Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Comparative Study of the Frequency Ratio, Analytical Hierarchy Process, Artificial Neural Networks and Fuzzy Logic Methods for Landslide Susceptibility Mapping: Taşkent (Konya), Turkey

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Geotechnical and Geological Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, the four landslide susceptibility (LS) mapping methods, frequency ratio (FR), analytic hierarchy process (AHP), artificial neural networks (ANN) and fuzzy logic (FL) method, are compared. The study has been conducted in Taşkent (Konya, Turkey) Basin which is located between 36.88 N to 36.95 N latitudes and 32.35 E to 32.53 E longitudes. The survey area is approximately 80 km2. The FR, AHP, ANN and FL methods are used to map LS. Thematic layers of fourteen landslide conditioning factors including landslide inventory, elevation, slope, slope aspect, plan, and profile curvature, sediment loading factor, stream power, and wetness index, drainage, and fault density, distance to drainage, and fault, geological units, and land use-land cover are used for preparing the LS maps. Estimation power of models has been evaluated by the relative operating characteristic curve method. The areas under the curve for FR, AHP, ANN and FL method have been computed as 0.926, 0.899, 0.916 and 0.842, respectively. These results showed that FR method is relatively good, whereas FL method is a relatively poor estimator for susceptibility. The validity of the LS maps was evaluated by test landslides. The 58 test landslides (76 pixels), 43 training landslides (200 pixels), and 101 total landslides (276 pixels) have been put onto the LS maps prepared by the various methods. The percentages of the existing landslide pixels within the different landslide occurrence potential classes were determined. It is determined that a significant portion of all landslides (76% in the ANN, 83% in the FR, 87% in the AHP and 89% in the FL method) belong to the high and very high LS class. The produced four susceptibility maps were also compared using cross-correlation methods. The cross-correlation coefficients were found to be 0.82, 0.70, 0.63, 0.54, 0.48, and 0.45 for AHP versus FR, FR versus FL, AHP versus FL, AHP versus ANN, FR versus ANN, and FL versus ANN maps, respectively. Here, the confidence level is 0.95. The FR and AHP methods have been assessed to be more suitable methods among other used methods.

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
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-011-0283-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akgun A, Dag S, Bulut F (2008) Landslide susceptibility mapping for a landslide-prone area (Findikli, NE of Turkey) by likelihood-frequency ratio and weighted linear combination models. Environ Geol 54:1127–1143

    Google Scholar 

  • Aleotti P, Balzelli P, De Marchi D (1996) Le reti neurali nella valutazione della suscettibilita` da frana. Geol Tecnica Ambient 5(4):37–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Alreshoodi M, Danish E, Woods J, Fernando A, Alwis CD (2015) Prediction of perceptual quality for mobile video using fuzzy inference systems. IEEE Trans Consum Electron 61(4):546–554

    Google Scholar 

  • Anbalgan R (1992) Landslide hazard evaluation and zonation mapping in mountainous terrain. Eng Geol 32:269–277

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson PM, Tatnall ARL (1997) Neural networks in remote sensing. Int J Remote Sens 18:699–709

    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

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayalew L, Yamagishi H, Ugawa N (2004) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS-based weighted linear combination, the case in Tsugawa area of Agano River, Niigata prefecture, Japan. Landslides 1:73–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayalew L, Yamagishi H, Marui H, Kanno T (2005) Landslides in Sado Island of Japan: part II. GIS-based susceptibility mapping with comparisons of results from two methods and verifications. Eng Geol 81:432–445

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayenew T, Barbieri G (2005) Inventory of landslides and susceptibility mapping in the Dessie area, northern Ethiopia. Eng Geol 77(1–2):1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Barredo JI, Benavidesz A, Herhl J, Van Westen CJ (2000) Comparing heuristic landslide hazard assessment techniques using GIS in the Tirajana basin, Gran Canaria Island, Spain. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 2:9–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartolomei A, Brugioni M, Canuti P, Casagli N, Catani F, Ermini L, Kukavicic M, Menduni G, Tofani V (2006) Analisi della suscettibilità da frana a scala di bacino (Bacino del Fiume Arno, Toscana-Umbria, Italia). Giornale Geol Appl 3(2006):189–195. https://doi.org/10.1474/GGA.2006-03.0-25.0118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bathurst JC, Bovolo CI, Cisneros F (2010) Modelling the effect of forest cover on shallow landslides at the river basin scale. Ecol Eng 36(3):317–327

    Google Scholar 

  • Begueria S (2006) Validation and evaluation of predictive models in hazard assessment and risk management. Nat Hazards 37:315–329

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonham-Carter GF (1994) Geographic information systems for geoscientists: modeling with GIS. Pergamon Press, Ottawa, p 398

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannon SH (2000) Debris-flow response of southern California watersheds burned by wildfire. In: Wieczorek GF, Naeser ND (eds) Debris-flow hazards mitigation, mechanics, prediction and assessment. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 45–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Cevik E, Topal T (2003) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping for a problematic segment of the natural gas pipeline, Hendek (Turkey). Environ Geol 44(8):949–962

    Google Scholar 

  • Chauhan S, Sharma M, Arora MK, Gupta NK (2010) Landslide susceptibility zonation through ratings derived from artificial neural network. Int J Appl Earth Observ Geoinf 12:340–350

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen CH, Ke CC, Wang CL (2009) A back-propagation network for the assessment of susceptibility to rock slope failure in the eastern portion of the Southern Cross-Island Highway in Taiwan. Environ Geol 57:723–733

    Google Scholar 

  • Clerici A, Perego S, Tellini C, Vescovi P (2006) A GIS-based automated procedure for landslide susceptibility mapping by the Conditional Analysis method: the Baganza valley case study (Italian Northern Apennines). Environ Geol 50:941–961

    Google Scholar 

  • Conforti M, Robustelli G, Muto F, Critelli S (2012) Application and validation of bivariate GIS-based landslide susceptibility assessment for the Vitravo river catchment (Calabria, south Italy). Nat Hazards 61(1):127–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahal RK, Hasegawa S, Nonomura S, Yamanaka M, Masuda T, Nishino K (2008) GIS-based weights-ofevidence modelling of rainfall-induced landslides in small catchments for landslide susceptibility mapping”. Environ Geol 54(2):314–324

    Google Scholar 

  • Dai FC, Lee CF (2002) Landslide on natural terrain-physical characteristics and susceptibility mapping in Hong Kong. Mt Res Dev 22(1):40–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Dai F, Lee C, Li J, Xu ZW (2001a) Assessment of landslide susceptibility on the natural terrain of Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Environ Geol 40:339–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002540000163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dai FC, Lee CF, Xu ZW (2001b) Assessment of landslide susceptibility on the naturalte rrain of Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Environ Geol 40(3):381–391

    Google Scholar 

  • Daneshvar MRM, Bagherzadeh A (2010) The feasibility of landslide susceptibility map with using GIS at Golmakan Watershed. The 1st International Applied Geological Congress, Department of Geology, Islamic Azad University-Mashad Branch, Iran, 26–28 April 2010

  • Dowla FU, Rogers LL (1995) Solving problems in environmental engineering and geosciences with artificial neural Networks. The MIT Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Eastman JR (2006) IDRISI Andes guide to GIS and image processing. Clark University, USA, Clark Labs

    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

    Google Scholar 

  • Ermini L, Catani F, Casagli N (2005) Artificial neural network applied to landslide susceptibility assessment. Geomorphology 66:327–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2004.09.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez T, Irigaray C, El Hamdouni R, Chacon J (2008) Correlation between natural slope angle and rock mass strength rating in the Betic Cordillera, Granada, Spain. Bull Eng Geol Environ 67:153–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-007-0118-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez-Steeger TM, Rohn J, Czurda K (2002) Identification of landslide areas with neural nets for hazard analysis. In: Stemberk J,Wagner P, Rybar J [eds] Landslides: proceedings of the first European conference on landslides, Prague, Czech Republic, June 24–26 2002, pp 163–168

  • Fourniadis IG, Liu JG, Mason PJ (2007) Landslide hazard assessment in the three Gorges area, China, using ASTER imagery: Wushan-Badong. Geomorphology 84:126–144

    Google Scholar 

  • García-Rodríguez MJ, Malpica JA, Benito B, Díaz M (2008) Susceptibility assessment of earthquake-triggered landslides in El Salvador using logistic regression. Geomorphology 95:172–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Gemitzi A, Falalakis G, Eskioglou P, Petalas C (2010) Evaluating landslide susceptibility using environmental factors, fuzzy membership functions and gis. Global Nest J 13(1):28–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Glade T (2003) Vulnerability assessment in landslide risk analysis. Erde 134(2):123–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Gokceoglu C, Gokceoglu 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorsevski PV, Jankowski P, Gessler PE (2006) An heuristic approach for mapping landslide hazard by integrating fuzzy logic with analytic hierarchy process. Control Cybern 35:1

    Google Scholar 

  • Gritzner ML, Marcus WA, Aspinall R, Custer SG (2001) Assessing landslide potential using GIS, soil wetness modeling and topographic attributes, Payette River, Idaho. Geomorphology 37(1–2):149–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta RP, Joshi BC (1990) Landslide Hazard Zonation using the GIS approach: A case study from the Ramganga Catchment, Himalayas. Eng Geol 28:119–131

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzzetti F, Carrarra A, Cardinali M, Reichenbach P (1999) Landslide hazard evaluation: a review of current techniques and their application in a multi-scale study. Central Italy. Geomorphology 31:181–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Havenith HB, Strom A, Caceres F, Pirard E (2006) Analysis of landslide susceptibility in the Suusamyr region, Tien Shan: statistical and geotechnical approach. Landslides 3:39–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Haykin S (1994) Neural networks: a comprehensive foundation. Macmillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • ILWIS (2001) ILWIS 3.0 academic user’s guide. Aerospace Survey and Earth Sciences (ITC) Enschede, The Netherlands, 530 p

  • Intarawichian N, Dasananda S (2010) Analytical hierarchy process for landslide susceptibility mapping in Lower Mae Chaem Watershed, northern Thailand, Suranaree. J Sci Technol 17(3):1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Intarawichian N, Dasananda S (2011) Frequency ratio model based landslide susceptibility mapping in lower Mae Chaem watershed, Northern Thailand. Environ Earth Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-011-1055-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakob M (2000) The impacts of logging on landslide activity at Clayoquot Sound British Columbia. CATENA 38:279–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones FO, Embody DR, Peterson WC (1961) Landslides along the Columbia river valley, Northeastern Washington, U.S. Geol Surv Prof Pap 367:1–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanungo DP, Arora MK, Sarkar S, Gupta RP (2006) A comparative study of conventional, ANN black box, fuzzy and combined neural and fuzzy weighting procedures for landslide susceptibility zonation in Darjeeling Himalayas. Eng Geol 85:347–366

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanungo DP, Arora MK, Gupta RP, Sarkar S (2008) Landslide risk assessment using concepts of danger pixels and fuzzy set theory in Darjeeling Himalayas. Landslides 5:407–416

    Google Scholar 

  • Karkazi A, Hatzichristos T, Mavropoulos A, Emmanouilidou B, Elseoud A (2001) Landfill siting using GIS and fuzzy logic. EPEM S.A. Department of Solid and Hazardous Wastes, Greece; Egyptian Environmental Affairs Agency; and Dept. of Geography, National Technical University of Athens, Greece. http://www.epem.gr/pdfs/2001_2.pdf. Accessed 22 Aug 2019

  • Khanh NQ (2009) Landslide hazard assessment in muonglay, Vietnam applying GIS and remote sensing. Dr.rer. nat. at the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-University Greifswald. https://epub.ub.uni-greifswald.de/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/661/file/khanh_thesis_final. Accessed 22 Aug 2019

  • Lan HX, Zhou CH, Wang LJ, Zhang HJ, Li RH (2004) Landslide hazard spatial analysis and prediction using GIS in the Xiaojiang watershed, Yunnan. China. Eng Geol 76(1–2):109–128

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee S (2005b) Application and cross-validation of spatial logistic multiple regression for landslide susceptibility analysis. Geosciences 9(1):63–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee S (2007) Comparison of landslide susceptibility maps generated through multiple logistic regression for three test areas in Korea. Earth Surf Proc Land 32:2133–2148

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Min K (2001) Statistical analysis of landslide susceptibility at Youngin, Korea. Environ Geol 40:1095–1113

    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 

  • Lee S, Sambath T (2006) Landslide susceptibility mapping in the Damrei Romel area, Cambodia using frequency ratio and logistic regression models. Environ Geol 50:847–855

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Talib JA (2005) Probabilistic landslide susceptibility and factor effect analysis. Environ Geol 47:982–990

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Ryu J, Min K, Won J (2001) Proceedings of the geoscience and remote sensing symposium IGARSS ‘01. In: IEEE 2001 international, vol 5, pp 2364–2366

  • Lee S, Ryu JH, Won JS, Park HJ (2004) Determination and application of the weights for landslide susceptibility mapping using an artificial neural network. Eng Geol 71:289–302

    Google Scholar 

  • Leh MD, Chaubey I, Murdoch J, Brahana JV, Haggard BE (2008) Delineating runoff processes and critical runoff source areas in a Pasture Hillslope of the Ozark highlands. Hydrol Process 22:4190–4204

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin ML, Tung CC (2003) A GIS-based potential analysis of the landslides induced by the Chi-Chi earthquake. Eng Geol 71:63–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Lineback Gritzner M, Marcus WA, Aspinall R, Custer SG (2001) Assessing landslide potential using GIS, soil wetness modeling and topographic attributes, Payette River, Idaho. Geomorphology 37:149–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Looney CG (1996) Advances in feedforward neural networks: demystifying knowledge acquiring black boxes. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 8(2):211–226

    Google Scholar 

  • Luzi L, Pergalani F (1999) Slope instability in static and dynamic conditions for urban planning: the ‘‘Oltre Po Pavese’’ case history (Region Lombardia-Italy). Nat Hazards 20:57–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Magliuloü P, Lisio A, Russo F (2009) Comparison of GIS-based methodologies for the landslide susceptibility assessment. Geoinformatica 13(3):253–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10707-008-0063-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahdavifar M (1997) Landslide susceptibility mapping in Khoresh Rostam area, Khalkhal, In: Proceedings of 2nd conference on landslide and damage mitigation, Tehran, May 5–6 1997

  • Marjanovic M, Caha J (2011) Fuzzy approach to landslide susceptibility zonation. In: V. Snasel, J. Pokorny, K. Richta (eds) Dateso 2011, pp. 181–195. ISBN:978-80-248-2391-1

  • Masters T (1994) Practical neural network recipes in C++. Academic Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayoraz F, Cornu T, Vuillet L (1996) Using neural networks to predict slope movements. In: Proceedings of VII international symposium on landslides, Trondheim, June 1966, Balkema, pp 295–300

  • Meisina C, Scarabelli S (2007) A comparative analysis of terrain stability models for predicting shallow landslides in colluvial soils. Geomorphology 87:207–223

    Google Scholar 

  • Melchiorre C, Matteucci M, Remondo J (2006) Artificial neural networks and robustness analysis in landslide susceptibility zonation. In: IEEE. 2006 international joint conference on neural networks Sheraton Vancouver Wall Centre Hotel, Vancouver, 16–21 July, pp 4375–4381

  • Melchiorre C, Matteucci M, Azzoni A, Zanchi A (2008) Artificial neural net- works and cluster analysis in landslide susceptibility zonation. Geomorphology 94:379–400

    Google Scholar 

  • Melchiorre C, CastellanosAbella EA, vanWesten CJ (2010) Matteucci M (2010) Evaluation of prediction capability, robustness, and sensitivity in non-linear landslide susceptibility models, Guanta´namo, Cuba. Comput Geosci. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2010.10.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendel JM (1995) Fuzzy logic systems for engineering: a tutorial. IEEE Proc 83(3):345–377

    Google Scholar 

  • Menendez Duarte R, Marqınez J (2002) The influence of environmental and lithologic factors on rockfall at a regional scale: evaluation using GIS. Geomorphology 43:117–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Miner AS, Vamplew P, Windle DJ, Flentje P, Warner P (2010) A comparative study of various data mining techniques as applied to the modeling of Landslide susceptibility on the Bellarine Peninsula, Victoria, Australia. In: Geologically Active, Proceedings of the 11th IAEG congress of the international association of engineering geology and the environment, Auckland, New Zealand

  • Mohammady M, Moradi HR, Feiznia S, Pourghasemi HR (2010) Comparison of the efficiency of certainty factor, information value and AHP models in landslide hazard zonation (case study: part of Haraz Watershed). J Range Watershed Manag Iran J Nat Resour 62(4):539–551 (in Persian)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohammady M, Pourghasemi HR, Pradhan B (2012) Landslide susceptibility mapping at Golestan Province, Iran: a comparisonbetween frequency ratio, Dempster-Shafer, and weights-of-evidence models. J Asian Earth Sci 61(2012):221–236

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore I, Gessler PE, Nielsen GA, Peterson GA (1993) Soil attribute prediction using terrain analyses. Soil Sci Soc Am J 57:443–452

    Google Scholar 

  • Moradi M, Bazyar MH, Mohammadi Z (2012) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping by AHP method, a case study, Dena City, Iran. J Basic Appl Sci Res 2(7):6715–6723

    Google Scholar 

  • Mousavi SM, Omidvar B, Ghazban F, Feyzi R (2011) Quantitative risk analysis for earthquake-induced landslides- Emamzadeh Ali. Iran. Eng Geol 122:191–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Mousavi SM (2017) Landslide susceptibility in cemented volcanic soils, ask region. Indian Geothech J 47(1):115–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-016-0189-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mousavi SM, Horton SP, Langston CA, Samei B (2016) Seismic features and automatic discrimination of deep and shallow induced-microearthquakes using neural Network and logistic regression. Geophys J Int 207(1):29–46. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggw258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mousavi SM, Beroza GC, Hoover SM (2018) Variabilities in probabilistic seismic hazard maps for natural and induced seismicity in the Central and Eastern United States. Lead Edge 37(2):141a1–141a9. https://doi.org/10.1190/tle37020810.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthu K, Petrou M, Tarantino C, Blonda P (2008) Landslide possibility mapping using fuzzy approaches. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 46:1253–1265

    Google Scholar 

  • Mwasi B (2001) Land use conflicts resolution in a fragile ecosystem using Multi-Criteria Evaluation (MCE) and a GIS-based decision support system (DSS). In: International conference on spatial information for sustainable development, Nairobi, Kenya, October 2–5, 2001. http://www.iapad.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/mwasi-TS14-2.pdf

  • Nagarajan R, Roy A, Vinod Kumar R, Mukherjee A, Khire MV (2000) Landslide hazard susceptibility mapping based on terrain and climatic factors for tropical monsoon regions. Bull Eng Geol Environ 58:275–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Nefeslioglu HA, Duman TY, Durmaz S (2008) Landslide susceptibility mapping for a part of tectonic Kelkit Valley (Eastern Black Sea region of Turkey). Geomorphology 94:401–418

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson M, Illingworth WT (1990) A practical guide to neural nets. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  • Nie H F, Diao S J, Liu J X, Huang H (2001) The application of remote sensing technique and AHP-fuzzy method in comprehensive analysis and assessment for regional stability of Chongqing City, China. In: Proceedings of the 22nd international asian conference on remote sensing, November 5–9, 2001. University of Singapore, Singapore, vol 1, pp 660–665

  • Oh H-J, Lee S (2010) Assessment of ground subsidence using GIS and the weightsof-evidence model. Eng Geol 115:36–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Oh H, Lee S, Chotikasathien W, Kim CH, Kwon JH (2009) Predictive landslide susceptibility mapping using spatial information in the Pechabun area of Thailand. Environ Geol 57:641. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-008-1342-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozdemir A (2009) Landslide susceptibility mapping of vicinity of Yakalandslide (Gelendost, Turkey)using conditional probability approach in GIS. Environ Geol 57:1675–1686

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozdemir A, Altural T (2013) A comparative study of frequency ratio, weights of evidence and logistic regression methods for landslide susceptibility mapping: Sultan Mountains, SW Turkey. J Asian Earth Sci 64(2013):180–197

    Google Scholar 

  • Pachauri AK, Pant M (1992) Landslide hazard mapping based on geological attributes. EngGeol 32:81–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Pachauri AK, Gupta PV, Chander R (1998) Landslide zoning in a part of the Garhwal Himalayas. Environ Geol 36:325–334

    Google Scholar 

  • Pajanowski BC, Brown DG, Shellito BA, Manik GA (2002) Using neural networks and gis to forecast land use changes: a land transformation model. Comput Environ Urban Syst 26(2002):553–575

    Google Scholar 

  • Pao YC (1999) Engineering analysis, interactive methods and programs with FORTRAN, QuickBASIC, MATLAB, and mathematica. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Paola JD, Schowengerdt RA (1995) A review and analysis of backpropagation neural networks for classification of remotely sensed multi-spectral imagery. Int J Remote Sens 16:3033–3058

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulin GL, Bursik M (2009) Logisnet: a tool for multimethod, multiple soil layers slope stability analysis. Comput Geosci 35:1007–1016

    Google Scholar 

  • Pirasteh S, Pradhan B, Mahmoodzadeh A (2009) Stability mapping and landslide recognition in Zagros Mountain South West Iran: a case study. Disaster Adv 2(1):47–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Polykretis C, Chalkias C (2018) Comparison and evaluation of landslide susceptibility maps obtained from weight of evidence, logistic regression, and artificial neural network models. Nat Hazards 93:249–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Poudyal CP, Chang C, Oh HJ, Lee S (2010) Landslide susceptibility maps comparing frequency ratio and artificial neural networks: a case study from the Nepal Himalaya. Environ Earth Sci 61:1049–1064

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B (2010a) Remote sensing and GIS-based landslide hazard analysis and cross-validation using multivariate logistic regression model on three test areas in Malaysia. Adv Space Res 45:1244–1256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2010.01.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B (2010b) Application of an advanced fuzzy logic model for landslide susceptibility analysis. Int J Comput Intell Syst 3(3):370–381

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Lee S (2010c) Delineation of landslide hazard areas on Penang Island, Malaysia, by using frequency ratio, logistic regression, and artificial neural network models. Environ Earth Sci 60:1037–1054. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-009-0245-8

    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

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Buchroithner MF (2010) Comparison and validation of landslide susceptibility maps using an artificial neural network model for three test areas in Malaysia. Environ Eng Geosci 16(2):107–126

    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

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Lee S (2010b) Regional landslide susceptibility analysis using back- propagation neural network model at Cameron Highland, Malaysia. Landslides 7(1):13–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Lee S (2010c) Delineation of landslide hazard areas on Penang Island, Malaysia, by using frequency ratio, logistic regression, and artificial neural network models. Environ Earth Sci 60(5):1037–1054

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Pirasteh P (2010) Comparison between prediction capabilities of neural network and fuzzy logic techniques for landslide susceptibility mapping. Disaster Adv 3(3):26–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Youssef AM (2010) Manifestation of remote sensing data and GIS on landslide hazard analysis using spatial-based statistical models. Arab J Geosci 3(3):319–326

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Lee S, Buchroithner MF (2009) Use of geospatial data and fuzzy algebraic operators to landslide hazard mapping. Appl Geomat 1:3–15

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Lee S, Buchroithner MF (2010b) Remote sensing and GIS-based landslide susceptibility analysis and its cross-validation in three test areas using a frequency ratio model. Photogramm Fernerkund Geoinf 1(1):17–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Regmi NR, Giardino JR, Vitek JD (2010) Modeling susceptibility to landslides using the weight of evidence approach: western Colorado, USA. Geomorphology 115:172–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Riad PH, Billib MH, Hassan AA, Omar MA (2011) Overlay weighted model and fuzzy logic to determine the best locations for artificial recharge of groundwater in a semi-arid area in Egypt. Nile Basin Water Sci Eng J 4(1):11

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossi M, Apuani T, Felletti F (2009) A comparison between univariate probabilistic and multivariate (logistic regression) methods for landslide susceptibility analysis: the example of the Febbraro valley (Northern Alps, Italy). Geophys Res Abstr, Vol 11, EGU2009-8399, 2009 EGU General Assembly 2009. https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2009/EGU2009-8399.pdf

  • Rumelhart DE, Hinton GE, Williams RJ (1986) Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Nature 323:533–536

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. McGraw-Hill, New York, p 287

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1990) An exposition of the AHP in reply to the paper ‘remarks on the analytic hierarchy process’. Manage Sci 36:259–268

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1994) Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the AHP. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL, Vargas LG (2001) Models, methods, concepts, and applications of the analytic hierarchy process, 1st edn. Kluwer Academic, Boston, p 333p

    Google Scholar 

  • Saha AK, Gupta RP, Arora MK (2002) GIS-based landslide hazard zonation in the Bhagirathi (Ganga) valley, Himalayas. Int J Remote Sens 23(2):357–369

    Google Scholar 

  • Saraswathi K, Senthil R (2017) A comparative study of defuzzification methods for an interacting and non interacting system. Int J Eng Technol Sci Res 4(5):2017

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar S, Kanungo DP (2004) An intergraded approach for landslide susceptibility mapping using remote sensing and GIS. Photogr Eng Remote Sens 70(5):617–625

    Google Scholar 

  • Schernthanner H (2007) Fuzzy logic method for landslide susceptibility mapping, Rio Blanco, Nicaragua. http://www.geocomputation.org/2007/7A-Evolutionary_Computing_and_Fuzzy_Modelling/7A3.pdf

  • Suzen ML, Doyuran V (2003) A comparison of the GIS based landslide susceptibility assessment methods: multivariate versus bivariate. Environ Geol 45:665–679. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-003-0917-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suzen ML, Doyuran V (2004) Data driven bivariate landslide susceptibility assessment using geographical information systems: a method and application to Asarsuyu catchment, Turkey. Eng Geol 71(3–4):303–321

    Google Scholar 

  • Swingler K (1996) Applying neural networks: a practical guide. Academic Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Tangestani HM (2004) Landslide susceptibility mapping using the fuzzy gamma approach in a GIS, Kakan catchment area, southwest Iran. Aust J Earth Sci 51(3):439–450

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarboton D (2003) Terrain analysis using digital elevation models in hydrology. In: 23rd ESRI international users conference, July 7–11, 2003, San Diego, California, http://hydrology.usu.edu/dtarb/ESRI_paper_6_03.pdf

  • Teimouri M, Graee P (2012) Evaluation of AHP and frequency ratio methods in landslide hazard zoning (case study: Bojnord Urban Watershed, Iran). Int Res J Appl Basic Sci 3(9):1978–1984

    Google Scholar 

  • Turan A (1990) Toroslar’da Hadim (Konya) ve Güneybatısının Jeolojisi, Stratigrafisi ve Tektonik Gelişimi, Doktora Tezi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Konya

    Google Scholar 

  • Turrini MC, Visintainer P (1998) Proposal of a method to define areas of landslide hazard and application to an area of the Dolomites, Italy. Eng Geol 50:255–265

    Google Scholar 

  • Uromeihy A, Mahdavifar MR (2000) Landslide hazard zonation of the Khorshrostam area, Iran. Bull Eng Geol Environ 58(3):207–213

    Google Scholar 

  • Vahidnia MH, Alesheikh AA, Alimohammadi A, Hosseinali F (2009) Landslide hazard zonation using quantitative methods in GIS. Int J Civil Eng 7(3):176

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Den Eeckhaut M, Marre A, Poesen J (2010) Comparison of two landslide susceptibility assessments in the Champagne-Ardenne region (France). Geomorphology 115:141–155

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Westen CJ, Bonilla JBA (1990) Mountain hazard analysis using PC-based GIS. In: 6th IAEG congress, vol 1. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 265–271

  • Van Westen CJ, Rengers N, Soeters R (2003) Use of geomorphological information in indirect landslide assessment. Nat Hazards 30:399–419

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Westen CJ, Castellanos Abella EA, Sekhar LK (2008) Spatial data for landslide susceptibility, hazards and vulnerability assessment: an overview. Eng Geol 102(3–4):112–131

    Google Scholar 

  • Vijith H, Madhu G (2008) Estimating potential landslide sites of an upland sub-watershed in Western Ghat’s of Kerala (India) through frequency ratio and GIS. Environ Geol 55:1397–1405

    Google Scholar 

  • Voogd JH (1982) Multicriteria evaluation for urban and regional planning. Delftsche Uitgevers Maatschappij, London, p 367. https://doi.org/10.6100/IR102252

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson JP, Gallant JG (2000) Terrain analysis principles and applications. Wiley, New York, p 479p

    Google Scholar 

  • Yagi H (2003) Development of assessment method for landslide hazardness by AHP. In: Abstract volume of the 42nd annual meeting of the japan landslide society, pp 209–212

  • Yalcin A (2008) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping using analytical hierarchy process and bivariate statistics in Ardesen (Turkey): comparisons of results and confirmations. CATENA 72:1–12

    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 Turkey. CATENA 85:274–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Yesilnacar E, Topal T (2005) Landslide susceptibility mapping: A comparison of logistic regression and neural networks methods in a medium scale study, Hendek region (Turkey). Eng Geol 79:251–266

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    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(4):821–836

    Google Scholar 

  • Youssef AM, Pradhan B, Gaber AFD, Buchroithner MF (2009) Geomorphological hazard analysis along the Egyptian Red Sea Coast between Safaga and Quseir. Nat Hazard Earth Syst 9:751–766

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou CH, Lee CF, Li J, Xu ZW (2002) On the spatial relationship between landslides and causative factors on Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Geomorphology 43:197–207

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu C, Wang X (2009) Landslide susceptibility mapping: a comparison of information and weights-of-evidence methods in three Gorges Area. In: 2009 International conference on environmental science and information application technology, Wuhan, 2009, pp 342–346

  • Zimmerman H-J (1996) Fuzzy set theory and its applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, London

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya, Turkey

    Adnan Ozdemir

Authors
  1. Adnan Ozdemir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adnan Ozdemir.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ozdemir, A. A Comparative Study of the Frequency Ratio, Analytical Hierarchy Process, Artificial Neural Networks and Fuzzy Logic Methods for Landslide Susceptibility Mapping: Taşkent (Konya), Turkey. Geotech Geol Eng 38, 4129–4157 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-020-01284-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-020-01284-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation