Spatial Prediction of Landslide Susceptibility Using GIS-Based Data Mining Techniques of ANFIS with Whale Optimization Algorithm (WOA) and Grey Wolf Optimizer (GWO)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The most dangerous landslide disasters always cause serious economic losses and human deaths. The contribution of this work is to present an integrated landslide modelling framework, in which an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) is combined with the two optimization algorithms of whale optimization algorithm (WOA) and grey wolf optimizer (GWO) at Anyuan County, China. It means that WOA and GWO are used as two meta-heuristic algorithms to improve the prediction performance of the ANFIS-based methods. In addition, the step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA) method is used to obtain the initial weight of each class of landslide influencing factors. To validate the effectiveness of the proposed framework, 315 landslide events in history were selected for our experiments and were randomly divided into the training and verification sets. To perform landslide susceptibility mapping, fifteen geological, hydrological, geomorphological, land cover, and other factors are considered for the modelling construction. The landslide susceptibility maps by SWARA, SWARA-ANFIS, SWARA-ANFIS-PSO, SWARA-ANFIS-WOA, and SWARA-ANFIS-GWO models are assessed using the measures of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and root-mean-square error (RMSE). The experiments demonstrated that the obtained results of modelling process from the SWARA to the SAWRA-ANFIS-GWO model were more accurate and that the proposed methods have satisfactory prediction ability. Specifically, prediction accuracy by area under the curve (AUC) of SWARA, SWARA-ANFIS, SWARA-ANFIS-PSO, SWARA-ANFIS-GWO, and SWARA-ANFIS-WOA models were 0.831, 0.831, 0.850, 0.856, and 0.869, respectively. Due to adaptability and usability, the proposed prediction methods can be applied to other areas for landslide management and mitigation as well as prevention throughout the world.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".