Performance of Qualitative and Quantitative Models in Creating Landslide Susceptibility Map of Chaliyar River Basin
L. Aiswarya *
Department of IDE, KCAET, Tavanur, India.
K. P. Rema
Department of IDE, KCAET, Tavanur, India.
J. Asha
Department of IDE, KCAET, Tavanur, India.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
A Landslide Susceptibility Map (LSM) for Kerala's Chaliyar river basin is what this study aims to provide. Several landslides occurred in this basin as a result of the floods in 2018 and 2019. There were 592 identified landslides. Using ArcGIS 10.7 software, the landslide inventory was taken from the inventories created by the National Remote Sensing Center (NRSC) and Kerala State Disaster Management Authority (KSDMA), and the future incidence of landslides was projected by linking the landslide cause variables. Landslide inventories were split into training and validation groups in this study, with the ratios fixed at 70:30. Two models, including a qualitative one called Weighted Linear Combination (WLC) and a quantitative one (a bivariate statistical model) called Weights of Evidence (WOE) model, were used to evaluate landslide susceptibility. The following factors were employed as causative parameters: Slope, Aspect, Curvature, Relative Relief, TWI, Distance to Road, Distance to Streams, Distance to Lineaments, Land Use Land Cover, Drainage Density, Road Density, Lineament Density, Geomorphology, Soil Texture, and NDVI. The performance of the models was evaluated using the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC)'s Area Under the Curve (AUC). In the study, the WLC model yields an AUC success rate accuracy of 59.9%, while the WOE model yields an accuracy of 70.9%. In terms of ratio of landslide validation accuracy, the WOE model outperforms the WLC model by 11%. The anticipated landslide area is included in the landslide susceptibility map, which can be incorporated to lessen the risk of landslides in this research.
Keywords: Landslide susceptibility, weighted linear combination, weights of evidence, causative parameters, ROC-AUC; Chaliyar river basin
How to Cite
Downloads
References
Shavan K, Arunkumar KS, Krishnan MN, Assessment and prediction of shallow landslide susceptibility of Thodupuzha and Peermed Taluks in Idukki district. Kerala;2014.
Vijith H, Krishnakumar KN, Pradeep GS, Ninu Krishnan MV, Madhu G. Shallow LANDSLIDE initiation susceptibility mapping by GIS-based weights-of-evidence analysis of multi-class spatial data-sets: A case study from the natural sloping terrain of Western Ghats, India. Georisk: Assessment and Management of Risk for Engineered Systems and Geohazards. 2014;8(1):48-62.
Kuriakose SL, Van Beek LPH, Van Westen, CJ Parameterizing a physically based shallow landslide model in a data poor region. Earth surface processes and landforms. 2009;34(6):867-881.
Pandey A, Dabral PP, Chowdary VM, Yadav NK. Landslide hazard zonation using remote sensing and GIS: a case study of Dikrong river basin, Arunachal Pradesh, India. Environmental Geology. 2008;54:1517-1529.
Zakharovskyi V, Németh K. Quantitative-qualitative method for quick assessment of geodiversity. Land. 2021;10(9):946.
Khan H, Shafique M, Khan MA, Bacha MA, Shah SU, Calligaris C. Landslide susceptibility assessment using Frequency Ratio, a case study of northern Pakistan. The Egyptian J. Remote Sensing and Space Sci. 2019;22(1):11-24.
Achu AL, Aju CD, Reghunath R. Spatial modelling of shallow landslide susceptibility: A study from the southern Western Ghats region of Kerala, India. Annals of GIS. 2020;26(2):113-131.
Jacinth JJ, Saravanan S. Artificial neural network and sensitivity analysis in the landslide susceptibility mapping of Idukki district, India. Geocarto Int. 2022;37(19):5693-5715
Vineetha P, Sarun S. Sheela AM. Landslide susceptibility analysis using frequency ratio model in a tropical region, South East Asia. Journal of Geography, Environment and Earth Science International. 2019;22(2):1-13.
Yuvaraj RM, Dolui B. Statistical and machine intelligence based model for landslide susceptibility mapping of Nilgiri district in India. Environmental Challenges. 2021;5:100211.
Sato HP, Harp EL. Interpretation of earthquake-induced landslides triggered by the, M7. 9 Wenchuan earthquake in the Beichuan area, Sichuan Province, China using satellite imagery and Google Earth. Landslides. 2008;6:153-159.
Banerjee P, Ghose MK, Pradhan R. Analytic hierarchy process and information value method-based landslide susceptibility mapping and vehicle vulnerability assessment along a highway in Sikkim Himalaya. Arabian Journal of Geosciences. 2018;11:1-18.
Maheshwari BK.Earthquake-induced landslide hazard assessment of chamoli district, uttarakhand using relative frequency ratio method. Indian Geotechnical Journal. 2019;49108-123.
Wadhawan SK, Singh B, Ramesh MV. Causative factors of landslides 2019: case study in Malappuram and Wayanad districts of Kerala, India. Landslides. 2020;17:2689-2697.
Gururajan B, nehru Jawaharlal A. Landslide vulnerability assessment in Devikulam Taluk, Idukki District, Kerala Using Gis and Machine Learning Algorithms; 2021.
Vishnu CL, Oommen T, Chatterjee S, Sajinkumar KS. Challenges of modeling rainfall triggered landslides in a data-sparse region: A case study from the Western Ghats, India. Geosystems and Geoenvironment. 2022;1(3):100060.
Martha TR, Roy P, Govindharaj KB, Kumar KV, Diwakar PG, Dadhwal VK.. Landslides triggered by the June 2013 extreme rainfall event in parts of Uttarakhand state, India. Landslides. 2015;12:135-146.
Samia J, Temme A, Bregt AK, Wallinga J, Stuiver J, Guzzetti F, Ardizzone F, Rossi M.. Implementing landslide path dependency in landslide susceptibility modelling. Landslides. 2018;15:2129-2144.
Kumar R, Anbalagan R. Landslide susceptibility mapping of the Tehri reservoir rim area using the weights of evidence method. Journal of Earth System Science, 2019;128:1-18.
Goetz J, Brenning A, Petschko H, Leopold P. Evaluating machine learning and statistical prediction techniques for landslide susceptibility modeling. Comput. Geosci. 2015;81:1–11.
Ding Q, Chen W, Hong H. Application of frequency ratio, weights of evidence and evidential belief function models in landslide susceptibility mapping. Geocarto International. 2017;32(6):619-639.
Polykretis C, Ferentinou M, Chalkias C. A comparative study of landslide susceptibility mapping using landslide susceptibility index and artificial neural networks in the Krios River and Krathis River catchments (northern Peloponnesus, Greece). Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment. 2015;74:27-45.
Ram P, Gupta V. Landslide hazard, vulnerability, and risk assessment (HVRA), Mussoorie township, lesser himalaya, India. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 2021;1-29.
Clerici A, Perego S, Tellini C, Vescovi P. A procedure for landslide susceptibility zonation by the conditional analysis method. Geomorphology. 2002;48(4):349-364.
Corominas J, Copons R, Vilaplana JM, Altimir J, Amigó J. Integrated landslide susceptibility analysis and hazard assessment in the principality of Andorra. Natural Hazards. 200;330:421-435.
Panchal S, Shrivastava AK. Landslide susceptibility mapping along highway corridors in GIS environment. In Smart Cities—Opportunities and Challenges: Select Proceedings of ICSC. Springer Singapore. 2019;79- 89.
Panchal S, Srivastava AK. Expert based landslide susceptibility mapping for energy infrastructure planning. Journal of Information and Optimization Sciences. 2022;43(3):635-641.
Pourghasemi HR, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C, Mohammadi M, Moradi HR. Application of weights-of-evidence and certainty factor models and their comparison in landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed, Iran. Arabian Journal of Geosciences. 2013;6:2351-2365.
Sifa SF, Mahmud T, Tarin MA, Haque DME. Event-based landslide susceptibility mapping using weights of evidence (WoE) and modified frequency ratio (MFR) model: A case study of Rangamati district in Bangladesh. Geology, Ecology, and Landscapes. 2020;4(3):222-235.
Van Westen CJ, Van Asch TW, Soeters R. Landslide hazard and risk zonation—why is it still so difficult?. Bulletin of Engineering geology and the Environment. 2006; 65:167-184.