Landslide susceptibility near highways is increased by 1 order of magnitude in the Andes of southern Ecuador, Loja province
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Mountain roads in developing countries are known to increase landslide occurrence due to often inadequate drainage systems and mechanical destabilization of hillslopes by undercutting and overloading. This study empirically investigates landslide initiation frequency along two paved interurban highways in the tropical Andes of southern Ecuador across different climatic regimes. Generalized additive models (GAM) and generalized linear models (GLM) were used to analyze the relationship between mapped landslide initiation points and distance to highway while accounting for topographic, climatic, and geological predictors as possible confounders. A spatial block bootstrap was used to obtain nonparametric confidence intervals for the odds ratio of landslide occurrence near the highways (25 m distance) compared to a 200 m distance. The estimated odds ratio was 18–21, with lower 95% confidence bounds >13 in all analyses. Spatial bootstrap estimation using the GAM supports the higher odds ratio estimate of 21.2 (95% confidence interval: 15.5–25.3). The highway-related effects were observed to fade at about 150 m distance. Road effects appear to be enhanced in geological units characterized by Holocene gravels and Laramide andesite/basalt. Overall, landslide susceptibility was found to be more than 1 order of magnitude higher in close proximity to paved interurban highways in the Andes of southern Ecuador.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".