[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Comparison of hybrid data-driven and physical models for landslide susceptibility mapping at regional scales

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Acta Geotechnica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Landslide susceptibility mapping (LSM) is essential for the spatial prediction of landslides and risk prevention. Physically based LSM models are confined by oversimplifications of physical processes and limited information about soil properties. Data-driven LSM models may give reliable results only when the training and the testing data have high similarity, and application in regions with different geological conditions is often inapplicable. This paper proposes four hybrid data-driven and physical models and compares these models in terms of cross-regional generalization ability and prediction uncertainty. The effects of physical module performance on the hybrid model are analyzed. For the physical modules of the four hybrid models, two-dimensional (2D) physically based models, TRIGRS and the infinite-slope stability models (ISSMs), and the three-dimensional (3D) physically based model, Scoops3D, are adopted. The data-driven modules all adopt the convolutional neural network (CNN) model. Two towns in the Three-Gorge Reservoir area of China are used as the training and testing areas. The results show that all hybrid models have better generalization ability than using the data-driven module exclusively. The prediction uncertainty is significantly reduced by pre-selecting training samples using the physical module. The optimal hybrid model is the one that integrates CNN and ISSM (under the saturated condition). It is then applied to a new region (Wushan County) to further validate the generalization ability. It can make accurate predictions without calibrating the trained model using new data from the validation area. Finally, the effectiveness of model averaging for improving the prediction performance is verified. Using model averaging, the AUC value in the validation area yields 0.834, which is even higher than the original realizations, with AUC values ranging from 0.683 to 0.817. Therefore, the optimal hybrid model can be directly used for LSM in the Three-Gorge Reservoir, and the findings can provide valuable guidance for generalization ability improvement and prediction uncertainty reduction of LSM models in other countries and regions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Data availability

All data are included in the manuscript.

References

  1. Al-Najjar HAH, Pradhan B (2021) Spatial landslide susceptibility assessment using machine learning techniques assisted by additional data created with generative adversarial networks. Geosci Front 12:625–637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2020.09.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alvioli M, Baum RL (2016) Parallelization of the TRIGRS model for rainfall-induced landslides using the message passing interface. Environ Model Softw 81:122–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.04.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. An H, Viet TT, Lee G, Kim Y, Kim M, Noh S, Noh J (2016) Development of time-variant landslide-prediction software considering three-dimensional subsurface unsaturated flow. Environ Model Softw 85:172–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.08.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baum RL, Godt JW, Savage WZ (2010) Estimating the timing and location of shallow rainfall-induced landslides using a model for transient, unsaturated infiltration. J Geophys Res 115:F03013. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009jf001321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Baum RL, Savage WZ, Godt JW (2002) TRIGRS-A Fortran program for transient rainfall infiltration and grid-based regional slope-stability analysis, version 1.0. US Geological Survey Open-File Report. Available via http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2002/ofr-02-424/

  6. Baum RL, Savage WZ, Godt JW (2008) TRIGRS-A Fortran program for transient rainfall infiltration and grid-based regional slope-stability analysis, version 2.0. US Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008-1159. Available via https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1159/

  7. Bordoni M, Vivaldi V, Lucchelli L, Ciabatta L, Brocca L, Galve JP, Meisina C (2020) Development of a data-driven model for spatial and temporal shallow landslide probability of occurrence at catchment scale. Landslides 18:1209–1229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-020-01592-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cantarino I, Carrion MA, Goerlich F, Martinez Ibañez V (2018) A ROC analysis-based classification method for landslide susceptibility maps. Landslides 16:265–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-018-1063-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chang K-T, Chiang S-H (2009) An integrated model for predicting rainfall-induced landslides. Geomorphology 105:366–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2008.10.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chen JY, Yang TJ, Zhang DM, Huang HW, Tian Y (2021) Deep learning based classification of rock structure of tunnel face. Geosci Front 12:395–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2020.04.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen JY, Zhou ML, Huang HW, Zhang DM, Peng ZC (2021) Automated extraction and evaluation of fracture trace maps from rock tunnel face images via deep learning. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2021.104745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chen Q, Chen LX, Gui L, Yin KL, Shrestha DP, Du J, Cao XL (2020) Assessment of the physical vulnerability of buildings affected by slow-moving landslides. Nat Hazard 20:2547–2565. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-2547-2020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen W, Li Y (2020) GIS-based evaluation of landslide susceptibility using hybrid computational intelligence models. Catena. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2020.104777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chen XY, Zhang LL, Chen LH, Li X, Liu DS (2018) Slope stability analysis based on the Coupled Eulerian-Lagrangian finite element method. Bull Eng Geol Env 78:4451–4463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-018-1413-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ciurleo M, Mandaglio MC, Moraci N (2018) Landslide susceptibility assessment by TRIGRS in a frequently affected shallow instability area. Landslides 16:175–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-018-1072-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Cui Q, Zhang LL, Chen XY, Cao ZJ, Wei X, Zhang J, Xu JB, Liu DS, Du CL (2022) Quantitative risk assessment of landslides with direct simulation of pre-failure to post-failure behaviors. Acta Geotech. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-022-01485-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Depina I, Oguz EA, Thakur V (2020) Novel Bayesian framework for calibration of spatially distributed physical-based landslide prediction models. Comput Geotech. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2020.103660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Di Napoli M, Carotenuto F, Cevasco A, Confuorto P, Di Martire D, Firpo M, Pepe G, Raso E, Calcaterra D (2020) Machine learning ensemble modelling as a tool to improve landslide susceptibility mapping reliability. Landslides 17:1897–1914. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-020-01392-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dormann CF, Calabrese JM, Guillera-Arroita G, Matechou E, Bahn V, Bartoń K, Beale CM, Ciuti S, Elith J, Gerstner K, Guelat J, Keil P, Lahoz-Monfort JJ, Pollock LJ, Reineking B, Roberts DR, Schröder B, Thuiller W, Warton DI, Wintle BA, Wood SN, Wüest RO, Hartig F (2018) Model averaging in ecology: a review of Bayesian, information-theoretic, and tactical approaches for predictive inference. Ecol Monogr 88:485–504. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecm.1309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Dou J, Yunus AP, Bui DT, Merghadi A, Sahana M, Zhu ZF, Chen C-W, Han Z, Pham BT (2019) Improved landslide assessment using support vector machine with bagging, boosting, and stacking ensemble machine learning framework in a mountainous watershed, Japan. Landslides 17:641–658. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-019-01286-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Fink O, Wang Q, Svensén M, Dersin P, Lee W-J, Ducoffe M (2020) Potential, challenges and future directions for deep learning in prognostics and health management applications. Eng Appl Artif Intell. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2020.103678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Gardoni P, Der Kiureghian A, Mosalam KM (2002) Probabilistic capacity models and fragility estimates for reinforced concrete columns based on experimental observations. J Eng Mech 128:1024–1038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Goetz JN, Guthrie RH, Brenning A (2011) Integrating physical and empirical landslide susceptibility models using generalized additive models. Geomorphology 129:376–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.03.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gupta HV, Nearing GS (2014) Debates-the future of hydrological sciences: A (common) path forward? Using models and data to learn: A systems theoretic perspective on the future of hydrological science. Water Resour Res 50:5351–5359. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013wr015096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. He J, Qiu H, Qu F, Hu S, Yang D, Shen Y, Zhang Y, Sun H, Cao M (2021) Prediction of spatiotemporal stability and rainfall threshold of shallow landslides using the TRIGRS and Scoops3D models. Catena. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2020.104999

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. He Y, Zhao ZA, Yang W, Yan HW, Wang WH, Yao S, Zhang LF, Liu T (2021) A unified network of information considering superimposed landslide factors sequence and pixel spatial neighbourhood for landslide susceptibility mapping. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2021.102508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Huang FM, Yan J, Fan XM, Yao C, Huang JS, Chen W, Hong HY (2022) Uncertainty pattern in landslide susceptibility prediction modelling: Effects of different landslide boundaries and spatial shape expressions. Geosci Front. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2021.101317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Huang FM, Ye Z, Jiang S-H, Huang JS, Chang ZL, Chen JW (2021) Uncertainty study of landslide susceptibility prediction considering the different attribute interval numbers of environmental factors and different data-based models. Catena. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2021.105250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Huang Y, Zhao L (2018) Review on landslide susceptibility mapping using support vector machines. CATENA 165:520–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2018.03.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kingma DP, Ba J (2014) Adam: a method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:14126980

  31. Lacroix P, Dehecq A, Taipe E (2019) Irrigation-triggered landslides in a Peruvian desert caused by modern intensive farming. Nat Geosci 13:56–60. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-019-0500-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lei MY, Cui YF, Ni JJ, Zhang GT, Li Y, Wang H, Liu DZ, Yi SJ, Jin W, Zhou LQ (2022) Temporal evolution of the hydromechanical properties of soil-root systems in a forest fire in China. Sci Total Environ 809:151165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Li DQ, Qi XH, Phoon K-K, Zhang LM, Zhou CB (2014) Effect of spatially variable shear strength parameters with linearly increasing mean trend on reliability of infinite slopes. Struct Saf 49:45–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2013.08.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Li YY, Yin KL, Chai B, Zhang GR (2008) Study on statistical rule of shear strength parameters of soil in landslide zone in three gorges reservoir area. Rock Soil Mech 29:1419–1418. https://doi.org/10.16285/j.rsm.2008.05.032. (in Chinese)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Lin QG, Lima P, Steger S, Glade T, Jiang T, Zhang JH, Liu TX, Wang Y (2021) National-scale data-driven rainfall induced landslide susceptibility mapping for China by accounting for incomplete landslide data. Geosci Front. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2021.101248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lin S, Zheng H, Han B, Li YY, Han C, Li W (2022) Comparative performance of eight ensemble learning approaches for the development of models of slope stability prediction. Acta Geotech 17:1477–1502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-021-01440-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Liu H, Zheng J, Zhang R, Yang W, Guo Y (2022) Representative slip surface identification and reliability analysis of slope systems in spatially variable soils. Georisk Assess Manag Risk Eng Syst Geohazards. https://doi.org/10.1080/17499518.2022.2112697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Liu J, Zhang YB, Wei JT, Xiang CL, Wang QD, Xu PY, Fu HY (2021) Hazard assessment of earthquake-induced landslides by using permanent displacement model considering near-fault pulse-like ground motions. Bull Eng Geol Env 80:8503–8518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-021-02464-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Liu LN, Li SD, Li X, Jiang Y, Wei WH, Wang ZH, Bai YH (2019) An integrated approach for landslide susceptibility mapping by considering spatial correlation and fractal distribution of clustered landslide data. Landslides 16:715–728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-018-01122-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Lucchese LV, de Oliveira GG, Pedrollo OC (2021) Investigation of the influence of nonoccurrence sampling on landslide susceptibility assessment using Artificial Neural Networks. Catena. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2020.105067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Luo JY, Zhang LL, Yang H-Q, Wei X, Liu DS, Xu JB (2021) Probabilistic model calibration of spatial variability for a physically-based landslide susceptibility model. Georisk Assess Manag Risk Eng Syst Geohazards. https://doi.org/10.1080/17499518.2021.1988986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Melo R, Zêzere JL, Rocha J, Oliveira SC (2019) Combining data-driven models to assess susceptibility of shallow slides failure and run-out. Landslides 16:2259–2276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-019-01235-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Moosavi V, Niazi Y (2015) Development of hybrid wavelet packet-statistical models (WP-SM) for landslide susceptibility mapping. Landslides 13:97–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-014-0547-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Nhu V-H, Hoang N-D, Nguyen H, Ngo PTT, Thanh Bui T, Hoa PV, Samui P, Tien Bui D (2020) Effectiveness assessment of Keras based deep learning with different robust optimization algorithms for shallow landslide susceptibility mapping at tropical area. Catena 188:104458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2020.104458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Oliveira SC, Zêzere JL, Lajas S, Melo R (2017) Combination of statistical and physically based methods to assess shallow slide susceptibility at the basin scale. Nat Hazard 17:1091–1109. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-17-1091-2017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Pham BT, Prakash I (2019) A novel hybrid model of Bagging-based Naïve Bayes Trees for landslide susceptibility assessment. Bull Eng Geol Env 78:1911–1925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-017-1202-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Pradhan B (2010) Use of GIS-based fuzzy logic relations and its cross application to produce landslide susceptibility maps in three test areas in Malaysia. Environ Earth Sci 63:329–349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-010-0705-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Pradhan B (2013) A comparative study on the predictive ability of the decision tree, support vector machine and neuro-fuzzy models in landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS. Comput Geosci 51:350–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2012.08.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Qi XH, Li DQ (2018) Effect of spatial variability of shear strength parameters on critical slip surfaces of slopes. Eng Geol 239:41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2018.03.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Raia S, Alvioli M, Rossi M, Baum RL, Godt JW, Guzzetti F (2014) Improving predictive power of physically based rainfall-induced shallow landslide models: a probabilistic approach. Geosci Model Dev 7:495–514. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-495-2014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Reichenbach P, Rossi M, Malamud BD, Mihir M, Guzzetti F (2018) A review of statistically-based landslide susceptibility models. Earth Sci Rev 180:60–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2018.03.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Reid ME, Christian SB, Brien DL, Henderson ST (2015) Scoops3D—software to analyze three-dimensional slope stability throughout a digital landscape (version 1.0). Geological Survey, Virginia, US

  53. Saadatkhah N, Mansor S, Kassim A, Lee LM, Saadatkhah R, Sobhanmanesh A (2016) Regional modeling of rainfall-induced landslides using TRIGRS model by incorporating plant cover effects: case study in Hulu Kelang, Malaysia. Environ Earth Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-5326-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Saha S, Roy J, Pradhan B, Hembram TK (2021) Hybrid ensemble machine learning approaches for landslide susceptibility mapping using different sampling ratios at East Sikkim Himalayan, India. Adv Space Res 68:2819–2840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2021.05.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Schilirò L, Esposito C, Scarascia Mugnozza G (2015) Evaluation of shallow landslide-triggering scenarios through a physically based approach: an example of application in the southern Messina area (northeastern Sicily, Italy). Nat Hazard 15:2091–2109. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-2091-2015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Shahabi H, Khezri S, Ahmad BB, Hashim M (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping at central Zab basin, Iran: a comparison between analytical hierarchy process, frequency ratio and logistic regression models. CATENA 115:55–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2013.11.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Sorbino G, Sica C, Cascini L (2009) Susceptibility analysis of shallow landslides source areas using physically based models. Nat Hazards 53:313–332. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-009-9431-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Strauch R, Istanbulluoglu E, Riedel J (2019) A new approach to mapping landslide hazards: a probabilistic integration of empirical and physically based models in the North Cascades of Washington, USA. Nat Hazard 19:2477–2495. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-19-2477-2019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Su CX, Wang BJ, Lv YH, Zhang MP, Peng DL, Bate B, Zhang S (2022) Improved landslide susceptibility mapping using unsupervised and supervised collaborative machine learning models. Georisk Assess Manag Risk Eng Syst Geohazards. https://doi.org/10.1080/17499518.2022.2088802

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Sun AY, Scanlon BR, Zhang Z, Walling D, Bhanja SN, Mukherjee A, Zhong Z (2019) Combining physically based modeling and deep learning for fusing GRACE satellite data: can we learn from mismatch? Water Resour Res 55:1179–1195. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018wr023333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Revhaug I, Nguyen DB, Pham HV, Bui QN (2013) A novel hybrid evidential belief function-based fuzzy logic model in spatial prediction of rainfall-induced shallow landslides in the Lang Son city area (Vietnam). Geomat Nat Haz Risk 6:243–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2013.843206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Tien Bui D, Shahabi H, Shirzadi A, Chapi K, Alizadeh M, Chen W, Mohammadi A, Ahmad B, Panahi M, Hong H, Tian Y (2018) Landslide detection and susceptibility mapping by AIRSAR data using support vector machine and index of entropy models in Cameron Highlands, Malaysia. Remote Sens. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10101527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Tien Bui D, Tuan TA, Klempe H, Pradhan B, Revhaug I (2015) Spatial prediction models for shallow landslide hazards: a comparative assessment of the efficacy of support vector machines, artificial neural networks, kernel logistic regression, and logistic model tree. Landslides 13:361–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-015-0557-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Vanacker V, Vanderschaeghe M, Govers G, Willems E, Poesen J, Deckers J, De Bievre B (2003) Linking hydrological, infinite slope stability and land-use change models through GIS for assessing the impact of deforestation on slope stability in high Andean watersheds. Geomorphology 52:299–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-555x(02)00263-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Varkey D, Hicks MA, Vardon PJ (2022) Effect of uncertainties in geometry, inter-layer boundary and shear strength properties on the probabilistic stability of a 3D embankment slope. Georisk Assess Manag Risk Eng Syst Geohazards. https://doi.org/10.1080/17499518.2022.2101066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Wang HJ, Wang L, Zhang LM (2022) Transfer learning improves landslide susceptibility assessment. Gondwana Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gr.2022.07.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Wang HJ, Xiao T, Li XY, Zhang LL, Zhang LM (2019) A novel physically-based model for updating landslide susceptibility. Eng Geol 251:71–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2019.02.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Wang Y, Fang ZC, Hong HY (2019) Comparison of convolutional neural networks for landslide susceptibility mapping in Yanshan County, China. Sci Total Environ 666:975–993. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Wang YM, Feng LW, Li SJ, Ren F, Du QY (2020) A hybrid model considering spatial heterogeneity for landslide susceptibility mapping in Zhejiang Province, China. Catena. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2019.104425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Wei X, Zhang LL, Luo JY, Liu DS (2021) A hybrid framework integrating physical model and convolutional neural network for regional landslide susceptibility mapping. Nat Hazards. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-021-04844-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Weidner L, Oommen T, Escobar-Wolf R, Sajinkumar KS, Samuel RA (2018) Regional-scale back-analysis using TRIGRS: an approach to advance landslide hazard modeling and prediction in sparse data regions. Landslides 15:2343–2356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-018-1044-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Xiao T, Segoni S, Chen LX, Yin KL, Casagli N (2019) A step beyond landslide susceptibility maps: a simple method to investigate and explain the different outcomes obtained by different approaches. Landslides 17:627–640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-019-01299-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Xiao T, Zhang LM, Cheung RWM, Lacasse S (2022) Predicting spatio-temporal man-made slope failures induced by rainfall in Hong Kong using machine learning techniques. Géotechnique. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.21.00160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Xu C, Xu XW, Dai FC, Wu ZD, He HL, Shi F, Wu XY, Xu SN (2013) Application of an incomplete landslide inventory, logistic regression model and its validation for landslide susceptibility mapping related to the May 12, 2008 Wenchuan earthquake of China. Nat Hazards 68:883–900. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0661-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Xu JB, Wang Y, Zhang LL (2021) Interpolation of extremely sparse geo-data by data fusion and collaborative Bayesian compressive sampling. Comput Geotech. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2021.104098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Xu JB, Zhang LL, Wang Y, Wang CH, Zheng JG, Yu YT (2020) Probabilistic estimation of cross-variogram based on Bayesian inference. Eng Geol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2020.105813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Yang H-Q, Zhang LL, Gao L, Phoon K-K, Wei X (2022) On the importance of landslide management: Insights from a 32-year database of landslide consequences and rainfall in Hong Kong. Eng Geol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2022.106578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Yang H-Q, Zhang LL, Pan QJ, Phoon K-K, Shen ZC (2020) Bayesian estimation of spatially varying soil parameters with spatiotemporal monitoring data. Acta Geotech. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-020-00991-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Yatheendradas S, Kirschbaum D, Nearing G, Vrugt JA, Baum RL, Wooten R, Lu N, Godt JW (2019) Bayesian analysis of the impact of rainfall data product on simulated slope failure for North Carolina locations. Comput Geosci 23:495–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10596-018-9804-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Yin YP, Huang BL, Wang WP, Wei YJ, Ma XH, Ma F, Zhao CJ (2016) Reservoir-induced landslides and risk control in Three Gorges Project on Yangtze River, China. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 8:577–595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2016.08.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Zezere JL, Pereira S, Melo R, Oliveira SC, Garcia RAC (2017) Mapping landslide susceptibility using data-driven methods. Sci Total Environ 589:250–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.02.188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Zhang J, Yao HZ, Wang ZP, Xue YD, Zhang LL (2022) On prediction of slope failure time with the inverse velocity method. Georisk Assess Manag Risk Eng Syst Geohazards. https://doi.org/10.1080/17499518.2022.2132263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Zhang K, Xue XW, Hong Y, Gourley JJ, Lu N, Wan ZM, Hong Z, Wooten R (2016) iCRESTRIGRS: a coupled modeling system for cascading flood–landslide disaster forecasting. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 20:5035–5048. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-5035-2016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Zhang LL, Fredlund DG, Zhang LM, Tang WH (2004) Numerical study of soil conditions under which matric suction can be maintained. Can Geotech J 41:569–582. https://doi.org/10.1139/t04-006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Zhang LL, Zhang J, Zhang LM, Tang WH (2011) Stability analysis of rainfall-induced slope failure: a review. Geotech Eng 164:299–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Zhang LL, Zheng YF, Zhang LM, Li X, Wang JH (2014) Probabilistic model calibration for soil slope under rainfall: effects of measurement duration and frequency in field monitoring. Géotechnique 64:365–378. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.13.P.134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Zhang X, Liu LY, Chen XD, Gao Y, Xie S, Mi J (2021) GLC_FCS30: global land-cover product with fine classification system at 30 m using time-series Landsat imagery. Earth Syst Sci Data 13:2753–2776. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-2753-2021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Zhang YB, Chen GQ, Zheng L, Li YG, Zhuang XY (2013) Effects of geometries on three-dimensional slope stability. Can Geotech J 50:233–249. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2012-0279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Zhang YB, Liu J, Cheng QG, Xiao L, Zhao LH, Xiang CL, Buah PA, Yu HH, He YY (2022) A new permanent displacement model considering pulse-like ground motions and its application in landslide hazard assessment. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2022.107556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Zhang YB, Xiang CL, Yu PC, Zhao LH, Zhao JX, Fu HY (2021) Investigation of permanent displacements of near-fault seismic slopes by a general sliding block model. Landslides 19:187–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-021-01736-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Zhao LH, Zuo S, Lin YL, Li L, Zhang YB (2015) Reliability back analysis of shear strength parameters of landslide with three-dimensional upper bound limit analysis theory. Landslides 13:711–724. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-015-0604-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Zhou XZ, Wen HJ, Zhang YL, Xu JH, Zhang WG (2021) Landslide susceptibility mapping using hybrid random forest with GeoDetector and RFE for factor optimization. Geosci Front. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2021.101211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Zhu AX, Miao Y, Liu J, Bai S, Zeng C, Ma T, Hong H (2019) A similarity-based approach to sampling absence data for landslide susceptibility mapping using data-driven methods. Catena. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2019.104188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Zieher T, Rutzinger M, Schneider-Muntau B, Perzl F, Leidinger D, Formayer H, Geitner C (2017) Sensitivity analysis and calibration of a dynamic physically based slope stability model. Nat Hazard 17:971–992. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-17-971-2017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Zieher T, Schneider-Muntau B, Mergili M (2017) Are real-world shallow landslides reproducible by physically-based models? Four test cases in the Laternser valley, Vorarlberg (Austria). Landslides 14:2009–2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-017-0840-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work in this paper was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (Project Nos. 52025094, 52088102, 51979158). The authors are grateful for the support from Shanghai Municipal Education Commission (Project No. 2021-01-07-00-02-E00089).

Funding

The work in this paper was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (Project Nos. 52025094, 52088102, 51979158). The authors are grateful for the support from Shanghai Municipal Education Commission (Project No. 2021-01-07-00-02-E00089).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. State Key Laboratory of Ocean Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Room B522, Mulan Building, 800 Dongchuan Road, Shanghai, 200240, China

    Xin Wei, Lulu Zhang, Yangming Chen & Lin Tan

  2. Collaborative Innovation Center for Advanced Ship and Deep-Sea Exploration (CISSE), Shanghai, 200240, China

    Xin Wei, Lulu Zhang, Yangming Chen & Lin Tan

  3. Shanghai Key Laboratory for Digital Maintenance of Buildings and Infrastructure, Shanghai, 200240, China

    Xin Wei, Lulu Zhang, Yangming Chen & Lin Tan

  4. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, MAE Center: Creating a Multi-Hazard Approach to Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 205 N. Mathews Ave, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA

    Xin Wei & Paolo Gardoni

  5. Chongqing Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, Chongqing, China

    Dongsheng Liu

  6. Hydrogeology & Engineering Team 208, Chongqing Bureau of Geological Exploration (Chongqing Reconnaissance and Design Academy of Geological Disasters Prevention and Treatment Engineering), Chongqing, China

    Chunlan Du & Hai Li

Authors
  1. Xin Wei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lulu Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paolo Gardoni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yangming Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lin Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dongsheng Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Chunlan Du
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Hai Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

XW contributed to conceptualization, methodology, field investigation, data curation, and writing—original draft; LZ contributed to conceptualization, writing—reviewing and editing, supervision, and funding acquisition; PG contributed to writing—reviewing and editing, supervision; YC contributed to writing—reviewing; LT contributed to data curation; DL contributed to field investigation and data support; CD contributed to field investigation and data support; and HL contributed to field investigation and data support.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lulu Zhang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wei, X., Zhang, L., Gardoni, P. et al. Comparison of hybrid data-driven and physical models for landslide susceptibility mapping at regional scales. Acta Geotech. 18, 4453–4476 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-023-01841-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-023-01841-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation