Advertisement

Susceptibility Assessment of Landslides in Alpine-Canyon Region Using Multiple GIS-Based Models

  • Man HuEmail author
  • Qiuqiang Liu
  • Pengyu Liu
Engineering Technology
  • 23 Downloads

Abstract

This study explores a comparative study of three susceptibility assessment models based on remote sensing (RS) and geographic information system (GIS). The Lenggu region (China) was selected as a case study. At first, a landslide inventory map was compiled using data from existing geology reports, satellite imagery, and coupling with field observations. Subsequently, three models were built to map the landslide susceptibility using analytical hierarchy process (AHP), fuzzy logic (FL) and certainty factors (CF). The resulting models were validated and compared using areas under the curve (AUC). The AUC plot estimation results indicated that the three models are promising methods for landslide susceptibility mapping. Among the three methods, CF model has highest prediction accuracy than the other two models. Similarly, the outcome of this study reveals that streams, faults, slope and elevation are the main conditioning factors of landslides. Especially, the erosion of streams plays a key role of the landslide occurrence. These landslide susceptibility maps, to some extent, reflect spatial distribution characteristics of landslides in alpine- canyon region of southwest China, and can be used for land planning and hazard risk assessment.

Key words

landslide susceptibility assessment geographic information system (GIS) analytical hierarchy process (AHP) fuzzy logic (FL) certainty factors (CF) 

CLC number

TP 305 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Wu W, Sidle R C. A distributed slope stability model for steep forested basins [J]. Water Resources Research, 1995, 31(8): 2097–2110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Chung C J F, Fabbri A G, Van Westen C J. Geographical Information Systems in Assessing Natural Hazards [M]. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Guzzetti F. Landslide Hazard and Risk Assessment [D]. Bonn: University of Bonn, 2005.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Lan H X, Zhou C H, Wang L J, et al. Landslide hazard spatial analysis and prediction using GIS in the Xiaojiang Watershed, Yunnan, China [J]. Engineering Geology, 2004, 76(1-2): 109–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Wang W D, Xie C M, Du X G. Landslides susceptibility mapping based on geographical information system, Guizhou, south-west China [J]. Environmental Geology, 2009, 58(1): 33–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Guo C, Montgomery D R, Zhang Y, et al. Quantitative assessment of landslide susceptibility along the Xianshuihe fault zone, Tibetan Plateau, China [J]. Geomorphology, 2015, 248: 93–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Cao C, Wang Q, Chen J, et al. Landslide susceptibility mapping in vertical distribution law of precipitation area: Case of the Xulong Hydropower Station Reservoir, Southwestern China [J]. Water, 2016, 8(7): 270–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Thanh L N, Smedt F D. Application of an analytical hierarchical process approach for landslide susceptibility mapping in A Luoi district, Thua Thien Hue Province, Vietnam [J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2012, 66(7): 1739–1752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Jebur M N, Pradhan B, Tehrany M S. Optimization of landslide conditioning factors using very high-resolution airborne laser scanning (LiDAR) data at catchment scale [J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2014, 152: 150–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Kayastha P, Dhital M R, De Smedt F. Application of the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) for landslide susceptibility mapping: A case study from the Tinau watershed, west Nepal [J]. Computers & Geosciences, 2013, 52: 398–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Bui D T, 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 [J]. Landslides, 2016, 13(2): 361–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Jia N, Mitani Y, Xie M, et al. Shallow landslide hazard assessment using a three-dimensional deterministic model in a mountainous area [J]. Computers and Geotechnics, 2012, 45: 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Hasekioğulları G D, Ercanoglu M. A new approach to use AHP in landslide susceptibility mapping: A case study at Yenice (Karabuk, NW Turkey) [J]. Natural Hazards, 2012, 63(2): 1157–1179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Yilmaz I. Comparison of landslide susceptibility mapping methodologies for Koyulhisar, Turkey: Conditional probability, logistic regression, artificial neural networks, and support vector machine [J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2010, 61(4): 821–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Xu C, Xu X, Dai F, et al. Comparison of different models for susceptibility mapping of earthquake triggered landslides related with the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in China [J]. Computers & Geosciences, 2012, 46: 317–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Devkota K C, Regmi A D, Pourghasemi H R, et al. Landslide susceptibility mapping using certainty factor, index of entropy and logistic regression models in GIS and their comparison at Mugling-Narayanghat road section in Nepal Himalaya [J]. Natural Hazards, 2013, 65(1): 135–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Pradhan B, Buchroithner M F. Comparison and validation of landslide susceptibility maps using an artificial neural network model for three test areas in Malaysia [J]. Environmental & Engineering Geoscience, 2010, 16(2): 107–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Park S, Choi C, Kim B, et al. Landslide susceptibility mapping using frequency ratio, analytic hierarchy process, logistic regression, and artificial neural network methods at the Inje area, Korea [J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2013, 68(5): 1443–1464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Pradhan B. A comparative study on the predictive ability of the decision tree, support vector machine and neuro-fuzzy models in landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS [J]. Computers & Geosciences, 2013, 51: 350–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Atkinson P M, Massari R. Generalised linear modelling of susceptibility to landsliding in the central Apennines, Italy [J]. Computers & Geosciences, 1998, 24(4): 373–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Reger J P. Discriminant analysis as a possible tool in landslide investigations [J]. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 1979, 4(3): 267–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Pourghasemi H R, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C. Application of fuzzy logic and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed, Iran[J]. Natural Hazards, 2012, 63(2): 965–996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Ermini L, Catani F, Casagli N. Artificial neural networks applied to landslide susceptibility assessment [J]. Geomorphology, 2005, 66(1): 327–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Yao X, Tham L G, Dai F C. Landslide susceptibility mapping based on support vector machine: A case study on natural slopes of Hong Kong, China [J]. Geomorphology, 2008, 101(4): 572–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Glade T. Linking debris-flow hazard assessments with geomorphology [J]. Geomorphology, 2005, 66(1): 189–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    Qi S, Wu F, Yan F, et al. Mechanism of deep cracks in the left bank slope of Jinping First Stage Hydropower Station [J]. Engineering Geology, 2004, 73(1): 129–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    Liu H Q, Hu R, Tan R, et al. Huashiban loose deposit landslide, Tiger-Leaping-Gorge, China: Analysis and prediction [J]. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 2007, 66(2): 197–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    Wang Z L. Research on Failure Mode and Stability Analysis of the Slope at Lenggu Hydropower Station on Yalong River [D]. Chengdu: Chengdu University of Technology, 2016 (Ch).Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    Saaty T L. Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process [J]. Management Science, 1986, 32(7): 841–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    Shortliffe E H, Buchanan B G. A model of inexact reasoning in medicine [J]. Mathematical Biosciences, 1975, 23(3-4): 351–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    Binaghi E, Luzi L, Madella P, et al. Slope instability zonation: A comparison between certainty factor and fuzzy Dempster–Shafer approaches [J]. Natural Hazards, 1998, 17(1): 77–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    Pourghasemi H R, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C, et al. Application of weights-of-evidence and certainty factor models and their comparison in landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed, Iran [J]. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 2013, 6(7): 2351–2365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. [33]
    Zadeh L A. Fuzzy sets [J]. Information and Control, 1965, 8(3): 338–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. [34]
    Bonham-Carter G F. Geographic Information Systems for Geoscientists: Modeling with GIS [M]. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    Wieczorek G F. Preparing a detailed landslide-inventory map for hazard evaluation and reduction [J]. Bull Assoc Eng Geol, 1984, 21(3): 337–342.Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    Soeters R, van Westen C J. Slope instability recognition, analysis, and zonation [J]. Transportation Research Board Special Report, 1996, (247): 129–177.Google Scholar
  37. [37]
    Van Westen C J, Castellanos E, Kuriakose S L. Spatial data for landslide susceptibility, hazard, and vulnerability assessment: An overview[J]. Engineering Geology, 2008, 102(3): 112–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. [38]
    Kritikos T, Davies T. Assessment of rainfall-generated shallow landslide/debris-flow susceptibility and runout using a GIS-based approach: Application to western Southern Alps of New Zealand [J]. Landslides, 2015, 12(6): 1051–1075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. [39]
    Ercanoglu M, Gokceoglu C, Van Asch T W J. Landslide susceptibility zoning north of Yenice (NW Turkey) by multivariate statistical techniques [J]. Natural Hazards, 2004, 32(1): 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. [40]
    Dai F C, Lee C F. Landslide characteristics and slope instability modeling using GIS, Lantau Island, Hong Kong [J]. Geomorphology, 2002, 42(3): 213–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. [41]
    Donati L, Turrini M C. An objective method to rank the importance of the factors predisposing to landslides with the GIS methodology: application to an area of the Apennines (Valnerina; Perugia, Italy) [J]. Engineering Geology, 2002, 63(3): 277–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. [42]
    Yalcin A, Bulut F. Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS and digital photogrammetric techniques: A case study from Ardesen (NE-Turkey) [J]. Natural Hazards, 2007, 41(1): 201–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. [43]
    Korup O. Geomorphic implications of fault zone weakening: Slope instability along the Alpine Fault, South Westland to Fiordland[J]. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics, 2004, 47(2): 257–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. [44]
    Warr L N, Cox S. Clay mineral transformations and weakening mechanisms along the Alpine Fault, New Zealand [J]. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 2001, 186(1): 85–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. [45]
    Larsen I J, Montgomery D R. Landslide erosion coupled to tectonics and river incision [J]. Nature Geoscience, 2012, 5(7): 468–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. [46]
    Nefeslioglu H A, Gokceoglu C, Sonmez H. An assessment on the use of logistic regression and artificial neural networks with different sampling strategies for the preparation of landslide susceptibility maps [J]. Engineering Geology, 2008, 97(3): 171–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. [47]
    Hall F G, Townshend J R, Engman E T. Status of remote sensing algorithms for estimation of land surface state parameters [J]. Remote Sensing of Environment, 1995, 51(1): 138–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. [48]
    Chen W, Li W P, Chai H C, et al. GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping using analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and certainty factor (CF) models for the Baozhong region of Baoji City, China [J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2016, 75(1): 63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Wuhan University and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Engineering and TechnologySouthwest UniversityChongqingChina
  2. 2.Consultative Centre for Geo-Hazard EmergencyMinistry of Land and Resources of ChinaBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations