Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Machine Learning Techniques in Landslide Susceptibility Mapping: A Survey and a Case Study

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Landslides: Theory, Practice and Modelling

Part of the book series: Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research ((NTHR,volume 50))

Abstract

Machine learning techniques have been increasingly employed for solving many scientific and engineering problems. These data driven methods have been lately utilized with great success to produce landslide susceptibility maps. They give promising results particularly for mapping large landslide prone areas with limited geotechnical data. This chapter surveys their use in landslide susceptibility analysis and presents a case study investigating their effectiveness with regard to a conventional statistical method, namely logistic regression. It starts with the importance of spatial prediction of future landslides from past and present ones and discusses the requirement of advanced techniques for landslide susceptibility mapping. A critical literature survey is given under five main categories including core algorithms and their ensembles together with their hybrid forms. An application is presented for machine learning application using bagging, random forest, rotation forest and support vector machines with their optimal settings.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kreimer A, Munasinghe M (1991) Managing environmental degradation and natural disasters: an overview. In: Kreimer A, Munasinghe M (eds) Managing natural disasters and the environment. World Bank, Washington, DC, pp 3–6

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lacasse S, Nadim F (2009) Landslide risk assessment and mitigation strategy. In: Sassa K, Canuti P (eds) Landslides – disaster risk reduction. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  3. Varnes DJ (1978) Slope movement types and processes. In: Schuster RL, Krizek RJ (eds) Landslides: analysis and control. Transportation Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  4. Marsh SH (2000) Landslide hazard mapping: summary report. British Geological Survey Technical Report WC/00/11, 25p

    Google Scholar 

  5. Schuster RL (1996) Socioeconomic significance of landslides. In: Turner AK, Schuster RL (eds) Landslides: investigation and mitigation, Special Report 247. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, pp 12–35

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dai FC, Lee CF, Ngai YY (2002) Landslide risk assessment and management: an overview. Eng Geol 64:65–87

    Google Scholar 

  7. Marjanović M, Kovacevic M, Bajat B et al (2011) Landslide assessment of the starcˇa basin (Croatia) using machine learning algorithms. Acta Geotech Slov 2011:45–55

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kavzoglu T, Sahin EK, Colkesen I (2015) An assessment of multivariate and bivariate approaches in landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study of Duzkoy district. Nat Hazards 76:471–496

    Google Scholar 

  9. van Westen CJ, Rengers N, Soeters R (2003) Use of geomorphological information in indirect landslide susceptibility assessment. Nat Hazards 30:399–419

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hasekiogullari GD, Ercanoglu M (2012) A new approach to use AHP in landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study at Yenice (Karabuk, NW Turkey). Nat Hazards 63:1157–1179

    Google Scholar 

  11. Suzen ML, Kaya BS (2012) Evaluation of environmental parameters in logistic regression models for landslide susceptibility mapping. Int J Digit Earth 5:338–355

    Google Scholar 

  12. Smola A, Vishwanathan SVN (2008) Introduction to machine learning. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  13. Costanzo D, Rotigliano E, Irigaray C et al (2012) Factors selection in landslide susceptibility modelling on large scale following the GIS matrix method: application to the river Beiro basin (Spain). Nat Hazards Earth Syst 12:327–340

    Google Scholar 

  14. 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

    Google Scholar 

  15. Brenning A (2005) Spatial prediction models for landslide hazards: review, comparison and evaluation. Nat Hazards Earth Syst 5:853–862

    Google Scholar 

  16. Marrapu BM, Jakka RS (2014) Landslide hazard zonation methods: a critical review. Int J Civ Eng Res 5:215–220

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bai SB, Wang J, Thiebes B et al (2014) Susceptibility assessments of the Wenchuan earthquake-triggered landslides in Longnan using logistic regression. Environ Earth Sci 71:731–743

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wan S, Yen JY, Lin CY et al (2015) Construction of knowledge-based spatial decision support system for landslide mapping using fuzzy clustering and KPSO analysis. Arab J Geosci 8:1041–1055

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lian C, Zeng ZG, Yao W et al (2013) Displacement prediction model of landslide based on a modified ensemble empirical mode decomposition and extreme learning machine. Nat Hazards 66:759–771

    Google Scholar 

  20. Pradhan B, Sezer EA, Gokceoglu C et al (2010) Landslide susceptibility mapping by neuro-fuzzy approach in a landslide-prone area (Cameron Highlands, Malaysia). IEEE T Geosci Remote 48:4164–4177

    Google Scholar 

  21. Choi J, Lee YK, Lee M et al (2011) Landslide susceptibility mapping by using an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS). In: 2011 I.E. international geoscience and remote sensing symposium (IGARSS):1989–1992

    Google Scholar 

  22. Aghdam IN, Varzandeh MHM, Pradhan B (2016) Landslide susceptibility mapping using an ensemble statistical index (Wi) and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) model at Alborz Mountains (Iran). Environ Earth Sci 75:553

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lee S, Ryu JH, Lee MJ et al (2003) Use of an artificial neural network for analysis of the susceptibility to landslides at Boun, Korea. Environ Geol 44:820–833

    Google Scholar 

  24. Gómez H, Kavzoglu T (2005) Assessment of shallow landslide susceptibility using artificial neural networks in Jabonosa River Basin, Venezuela. Eng Geol 78:11–27

    Google Scholar 

  25. Yilmaz I (2010) Comparison of landslide susceptibility mapping methodologies for Koyulhisar, Turkey: conditional probability, logistic regression, artificial neural networks, and support vector machine. Environ Earth Sci 61:821–836

    Google Scholar 

  26. Bui DT, Tuan TA, Klempe H et al (2016) 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

    Google Scholar 

  27. Gorsevski PV, Brown MK, Panter K et al (2016) Landslide detection and susceptibility mapping using LiDAR and an artificial neural network approach: a case study in the Cuyahoga Valley National Park, Ohio. Landslides 13:467–484

    Google Scholar 

  28. Wang LJ, Guo M, Sawada K et al (2016) A comparative study of landslide susceptibility maps using logistic regression, frequency ratio, decision tree, weights of evidence and artificial neural network. Geosci J 20:117–136

    Google Scholar 

  29. Xu C, Shen LL, Wang GL (2016) Soft computing in assessment of earthquake-triggered landslide susceptibility. Environ Earth Sci 75:767

    Google Scholar 

  30. Vasu NN, Lee SR (2016) A hybrid feature selection algorithm integrating an extreme learning machine for landslide susceptibility modeling of Mt. Woomyeon, South Korea. Geomorphology 263:50–70

    Google Scholar 

  31. Pavel M, Nelson JD, Fannin RJ (2011) An analysis of landslide susceptibility zonation using a subjective geomorphic mapping and existing landslides. Comput Geosci 37:554–566

    Google Scholar 

  32. Felicisimo A, Cuartero A, Remondo J et al (2013) Mapping landslide susceptibility with logistic regression, multiple adaptive regression splines, classification and regression trees, and maximum entropy methods: a comparative study. Landslides 10:175–189

    Google Scholar 

  33. Wang LJ, Guo M, Sawada K et al (2015) Landslide susceptibility mapping in Mizunami City, Japan: a comparison between logistic regression, bivariate statistical analysis and multivariate adaptive regression spline models. Catena 135:271–282

    Google Scholar 

  34. Conoscenti C, Rotigliano E, Cama M et al (2016) Exploring the effect of absence selection on landslide susceptibility models: a case study in Sicily, Italy. Geomorphology 261:222–235

    Google Scholar 

  35. Wan SA (2013) Entropy-based particle swarm optimization with clustering analysis on landslide susceptibility mapping. Environ Earth Sci 68:1349–1366

    Google Scholar 

  36. Wang LJ, Sawada K, Moriguchi S (2013) Landslide susceptibility analysis with logistic regression model based on FCM sampling strategy. Comput Geosci 57:81–92

    Google Scholar 

  37. Alimohammadlou Y, Najafi A, Gokceoglu C (2014) Estimation of rainfall-induced landslides using ANN and fuzzy clustering methods: a case study in Saeen Slope, Azerbaijan province, Iran. Catena 120:149–162

    Google Scholar 

  38. Yu XY, Wang Y, Niu RQ et al (2016) A combination of geographically weighted regression, particle swarm optimization and support vector machine for landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study at Wanzhou in the three gorges area, China. Int J Environ Res Publ Health 13:487. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph13050487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Moosavi V, Niazi Y (2016) Development of hybrid wavelet packet-statistical models (WP-SM) for landslide susceptibility mapping. Landslides 13:97–114

    Google Scholar 

  40. Colkesen I, Sahin EK, Kavzoglu T (2016) Susceptibility mapping of shallow landslides using kernel-based Gaussian process, support vector machines and logistic regression. J Afr Earth Sci 118:53–64

    Google Scholar 

  41. Hong HY, Pradhan B, Xu C et al (2015) Spatial prediction of landslide hazard at the Yihuang area (China) using two-class kernel logistic regression, alternating decision tree and support vector machines. Catena 133:266–281

    Google Scholar 

  42. Yao X, Tham LG, Dai FC (2008) Landslide susceptibility mapping based on support vector machine: a case study on natural slopes of Hong Kong, China. Geomorphology 101:572–582

    Google Scholar 

  43. Goetz JN, Brenning A, Petschko H et al (2015) Evaluating machine learning and statistical prediction techniques for landslide susceptibility modeling. Comput Geosci 81:1–11

    Google Scholar 

  44. Hong HY, Pradhan B, Jebur MN et al (2016) Spatial prediction of landslide hazard at the Luxi area (China) using support vector machines. Environ Earth Sci 75:40

    Google Scholar 

  45. Bui DT, Ho CT, Revhaug I et al (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping along the national road 32 of Vietnam using GIS-based J48 decision tree classifier and its ensembles. In: Buchroithner M, Prechtel N, Burghardt D (eds) Cartography from pole to pole: selected contributions to the XXVIth international conference of the ICA, Dresden 2013. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 303–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32618-9_22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  46. Bui DT, Ho TC, Pradhan B et al (2016) GIS-based modeling of rainfall-induced landslides using data mining-based functional trees classifier with Ada Boost, Bagging, and Multi Boost ensemble frameworks. Environ Earth Sci 75:1101

    Google Scholar 

  47. Althuwaynee OF, Pradhan B, Park HJ et al (2014) A novel ensemble bivariate statistical evidential belief function with knowledge-based analytical hierarchy process and multivariate statistical logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping. Catena 114:21–36

    Google Scholar 

  48. Althuwaynee OF, Pradhan B, Lee S (2016) A novel integrated model for assessing landslide susceptibility mapping using CHAID and AHP pair-wise comparison. Int J Remote Sens 37:1190–1209

    Google Scholar 

  49. Saito H, Nakayama D, Matsuyama H (2009) Comparison of landslide susceptibility based on a decision-tree model and actual landslide occurrence: the Akaishi Mountains, Japan. Geomorphology 109:108–121

    Google Scholar 

  50. Yeon YK, Han JG, Ryu KH (2010) Landslide susceptibility mapping in Injae, Korea, using a decision tree. Eng Geol 116:274–283

    Google Scholar 

  51. Catani F, Lagomarsino D, Segoni S et al (2013) Landslide susceptibility estimation by random forests technique: sensitivity and scaling issues. Nat Hazards Earth Syst 13:2815–2831

    Google Scholar 

  52. Trigila A, Iadanza C, Esposito C et al (2015) Comparison of logistic regression and random forests techniques for shallow landslide susceptibility assessment in Giampilieri (NE Sicily, Italy). Geomorphology 249:119–136

    Google Scholar 

  53. Were K, Bui DT, Dick OB et al (2015) A comparative assessment of support vector regression, artificial neural networks, and random forests for predicting and mapping soil organic carbon stocks across an Afromontane landscape. Ecol Indic 52:394–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.12.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Pham BT, Bui DT, Prakash I et al (2016) Rotation forest fuzzy rule-based classifier ensemble for spatial prediction of landslides using GIS. Nat Hazards 83:97–127

    Google Scholar 

  55. Klose M (2015) Landslide databases as tools for integrated assessment of landslide risk. Springer Theses, Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  56. Breiman L (1996) Bagging predictors. Mach Learn 24:123–140

    Google Scholar 

  57. Aggarwal CC (2015) Data classification: advanced concepts. In: Data mining: the textbook. Springer, Cham, pp 345–387

    Google Scholar 

  58. Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45:5–32

    Google Scholar 

  59. Rokach L (2016) Decision forest: twenty years of research. Inform Fusion 27:111–125

    Google Scholar 

  60. Rodriguez JJ, Kuncheva LI (2006) Rotation forest: a new classifier ensemble method. IEEE T Pattern Anal 28:1619–1630

    Google Scholar 

  61. Rokach L (2010) Ensemble-based classifiers. Artif Intell Rev 33:1–39

    Google Scholar 

  62. Schölkopf B, Smola AJ (2002) Learning with kernels: support vector machines, regularization, optimization and beyond. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  63. Gleason CJ, Im J (2012) Forest biomass estimation from airborne LiDAR data using machine learning approaches. Remote Sens Environ 125:80–91

    Google Scholar 

  64. Mancini F, Ceppi C, Ritrovato G (2010) GIS and statistical analysis for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Daunia area, Italy. Nat Hazards Earth Syst 10:1851–1864

    Google Scholar 

  65. Kavzoglu T, Sahin EK, Colkesen I (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis, support vector machines, and logistic regression. Landslides 11:425–439

    Google Scholar 

  66. Wang YT, Seijmonsbergen AC, Bouten W et al (2015) Using statistical learning algorithms in regional landslide susceptibility zonation with limited landslide field data. J Mt Sci-Engl 12:268–288

    Google Scholar 

  67. Feng HJ, Yu JJ, Zheng JL et al (2016) Evaluation of different models in rainfall-triggered landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study in Chunan, southeast China. Environ Earth Sci 75(21):1–15

    Google Scholar 

  68. Pham BT, Pradhan B, Bui DT et al (2016) A comparative study of different machine learning methods for landslide susceptibility assessment: a case study of Uttarakhand area (India). Environ Model Softw 84:240–250

    Google Scholar 

  69. Yilmaz I (2009) Landslide susceptibility mapping using frequency ratio, logistic regression, artificial neural networks and their comparison: a case study from Kat landslides (Tokat-Turkey). Comput Geosci 35:1125–1138

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geomatics, Gebze Technical University, Gebze-Kocaeli, Turkey

    Taskin Kavzoglu, Ismail Colkesen & Emrehan Kutlug Sahin

Authors
  1. Taskin Kavzoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ismail Colkesen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Emrehan Kutlug Sahin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Taskin Kavzoglu .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Earth Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee, India

    S.P. Pradhan

  2. Department of Earth Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

    V. Vishal

  3. Department of Earth Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India

    T.N. Singh

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kavzoglu, T., Colkesen, I., Sahin, E.K. (2019). Machine Learning Techniques in Landslide Susceptibility Mapping: A Survey and a Case Study. In: Pradhan, S., Vishal, V., Singh, T. (eds) Landslides: Theory, Practice and Modelling. Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research, vol 50. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77377-3_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation