MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197879980 · doi:10.3390/rs13173436

Accurate Prediction of Earthquake-Induced Landslides Based on Deep Learning Considering Landslide Source Area

2021· article· en· W3197879980 on OpenAlexaff
Yao Li, Peng Cui, Chengming Ye, José Marcato, Zhengtao Zhang, Jian Guo, Jonathan Li

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandslideSupport vector machineComputer scienceRandom forestDeep learningAutoencoderArtificial intelligenceDeep belief networkData miningClassifier (UML)Machine learningGeologySeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An earthquake-induced landslide (EQIL) is a rapidly changing process occurring at the Earth’s surface that is strongly controlled by the earthquake in question and predisposing conditions. Predicting locations prone to EQILs on a large scale is significant for managing rescue operations and disaster mitigation. We propose a deep learning framework while considering the source area feature of EQIL to model the complex relationship and enhance spatial prediction accuracy. Initially, we used high-resolution remote sensing images and a digital elevation model (DEM) to extract the source area of an EQIL. Then, 14 controlling factors were input to a stacked autoencoder (SAE) to search for robust features by sparse optimization, and the classifier took advantage of high-level abstract features to identify the EQIL spatially. Finally, the EQIL inventory collected from the Wenchuan earthquake was used to validate the proposed model. The results show that the proposed method significantly outperformed conventional methods, achieving an overall accuracy (OA) of 91.88%, while logistic regression (LR), support vector machine (SVM), and random forest (RF) achieved 80.75%, 82.22%, and 84.16%, respectively. Meanwhile, this study reveals that shallow machine learning models only take advantage of significant factors for EQIL prediction, but deep learning models can extract more effective information related to EQIL distribution from low-value density data, which is why its prediction accuracy is growing with increasing input factors. There is hope that new knowledge of EQILs can be represented by high-level abstract features extracted by hidden layers of the deep learning model, which are typically acquired by statistical methods.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score0.599

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations41
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207