MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408441270 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu25-3859

Explainable convolutional neural network for flood susceptibility mapping in Southern Ontario  

2025· preprint· en· W4408441270 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rahma Khalid, Usman T. Khan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkFlood mythComputer scienceGeographyArtificial intelligenceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flood susceptibility mapping (FSM) plays a crucial role in proactive flood risk management, particularly in light of increasing fluvial flooding events. Traditional FSM methods, such as physics-based and qualitative approaches, are hindered by either high computational demands or inherent uncertainty. To address this, machine learning (ML) models have become an increasingly popular FSM approach, though commonly cited as black-box approaches due to the difficulty associated with understanding their underlying mechanisms. In order to better understand the ML approaches used for FSM, this study uses the gradient-weighted class activation mapping (Grad-CAM) to interpret flood susceptibility predictions of a convolutional neural network (CNN) for the Don River watershed in Ontario, Canada. Grad-CAM is an explainable algorithm highlighting input regions that are influential to the output, aiding the user in understanding and visualizing model selected important features used to arrive at the prediction. Grad-CAM results are compared to the commonly used shapley additive explanation (SHAP) algorithm. SHAP is used to calculate the relative contribution of each input onto the output, and provides a benchmark for comparisons due to its popularity.A two dimensional CNN with an architecture of two convolutional layers, two pooling layers and a fully connected layer is used to predict flood susceptibility. The inputs to the CNN include topographical and climactic variables across the entire watershed, with a 60-40% training and testing split respectively. The results of the CNN were compared against the floodplain map of the Don River. Using the area under curve- receiver operating characteristics (AUC-ROC) as a performance metric, the CNN exhibits high performance with an AUC-ROC of 0.96.The study highlights the potential of CNNs for flood susceptibility mapping, as well as compares two explainable machine learning algorithms, helping to further their application within FSM. Explainable algorithms are essential to decision makers in flood risk management for proactive planning and resource allocation. Future work should explore expanding the scope to predict flood susceptibility at a nationwide level.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207