Advertisement

Gully Erosion Susceptibility Assessment Through the SVM Machine Learning Algorithm (SVM-MLA)

  • Hamid Reza PourghasemiEmail author
  • Amiya Gayen
  • Sk. Mafizul Haque
  • Shibiao Bai
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Science, Technology & Innovation book series (ASTI)

Abstract

Gully erosion susceptibility mapping (GESM) is a valuable tool for sustainable land use management and reducing soil erosion. Gully erosion and its formation are a natural process; it greatly threatens agriculture, environment, ecosystem disruption, and natural resources. The objective of this present study is to develop a GESM by implementation of well acceptable SVM learning algorithm in Golestan Province, Kalaleh Township, Iran. Primarily, gully sites were obtained by comprehensive field observations. After that, 12 gully erosion predisposing factors were selected to assess the gully erosion susceptibility map. The 12 conditioning factors were aspect, altitude, drainage density, lithology, slope angle, slope length, distance from river, profile curvature, drainage density, TWI, distance from road, and plan curvature. Finally, gully erosion susceptibility map was prepared using the SVM model in “R” environment. In the final stage, assessment of the prediction accuracy of the susceptibility model with the help of training (70%) and validation datasets (30%) of gully location was done. The predicted susceptibility map was validated with the help of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, true skill statistics (TSS), and deviance value. The results indicated that the areas under the curve (AUC) were calculated as 94.3% and 97.0% based on validation and training dataset, respectively. Furthermore, the TSS, deviance, and correlation values were 0.84, 0.50, and 0.85, respectively. So, the results of other indices including, sensitivity, specificity, and Cohen’s Kappa (CK) showed that SVM model has reasonable prediction accuracy for the cases of gully erosion susceptibility assessment. As regards the SVM model, a total area of 11.66% was identified as the hazard prone area of the mentioned Town ship. So, it is concluded that the gully erosion map serves as an important tool for protective action and watershed management, specifically at the initiation of the gully to protect the development of land degradation.

Keywords

Gully erosion True skill statistics Area under the curve Support vector machine Machine learning 

References

  1. Accadia, C., Mariani, S., Casaioli, M., Lavaqnini, A., Speranza, A., 2005. Verification of precipitation forecasts from two limited-area models over Italy and comparison with ECMWF forecasts using a resampling technique. Weather and Forecasting, 20, 276-300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agnesi, V., Angileri, S., Cappadonia, C., Conoscenti, C., Rotigliano, E., 2011. Multi-parametric GIS analysis to assess gully erosion susceptibility: a test in southern Sicily, Italy. Landf Anal. 7, 15-20.Google Scholar
  3. Allouche, O., Tsoar, A., Kadmon, R., 2006. Assessing the accuracy of species distribution models: prevalence, kappa and the true skill statistic (TSS). J. Appl. Ecol. 43, 1223–1232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amiri M, Pourghasemi HR, Ghanbarian GA, Afzali SF (2019) Assessment of the importance of gully erosion effective factors using Boruta algorithm and its spatial modelling and mapping using three machine learning algorithms. Geoderma 340:55-69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Amor, D., and Pfaff, A., 2008. Early history of the impact of road investments on deforestation in the Mayan forest. In Working paper, Nicholas School of the Environment and Sanford School of Public Policy, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.Google Scholar
  6. Bernatek-Jakiel, A., Jakiel, M., Krzemień, K., 2017. Piping dynamics in mid-altitude mountains under a temperate climate: Bieszczady Mts., Eastern Carpathians. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 42, 1419–1433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carey, B., Gray, J., Seagrave, C., 2001. Gully Erosion. Department of Natural Resources and Mines, The State of Queensland. http://www.gcenvironment.org.au/pdf/LM81w.pdf.
  8. Cevik, E., Topal, T., 2003. GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping for a problematic segment of the natural gas pipeline, Hendek (Turkey). Environ. Geol. 44, 949–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen, W., Chai, H., Zhao, Z., Wang, Q., Hong, H., 2016. Landslide susceptibility mapping based on GIS and support vector machine models for the Qianyang County, China. Environ Earth Sci 75(6), 1–13.Google Scholar
  10. Conoscenti, C., Angileri, S., Cappadonia, C., Rotigliano, E., Agnesi, V., Ma¨rker, M., 2014. Gully erosion susceptibility assessment by means of GIS-based logistic regression: a case of Sicily (Italy). Geomorphology 204 (1), 399–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Conoscenti, C., Maggio, C.D., Rotigliano, E., 2008. Soil erosion susceptibility assessment and validation using a geostatistical multivariate approach: a test in Southern Sicily. Natural Hazards 46 (3), 287-305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cortes, C., Vapnik, V., 1995. Support vector networks. Mach. Learn. 20 (3), 273-297.Google Scholar
  13. Engler, R., A. Guisan, Rechsteiner, L., 2004. An improved approach for predicting the distribution of rare and endangered species from occurrence and pseudo-absence data. Journal of Applied Ecology 41,263–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gayen, A., Pourghasemi, H.R., 2019. Spatial Modeling of Gully Erosion: A New Ensemble of CART and GLM Data-Mining Algorithms. Spatial Modeling in GIS and R for Earth and Environmental Science, pp 653-669.Google Scholar
  15. Gayen, A., Saha, S., 2017. Application of weights-of-evidence (WoE) and evidential belief function (EBF) models for the delineation of soil erosion vulnerable zones: a study on Pathro river basin, Jharkhand, India. Modeling Earth Systems and Environment 3, 1123-1139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gayen, A., Saha, S., 2018. Deforestation probable area predicted by logistic regression in Pathro river basin: a tributary of Ajay River. Spatial Information Research 26 (1), 1-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gayen, A., Saha, S., Pourghasemi, H.R., 2019a. Soil erosion Assessment using RUSLE model and its Validation by FR probability model. Geocarto International. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2019.1581272
  18. Gayen, A., Pourghasemi, H.R., Saha, S., Keesstra, S.D., Bai, S., 2019b. Gully erosion susceptibility assessment and management of hazard-prone areas in India using different machine learning algorithms. Science of the Total Environment, DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Guerra, C.A., Maes, J., Geijzendorffer, I., Metzger, M.J., 2016. An assessment of soil erosionGoogle Scholar
  20. Guisan, A., and Zimmermann, N.E., 2000. Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecological Modelling 135, 147-186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Haque, M., Ghosh, S., 2018. Microstructural Evidence of Palaeo-Coastal Landform from Westernmost Fringe of Lower Ganga-Brahmaputra Delth. Quaternary Geomorphology in India, pp. 61-78.Google Scholar
  22. Hong, H., Pradhan, B., Bui, D.T., Xu, C., Youssef, A.M., Chen, W., 2016. Comparison of four kernel functions used in support vector machines for landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study at Suichuan area (China). Geomatics Natural Hazards and Risk 8 (2), 544-569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hong, H., Pradhan, B., Xu, C., Tien Bui, D., 2015. Spatial prediction of landslide hazard at the Yihuang area (China) using two-class kernel logistic regression, alternating decision tree and support vector machines. Catena 133, 266–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jebur, M.N., Pradhan, B., Shafapour Tehrany, M., 2014. Optimization of landslide conditioning factors using very high-resolution airborne laser scanning (LiDAR) data at catchment scale. Remote Sens Environ 152, 150–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kalantar, B., Pradhan, B., Naghibi, S.A., Motevalli, A., Mansor, S., 2017. Assessment of the effects of training data selection on the landslide susceptibility mapping: a comparison between support vector machine (SVM), logistic regression (LR) and artificial neural networks (ANN). Geomatics, Natural hazards and Risk 9 (1), 49-69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Liu, C., White, M., Newell, G., 2009. Measuring the accuracy of species distribution models: a review. In: Andersen, R.S., Braddock, R.D., Newham, L.T.H. (Eds.), Proceedings 18th World IMACs/MODSIM Congress. Cairns, Australia, pp. 4241–4247.Google Scholar
  27. Metternicht, G., Gonzalez, S., 2013. FUERO: Foundations of a fuzzy exploratory model for soil erosion hazard prediction. Environmental Modelling and Software 20(6), 715-728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mittlböck, M., and Schemper, M., 1996. Explained variation for logistic regression. Statistics in Medicine, 15, 1987-1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mohsen Hosseinalizadeh, M., Kariminejad, N., Rahmati, O., Keesstra, S., Alinejad, M., Behbahani, A.M., 2019. How can statistical and artificial intelligence approaches predict piping erosion susceptibility? Science of the Total Environment 646, 1554–1566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Moore, I. D., Wilson, J. P., 1991. Length-slope factors for the revised universal soil loss equation: simplified method of estimation. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 47(5), 423–428.Google Scholar
  31. Moore, I.D., Burch, G.J., 1986. Physical basis of the length-slope factor in the Universal SoilGoogle Scholar
  32. Morgan, R.P., 2009. Soil Erosion and Conservation. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  33. Naghibi, S.A., Pourghasemi, H.R., Dixon, B., 2015. GIS-based groundwater potential mapping using boosted regression tree, classification and regression tree, and random forest machine learning models in Iran. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 188 (1).Google Scholar
  34. Pearson, K., 1897. Mathematical contributions to the theory of evolution. On a form of spurious correlation which may arise when indices are used in the measurement of organs. Proceeding of the royal society of London 60, 489-498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Poesen, J., 1993. Gully typology and gully control measures in the European loess belt. In: prevention by vegetation in Mediterranean Europe: current trends of ecosystem service provision. Ecol. Indic. 60, 213–222.Google Scholar
  36. Pourghasemi, H. R, Pradhan, B., Gokceoglu, C., Moezzi, K.D., 2013b. A comparative assessment of prediction capabilities of Dempster–Shafer and Weights-of-evidence models in landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS. Geomatics Natural Hazards and Risk 4 (2), 93-118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pourghasemi, H.R., Jirandeh, A.G., Pradhan, B., Xu, C., Gokceoglu, C., 2013a. Landslide susceptibility mapping using support vector machine and GIS at the Golestan Province, Iran. Journal of Earth System Science 122 (2), 349-369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pourghasemi, H.R., Mohammady, M., Pradhan, B., 2012. Landslide susceptibility mapping using index of entropy and conditional probability models in GIS: Safarood Basin, Iran. Catena 97, 71-84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pourghasemi, H.R., Yousefi, S., Kornejady, A., Cerdà, A., 2017. Performance assessment of individual and ensemble data-mining techniques for gully erosion modeling. Science of The Total Environment 609, 764-775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rahmati, O., Haghizadeh, A., Pourghasemi, H.R., Noormohamadi, F., 2016. Gully erosion susceptibility mapping: the role of GIS-based bivariate statistical models and their comparison. Nat. Hazards 82 (2), 1231–1258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rahmati, O., Tahmasebipour, N., Haghizadeh, A., Pourghasemi, H.R., Feizizadeh, B., 2017. Evaluating the influence of geo-environmental factors on gully erosion in a semi-arid region of Iran: an integrated framework. Science of The Total Environment 579, 913-927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rossi, M., Guzzetti, F., Reichenbach, P., Cesare Mondini, A., Peruccacci, S., 2010. Optimal landslide susceptibility zonation based on multiple forecasts. Geomorphology 114, 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rossi, M., Reichenbach, P., 2016. LAND-SE: a software for statistically based landslide susceptibility zonation, version 1.0. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 3533–3543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shit, P.K., Nandi, A.S., Bhunia, G.S., 2015. Soil erosion risk mapping using RUSLE model on jhargram sub-division at West Bengal in India. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 1: 28.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-015-0032-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Svoray, T., Michailov, E., Cohen, A., Rokah, L., Sturm, A., 2012. Predicting gully initiation: comparing data mining techniques, analytical hierarchy processes and the topographic threshold. Earth Surf. Process. Landforms 37, 607-619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tehrany, M.S., Pradhan, B., Mansor, S., Ahmad, N., 2015. Flood susceptibility assessment using GIS-based support vector machine model with different kernel types. Catena 125, 91-101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tien Bui, D., Tuan, T.A., Klempe, H., Pradhan, B., Revhaug, I., 2016. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Valentin, C., Poesen, J., Li, Y., 2005. Gully erosion: Impacts, factors and control. Catena 63 (2-3), 132-153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Verachtert, E., Devoldere, S., Van Den Eeckhaut, M., Poesen, J., Deckers, J., 2011. Impact of land use and soil properties on piping in Belgium. Landform Analysis. 17, pp. 215–218.Google Scholar
  50. Verachtert, E., Van Den Eeckhaut, M., Martínez-Murillo, J.F., Nadal-Romero, E., Poesen, J., Devoldere, S., Wijnants, N., Deckers, J., 2013. Impact of soil characteristics and land use on pipe erosion in a temperate humid climate: field studies in Belgium. Geomorphology 192, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wang, L., Wei, S., Horton, R., Shao, M., 2011. Effects of vegetation and slope aspect on water budget in the hill and gully region of the Loess Plateau of China, Catena 87 (1), 90-100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wilson, G.V., Rigby, J.R., Dabney, S.M., 2015. Soil pipe collapses in a loess pasture of Goodwin Creek watershed, Mississippi: role of soil properties and past land use. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 40 (11), 1448–1463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zabihi, M., Mirchooli, F., Motevalli, A., Darvishan, A.K., Pourghasemi, H.R., Zakeri, M.A., Sadighi, F., 2018a. Spatial modelling of gully erosion in Mazandaran Province, northern Iran. Catena 161, 1-13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zabihi, Z., Pourghasemi, H.R., Motevalli, A., Zakeri, M.A., 2018b. Gully erosion modeling using GIS-based data mining techniques in northern Iran: a comparison between boosted regression tree and multivariate adaptive regression spline. Natural Hazards GIS-Based Spatial Modeling Using Data Mining Techniques, 1-26.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hamid Reza Pourghasemi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Amiya Gayen
    • 3
  • Sk. Mafizul Haque
    • 3
  • Shibiao Bai
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Engineering, College of AgricultureShiraz UniversityShirazIran
  2. 2.College of Marine Sciences and EngineeringNanjing Normal UniversityNanjingChina
  3. 3.Department of GeographyUniversity of CalcuttaKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations