Landslide Susceptibility Mapping Using Different GIS-Based Bivariate Models
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Landslides are the most frequent phenomenon in the northern part of Iran, which cause considerable financial and life damages every year. One of the most widely used approaches to reduce these damages is preparing a landslide susceptibility map (LSM) using suitable methods and selecting the proper conditioning factors. The current study is aimed at comparing four bivariate models, namely the frequency ratio (FR), Shannon entropy (SE), weights of evidence (WoE), and evidential belief function (EBF), for a LSM of Klijanrestagh Watershed, Iran. Firstly, 109 locations of landslides were obtained from field surveys and interpretation of aerial photographs. Then, the locations were categorized into two groups of 70% (74 locations) and 30% (35 locations), randomly, for modeling and validation processes, respectively. Then, 10 conditioning factors of slope aspect, curvature, elevation, distance from fault, lithology, normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), distance from the river, distance from the road, the slope angle, and land use were determined to construct the spatial database. From the results of multicollinearity, it was concluded that no collinearity existed between the 10 considered conditioning factors in the occurrence of landslides. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and the area under the curve (AUC) were used for validation of the four achieved LSMs. The AUC results introduced the success rates of 0.8, 0.86, 0.84, and 0.85 for EBF, WoE, SE, and FR, respectively. Also, they indicated that the rates of prediction were 0.84, 0.83, 0.82, and 0.79 for WoE, FR, SE, and EBF, respectively. Therefore, the WoE model, having the highest AUC, was the most accurate method among the four implemented methods in identifying the regions at risk of future landslides in the study area. The outcomes of this research are useful and essential for the government, planners, decision makers, researchers, and general land-use planners in the study area.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 it