Spatial Distribution of Landslide Risk and Exposure Based on CART Model and GIS Technology - Case Study of Panzhihua Basin, Yangtze River, China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spatial distribution of natural disaster risk has been taking as a reference in urban planning and disaster management. Especially to the remote mountainous areas located in southwestern China where landslide disaster could cause enormous damage. In those areas, only few exposure researches could reveal disaster risk and exposure distribution which related to landslide occurrence since lack of landslide indicator information. This research aimed at combining landslide risk mapping with highly exposure mapping to reveal distribution of highly landslide exposure in a remote mountainous area: Panzhihua basin, Yangtze River, China. In this research, 203 landslide point data (103 occurrences and 100 absences) were collected based on governmental landslide inventory and fieldwork to build CART (Classification and Regression Tree) model, which was applied to investigate the relationship between landslide disaster and four independent variables (vegetation, elevation, slope and top soil type). Finally, we developed a landslide-prone hazard map based on transportation, threatened population and property distribution to illustrate potential socioeconomic damage of landslide occurrence. The output maps show that landslide-prone area basically follows valley stretch and Yangtze Rivers. Northeastern and center zone in study area are classified with higher risk to generate landslide disaster. Threaten population and property exposure shows similar distribution in northeastern and northwestern areas while detached in center and southeastern areas. To the transportation sector, there are 75.3km of local road, 8.6km of main road, 29.5km of railway and 39.2km of national highway are highly exposed to landslide occurrence respectively.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".