Accuracy assessment of GLM and SVM models in preparing a landslide susceptibility map (Case study: Karganeh watershed, Lorestan province)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Research Department, Lorestan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center(AREEO), Khorramabad, Iran

2 Forests and Rangelands Research Department, Khuzestan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Agricultural Research Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Ahvaz, Iran

3 Soil Conservation and Watershed Management Department, khorasan Razavi Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center (AREEO), Mashhhad, Iran

Abstract

Introduction
Landslide is one of the natural hazards that causes a lot of human and financial damage every year in mountainous, rainy and seismic areas. Mass movements play an effective role in destroying communication roads, pastures, mountainous areas and causing erosion and sedimentation in watersheds. Identifying landslide-prone areas through risk zoning with appropriate models is unique of the main methods in reducing potential damage and hazard managing. Landslide susceptibility map preparation is known as the cornerstone of landslide research and is used as a management tool in times of crisis. Considering that the identification of landslide sensitive areas based on traditional methods and expert opinions is not accurate enough, the use of modern machine learning methods such as the support vector machine method seems to be necessary and necessary. The purpose of this research is to spatially model landslide susceptibility using two methods: generalized linear model (GLM) and support vector machine (SVM) and compare the efficiency of these models in zoning landslide susceptibility in Karganeh Watershed, Lorestan Province.
 
Materials and Methods
Karganeh Watershed is one of the large sub-watersheds of Khorramabad with an area of 294.2 square kilometers. The minimum height of the this watershed is 1300 and the maximum is 2700 meters, and 60% of the area of this watershed has a slope of more than 12% (relatively high slope and more).The research method in this study is applied in terms of purpose and in terms of descriptive-analytical nature, library methods, field visits and modeling are used. On behalf of this goal, the distribution map layer of landslides in the watershed including 95 cases of landslides was prepared and separated into two sets for model training (70%) and model validation (30%) randomly. 
Also, 16 causes disturbing the happening of landslides in this watershed were selected permitting to the review of sources and the usage of principal component analysis (PCA), Tolerance and VIF tests. Digital layers of effective factors in geographic information system were equipped. Slope factors, slope direction, elevation classes, geology, drainage network (distance from the river), road (distance from the road), fault (distance from the fault), topographic indicators (river power index (SPI), topographic moisture index (TWI) and Slope length index (LS)), geomorphological indices (topographic position index (TPI), topographic roughness index (TRI) and power vector index or surface roughness measurement (VRM) of land use, distance from the village, and rain lines as the most effective factors Landslide occurrences in Karganeh Watershed were known. Then, the landslide hazard map was prepared based on the two mentioned methods in the ModEco software environment. Next, in order to evaluate the accuracy of the modeling and compare the efficiency of the models, the relative performance recognition index (ROC) was used.
 
Results and Discussion
By correcting the landslide data provided by the General Directorate of Natural Resources with the help of Google Earth satellite images and field visits, 95 landslides were identified, which cover an area of 1483.24 hectares of this watershed. Established on the fallouts of the maximum likelihood diagram, geological, land use, slope, topographic roughness index (TRI), slope length and slope direction are the best significant factors inducing the event of landslides in Karganeh Watershed. The results showed that the support vector machine (SVM) method with ROC equal to 0.913 was chosen as the best model for the basin. The generalized linear model with ROC equal to 0.803 also showed high efficiency in terms of landslide susceptibility evaluation. Permitting to the results of the support vector machine, about 19.3% of the Karganeh Watershed is in the high and very high hazard class of landslide happening. Based on the landslide susceptibility map with the support vector machine model, the villages of Jamshidabad Haider, Milmilk, Garmabala Bala, Bene Soura, Mahmoudabad Bala, Skin Bala, Cheshme Papi, Dareh Qasim Ali and Sheikh Haider are at high and very high hazard of landslides. It were located About 117 kilometers of communication roads in this area were classified as high and very high hazard.
 
Conclusion
Established on the fallouts of this study, the maximum entropy algorithm provides practical results in order to zone the hazard of landslides in the Karganeh Watershed; By matching the obtained results by the existing real conditions, there is a very high agreement between the fallouts of the landslide hazard zoning map using this model and the real indication in this watershed. Assuming the concentration of management operations in high-sensitivity classes, about 70% of the area of the region will be removed from the management process and will cause the allocation of financial resources and less time. The implementation of landslide management programs based on the results of this research on a local and regional scale can explain the difficulties of domain instability and lead to the development of watershed management actions and the sustainability of the development of the Karganeh Watershed.

Keywords

Main Subjects


Afifi, M.A., 2021. Spatial analysis of landslide risk with emphasis on geomorphological factors using random forest model (case study: Larestan city in Fars province). Natural Geography Quarterly, v. 14(51), p. 53-39 (In Persian).
Alipour, H. and Malekiyan, A., 2015. Zoning the Landslide Hazard in Jahan Watershed in the North Khorasan Province, Geography and Development, V. 13(39), P. 165-180 (In Persian).
Arab Ameri, A.R., Rezaei, K., Yamani, M. and Shirani, K., 2018. Landslide spatial modeling: performance assessment of integrated model of data driven EBF model and knowledge driven AHP model (Case study: ferydoun shahr watershed), Journal of Water and Soil Conservation, v. 25(5), p. 47-67 (In Persian).
Balogun, A.L., Rezaie, F., Pham, Q.B., Gigović, L., Drobnjak, S., Aina, Y.A., Panahi, M., Temitope, S. and Yekeen, S.L., 2021. Spatial prediction of landslide susceptibility in western Serbia using hybrid support vector regression (SVR) with GWO, BAT and COA algorithms. Geoscience Frontiers, v. 12(3), Doi:     10.1016/j.gsf.2020.10.009.
Castro Camilo, D., Lombardo, L., Mai, P.M., Castro Camilo, D., Lombardo, L., Mai, P.M., Dou, J. and Huser, R., 2017. Handling high predictor dimensionality in slope-unit-based landslide susceptibility models through LASSO-penalized Generalized Linear Model, Environmental Modelling & Software, v. 97, p. 145-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.08.003.
Chen, W., Pourghasemi, H.R., Kornejady, A. and Zhang, N., 2017. Landslide spatial modeling: Introducing new ensembles of ANN, MaxEnt, and SVM machine learning techniques, Geoderma, v. 305, p. 314-327.
Chen, W., Pourghasemi, H.R., Zhang, S. and Wang, J., 2019. A Comparative Study of Functional Data Analysis and Generalized Linear Model Data-Mining Techniques for Landslide Spatial Modeling, Spatial Modeling in GIS and R for Earth and Environmental Sciences, p. 467-484.
Dahal, R.K., Hasegawa, S., Nonomura, A., Yamanaka, M., Dhakal, S. and Paudyal, P., 2008. Predictive modelling of rainfall-induced landslide hazard in the Lesser Himalaya of Nepal based on weights-of-evidence. Geomorphology, v. 102(3-4), p. 496-510.‌
Emadodin, S., Taheri, V., Mohammad ghasemi, M. and Nazari, Z., 2021. Landslide Susceptibility Zonation applying frequency ratio models and statistical index in in Oghan watershed, Quantitative Geomorphological Research, v. 9(4), p. 75-95 (In Persian).
Ercanoglu, M. and Gokceoglu, C., 2002. Assessment of landslide susceptibility for a landslide-prone area (north of Yenice, NW Turkey) by fuzzy approach. Environmental geology, v. 41(6), p. 720-730.‌
Esfandiary Darabad, F., rahimi, M., navidfar, A. and Arsalan, M., 2020. Assessment of landslide sensitivity by neural network method and Vector machine algorithm (Case study: Heyran Road -Ardebil province). Quantitative Geomorphological Research, 9(3), 18-33 (in Persian).
Gasemyan, B., Abedini, M., Roostai, S., and Shirzadi, A., 2021. Landslide susceptibility assessment using a novel ensemble algorithm based model (Case Study: Kamyaran city, Kurdistan province), Quantitative Geomorphological Research, v. 9(4), p. 130-146 (In Persian).
Ghiasi, S.S., Rajabzadeh, F., Najirda, S., Feiznia, S. and Nazari Samani, A., 2017. A determination of effective factors on shallow landslide occurrence in Khiov-Chai watershed, Watershed Engineering and Management, v. 9(2), p. 140-154 (In Persian).
Heydari, N., Habibnejad, M., Kavian, A. and Pourghasemi, H.R., 2020. Landslide Susceptibility Modelling Using the Random Forest Machine Learning Algorithm in the Watershed of Rais-Ali Delvari Reservoir, Watershed Management Research, v. 33(1), p. 2-13 (In Persian).
Hong, H., Pradhan, B., Xu, C. and Bui, D.T., 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, v. 133, p. 266-281.
Karimi Sangchini, E., Arami, S., Rezaii Moghadam, H., Khodabakhshi, Z. and Jafari, R., 2014. Landslide Risk Assessment for Baba Heydar Watershed, Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari Province, Iran, Iranian journal of earth sciences, v. 6(2), p.121-132.
Kornejady, A., Ownegh, M., Pourghasemi, H.R., Bahremand, A. and Motamedi, M., 2020. (Landslide susceptibility prediction using the coupled Mahalanobis distance and machine learning models (case study: Owghan watershed, Golestan province. Researches in Earth Sciences, v. 11(2), p. 1-18 (In Persian).
Kornejady, A., Pourghasemi, H.R. and Afzali, S.F., 2019. Presentation of RFFR new ensemble model for landslide susceptibility assessment in Iran, In Landslides: theory, practice and modelling, p. 123-143.
Lee, S., Hong, S.M. and Jung, H.S., 2017. A support vector machine for landslide susceptibility mapping in Gangwon Province, Korea, Sustainability, v. 9(1), p. 48-54.
Meten, M., PrakashBhandary, N. and Yatabe, R., 2015. Effect of landslide factor combinations on the prediction accuracy of landslide susceptibility maps in the Blue Nile Gorge of Central Ethiopia, Geoenvironmental Disasters, v. 2(1), p. 1-17.‌
Panahi, M., Gayen, A., Pourghasemi, H.R., Rezaie, F. and Lee, S., 2020. Spatial prediction of landslide susceptibility using hybrid support vector regression (SVR) and the adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) with various metaheuristic algorithms. Science of the Total Environment, v. 741, doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139937.
Pandey, V.K., Pourghasemi, H.R. and Sharma, M.C., 2020. Landslide susceptibility mapping using maximum entropy and support vector machine models along the Highway Corridor, Garhwal Himalaya, Geocarto International, v. 35(2), p. 168-187.
Peng, L., Niu, R., Huang, B., Wu, X., Zhao, Y. and Ye, R., 2014. Landslide susceptibility mapping based on rough set theory and support vector machines: A case of the Three Gorges area, China, Geomorphology, v. 204, p. 287-301.
Pham, B.T., Pradhan, B., Bui, D.T., Prakash, I. and Dholakia, M.B., 2016. A comparative study of different machine learning methods for landslide susceptibility assessment: A case study of Uttarakhand area (India), Environmental Modelling & Software, v. 84, p. 240-250.
Phillips, S.J., Anderson, R.P. and Schapire, R.E., 2006. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions, Ecological modelling, v. 190(3), p. 231-259.
Pourghasemi, H.R. and Rahmati, O., 2018. Prediction of the landslide susceptibility: Which algorithm, which precision? Catena, v. 162, p. 177-192.
Prajisha, C.K., Achu, A.L. and Joseph, S., 2023. Landslide susceptibility modeling using a generalized linear model in a tropical river basin of the Southern Western Ghats, India,Water, Land, and Forest Susceptibility and Sustainability, v. 1, p. 237-266.
Rabet, A., Dastranj, A., Asadi, S. and Asadi Nalivan, O., 2020. Determination of Groundwater Potential Using Artificial Neural Network, Random Forest, Support Vector Machine and Linear Regression Models (Case Study: Lake Urmia Watershed), Iranian journal of Ecohydrology, v. 7(4), p. 1047-1060 (In Persian).
Rahmati, O., Tahmasebipour, N., Haghizadeh, A., Pourghasemi, H. and Feizizadeh, B., 2018. Assessing the effectiveness of the maximum entropy model to gully erosion susceptibility prediction in the Kashkan-Poldokhtar Watershed, Watershed Engineering and Management, v. 10(4), p. 727-738 (In Persian).
Roustaie, S., Mokhtari, D. and Ashrafi Fini, Z., 2020. Landslide hazard zonation in Taleghan watershed using Shannon entropy index, Journal of Geography and Planning, v. 24(71), p. 125-150 (In Persian).
Shano, L., Raghuvanshi, T.K. and Meten, M., 2021. Landslide Hazard Zonation using Logistic Regression Model: The Case of Shafe and Baso Catchments, Gamo Highland, Southern Ethiopia, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, p. 1-19.
Trigila, A., Frattini, P., Casagli, N., Catani, F., Crosta, G., Esposito, C. and Lari, S., 2013. Landslide susceptibility mapping at national scale: the Italian case study, In Landslide science and practice, p. 287-295. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.‌
Yarahamdi, J., Raushiti, Sh., Sharifikia, M. and Raushiti, M., 2015. Identification and monitoring of domain instability by differential interferometric method (case study: Garmi ChaymianehWhatershed), Quantitative Geomorphology Research, v. 3(4), p. 44-59 (In Persian).