An Alternative Technique for Landslide Inventory Modeling Based on Spatial Pattern Characterization

  • Omar F. Althuwaynee
  • Biswajeet PradhanEmail author
Part of the Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography book series (LNGC)


The present study analyses the spatial patterns of historical/present landslide inventory in the Kuala Lumpur and vicinity areas. The main objective is to statistically test the spatial nature pattern of landslide inventory, i.e. to determine whether it rejects the independency of spatial pattern or not (i.e. random or cluster distribution). For that purpose, the nearest neighbor index (NNI) was applied to measure and test the randomness. First, we tested the spatial patterns of 153 landslides. The results showed a percentage of clustered to dispersed was 85 % (130 events) to 15 % (23 events), indicating landslides have a cluster pattern tendency. Then, the spatial relationship between the cluster landslides and conditioning factors were analyzed using evidential belief function (EBF) model. Additionally, the susceptible map produced by an earlier study was used to compare the results of the inventory selection. Finally, two landslide susceptible maps (LSMs) were validated by using prediction rate curve techniques. Prediction accuracy of the cluster data LSM2 was 0.80 (80 %), whereas the random data produced LSM1 showed 0.75 (75 %) prediction accuracy. From the results obtained in this study, one can infer that the spatial nature pattern of landslide inventory follows a cluster patterns. Secondly, clustered data can be used as training data instead of random selection technique. As a conclusion, the same technique can be replicated elsewhere.


Landslide Spatial pattern analysis Cluster Nearest neighbor index GIS Malaysia 



The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support from the UPM-RUGS project grant, vote number: 9344100 with additional support from FIG grant.


  1. Akgun A, Kıncal C, Pradhan B (2011) Application of remote sensing data and GIS for landslide risk assessment as an environmental threat to Izmir city (west Turkey). Environ Monit Assess 184(9):5453–5470Google Scholar
  2. 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(1):23–34Google Scholar
  3. Althuwaynee OF, Pradhan B, Lee S (2012a) Application of an evidential belief function model in landslide susceptibility mapping. Comput Geosci 44:120–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Althuwaynee OF, Pradhan B, Mahmud AR, Yusoff, ZM, (2012b) Prediction of slope failures using bivariate statistical based index of entropy model. In: IEEE colloquium on humanities, science and engineering (CHUSER), 2012, IEEE, pp 362–367Google Scholar
  5. Bai S, Lü G, Wang J, Zhou P, Ding L (2011) GIS-based rare events logistic regression for landslide-susceptibility mapping of Lianyungang, China. Environ Earth Sci 62:139–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carranza EJM (2009) Controls on mineral deposit occurrence inferred from analysis of their spatial pattern and spatial association with geological features. Ore Geol Rev 35:383–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chu C-M, Tsai B-W, Chang K-T (2009) Integrating decision tree and spatial cluster analysis for landslide susceptibility zonation. World Acad Sci Eng Technol 59:479–483Google Scholar
  8. Clark PJ, Evans FC (1954) Distance to nearest neighbor as a measure of spatial relationships in populations. Ecology 35:445–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dempster AP (1968) Upper and lower probabilities generated by a random closed interval. Ann Math Stat 39:957–966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Devkota K et al (2013) 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. Nat Hazards 65:135–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Evett SR, Tolk JA, Howell TA (2006) Soil profile water content determination: sensor accuracy, axial response, calibration, temperature dependence, and precision. Vadose Zone J 5:894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jarman D (2006) Large rock slope failures in the Highlands of Scotland: characterisation, causes and spatial distribution. Eng Geol 83:161–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Keeper DK (1984) Landslides caused by earthquakes. Geol Soc Am Bull 95:406–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Oh H-J, Lee S (2011) Landslide susceptibility mapping on Panaon island, Philippines using a geographic information system. Environ Earth Sci 62:935–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Park N-W (2010) Application of Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence to GIS-based landslide susceptibility analysis. Environ Earth Sci 62:367–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pourghasemi HR, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C (2012a) Application of fuzzy logic and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed, Iran. Nat Hazards 63:965–996Google Scholar
  17. Pourghasemi HR, Mohammadi M, Pradhan B (2012b) Landslide susceptibility mapping using index of entropy and conditional probability models at Safarood Basin, Iran. Catena 97:71–84. Google Scholar
  18. Pourghasemi HR, Jirandeh AG, Pradhan B, Xu C, Gokceoglu C (2013a) Landslide susceptibility mapping using support vector machine and GIS at the Golestan Province. Iran. J Earth Syst Sci 122:1–21Google Scholar
  19. Pourghasemi HR, Moradi HR, Fatemi Aghda SM, Gokceoglu C, Pradhan B (2013b) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping with probabilistic likelihood ratio and spatial multi criteria evaluation models (North of Tehran, Iran). Arab J Geosci. (Article online first available)
  20. Pourghasemi HR, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C, Moezzi KD (2013c) 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(2): 93–118.
  21. Pradhan B, Oh HJ, Buchroithner M (2010a) Weights-of-evidence model applied to landslide susceptibility mapping in a tropical hilly area. Geomat Nat Hazards Risk 1(3):199–223Google Scholar
  22. Pradhan B, Youssef AM, Varathrajoo R (2010b) Approaches for delineating landslide hazard areas using different training sites in an advanced artificial neural network model. Geosp Inf Sci 13(2):93–102Google Scholar
  23. 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 18:471–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pradhan B, Mansor S, Pirasteh S, Buchroithner MF (2011) Landslide hazard and risk analyses at a landslide prone catchment area using statistical based geospatial model. Int J Remote Sens 32(14):4075–4087Google Scholar
  25. Pradhan B (2013) 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 51:350–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pradhan B, Chaudhari A, Adinarayana J, Buchroithner MF (2012) Soil erosion assessment and its correlation with landslide events using remote sensing data and GIS: a case study at Penang Island, Malaysia. Environ Monit Assess 184:715–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pradhan B, Lee S (2007) Utilization of optical remote sensing data and GIS tools for regional landslide hazard analysis using an artificial neural network model. Earth Sci Front 14:143–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ripley BD (1976) The second-order analysis of stationary point processes. J appl probab 13:255–266Google Scholar
  29. Shafer G (1976) A mathematical theory of evidence. Princeton university press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  30. Stoyan D (2006) Fundamentals of point process statistics, case studies in spatial point process modeling. Springer, New York, pp 3–22Google Scholar
  31. Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick OB (2012a) Landslide susceptibility assessment in the Hoa Binh province of Vietnam: a comparison of the Levenberg-Marquardt and Bayesian regularized neural networks. Geomorphology 171:12–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick OB (2012b) 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 96:28–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I (2012c) Landslide susceptibility assessment in Vietnam using support vector machines, decision tree and Naïve Bayes models. Math Probl Eng 2012:1–26Google Scholar
  34. 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 45:199–211Google Scholar
  35. Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick O (2013) Regional prediction of landslide hazard using probability analysis of intense rainfall in the Hoa Binh province, Vietnam. Nat Hazards 66:707–730Google Scholar
  36. Varnes DJ (1984) Landslide hazard zonation: a review of principles and practice. Nat Hazards 3:63Google Scholar
  37. Zare M, Pourghasemi HR, Vafakhah M, Pradhan B (2013) Landslide susceptibility mapping at Vaz Watershed (Iran) using an artificial neural network model: a comparison between multilayer perceptron (MLP) and radial basic function (RBF) algorithms. Arab J Geosci 6(8):2873–2888Google Scholar
  38. Zuo R, Agterberg FP, Cheng Q, Yao L (2009) Fractal characterization of the spatial distribution of geological point processes. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 11:394–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringUniversity Putra MalaysiaSerdangMalaysia

Personalised recommendations