Geotechnical and Geological Engineering

, Volume 36, Issue 2, pp 915–937 | Cite as

Landslide Susceptibility Mapping Using Fuzzy Logic System and Its Influences on Mainlines in Lashgarak Region, Tehran, Iran

  • S. M. Fatemi AghdaEmail author
  • V. Bagheri
  • M. Razifard
Original paper


Landslide susceptibility mapping is among the useful tools applied in disaster management and planning development activities in mountainous areas. The susceptibility maps prepared in this research provide valuable information for landslide hazard management in Lashgarak region of Tehran. This study was conducted to, first, prepare landslide susceptibility maps for Lashgarak region and evaluate landslide effect on mainlines and, second, to analyze the main factors affecting landslide hazard increase in the study area in order to propose efficient strategies for landslide hazard mitigation. A GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis model (fuzzy logic) is used in the present work for scientific evaluation of landslide susceptible areas in Lashgarak region. To this end, ArcGIS, PCIGeomatica, and IDIRISI software packages were used. Eight information layers were selected for information analysis: ground strength class, slope angle, terrain roughness, normalized difference moisture index, normalized difference vegetation index, distance from fault, distance from the river, and distance from the road. Next, eight different scenarios were created to determine landslide susceptibility of the study area using different operators (intersection (AND), union (OR), algebraic sum (SUM), multiplication (PRODUCT), and different fuzzy gamma values) of fuzzy overlay approach. After that, the performance of various fuzzy operators in landslide susceptibility mapping was empirically compared. The results revealed the excellent consistency of landslide susceptibility map prepared using the fuzzy union (OR) operator with landslide distribution map in the study area. Eventually, the accuracy of landslide susceptibility map prepared using the fuzzy union (OR) operator was evaluated using the frequency ratio diagram. The results showed that frequency values of the landslides gradually increase from “low susceptibility” to high “susceptibility” as 88.34% of the landslides are categorized into two “high” and “very high” susceptibility classes, implying the satisfactory consistency between the landslide susceptibility map prepared using fuzzy union (OR) operator and landslide distribution map.


Landslide susceptibility Zonation Fuzzy logic Lashgarak, Tehran Geographical information system 


  1. Ahmed B (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping using multi-criteria evaluation techniques in Chittagong Metropolitan Area, Bangladesh. Landslides, 1–19Google Scholar
  2. Ahmed B, Ahmed R, Zhu X (2013) Evaluation of model validation techniques in land cover dynamics. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf 2(3):577–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ayalew L, Yamagishi H (2005) The Application of GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Kakuda-Yahoko Mountains, central Japan. Geomorphology 65:15–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banshtu RS, and Prakash C (2014) Application of remote sensing and GIS techniques in landslide hazard zonation of Hilly Terrain. In: Landslide Science for a Safer Geo environment. Springer international publishing, pp 313–317Google Scholar
  5. Brand EW (1984) Landslides in Southeast Asia: a state-of-the-art report. In: proceedings of 4th international symposium on landslides, Toronto, Canadian geotechnical society 1, pp 17–59Google Scholar
  6. Bui DT, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick OB (2012) Landslide susceptibility mapping at Hoa Binh province (Vietnam) using an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system and GIS. Comput Geosci 45:199–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cruden D, Varnes D (1996) Landslide types and processes. In: Turner A, Schuster R (eds) Landslides: investigations and mitigation. National Academy Press, Washington, pp 36–75Google Scholar
  8. Darvish Zadeh A (1991) Geology of Iran. Danesh e Emrooz Press (associated with Amir Kabir press institution). Tehran, p 908 (in Persian) Google Scholar
  9. Deering DW, Rouse JW, Haas RH, and Schell JA (1975) Measuring forage production of grazing using from Landsat MSS data. In: proceedings of 10th international symposium on remote sensing of environment, Ann Arbor: ERIM 2, pp 1169–1178Google Scholar
  10. Eastman JR (1997) Idrisi for windows user’s guide version 2.0 clark labs for cartographic technology and geographic analysis. Clark University, WorcesterGoogle Scholar
  11. Ebrahimi Gh (2015) Landslide hazard zonation in the south of Ardebil (the 5th segment of the Ardebil-Mianeh railroad). M.Sc. Thesis, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran, p 149 (in Persian) Google Scholar
  12. Fatemi Aghda SM, and Bagheri V (2014) Evaluation of earthquake-induced landslides hazard zonation methods: a case study of Sarein, Iran, earthquake (1997). Arabian J Geosci, 1–21Google Scholar
  13. Fatemi Aghda SM, Giamian J, Eshgheli Farahani A (2006) Investigation landslide hazard using Fuzzy logic (case study: Roudbar area). Sci Tehran Univ J 31:43–64 (in Persian) Google Scholar
  14. Florina CR (2013) Climatic dysfunctionalities observed with the aid of NDMI and SAVI indices in the LEU-ROTUNDA and DĂBULENI plains. Acad J Air Water Compon Environ/Aerul si Apa Compone, 500–507Google Scholar
  15. Hafezi Moghadas N, Ghafouri M (2009) Environmental geology. Shahrood University of Technology Press, Shahrood, p 273 (in Persian) Google Scholar
  16. He X, Hong Y, Yu X, Cerato AB, Zhang X, and Komac M (2014) Landslides susceptibility mapping in Oklahoma State using GIS-based weighted linear combination method. In: Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment. Springer International Publishing, 371–377Google Scholar
  17. Jibson RW, Harp EL, and Michael JA (1998) A method for producing digital probabilistic seismic landslide hazard maps: an example from the Los Angles, California, Area. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 1998 (113), p 17Google Scholar
  18. Keefer DK (1993) The susceptibility of rock slopes to earthquakeinduced failure. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 30(3):353–361Google Scholar
  19. Keefer DK (2000) Statistical analysis of an earthquake-induced landslide distribution—the 1989 Loma Prieta. California event. Engineering geology 58(3):231–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kouraki Nezhad M, Oonagh M, Sepehri A (2002) A comparison between two landslide zoning models (Haeri and Mora) in Siah Watershed, Roudbar, Gorgan. Quarterly of Agriculturing and Natural Resources. 12(3):91–99 (in Persian) Google Scholar
  21. Lee S (2007) Application and verification of fuzzy algebraic operators to landslide susceptibility mapping. Environ Geol 50:847–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lee S, Min K (2002) Statistical analysis of landslide susceptibility at Yongin, Korea. Environ Geol 40:1095–1113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mahdavifar MR (2006) Analytical evaluation and design of the system (GIS) for seismic landslides hazard management in Iran. Ph.D thesis, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering And Seismology, Tehran, Iran, p 213 (in Persian) Google Scholar
  24. Miles SB, and Keefer DK (2007) Comprehensive areal model of earthquake-induced landslides: technical specification and user guide. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2007 (1072), p 69Google Scholar
  25. Miles SB, Keefer DK (2009) Evaluation of CAMEL - Comprehensive areal model of earthquake-induced landslides. Eng Geol 104(1):1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Moradi HR, Pour Ghasemi HR, Mohammadi M, Mahdavifar MR (2010) Landslide hazard zonation using Fuzzy Gamma operator (case study: Haraz watershed). Environ Sci J 7(4):129–142Google Scholar
  27. Motavali S, Esmaeeli R (2013) Landslide hazard zonation using Fuzzy Gamma operator (case study: Taleghan watershed). Environ Eros Res J 2(8):1–20Google Scholar
  28. Nagarajan R, Roy A, Kumar RV, Mukherjee A, Khire MV (2000) Landslide hazard susceptibility mapping based on terrain and climatic factors for tropical monsoon regions. Bull Eng Geol Environ 58(4):275–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nourifard N (2009) Landslide Hazard Zonation Using Fuzzy sets In: Fasham Area. M.Sc. Thesis, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran, p 195 (in Persian) Google Scholar
  30. Orn-uma P, and Bulgan D (2010) Mapping soil moisture in Darkhan’s agricultural land, Mongolia. In: 5th Annual International Workshop and Expo on Sumatra Tsunami Disaster and Recovery, 250–254Google Scholar
  31. Orn-uma P, and Lal S (2009) Retrieval of soil moisture index from MODIS in dry land areas. Joint training workshop, AWCI‐ICG 15–17, Tokyo, p 60Google Scholar
  32. Pachauri AK, Pant M (1992) Landslide Hazard Mapping Based On Geological Attributes. Eng Geol 32:81–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pour Ghasemi HR, Mohammady M, Pradhan B (2012a) Landslide susceptibility mapping using index of entropy and conditional probability models in GIS: Safarood Basin Iran. Catena 97:71–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pour Ghasemi HR, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C (2012b) Application of fuzzy logic and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed Iran. Nat Hazards 63(2):965–996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pour Ghasemi HR, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C, Moezzi KD (2013) A comparative assessment of prediction capabilities of Dempster-Shafer and weights-of-evidence models in landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS. Geomat, Nat Hazards Risk 4(2):93–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pour Ghasemi HR, Moradi HR, Fatemi Aghda SM (2014) Prioritization of factors effective on landslide occurrence and susceptibility zoning using the Shannon entropy index. J Sci Technol Agric Nat Resour; Soil Water Sci 18(70):181–192 (in Persian) Google Scholar
  37. 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(6):747–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pradhan B, Lee S (2010b) Regional landslide susceptibility analysis using back-propagation neural network model at Cameron Highland Malaysia. Landslides 7(1):13–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Qin S, Jiao JJ, Wang S (2002) A nonlinear dynamical model of landslide evolution. Geomorphology 43(1):77–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rajabi AM (2010) Probabilistic Assessment of Earthquake-Induced Landslides Hazard in Iran. Ph.D Thesis, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran, p 238 (in Persian) Google Scholar
  41. Sakar S, Kanungo D, Mehrotar GS (1995) Landslide hazard zonation: a case study in Garhwal Himalaya, India. Mt Res Dev 15:301–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Salimi N (2014) Landslide Zonation Using Artificial Neural Networks (case study: Taleghan Aquiferous basin). M.Sc. Thesis, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran, p 170 (in Persian) Google Scholar
  43. Zhou CH, Lee CF, Li J, Xu ZW (2002) On the spatial relationship between landslide and causative factors on Lantua island. Hong Kong. Geomorphol 43(3):197–207Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied Geology, Faculty of Geological ScienceKharazmi UniversityTehranIran
  2. 2.Department of Geology, Faculty of Basic SciencesTarbiat Modares UniversityTehranIran

Personalised recommendations