Rapid Terrain Assessment for Earthquake-Triggered Landslide Susceptibility With High-Resolution DEM and Critical Acceleration
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
Earthquake ground motion often triggers landslides in mountainous areas. A simple, robust method to quickly evaluate the terrain’s susceptibility of specific locations to earthquake-triggered landslides is important for planning field reconnaissance and rescues after earthquakes. Different approaches have been used to estimate coseismic landslide susceptibility using Newmark’s sliding block model. This model requires an estimate of the landslide depth or thickness, which is a difficult parameter to estimate. We illustrate the use of Newmark sliding block’s critical acceleration for a glaciated valley affected by the 2015 Gorkha earthquake in Nepal. The landslide data came from comparing high-resolution pre- and post-earthquake digital elevation models (DEMs) derived from Spot 6/7 images. The areas where changes were detected provided an inventory of all the landslides triggered by the earthquake. The landslide susceptibility was modeled in a GIS environment using as inputs the pre-earthquake terrain and slope angles, the peak ground acceleration from the 2015 Gorkha earthquake, and a geological map. We exploit the depth information for the landslides (obtained by DEM difference) to apply the critical acceleration model. The spatial distribution of the predicted earthquake-triggered landslides matched the actual landslides when the assumed landslide thickness in the model is close to the median value of the actual landslide thickness (2.6 m in this case). The landslide predictions generated a map of landslide locations close to those observed and demonstrated the applicability of critical acceleration for rapidly creating a map of earthquake-triggered landslides.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it