MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206910722 · doi:10.3390/rs14030532

Monitoring and Stability Analysis of the Deformation in the Woda Landslide Area in Tibet, China by the DS-InSAR Method

2022· article· en· W4206910722 on OpenAlexaff
Youfeng Liu, Honglei Yang, Wang Shizheng, Linlin Xu, Junhuan Peng

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersState Key Laboratory of Coal Resources and Safe MiningNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaEuropean Space AgencyNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsLandslideInterferometric synthetic aperture radarGeologyDeformation (meteorology)SeismologyGeodesyDeformation monitoringTerrainRemote sensingSynthetic aperture radarCartographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Woda area in the upper Jinsha River has steep terrain and broken structures, causing landslide disasters frequently. Here, we used the distributed scatterer interferometric SAR (DS-InSAR) method to monitor and analyze the Woda landslide area. With the DS-InSAR method, we derived the deformation of the Woda landslide area from 106 Sentinel-1A ascending images acquired between 5 November 2014 and 4 September 2019 and 102 Sentinel-1A descending images acquired between 31 October 2014 and 11 September 2019. The obvious advantage of the DS-InSAR method compared to the persistent scatterer (PS) InSAR (PS-InSAR) method is that the densities of the monitoring points were increased by 25.1% and 22.9% in the ascending and descending images, respectively. The two-dimensional deformation of the landslide area shows that the maximum surface deformation rate in the normal direction was −80 mm/yr, and in the east–west direction, 118 mm/yr. According to the rescaled range (R/S) analysis, the Hurst index values of the deformation trends were all greater than 0.5, which means the deformation trend will continue for some time. In addition, we analyzed the influencing factors and the deformation mechanism of the Woda landslide area and found that the surface deformation is closely related to the geological structure and precipitation, among which precipitation is the main factor triggering the deformation. Our monitoring results will help the local government to conduct regular inspections and strengthen landslide disaster prevention in low-coherence mountainous areas.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score0.655

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations53
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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