Mapping Risk to Land Subsidence: Developing a Two-Level Modeling Strategy by Combining Multi-Criteria Decision-Making and Artificial Intelligence Techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Groundwater over-abstraction may cause land subsidence (LS), and the LS mapping suffers the subjectivity associated with expert judgment. The paper seeks to reduce the subjectivity associated with the hazard, vulnerability, and risk mapping by formulating an inclusive multiple modeling (IMM), which combines two common approaches of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) at Level 1 and artificial intelligence (AI) at Level 2. Fuzzy catastrophe scheme (FCS) is used as MCDM, and support vector machine (SVM) is employed as AI. The developed methodology is applied in Iran’s Tasuj plain, which has experienced groundwater depletion. The result highlights hotspots within the study area in terms of hazard, vulnerability, and risk. According to the receiver operating characteristic and the area under curve (AUC), significant signals are identified at both levels; however, IMM increases the modeling performance from Level 1 to Level 2, as a result of its multiple modeling capabilities. In addition, the AUC values indicate that LS in the study area is caused by intrinsic vulnerability rather than man-made hazards. Still, the hazard plays the triggering role in the risk realization.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".