution map) of seismic rockfalls, by which the results revealed a good overlapping between the susceptible zones predicted by the ANFIS and the field observation of rockfalls triggered by this earthquake. Besides, for the statistical evaluation of results obtained by LR and ANFIS models, the verification parameters with high accuracy such as density ratio (Dr), quality sum (Qs), and receiver-operating characteristic curve (ROC) were used. By analyzing the susceptibility maps and considering the Qs index obtained by LR (21.04184) and ANFIS (26.75592), it could be found that the Qs of ANFIS is higher than that of LR. Moreover, based on the obtained value of the area under the curve (AUC) from LR (0.972) and ANFIS (0.984) methods, ANFIS provided a higher accuracy in zonation and susceptibility mapping of rockfalls triggered by Firooz Abad-Kojour earthquake of 2004 compared to the LR method.


Seismic rockfalls Hazard zonation Firouz Abad-Kojour Susceptibility mapping Logistic regression Adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system 



  1. Agliardi F, Crosta GB, Frattini P (2009) Integrating rockfall risk assessment and countermeasure design by 3D modeling techniques. Nat Hazards Earth Sys Sci 9(4):1059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amini Hosseyni K, Mahdavifar MR, Bakhshayesh MK, Khazaie B, Azadi A, Bidar AS, Ravanfar SO, Kamalpour F, Rakhshandeh M, Banki Sh (2004) Earthquake-induced Landslide Identification Report of the 2004/05/28 Firuzabad (Kojur) earthquake. Seismol Earthq Eng Res J Int Inst Seismol Earthq Eng 7(2):21–36 (in Persian) Google Scholar
  3. Arias A (1970) A measure of the earthquake intensity in seismic design for nuclear power plants. Massachusetts Institute of Tech Press, Cambridge, pp 438–468Google Scholar
  4. Ayalew L, Yamagishi H (2005) The application of GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Kakuda-Yahiko Mountains, Central Japan. Geomorph J 65(1):15–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bednarik M, Magulová B, Matys M, Marschalko M (2010) Landslide susceptibility assessment of the Kraľovany–Liptovský Mikuláš railway case study. Phys Chem Earth Parts A/B/C 35(3):162–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Budimir MEA, Atkinson PM, Lewis HG (2015) A systematic review of landslide probability mapping using logistic regression. Landslide J 12(3):419–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bui DT, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick OB (2012) Spatial prediction of landslide hazards in Hoa Binh province (Vietnam): a comparative assessment of the efficacy of evidential belief functions and fuzzy logic models. Catena J 96:28–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cancelli A, Crosta G (1993) Rockfall hazard, and risk mapping. In: Proceedings 7th international conference and field workshop on landslides, Czech-Slovak Rep., Balkema, pp 69–76Google Scholar
  9. Capolongo D, Refice A, Mankelow J (2002) Evaluating earthquake-triggered landslide hazard at the basin scale through GIS in the Upper Sele river valley. Surv Geophys 23(6):595–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chau KT, Wong RHC, Liu J, Lee CF (2003) Rockfall hazard analysis for Hong Kong based on rockfall inventory. Rock Mech Rock Eng 36(5):383–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chauhan S, Sharma M, Arora MK (2010) Landslide susceptibility zonation of the Chamoli region, Garhwal Himalayas, using logistic regression model. Landslide J 7(4):411–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Constantin M, Bednarik M, Jurchescu MC, Vlaicu M (2011) Landslide susceptibility assessment using the bivariate statistical analysis and the index of entropy in the Sibiciu Basin (Romania). Environ Earth Sci 63(2):397–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Corominas J, Copons R, Moya J, Vilaplana JM, Altimir J, Amigó J (2005) Quantitative assessment of the residual risk in a rockfall protected area. Landslide J 2(4):343–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Corominas J, Mavrouli O, Ruiz-Carulla R (2017) Rockfall Occurrence and Fragmentation. In Workshop on World Landslide Forum. Springer, 75–97Google Scholar
  15. Cox DR (1958) The regression analysis of binary sequences. J R Stat Soc Ser B (Methodol) 20(2):215–242Google Scholar
  16. Dashti Marvily M (2008) Landslide hazard zoning using logistic regression (case study: a part of gamasiab watershed). M.Sc Thesis. Tarbiat Modares University, pp 92 (in Persian) Google Scholar
  17. Del Gaudio V, Wasowski J (2004) Time probabilistic evaluation of seismically induced landslide hazard in Irpinia (Southern Italy). Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 24(12):915–928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Del Gaudio V, Pierri P, Wasowski J (2003) An approach to the time-probabilistic evaluation of seismically induced landslide hazard. Bull Seismol Soc Am 93(2):557–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ercanoglu M, Gokceoglu C (2002) Assessment of landslide susceptibility for a landslide-prone area (north of Yenice, NW Turkey) by the fuzzy approach. Environ Geo 41:720–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fatemi Aghda SM, Bagheri V (2015) Evaluation of earthquake-induced landslides hazard zonation methods: a case study of Sarein, Iran, earthquake (1997). Arabian J Geosci 8(9):7207–7227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Garsia-Rodríguez MJ, Malpica JA, Benito B, Díaz M (2008) Susceptibility assessment of earthquake-triggered landslides in El Salvador using logistic regression. Geomorph J 95(3):172–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gee MD (1992) Classification of landslide hazard zonation methods and a test of predictive capability. In: Proceedings of 6th international symposium on landslides, Christchurch, New Zealand, vol 2, pp 947–952Google Scholar
  23. Gosar A (2017) Earthquake-induced rockfalls caused by 1998 Mw5. 6 earthquake in Krn mountains (NW Slovenia) and ESI 2007 Intensity Scale. In: Workshop on world landslide forum. Springer, pp 131–139Google Scholar
  24. Hungr O, Evans SG, Hazzard J (1999) Magnitude and frequency of rock falls and rock slides along the main transportation corridors of southwestern British Columbia. Can Geotech J 36(2):224–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jaboyedoff M, Dudt JP, Labiouse V (2005) An attempt to refine rockfall hazard zoning based on the kinetic energy, frequency and fragmentation degree. Nat Hazards Earth System Sci 5(5):621–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jang JS (1993) ANFIS: adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference system. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 23(3):665–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jibson RW, Harp EL, Michael JA (2000) A method for producing digital probabilistic seismic landslide hazard maps. Eng Geol 58(3):271–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Keefer DK (1984) Landslides caused by earthquakes. Geol Soc Am Bull 95(4):406–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Keefer DK (2000) Statistical analysis of an earthquake-induced landslide distribution -the 1989 Loma Prieta, California event. Eng Geool J 58:231–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lari S, Frattini P, Crosta GB (2014) A probabilistic approach for landslide hazard analysis. Eng Geool 182:3–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lee S, Sambath T (2006) Landslide susceptibility mapping in the Damrei Romel area, Cambodia using frequency ratio and logistic regression models. Environ Geool 50(6):847–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lee CT, Huang CC, Lee JF, Pan KL, Lin ML, Dong JJ (2008) Statistical approach to earthquake-induced landslide susceptibility. Eng Geool 100(1):43–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mahdavifar MR (2006) Analytical evaluation and design of the system (GIS) for seismic landslides hazard management in Iran. Ph.D. thesis. In: International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, pp 213 (in Persian) Google Scholar
  34. Mahdavifar MR, Jafari MK, Zolfaghari MR (2007) The attenuation of Arias intensity in Alborz and Central Iran. In: The fifth international conference on seismology and earthquake engineering, Tehran, Iran: pp 7Google Scholar
  35. Mahdavifar M, Askari F, Memarian P, Seyedimorad SM (2016) Earthquake-induced rock fall hazard zonation of Varzegha-Ahar region in northwest Iran: a comparison of quantitative and qualitative approaches. J Seismol Earthq Eng 18(2):101–116Google Scholar
  36. Marzorati S, Luzi L, De Amicis M (2002) Rock falls induced by earthquakes: a statistical approach. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng J 22(7):565–577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Massey CI, MacSaveney MJ, Richards L (2015) Characteristics of some rockfalls triggered by the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence, New Zealand. In: Eng Geo for Soci and Terri, Springer, vol 2, pp 1943–1948Google Scholar
  38. Mathew J, Jha VK, Rawat GS (2009) Landslide susceptibility zonation mapping and its validation in part of Garhwal Lesser Himalaya, India, using binary logistic regression analysis and receiver operating characteristic curve method. Landslide J 6(1):17–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Miles SB, Keefer DK (2007) Comprehensive areal model of earthquake-induced landslides: Technical specification and user guide. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2007–1072: pp 69Google Scholar
  40. Miles SB, Keefer DK (2009a) Evaluation of CAMEL—comprehensive areal model of earthquake-induced landslides. Eng Geool 104(1):1–15Google Scholar
  41. Miles SB, Keefer DK (2009b) Toward a comprehensive areal model of earthquake-induced landslides. Nat Hazards Rev 10(1):19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mohammady M, Pourghasemi HR, Pradhan B (2012) Landslide susceptibility mapping at Golestan Province, Iran: a comparison between frequency ratio, Dempster–Shafer, and weights-of-evidence models. J Asian Earth Sci 61:221–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Motamedi M, Liang RY (2013) Probabilistic landslide hazard assessment using Copula modeling technique. Landslide J 11(4):565–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nefeslioglu HA, Gokceoglu C, Sonmez H (2008) An assessment of the use of logistic regression and artificial neural networks with different sampling strategies for the preparation of landslide susceptibility maps. Eng Geol 97(3):171–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Oh HJ, Pradhan B (2011) Application of a neuro-fuzzy model to landslide susceptibility mapping for shallow landslides in a tropical hilly area. Comp Geosci 37(9):1264–1276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Peng WF, Wang CL, Chen ST, Lee ST (2009) Incorporating the effects of topographic amplification and sliding areas in the modeling of earthquake-induced landslide hazards, using the cumulative displacement method. Comp Geosci 35(5):946–966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Petley DN (2012) Landslides and engineered slopes: protecting society through improved understanding. Landslide Eng Slopes J 1:3–13Google Scholar
  48. Polat K, Güneş S (2006) Hepatitis disease diagnosis using a new hybrid system based on feature selection (FS) and artificial immune recognition system with fuzzy resource allocation. Digital Signal Proces 16(6):889–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pourghasemi HR, Mohammady M, Pradhan B (2012a) Landslide susceptibility mapping using the index of entropy and conditional probability models in GIS: Safarood Basin, Iran. Catena J 97:71–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pourghasemi HR, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C, Moezzi KD (2012b) Landslide susceptibility mapping using a spatial multi-criteria evaluation model at Haraz Watershed, Iran. In: Terrigenous mass movements. Springer, Berlin, pp 23–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pourghasemi HR, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C (2012c) Application of fuzzy logic and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed, Iran. Nat Hazards 63(2):965–996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pourghasemi H, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C, Moezzi KD. Geomatics (2013) A comparative assessment of prediction capabilities of Dempster–Shafer and weights-of-evidence models in landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS. Nat Hazards Risk 4(2):93–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pradhan B (2013) A comparative study on the predictive ability of the decision tree, support vector machine and neuro-fuzzy models in landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS. Comp Geosci 51:350–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pradhan B, Sezer EA, Gokceoglu C, Buchroithner MF (2010) Landslide susceptibility mapping by the neuro-fuzzy approach in a landslide-prone area (Cameron Highlands, Malaysia). IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 48(12):4164–4177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rapolla A, Paoletti V, Secomandi M (2010) Seismically-induced landslide susceptibility evaluation: application of a new procedure to the island of Ischia, Campania Region, Southern Italy. Eng Geol 114(1):10–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Regmi NR, Giardino JR, McDonald EV, Vitek JD (2014) A comparison of logistic regression-based models of susceptibility to landslides in western Colorado, USA. Landslide J 11(2):247–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rodrıguez CE, Bommer JJ, Chandler RJ (1999) Earthquake-induced landslides: 1980–1997. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng J 18(5):325–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Shariat Jafari M (2009) Specific risk zonation of landslides in the critical (Central Alborz) zones. National Disaster Mitigation Organization. A specialized workshop of earthquake and landslide, pp 95 (in Persian) Google Scholar
  59. Straub D, Schubert M (2008) Modeling and managing uncertainties in rock-fall hazards. Georisk 2(1):1–15Google Scholar
  60. Sugeno M (1985) Industrial applications of fuzzy control. Elsevier Science Ltd., Amsterdam, pp 278Google Scholar
  61. Swets JA (1988) Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science 240(4857):1285–1293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Turner AK, Jayaprakash GP (2012) Introduction. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Rockfall characterization and control. Transportation Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, Whasington, DC, pp 3–20Google Scholar
  63. Uchida T, Osanai N, Onoda S, Takayama T, Tomura K (2006) A simple method for producing probabilistic seismic shallow landslide hazard maps. In: Proceedings of interpraevent, Universal Academy Press, vol 2, pp 529–534Google Scholar
  64. Valagussa A, Frattini P, Crosta GB (2014a) Quantitative probabilistic hazard analysis of earthquake-induced rockfalls. In: Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment, Springer, pp 213–218Google Scholar
  65. Valagussa A, Frattini P, Crosta GB (2014b) Earthquake-induced rockfall hazard zoning. Eng Geol 182:213–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Varnes DJ (1978) Slope movement types and processes. Special report 176:11–33Google Scholar
  67. Wang YM, Elhag TM (2008) An adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system for bridge risk assessment. Expert Syst Appl 34(4):3099–3106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wasowski J, Del Gaudio V (2000) Evaluating seismically induced mass movement hazard in Caramanico Terme (Italy). Eng Geo 58(3):291–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wilson RC (1993) Relation of Arias Intensity to Magnitude and Distance in California. U.S Geological Survey Open-File report 1993-556, pp 41Google Scholar
  70. Wyllie DC (2014) Rock fall engineering. CRC Press, Baco Raton, pp 270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Yesilnacar EK (2005) The Application of Computational Intelligence to Landslide Susceptibility Mapping in Turkey, Ph.D. Thesis. Department of Geomatics the University of Melbourne: pp 423Google Scholar
  72. Yilmaz I (2009) Landslide susceptibility mapping using frequency ratio, logistic regression, artificial neural networks and their comparison: a case study from Kat landslides (Tokat—Turkey). Comp Geosci 35(6):1125–1138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Yin KL, Yan TZ (1988) Statistical prediction model for slope instability of metamorphosed rocks. In: Proceedings of the 5th international symposium on landslides, Lausanne, Switzerland, AA Balkema Rotterdam, The Netherlands. vol 2, pp 1269–1272Google Scholar
  74. Ying LC, Pan MC (2008) Using adaptive network-based fuzzy inference system to forecast regional electricity loads. Energy Convers Manag 49(2):205–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zare M (2004) Seismology and earthquake engineering aspects of the 2004/05/28 Firuzabad (Kojur) earthquake with magnitudes Mw = 6.2. Seismol Earthq Eng Res J Int Inst Seismol Earthq Eng 7(2):45–57 (in Persian) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vahid Bagheri
    • 1
  • Ali Uromeihy
    • 1
    Email author
  • Seyed Mahmood Fatemi Aghda
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Geology, Faculty of Basic SciencesTarbiat Modares UniversityTehranIran
  2. 2.Department of Applied Geology, Faculty of Geological SciencesKharazmi UniversityTehranIran

Personalised recommendations