Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

GIS-based landslide susceptibility analysis using frequency ratio and evidential belief function models

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Environmental Earth Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aimed to produce landslide susceptibility maps using frequency ratio (FR) and evidential belief function (EBF) models based on GIS for Gongliu County, China. For this purpose, a detailed landslide inventory map was prepared and 12 landslide conditioning factors were considered; these factors were as follows: slope angle, slope aspect, curvature, plan curvature, profile curvature, altitude, the normalized difference vegetation index, rainfall, the topographic wetness index (STI), distance from roads, distance from rivers, and lithology. The landslide inventory map was prepared from published sources and aerial photographs, supported by field work. A total of 233 landslides were identified and mapped in the study area. Out of which, 70 % landslides were applied for establishing the model and 30 % landslides were used to validate the model. GIS software was used to analyze landslide conditioning factors and to map landslide susceptibility. Landslide susceptibility maps were prepared using FR and EBF models based on ArcGIS 10.0 and classified into five susceptibility zones: very low, low, moderate, high, and very high. Finally, in order to validate the accuracy of the landslide susceptibility maps produced from two models, the area under curve approach was applied. The validation results showed that the maps using FR and EBF models have a success rate of 82.41 and 79.69 %, respectively. Similarly, the maps using FR and EBF models have a predictive rate of 77.26 and 68.79 %, respectively. Based on the results, both landslide susceptibility maps produced by the two models have a high accuracy and will be helpful for land-use planning in the study area.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Althuwaynee OF, Pradhan B, Lee S (2012) Application of an evidential belief function model in landslide susceptibility mapping. Comput Geosci 44:120–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bui DT, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick OB (2012) Spatial prediction of landslide hazards in Hoa Binh province (Vietnam): a comparative assessment of the efficacy of evidential belief functions and fuzzy logic models. Catena 96:28–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bui DT, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick ØB (2013) Regional prediction of landslide hazard using probability analysis of intense rainfall in the Hoa Binh Province, Vietnam. Nat Hazards 66(2):707–730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carranza EJM, Hale M (2003) Evidential belief functions for data-driven geologically constrained mapping of gold potential, Baguio District, Philippines. Ore Geol Rev 22(1):117–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Z, Wang J (2007) Landslide hazard mapping using logistic regression model in Mackenzie Valley, Canada. Nat Hazards 42(1):75–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Li X, Wang Y, Chen G, Liu S (2014) Forested landslide detection using LiDAR data and the random forest algorithm: a case study of the Three Gorges, China. Remote Sens Environ 152:291–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung CJF, Fabbri AG (2003) Validation of spatial prediction models for landslide hazard mapping. Nat Hazards 30(3):451–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dai FC, Lee CF, Li J, Xu ZW (2001) Assessment of landslide susceptibility on the natural terrain of Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Environ Geol 40(3):381–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demir G, Aytekin M, Akgün A, Ikizler SB, Tatar O (2013) A comparison of landslide susceptibility mapping of the eastern part of the North Anatolian Fault Zone (Turkey) by likelihood-frequency ratio and analytic hierarchy process methods. Nat Hazards 65(3):1481–1506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dempster AP (1967) Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping. Ann Math Stat 38:325–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devkota KC, Regmi AD, Pourghasemi HR, Yoshida K, Pradhan B, Ryu IC, Dhital MR, Althuwaynee OF (2013) Landslide susceptibility mapping using certainty factor, index of entropy and logistic regression models in GIS and their comparison at Mugling–Narayanghat road section in Nepal Himalaya. Nat Hazards 65(1):135–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dragićević S, Lai T, Balram S (2015) GIS-based multicriteria evaluation with multiscale analysis to characterize urban landslide susceptibility in data-scarce environments. Habitat Int 45:114–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felicísimo ÁM, Cuartero A, Remondo J, Quirós E (2013) Mapping landslide susceptibility with logistic regression, multiple adaptive regression splines, classification and regression trees, and maximum entropy methods: a comparative study. Landslides 10(2):175–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzetti F, Carrara A, Cardinali M, Reichenbach P (1999) Landslide hazard evaluation: a review of current techniques and their application in a multi-scale study, Central Italy. Geomorphology 31(1):181–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ilia I, Koumantakis I, Rozos D, Koukis G, Tsangaratos P (2015) A geographical information system (GIS) based probabilistic certainty factor approach in assessing landslide susceptibility: the case study of Kimi, Euboea, Greece. In: Lollino G et al (eds) Engineering geology for society and territory, vol 2. Springer, Switzerland, pp 1199–1204. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-09057-3_210

  • 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(1):471–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Komac M (2006) A landslide susceptibility model using the analytical hierarchy process method and multivariate statistics in perialpine Slovenia. Geomorphology 74(1):17–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Min K (2001) Statistical analysis of landslide susceptibility at Yongin, Korea. Environ Geol 40(9):1095–1113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Pradhan B (2007) Landslide hazard mapping at Selangor, Malaysia using frequency ratio and logistic regression models. Landslides 4(1):33–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Sambath T (2006) Landslide susceptibility mapping in the Damrei Romel area, Cambodia using frequency ratio and logistic regression models. Environ Geol 50(6):847–855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Talib JA (2005) Probabilistic landslide susceptibility and factor effect analysis. Environ Geol 47(7):982–990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Hwang J, Park I (2013) Application of data-driven evidential belief functions to landslide susceptibility mapping in Jinbu, Korea. Catena 100:15–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lepore C, Kamal SA, Shanahan P, Bras RL (2012) Rainfall-induced landslide susceptibility zonation of Puerto Rico. Environ Earth Sci 66(6):1667–1681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu M, Chen X, Yang S (2014) Collapse landslide and mudslides hazard zonation. In: Sassa K et al (eds) Landslide science for a safer geoenvironment, vol 2. Springer, Switzerland, pp 457–462

  • Mancini F, Ceppi C, Ritrovato G (2010) GIS and statistical analysis for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Daunia area, Italy. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 10(9):1851–1864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michel GP, Kobiyama M, Goerl RF (2014) Comparative analysis of SHALSTAB and SINMAP for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Cunha River basin, southern Brazil. J Soils Sediments 14(7):1266–1277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagarajan R, Roy A, Kumar RV, Mukherjee A, Khire MV (2000) Landslide hazard susceptibility mapping based on terrain and climatic factors for tropical monsoon regions. Bull Eng Geol Environ 58(4):275–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nefeslioglu HA, Duman TY, Durmaz S (2008) Landslide susceptibility mapping for a part of tectonic Kelkit Valley (Eastern Black Sea region of Turkey). Geomorphology 94(3):401–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nourani V, Pradhan B, Ghaffari H, Sharifi SS (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping at Zonouz Plain, Iran using genetic programming and comparison with frequency ratio, logistic regression, and artificial neural network models. Nat Hazards 71(1):523–547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozdemir A, Altural T (2013) A comparative study of frequency ratio, weights of evidence and logistic regression methods for landslide susceptibility mapping: Sultan Mountains, SW Turkey. J Asian Earth Sci 64:180–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park NW (2011) Application of Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence to GIS-based landslide susceptibility analysis. Environ Earth Sci 62(2):367–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park S, Choi C, Kim B, Kim J (2013) Landslide susceptibility mapping using frequency ratio, analytic hierarchy process, logistic regression, and artificial neural network methods at the Inje area, Korea. Environ Earth Sci 68(5):1443–1464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pourghasemi HR, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C (2012) Application of fuzzy logic and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed, Iran. Nat Hazards 63(2):965–996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pourghasemi HR, Moradi HR, Aghda SF (2013) Landslide susceptibility mapping by binary logistic regression, analytical hierarchy process, and statistical index models and assessment of their performances. Nat Hazards 69(1):749–779

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B (2010) Landslide susceptibility mapping of a catchment area using frequency ratio, fuzzy logic and multivariate logistic regression approaches. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 38(2):301–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Lee S (2010) Landslide susceptibility assessment and factor effect analysis: backpropagation artificial neural networks and their comparison with frequency ratio and bivariate logistic regression modelling. Environ Model Softw 25(6):747–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan B, Abokharima MH, Jebur MN, Tehrany MS (2014) Land subsidence susceptibility mapping at Kinta Valley (Malaysia) using the evidential belief function model in GIS. Nat Hazards 73(2):1019–1042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramesh V, Anbazhagan S (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping along Kolli hills Ghat road section (India) using frequency ratio, relative effect and fuzzy logic models. Environ Earth Sci 73(12):8009–8021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regmi AD, Devkota KC, Yoshida K, Pradhan B, Pourghasemi HR, Kumamoto T, Akgun A (2014) Application of frequency ratio, statistical index, and weights-of-evidence models and their comparison in landslide susceptibility mapping in Central Nepal Himalaya. Arab J Geosci 7(2):725–742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shafer G (1976) A mathematical theory of evidence, vol 1. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma M, Kumar R (2008) GIS-based landslide hazard zonation: a case study from the Parwanoo area, Lesser and Outer Himalaya, HP, India. Bull Eng Geol Environ 67(1):129–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma LP, Patel N, Ghose MK, Debnath P (2015) Development and application of Shannon’s entropy integrated information value model for landslide susceptibility assessment and zonation in Sikkim Himalayas in India. Nat Hazards 75(2):1555–1576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stumpf A, Kerle N (2011) Object-oriented mapping of landslides using Random Forests. Remote Sens Environ 115(10):2564–2577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Süzen ML, Doyuran V (2004) Data driven bivariate landslide susceptibility assessment using geographical information systems: a method and application to Asarsuyu catchment, Turkey. Eng Geol 71(3):303–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu C, Xu X, Lee YH, Tan X, Yu G, Dai F (2012) The 2010 Yushu earthquake triggered landslide hazard mapping using GIS and weight of evidence modeling. Environ Earth Sci 66(6):1603–1616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yalcin A, Reis S, Aydinoglu AC, Yomralioglu T (2011) A GIS-based comparative study of frequency ratio, analytical hierarchy process, bivariate statistics and logistics regression methods for landslide susceptibility mapping in Trabzon, NE Turkey. Catena 85(3):274–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz C, Topal T, Süzen ML (2012) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping using bivariate statistical analysis in Devrek (Zonguldak-Turkey). Environ Earth Sci 65(7):2161–2178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Youssef AM, Al-Kathery M, Pradhan B (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping at Al-Hasher area, Jizan (Saudi Arabia) using GIS-based frequency ratio and index of entropy models. Geosci J 19(1):113–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yusof NM, Pradhan B, Shafri HZM, Jebur MN, Yusoff Z (2015) Spatial landslide hazard assessment along the Jelapang Corridor of the North-South expressway in Malaysia using high resolution airborne LiDAR data. Arab J Geosci 8(11):9789–9800

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the National Basic Research Program of China (Grant No. 2015CB251601) for the financial support. Also, the authors would like to express their gratitude to two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions, which highly increased the quality of the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yanli Wu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, Z., Yang, F., Chen, H. et al. GIS-based landslide susceptibility analysis using frequency ratio and evidential belief function models. Environ Earth Sci 75, 948 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-5732-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-5732-0

Keywords

Navigation