nach oben

International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering

Erschienen in:

01.08.2023 | Technical Note

Determination of GIS-Based Landslide Susceptibility and Ground Dynamics with Geophysical Measurements and Machine Learning Algorithms

verfasst von: Hilmi Dindar, Çağan Alevkayalı

Erschienen in: International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering | Ausgabe 4/2023

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Landslide is one of the major natural disasters that threatens engineering structures as well as complicates the construction process. There has been a rapid increase in studies to identify ground dynamics in areas with the potential for landslides. Landslide susceptibility maps are created using Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Random Forest (RF) machine learning algorithms based on geographic information systems to identify possible failures in selected areas. The aim of this study is to train different spatial data with machine learning algorithms to determine susceptible landslide areas, so as to analyze soil properties with the Multi-channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW) method, which is a fundamental shallow surface seismic surveying method in geophysical engineering. Also Refraction Microtremor (Re-Mi) method applied in some stations to detect shear wave velocity (V_s) up to engineering bedrock level. Obtained velocity values of soil layers from different seismic methods and historical records were used together to train the model. The seismic surveying results were used for the first time to train the machine learning algorithms to detect high susceptible areas for landslides. Some of the MASW applications were carried out in landslide areas and others in areas considered to be risky. Thus, with the contribution of the seismic method, the dynamic behavior that may occur was analyzed. All the measurements carried out in the Girne (Kyrenia) Mountains terrane. Consequently, it has been determined that the northeast-facing slopes of the Girne Mountains are the highest sensitivity for landslide, in other words, the most active in terms of ground dynamics.

Vorheriger Artikel Multiparameter Experimental Study on the Factor Contributions of Micropile Uplift Capacity Using Taguchi Approach

Nächster Artikel Harnessing Nature-Inspired Soft Computing for Reinforced Soil Bearing Capacity Prediction: A Neuro-nomograph Approach for Efficient Design

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Hussain Y, Cardenas-Soto M, Martino S, Moreira C, Borges W, Hamza O, Prado R, Uagoda R, Rodríguez-Rebolledo J, Silva RC et al (2019) Multiple geophysical techniques for investigation and monitoring of sobradinho landslide, Brazil. Sustainability 11:6672

Park S, Hamm SY, Kim J (2019) Performance evaluation of the GIS-based data-mining techniques decision tree, random forest, and rotation forest for landslide susceptibility modeling. Sustainability 11:5659

Tzouvaras M, Danezis C, Hadjimitsis DG (2020) Small scale landslide detection using sentinel-1 interferometric SAR coherence. Remote Sens 12:1560

Alexakis DD, Agapiou A, Tzouvaras M, Themistocleous K, Neocleous K, Michaelides S, Hadjimitsis DG (2014) Integrated use of GIS and remote sensing for monitoring landslides in transportation pavements: the case study of Paphos area in Cyprus. Nat Hazards 72:119–141

Hearn GJ, Larkin H, Hadjicharalambous K, Papageorgiou A, Zoi GE (2018) Proving a landslide: ground behaviour problems at Pissouri. Cyprus Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol 51:461–482

Myronidis D, Papageorgiou C, Theophanous S (2016) Landslide susceptibility mapping based on landslide history and analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Nat Hazards 81:245–263

Atalar C, Das BM (2018) Recent landslides in North Cyprus. Ce/papers 2(2–3):409–414

Wilde M, Günther A, Reichenbach P, Malet J-P, Hervas J (2018) Pan-European landslide susceptibility mapping: ELSUS version 2. J Maps 14:97–104

Hart AB, Hearn GJ (2013) Landslide assessment for land use planning and infrastructure management in the Paphos district of Cyprus. Bull Eng Geol Environ 72:173–188

10.

Tunçel A, Kıncal C, Berge MA (2021) Site investigation of a landslide site and its surroundings: a case study at Eğridere district, northern Izmir city, Turkey. Arab J Geosci 14(20):1–16

11.

Chen W, Zhang S, Li R, Shahabi H (2018) Performance evaluation of the GIS-based data mining techniques of best-first decision tree, random forest, and naïve Bayes tree for landslide susceptibility modeling. Sci Total Environ 644:1006–1018

12.

Habumugisha JM, Chen N, Rahman M, Islam MM, Ahmad H, Elbeltagi A, Sharma G, Liza SN, Dewan A (2022) Landslide susceptibility mapping with deep learning algorithms. Sustainability 14:1734

13.

Nguyen H, Mehrabi M, Kalantar B, Moayedi H, Abdullahi MM (2019) Potential of hybrid evolutionary approaches for assessment of geo-hazard landslide susceptibility mapping. Geomat Nat Hazards Risk 10:1667–1693

14.

Bui DT, Moayedi H, Kalantar B, Osouli A, Pradhan B, Nguyen H, Rashid ASAA (2019) Novel swarm intelligence—Harris Hawks optimization for spatial assessment of landslide susceptibility. Sensors 19:3590

15.

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

16.

Akgün A, Türk N (2011) Mapping erosion susceptibility by a multivariate statistical method: a case study from the Ayvalık region, NW Turkey. Comput Geosci 37:1515–1524

17.

Yalcin A, Reis S, Aydinoglu A, 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 85:274–287

18.

Lee S, Hong S-M, Jung H-S (2017) A support vector machine for landslide susceptibility mapping in Gangwon Province, Korea. Sustainability 9:48

19.

Chen W, Pourghasemi HR, Panahi M, Kornejady A, Wang J, Xie X, Cao S (2017) Spatial prediction of landslide susceptibility using an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system combined with frequency ratio, generalized additive model, and support vector machine techniques. Geomorphology 297:69–85

20.

Park I, Lee S (2014) Spatial prediction of landslide susceptibility using a decision tree approach: a case study of the Pyeong Chang area, Korea. Int J Remote Sens 35:6089–6112

21.

Shirzadi A, Bui DT, Pham BT, Solaimani K, Chapi K, Kavian A, Shahabi H, Revhaug I (2017) Shallow landslide susceptibility assessment using a novel hybrid intelligence approach. Environ Earth Sci 76:60–74

22.

Pham BT, Prakash I, Singh SK, Shirzadi A, Shahabi H, Tran TTG, Buig DT (2019) Landslide susceptibility modeling using reduced error pruning trees and different ensemble techniques: hybrid machine learning approaches. CATENA 175:203–218

23.

Erener A, Düzgün HSB (2010) Improvement of statistical landslide susceptibility mapping by using spatial and global regression methods in the case of more and romsdal (Norway). Landslides 7:55–68

24.

Zakaria MT, Muztaza NM, Zabidi H, Salleh AN, Mahmud N, Samsudin N, Rosli FN, Olugbenga AT, Jia TY (2021) 2-D cross-plot model analysis using integrated geophysical methods for landslides assessment. Appl Sci 11:747

25.

Akın Ö, Sayıl N (2016) Site characterization using surface wave methods in the Arsin-Trabzon province, NE Turkey. Environ Earth Sci 75:72–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-4840-6CrossRef

26.

Su LJ, Ullah F, Ali S, Cheng L, Ur Rehman M, Alam M (2022) Experimental observation and geophysical modeling of the hydrological effects on Pleistocene glaciation deposits susceptible to landslide. Int J Environ Sci Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-022-04103-0CrossRef

27.

Xu XQ, Su LJ, Zhang GD, Zhu HH (2017) Analysis on shear wave velocity structure of a gravel landslide based on dual-source surface wave method. Landslides 14:1127–1137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-016-0780-9CrossRef

28.

Lima Júnior SB, Prado RL, Moreda RM (2012) Application of multichannel analysis of surface waves method (MASW) in an area susceptible to landslide at Ubatuba City, Brazil. Rev Bras Geofis 30(2):213–224

29.

Elmas A (2018) Determination of structural discontinuities in Cyprus island by using EGM08 Gravity Data. J Geol Eng 42(1):17–32 (In Turkish)

30.

Dindar H, Akgün M, Atalar C, Özdağ ÖC (2021) The assessment of local site effects and dynamic behaviour in Nicosia, Cyprus. Geofizika 38(1):61–80

31.

Martínez-Pagán P, Navarro M, Pérez-Cuevas J, Alcalá FJ, García-Jerez A, Vidal F (2018) Shear-wave velocity structure from MASW and SPAC methods. The case of Adra town, SE Spain. Near Surf Geophys 16:356–371

32.

Park CB, Miller RD, Xia J (1999) Multi-channel analysis of surface waves. Geophysics 64:800–808

33.

Harba P, Pilecki Z, Krawiec K (2019) Comparison of MASW and seismic interferometry with use of ambient noise for estimation of S-wave velocity field in landslide subsurface. Acta Geophys 67(6):1875–1883

34.

Sugawara J, Suto K (2020) Landslide Investigation using Borehole and Multi-channel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW) Techniques. In 3rd Asia Pacific Meeting on Near Surface Geoscience & Engineering, Online

35.

Tunçel A, Kıncal C, Berge MA, Ongar A, Göktürkler G, Koca Y (2019) Investigation of a landslide: a case study from Eğridere, İzmir, Turkey. In International Earth Science Colloquium on the Aegean Region, Turkey

36.

Liu L, Zhang S, Yao X, Gao H, Wang Z, Shen Z (2021) Liquefaction evaluation based on shear wave velocity using random forest. Adv Civ Eng 2021:1–9

37.

Roberts JC, Asten MW (2004) Resolving a velocity inversion at the geotechnical scale using the microtremor (passive seismic) survey method. Explor Geophys 35:14–18

38.

Poormirzaee R (2016) (2001) S-wave velocity profiling from refraction microtremor Rayleigh wave dispersion curves via PSO inversion algorithm. Arab J Geosci 9(16):1–10

39.

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

40.

Solanki A, Gupta V, Joshi M (2022) Application of machine learning algorithms in landslide susceptibility mapping, Kali Valley, Kumaun Himalaya, India. Geocarto Int. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2022.2120546CrossRef

41.

Xi C, Han M, Hu X, Liu B, He K, Luo G, Cao X (2022) Effectiveness of Newmark-based sampling strategy for coseismic landslide susceptibility mapping using deep learning, support vector machine, and logistic regression. Bull Eng Geol Environ 81(5):1–21

42.

Lee J-H, Sameen MI, Pradhan B, Park H-J (2018) Modeling landslide susceptibility in data-scarce environments using optimized data mining and statistical methods. Geomorphology 303:284–298

43.

Louie JN (2001) Faster, better: shear-wave velocity to 100 meters depth from refraction microtremor arrays. Bull Seismol Soc Am 91:347–364

44.

Thelen WA, Clark M, Lopez CT, Loughner C, Park H, Scott JB, Smith SB, Greschke B, Louie JN (2006) A transect of 200 shallow shear-velocity profiles across the Los Angeles basin. Bull Seismol Soc Am 96(3):1055–1067

45.

Richwalski SM, Picozzi M, Parolai S, Milkereit C, Baliva F, Albarello D, Roy-Chowdhury K, van der Meer H, Zschau J (2007) Rayleigh wave dispersion curves from seismological and engineering-geotechnical methods: a comparison at the Bornheim test site (Germany). J Geophys Eng 4:349–361

46.

Anderson N, Thitimakorn T, Ismail A, Hoffman D (2007) A comparison of four geophysical methods for determining the shear wave velocity of soils. Environ Eng Geosci 13(1):11–23

47.

Chávez-García FJ, Domínguez T, Rodríguez M, Pérez F (2007) Site effects in a volcanic environment: a comparison between HVSR and array techniques at Colima, Mexico. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97(2):591–604

48.

Stokoe KH II, Wright GW, James AB, Jose MR (1994) Characterization of geotechnical sites by SASW method. Geophysical characterization of sites. A.A. Balkema, Netherlands, pp 15–25

49.

Bodet L, Abraham O, Clorennec D (2009) Near-offset effects on Rayleigh-wave dispersion measurements: physical modeling. J Appl Geophy 68(1):95–103

50.

Arabameri A, Saha S, Roy J, Chen W, Blaschke T, Tien Bui D (2020) Landslide susceptibility evaluation and management using different machine learning methods in the Gallicash River Watershed, Iran. Remote Sens 12:475. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12030475CrossRef

51.

Nhu V-H, Shirzadi A, Shahabi H, Singh SK, Al-Ansari N, Clague JJ, Jaafari A, Chen W, Miraki S, Dou J, Luu C, Górski K, Thai Pham B, Nguyen HD, Ahmad BB (2020) Shallow landslide susceptibility mapping: a comparison between logistic model tree, logistic regression, Naïve Bayes tree, artificial neural network, and support vector machine algorithms. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17:2749. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17082749CrossRef

52.

Kadavi PR, Lee C-W, Lee S (2018) Application of ensemble-based machine learning models to landslide susceptibility mapping. Remote Sens 10:1252. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10081252CrossRef

53.

Pourghasemi HR, Gayen A, Park S, Lee C-W, Lee S (2018) Assessment of landslide-prone areas and their zonation using logistic regression, LogitBoost, and NaïveBayes machine-learning algorithms. Sustainability 10:3697. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103697CrossRef

54.

Ghorbanzadeh O, Blaschke T, Gholamnia K, Meena SR, Tiede D, Aryal J (2019) Evaluation of different machine learning methods and deep-learning convolutional neural networks for landslide detection. Remote Sens 11:196. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11020196CrossRef

55.

Park S-J, Lee C-W, Lee S, Lee M-J (2018) Landslide susceptibility mapping and comparison using decision tree models: a case study of Jumunjin Area, Korea. Remote Sens 10:1545. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10101545CrossRef

56.

Qi T, Zhao Y, Meng X, Chen G, Dijkstra T (2021) AI-based susceptibility analysis of shallow landslides induced by heavy rainfall in Tianshui, China. Remote Sens 13:1819. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13091819CrossRef

57.

Skrzypczak I, Kokoszka W, Zientek D, Tang Y, Kogut J (2021) Landslide hazard assessment map as an element supporting spatial planning: the Flysch Carpathians region study. Remote Sens 13:317. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13020317CrossRef

58.

Dindar H, Alevkayalı Ç (2022) Determination of Landslide Susceptibility Based on GIS with MASW data and Machine Learning Algorithms. the 2nd National Civil Engineering Symposium/Nature Inspired Solutions for the Built Environment Conference/International Workshop on Advances in Laboratory Testing of Liquefiable Soils held in Kyrenia/Cyprus on September 14–17, 2022

59.

Dikshit A, Sarkar R, Pradhan B, Acharya S, Alamri AM (2020) Spatial landslide risk assessment at Phuentsholing, Bhutan. Geosciences 10:131. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences10040131CrossRef

60.

Francioni M, Calamita F, Coggan J, De Nardis A, Eyre M, Miccadei E, Piacentini T, Stead D, Sciarra N (2019) A multi-disciplinary approach to the study of large rock avalanches combining remote sensing, GIS and field surveys: the case of the Scanno landslide, Italy. Remote Sens 11:1570. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11131570CrossRef

61.

Salvatici T, Tofani V, Rossi G, D’Ambrosio M, Tacconi Stefanelli C, Masi EB, Casagli N (2018) Application of a physically based model to forecast shallow landslides at a regional scale. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 18(7):1919–1935

62.

Ciampalini A, Raspini F, Lagomarsino D, Catani F, Casagli N (2016) Landslide susceptibility map refinement using PSInSAR data. Remote Sens Environ 184:302–315

63.

Lagomarsino D, Tofani V, Segoni S, Catani F, Casagli N (2017) A tool for classification and regression using random forest methodology: applications to landslide susceptibility mapping and soil thickness modeling. Environ Model Assess 22:201–214

64.

Hussain Y, Schlögel R, Innocenti A, Hamza O, Iannucci R, Martino S, Havenith HB (2022) Review on the geophysical and UAV-based methods applied to landslides. Remote Sens 14(18):4564

65.

Confuorto P, Medici C, Bianchini S, Del Soldato M, Rosi A, Segoni S, Casagli N (2022) Machine learning for defining the probability of sentinel-1 based deformation trend changes occurrence. Remote Sens 14(7):1748

66.

Festa D, Casagli N, Casu F, Confuorto P, De Luca C, Del Soldato M, Raspini F (2022) Automated classification of A-DInSAR-based ground deformation by using random forest. GISci Remote Sens 59(1):1749–1766

67.

Chen W, Sun Z, Han J (2019) Landslide susceptibility modeling using integrated ensemble weights of evidence with logistic regression and random forest models. Appl Sci 9(1):171

68.

Assadi-Langroudi A, O’Kelly BC, Barreto D et al (2022) Recent advances in nature-inspired solutions for ground engineering (NiSE). Int J Geosynth Ground Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-021-00349-9CrossRef

69.

Catani F, Lagomarsino D, Segoni S, Tofani V (2013) Landslide susceptibility estimation by random forests technique: sensitivity and scaling issues. Nat Hazard 13(11):2815–2831

Titel: Determination of GIS-Based Landslide Susceptibility and Ground Dynamics with Geophysical Measurements and Machine Learning Algorithms
verfasst von: Hilmi Dindar
Çağan Alevkayalı
Publikationsdatum: 01.08.2023
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in: International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering / Ausgabe 4/2023
Print ISSN: 2199-9260
Elektronische ISSN: 2199-9279
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-023-00471-w

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2023

Mechanical Properties of Clays Stabilized with Glass Powder and Silica Fume

Effectiveness of Different Reinforcement Alternatives for Mitigating Liquefaction in Sands

Gravelly Liquefaction Case Histories after 2008 Wenchuan-China Earthquake Mw = 7.9

Evaluation of Different Protection Systems to Control the Geomembrane Deformations in Liner Applications

Guest Editorial for the Special Issue on “Recent Advances in Ground Engineering”

Using Waste PET Shreds for Soil Stabilization: Efficiency and Durability Assessment