Next Article in Journal
Geospatial Analysis and the Internet of Things
Previous Article in Journal
GIS Application to Regional Geological Structure Relationship Modelling Considering Semantics
Previous Article in Special Issue
Research on a 3D Geological Disaster Monitoring Platform Based on REST Service
Article Menu
Issue 7 (July) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2018, 7(7), 268; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7070268

Landslide Susceptibility Assessment at Mila Basin (Algeria): A Comparative Assessment of Prediction Capability of Advanced Machine Learning Methods

1
Research Laboratory of Sedimentary Environment, Mineral and Water resources of Eastern Algeria, University of Tebessa, Tebessa 12002, Algeria
2
Geographic Information System Group, Department of Business and IT, University of South-Eastern Norway, Gullbringvegen 36, N-3800 Bø i Telemark, Norway
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 7 May 2018 / Revised: 3 July 2018 / Accepted: 7 July 2018 / Published: 10 July 2018
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [17877 KB, uploaded 10 July 2018]   |  

Abstract

Landslide risk prevention requires the delineation of landslide-prone areas as accurately as possible. Therefore, selecting a method or a technique that is capable of providing the highest landslide prediction capability is highly important. The main objective of this study is to assess and compare the prediction capability of advanced machine learning methods for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Mila Basin (Algeria). First, a geospatial database was constructed from various sources. The database contains 1156 landslide polygons and 16 conditioning factors (altitude, slope, aspect, topographic wetness index (TWI), landforms, rainfall, lithology, stratigraphy, soil type, soil texture, landuse, depth to bedrock, bulk density, distance to faults, distance to hydrographic network, and distance to road networks). Subsequently, the database was randomly resampled into training sets and validation sets using 5 times repeated 10 k-folds cross-validations. Using the training and validation sets, five landslide susceptibility models were constructed, assessed, and compared using Random Forest (RF), Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM), Logistic Regression (LR), Artificial Neural Network (NNET), and Support Vector Machine (SVM). The prediction capability of the five landslide models was assessed and compared using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, the area under the ROC curves (AUC), overall accuracy (Acc), and kappa index. Additionally, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were performed to confirm statistical significance in the differences among the five machine learning models employed in this study. The result showed that the GBM model has the highest prediction capability (AUC = 0.8967), followed by the RF model (AUC = 0.8957), the NNET model (AUC = 0.8882), the SVM model (AUC = 0.8818), and the LR model (AUC = 0.8575). Therefore, we concluded that GBM and RF are the most suitable for this study area and should be used to produce landslide susceptibility maps. These maps as a technical framework are used to develop countermeasures and regulatory policies to minimize landslide damages in the Mila Basin. This research demonstrated the benefit of selecting the best-advanced machine learning method for landslide susceptibility assessment. View Full-Text
Keywords: landslide; susceptibility mapping; machine learning; GIS; Algeria landslide; susceptibility mapping; machine learning; GIS; Algeria
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Supplementary material

SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Merghadi, A.; Abderrahmane, B.; Tien Bui, D. Landslide Susceptibility Assessment at Mila Basin (Algeria): A Comparative Assessment of Prediction Capability of Advanced Machine Learning Methods. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2018, 7, 268.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. EISSN 2220-9964 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top