Geospatial Modeling Based-Multi-Criteria Decision-Making for Flash Flood Susceptibility Zonation in an Arid Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identifying areas susceptible to flash flood hazards is essential to mitigating their negative impacts, particularly in arid regions. For example, in southeastern Sinai, the Egyptian government seeks to develop its coastal areas along the Gulf of Aqaba to maximize its national economy while preserving sustainable development standards. The current study aims to map and predict flash flood prone areas utilizing a spatial analytic hierarchy process (AHP) that integrates GIS capabilities, remote sensing datasets, the NASA Giovanni web tool application, and principal component analysis (PCA). Nineteen flash flood triggering parameters were initially considered for developing the susceptibility model by conducting a detailed literature review and using our experiences in the flash food studies. Next, the PCA algorithm was utilized to reduce the subjective nature of the researchers’ judgments in selecting flash flood triggering factors. By reducing the dimensionality of the data, we eliminated ten explanatory variables, and only nine relatively less correlated factors were retained, which prevented the creation of an ill-structured model. Finally, the AHP method was utilized to determine the relative weights of the nine spatial factors based on their significance in triggering flash floods. The resulting weights were as follows: rainfall (RF = 0.310), slope (S = 0.221), drainage density (DD = 0.158), geology (G = 0.107), height above nearest drainage network (HAND = 0.074), landforms (LF = 0.051), Melton ruggedness number (MRN = 0.035), plan curvature (PnC = 0.022), and stream power index (SPI = 0.022). The current research proved that AHP, among the most dependable methods for multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM), can effectively classify the degree of flash flood risk in ungauged arid areas. The study found that 59.2% of the area assessed was at very low and low risk of a flash flood, 21% was at very high and high risk, and 19.8% was at moderate risk. Using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC ROC) as a statistical evaluation metric, the GIS-based AHP model developed demonstrated excellent predictive accuracy, achieving a score of 91.6%.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".