Skip to main content

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

Abstract

Preparation of landslide susceptibility maps is considered as the first important step in landslide risk assessments, but these maps are accepted as an end product that can be used for land use planning. The main objective of this study is to explore some new state-of-the-art sophisticated machine learning techniques and introduce a framework for training and validation of shallow landslide susceptibility models by using the latest statistical methods. The Son La hydropower basin (Vietnam) was selected as a case study. First, a landslide inventory map was constructed using the historical landslide locations from two national projects in Vietnam. A total of 12 landslide conditioning factors were then constructed from various data sources. Landslide locations were randomly split into a ratio of 70:30 for training and validating the models. To choose the best subset of conditioning factors, predictive ability of the factors were assessed using the Information Gain Ratio with 10-fold cross-validation technique. Factors with null predictive ability were removed to optimize the models. Subsequently, five landslide models were built using support vector machines (SVM), multi-layer perceptron neural networks (MLP Neural Nets), radial basis function neural networks (RBF Neural Nets), kernel logistic regression (KLR), and logistic model trees (LMT). The resulting models were validated and compared using the receive operating characteristic (ROC), Kappa index, and several statistical evaluation measures. Additionally, Friedman and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were applied to confirm significant statistical differences among the five machine learning models employed in this study. Overall, the MLP Neural Nets model has the highest prediction capability (90.2 %), followed by the SVM model (88.7 %) and the KLR model (87.9 %), the RBF Neural Nets model (87.1 %), and the LMT model (86.1 %). Results revealed that both the KLR and the LMT models showed promising methods for shallow landslide susceptibility mapping. The result from this study demonstrates the benefit of selecting the optimal machine learning techniques with proper conditioning selection method in shallow landslide susceptibility mapping.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

References

  • Abe S (2010) Support vector machines for pattern classification. Springer, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Aguirre-Gutiérrez J, Carvalheiro LG, Polce C, van Loon EE, Raes N, Reemer M, Biesmeijer JC (2013) Fit-for-purpose: species distribution model performance depends on evaluation criteria—Dutch hoverflies as a case study. PLoS One 8:e63708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akgun A (2012) A comparison of landslide susceptibility maps produced by logistic regression, multi-criteria decision, and likelihood ratio methods: a case study at İzmir, Turkey. Landslides 9:93–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akgun A, Sezer EA, Nefeslioglu HA, Gokceoglu C, Pradhan B (2012) An easy-to-use MATLAB program (MamLand) for the assessment of landslide susceptibility using a Mamdani fuzzy algorithm. Comput Geosci 38:23–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allison PD (1999) Logistic regression using the SAS system: theory and application. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson PM, Massari R (1998) Generalised linear modelling of susceptibility to landsliding in the central Apennines, Italy. Comput Geosci 24:373–385

    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 65:15–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballabio C, Sterlacchini S (2012) Support vector machines for landslide susceptibility mapping: the Staffora River Basin case study, Italy. Math Geosci 44:47–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beasley TM, Zumbo BD (2003) Comparison of aligned Friedman rank and parametric methods for testing interactions in split-plot designs. Comput Stat Data Anal 42:569–593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belsley D (1991) A guide to using the collinearity diagnostics. Comput Sci Econ Manag 4:33–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth GD, Niccolucci MJ, Schuster EG (1994) Identifying proxy sets in multiple linear regression: an aid to better coefficient interpretation. US Dept of Agriculture Forest Service, Ogden

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley AP (1997) The use of the area under the ROC curve in the evaluation of machine learning algorithms. Pattern Recogn 30:1145–1159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breiman L, Friedman JH, Olshen RA, Stone CJ (1984) Classification and regression trees. Wadsworth, Belmont

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenning A (2005) Spatial prediction models for landslide hazards: review, comparison and evaluation. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5:853–862

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrara A, Pike RJ (2008) GIS technology and models for assessing landslide hazard and risk. Geomorphology 94:257–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cawley G, Talbot NC (2008) Efficient approximate leave-one-out cross-validation for kernel logistic regression. Mach Learn 71:243–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chacon J, Irigaray C, Fernandez T, El Hamdouni R (2006) Engineering geology maps: landslides and geographical information systems. Bull Eng Geol Environ 65:341–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung C-J, Fabbri AG (2008) Predicting landslides for risk analysis—spatial models tested by a cross-validation technique. Geomorphology 94:438–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 20:37–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanzo D, Rotigliano E, Irigaray C, Jiménez-Perálvarez JD, Chacón J (2012) Factors selection in landslide susceptibility modelling on large scale following the GIS matrix method: application to the River Beiro Basin (Spain). Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 12:327–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanzo D, Chacón J, Conoscenti C, Irigaray C, Rotigliano E (2014) Forward logistic regression for earth-flow landslide susceptibility assessment in the Platani river basin (southern Sicily, Italy). Landslides 11:639–653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross M (2002) Landslide susceptibility mapping using the matrix assessment approach: a Derbyshire case study. In: Griffiths JS (ed) Mapping in engineering geology, The Geological Society. Key Issue in Earth Sciences, London, pp 247–261

    Google Scholar 

  • Dan NT, Tuan TA, Thu TH, Hong PV, Hung LQ, Luong NV, Hai NT, Nhung H, Ha NTV, Thu DH, Thanh LV, Hien D, Mai D (2011) Application of remote sensing, GIS, and GPS for the study of landslides at the Son La hydropower basin and proposed remedial measures. Institute of Marine Geology & Geophysics, Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology, Hanoi, p 140

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Arco M, Liccardo A, Pasquino N (2012) ANOVA-based approach for DAC diagnostics. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas 61:1874–1882

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derrac J, García S, Molina D, Herrera F (2011) A practical tutorial on the use of nonparametric statistical tests as a methodology for comparing evolutionary and swarm intelligence algorithms. Swarm and Evol Comput 1:3–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Do T, Bui Minh T, Truong Minh T, Trinh Xuan H, Nguyen Phuong M (2000) The investigation and assessment of environmental geology for the Son La hydropower basin and its surrounding areas. Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment of Vietnam, Hanoi, p 231

    Google Scholar 

  • Doetsch P, Buck C, Golik P, Hoppe N, Kramp M, Laudenberg J, Oberdörfer C, Steingrube P, Forster J and Mauser A (2009) Logistic model trees with AUC split criterion for the KDD Cup 2009 Small Challenge

  • Dormann CF, Elith J, Bacher S, Buchmann C, Carl G, Carré G, Marquéz JRG, Gruber B, Lafourcade B, Leitão PJ, Münkemüller T, McClean C, Osborne PE, Reineking B, Schröder B, Skidmore AK, Zurell D, Lautenbach S (2013) Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a simulation study evaluating their performance. Ecography 36:27–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dovzhikov AE, Mi BP, Vasilevskaya ED, Zhamoida AI, Ivanov GV, Izokh EP, Huu LD, Mareichev AM, Tien NV, Tri NT, Luong TD, Kuang PV, Long PD (1965) Geology of northern Vietnam. Science and Technology, Hanoi, p 668

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubois D, Prade H (1990) Rough fuzzy sets and fuzzy rough sets. Int J Gen Syst 17:191–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duc D (2013) Rainfall-triggered large landslides on 15 December 2005 in Van Canh district, Binh Dinh province, Vietnam. Landslides 10:219–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoglu M, Gokceoglu C (2002) Assessment of landslide susceptibility for a landslide-prone area (north of Yenice, NW Turkey) by fuzzy approach. Environ Geol 41:720–730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erener A, Düzgün H (2010) Improvement of statistical landslide susceptibility mapping by using spatial and global regression methods in the case of More and Romsdal (Norway). Landslides 7:55–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felicisimo A, Cuartero A, Remondo J, Quiros E (2013) Mapping landslide susceptibility with logistic regression, multiple adaptive regression splines, classification and regression trees, and maximum entropy methods: a comparative study. Landslides 10:175–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernández T, Irigaray C, El Hamdouni R, Chacón J (2003) Methodology for landslide susceptibility mapping by means of a GIS. Application to the Contraviesa Area (Granada, Spain). Nat Hazards 30:297–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forest Inventory and Planning Institute (2005) The forest map of Vietnam scale 1:50 000. Vietnam Forest Inventory and Planning Institute, Hanoi

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman M (1937) The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. J Am Stat Assoc 32:675–701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gama J (2004) Functional trees. Mach Learn 55:219–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • General Department of Geology and Minerals of Vietnam (2000) Geological and mineral resources maps scale of 1:200,000

  • Gil D and Johnsson M (2010) Supervised SOM based architecture versus multilayer perceptron and RBF networks. Proc Linköping Electron Conf: 15-24

  • Gokceoglu C, Aksoy H (1996) Landslide susceptibility mapping of the slopes in the residual soils of the Mengen region (Turkey) by deterministic stability analyses and image processing techniques. Eng Geol 44:147–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gokceoglu C, Sezer E (2009) A statistical assessment on international landslide literature (1945–2008). Landslides 6:345–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez H, Kavzoglu T (2005) Assessment of shallow landslide susceptibility using artificial neural networks in Jabonosa River Basin, Venezuela. Eng Geol 78:11–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzetti F, Galli M, Reichenbach P, Ardizzone F, Cardinali M (2006a) Landslide hazard assessment in the Collazzone area, Umbria, central Italy. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 6:115–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P, Ardizzone F, Cardinali M, Galli M (2006b) Estimating the quality of landslide susceptibility models. Geomorphology 81:166–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE (2009) Multivariate data analysis. Prentice Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Haykin S (1998) Neural networks: a comprehensive foundation (2nd edition). Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  • Hungr O, Fell R, Couture R, Eberhardt E (2005) Landslide risk management. CRC Press

  • Hunter E, Matin J, Stone P (1966) Experiments in induction. Academic, New York

    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). Nat Hazards 41:61–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jebur MN, Pradhan B, Tehrany MS (2014) Optimization of landslide conditioning factors using very high-resolution airborne laser scanning (LiDAR) data at catchment scale. Remote Sens Environ 152:150–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jia N, Mitani Y, Xie MW, Djamaluddin I (2012) Shallow landslide hazard assessment using a three-dimensional deterministic model in a mountainous area. Comput Geotech 45:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiménez-Perálvarez JD, Irigaray C, El Hamdouni R, Chacón J (2011) Landslide susceptibility mapping in a semi-arid mountain environment: an example from the southern slopes of Sierra Nevada (Granada, Spain). Bull Eng Geol Environ 70:265–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kavzoglu T, Colkesen I (2009) A kernel functions analysis for support vector machines for land cover classification. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinform 11:352–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kavzoglu T, Mather PM (2003) The use of backpropagating artificial neural networks in land cover classification. Int J Remote Sens 24:4907–4938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kavzoglu T, Kutlug Sahin E, Colkesen I (2014a) An assessment of multivariate and bivariate approaches in landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study of Duzkoy district. Nat Hazards 1-26

  • Kavzoglu T, Sahin E, Colkesen I (2014b) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis, support vector machines, and logistic regression. Landslides 11:425–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keith TZ (2006) Multiple regressions and beyond. Pearson, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Kononenko I (1994) Estimating attributes: analysis and extensions of relief. In: Bergadano F, Raedt L (eds) Machine learning: ECML-94. Springer, Berlin, pp 171–182

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landwehr N, Hall M, Frank E (2005) Logistic model trees. Mach Learn 59:161–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S (2005) Application of logistic regression model and its validation for landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS and remote sensing data journals. Int J Remote Sens 26:1477–1491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S (2007) Application and verification of fuzzy algebraic operators to landslide susceptibility mapping. Environ Geol 52:615–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Ryu JH, Min KD, Won JS (2003) Landslide susceptibility analysis using GIS and artificial neural network. Earth Surf Process Landf 28:1361–1376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao D, Valliant R (2012) Variance inflation factors in the analysis of complex survey data. Surv Methodol 38:53–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Álvarez F, Reyes J, Morales-Esteban A, Rubio-Escudero C (2013) Determining the best set of seismicity indicators to predict earthquakes. Two case studies: Chile and the Iberian Peninsula. Knowl-Based Syst 50:198–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mercer J (1909) Functions of positive and negative type, and their connection with the theory of integral equations. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser A, Containing Pap Math Phys Charact 209:415–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery DR, Dietrich WE (1994) A physically-based model for the topographic control on shallow landsliding. Water Resour Res 30:1153–1171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nefeslioglu HA, Sezer E, Gokceoglu C, Bozkir AS, Duman TY (2010) Assessment of landslide susceptibility by decision trees in the metropolitan area of Istanbul, Turkey. Math Probl Eng

  • Pavel M, Fannin RJ, Nelson JD (2008) Replication of a terrain stability mapping using an artificial neural network. Geomorphology 97:356–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pourghasemi H, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C (2012a) Application of fuzzy logic and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed, Iran. Nat Hazards 63:965–996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pourghasemi H, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C, Moezzi KD (2012b) A comparative assessment of prediction capabilities of Dempster–Shafer and weights-of-evidence models in landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS. Geomatics Nat Hazards Risk 4:93–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B (2011) Manifestation of an advanced fuzzy logic model coupled with geo-information techniques to landslide susceptibility mapping and their comparison with logistic regression modelling. Environ Ecol Stat 18:471–493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B (2012) A comparative study on the predictive ability of the decision tree, support vector machine and neuro-fuzzy models in landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS. Comput Geosci 51:350–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Lee S (2010a) Landslide susceptibility assessment and factor effect analysis: backpropagation artificial neural networks and their comparison with frequency ratio and bivariate logistic regression modelling. Environ Model Softw 25:747–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Lee S (2010b) Regional landslide susceptibility analysis using back-propagation neural network model at Cameron Highland, Malaysia. Landslides 7:13–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Lee S, Buchroithner MF (2010a) A GIS-based back-propagation neural network model and its cross-application and validation for landslide susceptibility analyses. Comput Environ Urban Syst 34:216–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Sezer EA, Gokceoglu C, Buchroithner MF (2010b) Landslide susceptibility mapping by neuro-fuzzy approach in a landslide-prone area (Cameron Highlands, Malaysia). IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 48:4164–4177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinlan JR (1993) C4.5: programs for machine learning. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, USA

  • Saito H, Nakayama D, Matsuyama H (2009) Comparison of landslide susceptibility based on a decision-tree model and actual landslide occurrence: the Akaishi mountains, Japan. Geomorphology 109:108–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sasikala S, AppavualiasBalamurugan S, Geetha S (2014) Multi filtration feature selection (MFFS) to improve discriminatory ability in clinical data set. Appl Comput Inform. doi:10.1016/j.aci.2014.03.002

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuerman J (1983) Principal components analysis. Multivariate analysis in the human services. Springer, Netherlands, pp 93–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Şenkal O, Kuleli T (2009) Estimation of solar radiation over turkey using artificial neural network and satellite data. Appl Energy 86:1222–1228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sezer EA, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C (2011) Manifestation of an adaptive neuro-fuzzy model on landslide susceptibility mapping: Klang valley, Malaysia. Expert Syst Appl 38:8208–8219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sossa H, Guevara E (2014) Efficient training for dendrite morphological neural networks. Neurocomputing 131:132–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thanh L, De Smedt F (2014) Slope stability analysis using a physically based model: a case study from a Luoi district in Thua Thien-Hue province, Vietnam. Landslides 11:897–907

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tien Bui D (2012) Modeling of rainfall-induced landslide hazard for the hoa binh province of vietnam. Norwegian University of Life Sciences. Ph.D Thesis, 192p

  • Tien Bui D, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick O (2011) Landslide susceptibility analysis in the Hoa Binh province of Vietnam using statistical index and logistic regression. Nat Hazards 59:1413–1444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I (2012a) Landslide susceptibility assessment in Vietnam using support vector machines, decision tree and naïve Bayes models. Math Probl Eng 2012:1–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick OB (2012b) Application of support vector machines in landslide susceptibility assessment for the Hoa Binh province (Vietnam) with kernel functions analysis. In: Seppelt R, Voinov AA, Lange S, Bankamp D (eds) Proceedings of the iEMSs Sixth Biennial Meeting: International Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software (iEMSs 2012) International Environmental Modelling and Software Society, Leipzig, Germany, July 2012

  • Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick OB (2012c) Landslide susceptibility assessment in the Hoa Binh province of Vietnam: a comparison of the Levenberg-Marquardt and Bayesian regularized neural networks. Geomorphology 171–172:12–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick OB (2012d) Landslide susceptibility mapping at Hoa Binh province (Vietnam) using an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system and GIS. Comput Geosci 45:199–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I and Dick OB (2012e) 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 96: 28-40

  • Tien Bui D, Ho TC, Revhaug I, Pradhan B, Nguyen D (2013a) Landslide susceptibility mapping along the national road 32 of Vietnam using GIS-based j48 decision tree classifier and its ensembles. In: Buchroithner M, Prechtel N, Burghardt D (eds) Cartography from pole to pole. Springer, Berlin, pp 303–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick O (2013b) Regional prediction of landslide hazard using probability analysis of intense rainfall in the Hoa Binh province, Vietnam. Nat Hazards 66:707–730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Revhaug I, Trung Tran C (2014) A comparative assessment between the application of fuzzy unordered rules induction algorithm and j48 decision tree models in spatial prediction of shallow landslides at Lang Son city, Vietnam. In: Srivastava PK, Mukherjee S, Gupta M, Islam T (eds) Remote sensing applications in environmental research. Springer International Publishing, pp 87–111

  • Tuan TA, Dan NT (2012) Landslide susceptibility mapping and zoning in the Son La hydropower catchment area using the analytical hierarchy process. J Sci Earth (Vietnamese): 223–232

  • Tunusluoglu MC, Gokceoglu C, Nefeslioglu HA, Sonmez H (2008) Extraction of potential debris source areas by logistic regression technique: a case study from Barla, Besparmak and Kapi mountains (NW Taurids, Turkey). Environ Geol 54:9–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Den Eeckhaut M, Vanwalleghem T, Poesen J, Govers G, Verstraeten G, Vandekerckhove L (2006) Prediction of landslide susceptibility using rare events logistic regression: a case-study in the Flemish Ardennes (Belgium). Geomorphology 76:392–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Den Eeckhaut M, Reichenbach P, Guzzetti F, Rossi M, Poesen J (2009) Combined landslide inventory and susceptibility assessment based on different mapping units: an example from the Flemish Ardennes, Belgium. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9:507–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Westen CJ, Terlien MTJ (1996) An approach towards deterministic landslide hazard analysis in GIS. A case study from Manizales (Colombia). Earth Surf Process Landf 21:853–868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van TT, Anh DT, Hieu HH, Giap NX, Ke TD, Nam TD, Ngoc D, Ngoc DTY, Thai TN, Thang DV, Tinh NV, Tuat LT, Tung NT, Tuy PK, Viet HA (2006) Investigation and assessment of the current status and potential of landslides in some sections of the Ho Chi Minh Road, National Road 1a and proposed remedial measures to prevent landslides from threat of safety of people, property, and infrastructure. Vietnam Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources, Hanoi, p 249

    Google Scholar 

  • Vapnik VN (1998) Statistical learning theory. Wiley-Interscience

  • Vorpahl P, Elsenbeer H, Marker M, Schroder B (2012) How can statistical models help to determine driving factors of landslides? Ecol Model 239:27–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walter SD (2002) Properties of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve for diagnostic test data. Stat Med 21:1237–1256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witten IH, Frank E, Mark AH (2011) Data mining: practical machine learning tools and techniques (third edition). Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu W, Sidle RC (1995) A distributed slope stability model for steep forested basins. Water Resour Res 31:2097–2110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiaomeng W, Borgelt C (2004) Information measures in fuzzy decision trees. Fuzzy Systems, 2004 Proceedings 2004 I.E. International Conference on, pp 85–90 vol. 81

  • Xu L, Li J, Brenning A (2014) A comparative study of different classification techniques for marine oil spill identification using RADARSAT-1 imagery. Remote Sens Environ 141:14–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yao X, Tham LG, Dai FC (2008) Landslide susceptibility mapping based on support vector machine: a case study on natural slopes of Hong Kong, China. Geomorphology 101:572–582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yem NT (2006) Assessment of landslides, flash floods, and debris flows in selected prone areas in the northern mountainous Vietnam and recommendation of remedial measures to prevent and mitigate potential damages. pp 166

  • 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). Comput Geosci 35:1125–1138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz I (2010) Comparison of landslide susceptibility mapping methodologies for Koyulhisar, Turkey: conditional probability, logistic regression, artificial neural networks, and support vector machine. Environ Earth Sci 61:821–836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhuang L, Dai HH (2006) Parameter optimization of kernel-based one-class classifier on imbalance text learning. PRICAI 2006. Trends Artif Intell Proc 4099:434–443

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This research was supported by the Geographic Information System group, Department of Business Administration and Computer Science, Faculty of Art and Sciences, Telemark University College, Bø i Telemark, Norway. The authors would like to thank Professor Candan Gokceoglu and three anonymous reviewers for their valuable and constructive comments on the earlier version of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dieu Tien Bui.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tien Bui, D., Tuan, T.A., Klempe, H. et al. 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 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-015-0557-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-015-0557-6

Keywords

  • Landslide
  • GIS
  • Support vector machines
  • Neural network
  • Kernel logistic regression
  • Decision trees
  • Son La hydropower