GIS-Based Gully Erosion Susceptibility Mapping: A Comparison of Computational Ensemble Data Mining Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gully erosion destroys agricultural and domestic grazing land in many countries, especially those with arid and semi-arid climates and easily eroded rocks and soils. It also generates large amounts of sediment that can adversely impact downstream river channels. The main objective of this research is to accurately detect and predict areas prone to gully erosion. In this paper, we couple hybrid models of a commonly used base classifier (reduced pruning error tree, REPTree) with AdaBoost (AB), bagging (Bag), and random subspace (RS) algorithms to create gully erosion susceptibility maps for a sub-basin of the Shoor River watershed in northwestern Iran. We compare the performance of these models in terms of their ability to predict gully erosion and discuss their potential use in other arid and semi-arid areas. Our database comprises 242 gully erosion locations, which we randomly divided into training and testing sets with a ratio of 70/30. Based on expert knowledge and analysis of aerial photographs and satellite images, we selected 12 conditioning factors for gully erosion. We used multi-collinearity statistical techniques in the modeling process, and checked model performance using statistical indexes including precision, recall, F-measure, Matthew correlation coefficient (MCC), receiver operatic characteristic curve (ROC), precision–recall graph (PRC), Kappa, root mean square error (RMSE), relative absolute error (PRSE), mean absolute error (MAE), and relative absolute error (RAE). Results show that rainfall, elevation, and river density are the most important factors for gully erosion susceptibility mapping in the study area. All three hybrid models that we tested significantly enhanced and improved the predictive power of REPTree (AUC=0.800), but the RS-REPTree (AUC= 0.860) ensemble model outperformed the Bag-REPTree (AUC= 0.841) and the AB-REPTree (AUC= 0.805) models. We suggest that decision makers, planners, and environmental engineers employ the RS-REPTree hybrid model to better manage gully erosion-prone areas in Iran.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".