Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Landslide spatial probability prediction: a comparative assessment of naïve Bayes, ensemble learning, and deep learning approaches

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the performances of 5 machine learning (ML) techniques for predicting the spatial probability of landslide at Atsuma, Japan, and Mt. Umyeon, Korea. 5 ML models used are Naïve Bayes (NB), ensemble learning (random forest (RF) and adaboost (AB)), and deep learning (multilayer perceptron (MLP) and convolutional neural network (CNN)) models. Real landslide events at the study areas are randomly separated to the training set for landslide mapping and the validation set for assessing performance. To assess the performance of the used models, the resulting models are validated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The success rate curves show that the areas under the curve (AUC) for the NB, RF, AB, MLP, and CNN are 85.1, 88.8, 88.6, 87.5, and 95.0%, respectively, at Atsuma and 68.7, 85.6, 90.5, 81.6, and 92.0%, respectively, at Mt. Umyeon. Similarly, the validation results show that the areas under the curve for the NB, RF, AB, MLP, and CNN are 84.3, 87.1, 87.1, 86.7, and 89.7%, respectively, at Atsuma and 64.9, 85.5, 83.9, 84.7, and 90.5%, respectively, at Mt. Umyeon. In addition, statistical tests such as Chi-square test and difference of proportions test show that all classified landslide susceptibility maps have statistical significance and the significant difference in classified landslide susceptibility maps from different ML models. The comparison results among 5 ML models show that the CNN model had the best performance and NB model had the worst performance in both study areas.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abella EAC, Van Westen CJ (2007) Generation of a landslide risk index map for Cuba using spatial multi-criteria evaluation. Landslides 4(4):311–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-007-0087-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akgun A (2012) A comparison of landslide susceptibility maps produced by logistic regression, multi-criteria decision, and likelihood ratio methods: a case study at İzmir, Turkey. Landslides 9(1):93–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Alkhasawneh MS, Ngah UK, Tay LT, Isa M, Ashidi N, Al-Batah MS (2014) Modeling and testing landslide hazard using decision tree. Journal of Applied Mathematics 2014

  • Althuwaynee OF, Pradhan B, Park H-J, Lee JH (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 

  • Altmann A, Toloşi L, Sander O, Lengauer T (2010) Permutation importance: a corrected feature importance measure. Bioinformatics 26(10):1340–1347

  • 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(3):475

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayalew L, Yamagishi H (2005) The application of GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Kakuda-Yahiko Mountains, Central Japan. Geomorphology 65(1–2):15–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2004.06.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baeza C, Lantada N, Amorim S (2016) Statistical and spatial analysis of landslide susceptibility maps with different classification systems. Environ Earth Sci 75(19):1–17

  • Bai S, Wang J, Thiebes B, Cheng C, Yang Y (2014) Analysis of the relationship of landslide occurrence with rainfall: A case study of Wudu County, China. Arab J Geosci 7(4):1277–1285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-013-0939-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barredo J, Benavides A, Hervás J, van Westen CJ (2002) Comparing heuristic landslide hazard assessment techniques using GIS in the Tirajana basin, Gran Canaria Island, Spain. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 2(1):9–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0303-2434(00)85022-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45(1):5–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownlee J (2016) Deep learning with python: Develop deep learning models on theano and tensorflow using keras. Machine Learning Mastery

  • Casadei M, Dietrich WE, Miller NL (2003) Testing a model for predicting the timing and location of shallow landslide initiation in soil-mantled landscapes. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms. The Journal of the British Geomorphological Research Group 28(9):925–950

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen X, Chen W (2020) GIS-based landslide susceptibility assessment using optimized hybrid machine learning methods. Catena 196:104833

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Li Y (2020) GIS-based evaluation of landslide susceptibility using hybrid computational intelligence models. Catena 195:104777

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Pourghasemi HR, Zhao Z (2017a) A GIS-based comparative study of Dempster-Shafer, logistic regression and artificial neural network models for landslide susceptibility mapping. Geocarto International 32(4):367–385

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Xie X, Peng J, Wang J, Duan Z, Hong H (2017b) GIS-based landslide susceptibility modelling: a comparative assessment of kernel logistic regression, Naïve-Bayes tree, and alternating decision tree models. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 8(2):950–973

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Xie X, Wang J, Pradhan B, Hong H, Bui DT, Duan Z, Ma J (2017c) A comparative study of logistic model tree, random forest, and classification and regression tree models for spatial prediction of landslide susceptibility. Catena 151:147–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Chen X, Peng J, Panahi M, Lee S (2020a) Landslide susceptibility modeling based on ANFIS with teaching-learning-based optimization and Satin bowerbird optimizer. Geosci Front 12(1):93–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Zhao X, Tsangaratos P, Shahabi H, Ilia I, Xue W, Wang X, Ahmad BB (2020b) Evaluating the usage of tree-based ensemble methods in groundwater spring potential mapping. J Hydrol 583:124602

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung CF, Fabbri AG (2001) Prediction models for landslide hazard zonation using a fuzzy set approach. Geomorphology and Environmental Impact Assessment Balkema, Lisse, The Netherlands, pp 31–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Conoscenti C, Di Maggio C, Rotigliano E (2008) GIS analysis to assess landslide susceptibility in a fluvial basin of NW Sicily (Italy). Geomorphology 94(3–4):325–339

    Google Scholar 

  • Constantin M, Bednarik M, Jurchescu MC, Vlaicu M (2011) Landslide susceptibility assessment using the bivariate statistical analysis and the index of entropy in the Sibiciu Basin (Romania). Environ Earth Sci 63(2):397–406

    Google Scholar 

  • Das I, Stein A, Kerle N, Dadhwal VK (2012) Landslide susceptibility mapping along road corridors in the Indian Himalayas using Bayesian logistic regression models. Geomorphology 179:116–125

    Google Scholar 

  • Ercanoglu M, Gokceoglu C (2004) Use of fuzzy relations to produce landslide susceptibility map of a landslide prone area (West Black Sea Region, Turkey). Eng Geol 75(3–4):229–250

    Google Scholar 

  • Ermini L, Catani F, Casagli N (2005) Artificial Neural Networks applied to landslide susceptibility assessment. Geomorphology 66(1-4 SPEC. ISS.):327–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2004.09.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freund Y, Schapire RE (1997) A decision-theoretic generalization of on-line learning and an application to boosting. J Comput Syst Sci 55(1):119–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Frye C (2007) About the geometrical interval classification method. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. https://blogs.esri.com/esri/arcgis/2007/10/18/about-thegeometrical-interval-classification-method

  • Gardner MW, Dorling SR (1998) Artificial neural networks (the multilayer perceptron)—a review of applications in the atmospheric sciences. Atmos Environ 32(14–15):2627–2636

    Google Scholar 

  • Girshick R (2015) Fast r-cnn. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, 1440–1448

  • Gökceoglu C, Aksoy H (1996) Landslide susceptibility mapping of the slopes in the residual soils of the Mengen region (Turkey) by deterministic stability analyses and image processing techniques. Eng Geol 44(1–4):147–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Gökçeoğlu C, Ercanoğlu M (2001) Heyelan duyarlılık haritalarının hazırlanmasında kullanılan parametrelere ilişkin belirsizlikler. Yerbilimleri Dergisi 22(23):189–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzzetti F (2000) Landslide fatalities and the evaluation of landslide risk in Italy. Eng Geol 58(2):89–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE (2009) Multivariate data analysis, Upper Saddle River, NJ [etc.]. Pearson Prentice Hall, New York, NY: Macmillan, 24, 899

  • Haykin SS (2009) Neural networks and learning machines/Simon Haykin. Prentice Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Igwe O, Mode W, Nnebedum O, Okonkwo I, Oha I (2014) The analysis of rainfall-induced slope failures at Iva Valley area of Enugu State, Nigeria. Environ Earth Sci 71(5):2465–2480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-013-2647-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irigaray C, Fernández T, El Hamdouni R, Chacón J (2007) Evaluation and validation of landslide-susceptibility maps obtained by a GIS matrix method: examples from the Betic Cordillera (southern Spain). Nat Hazards 41(1):61–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeong S, Kim Y, Lee JK, Kim J (2015) The 27 July 2011 debris flows at Umyeonsan, Seoul, Korea. Landslides 12(4):799–813. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-015-0595-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jibson RW, Harp EL, Michael JA (2000) A method for producing digital probabilistic seismic landslide hazard maps. Eng Geol 58(3–4):271–289

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • Keefer DK (1984) Landslides caused by earthquakes. Geol Soc Am Bull 95(4):406–421

    Google Scholar 

  • Keith TZ (2014) Multiple regression and beyond: An introduction to multiple regression and structural equation modeling. Routledge

  • Kuncheva LI (2014) Combining pattern classifiers: methods and algorithms. John Wiley & Sons

  • LeCun Y, Bengio Y, Hinton G (2015) Deep learning. Nature 521(7553):436

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Hong S-M, Jung H-S (2017) A support vector machine for landslide susceptibility mapping in Gangwon Province, Korea. Sustainability 9(1):48

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee S, Hong S-M, Jung H-S (2018) GIS-based groundwater potential mapping using artificial neural network and support vector machine models: the case of Boryeong city in Korea. Geocarto International 33(8):847–861

    Google Scholar 

  • Li Y, Chen W (2020) Landslide susceptibility evaluation using hybrid integration of evidential belief function and machine learning techniques. Water 12(1):113

    Google Scholar 

  • Listo F d LR, Vieira BC (2012) Mapping of risk and susceptibility of shallow-landslide in the city of São Paulo, Brazil. Geomorphology 169:30–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehta DB, Barot PA, Langhnoja SG (2020). Effect of Different Activation Functions on EEG Signal Classification based on Neural Networks. 2020 Fourth International Conference on Computing Methodologies and Communication (ICCMC), 132–135

  • Meisina C, Scarabelli S (2007) A comparative analysis of terrain stability models for predicting shallow landslides in colluvial soils. Geomorphology 87(3):207–223

    Google Scholar 

  • Micheletti N, Foresti L, Robert S, Leuenberger M, Pedrazzini A, Jaboyedoff M, Kanevski M (2014) Machine learning feature selection methods for landslide susceptibility mapping. Math Geosci 46(1):33–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore ID, Burch GJ (1986) Physical basis of the length-slope factor in the universal soil loss equation 1. Soil Sci Soc Am J 50(5):1294–1298

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore ID, Grayson RB, Ladson AR (1991) Digital terrain modelling: a review of hydrological, geomorphological, and biological applications. Hydrol Process 5(1):3–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Mora CS, Vahrson W-G (1994) Macrozonation methodology for landslide hazard determination. Bull Assoc Eng Geol 31(1):49–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen VB-Q, Kim Y-T (2020) Rainfall-earthquake-Induced landslide hazard prediction by Monte Carlo simulation: a case study of MT. Umyeon in Korea. KSCE J Civ Eng 24(1):73–86

  • Nguyen BQV, Lee SR, Kim YT (2020) Spatial probability assessment of landslide considering increases in pore water pressure during rainfall and earthquakes: Case studies at Atsuma and Mt. Umyeon. CATENA, 187, 104317

  • Nwankpa C, Ijomah W, Gachagan A, Marshall S (2018) Activation functions: Comparison of trends in practice and research for deep learning. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv 1811:03378

    Google Scholar 

  • Pack, R. T., Tarboton, D. G., & Goodwin, C. N. (1998). The SINMAP Approach to Terrain Stability Mapping. 8th Congress of the International Association of Engineering Geology, 8.

  • Park S, Kim J (2019) Landslide susceptibility mapping based on random Forest and boosted regression tree models, and a comparison of their performance. Appl Sci 9(5):942

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng L, Niu R, Huang B, Wu X, Zhao Y, Ye R (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping based on rough set theory and support vector machines: A case of the Three Gorges area, China. Geomorphology 204:287–301

    Google Scholar 

  • Perotto-Baldiviezo HL, Thurow TL, Smith CT, Fisher RF, Wu XB (2004) GIS-based spatial analysis and modeling for landslide hazard assessment in steeplands, southern Honduras. Agric Ecosyst Environ 103(1):165–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Pham BT, Prakash I (2019) A novel hybrid model of bagging-based naïve bayes trees for landslide susceptibility assessment. Bull Eng Geol Environ 78(3):1911–1925

    Google Scholar 

  • Pham BT, Bui D, Prakash I, Dholakia M (2016) Evaluation of predictive ability of support vector machines and naive Bayes trees methods for spatial prediction of landslides in Uttarakhand state (India) using GIS. J Geom 10:71–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Pham BT, Bui DT, Pourghasemi HR, Indra P, Dholakia MB (2017a) Landslide susceptibility assesssment in the Uttarakhand area (India) using GIS: a comparison study of prediction capability of naïve bayes, multilayer perceptron neural networks, and functional trees methods. Theor Appl Climatol 128(1–2):255–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Pham BT, Bui DT, Prakash I, Dholakia MB (2017b) Hybrid integration of Multilayer Perceptron Neural Networks and machine learning ensembles for landslide susceptibility assessment at Himalayan area (India) using GIS. Catena 149:52–63

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Pradhan AMS, Kim Y-T (2014) Relative effect method of landslide susceptibility zonation in weathered granite soil: a case study in Deokjeok-ri Creek, South Korea. Nat Hazards 72(2):1189–1217

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan AMS, Kim Y-T (2017) Spatial data analysis and application of evidential belief functions to shallow landslide susceptibility mapping at Mt. Umyeon, Seoul. Korea Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment 76(4):1263–1279

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan AMS, Kim YT (2021) Development and evaluation of relative relief based soil thickness model: a comparative study in Hilly Terrain, South Korea. KSCE J Civ Eng 1–13

  • Pradhan AMS, Kang H-S, Lee J-S, Tarolli P, Kim Y-T (2016) Shallow landslide hazard modeling by incorporating heavy rainfall statistics and quasi-dynamic wetness index: a case study from Korean mountain. Japanese Geotechnical Society Special Publication 2(27):1012–1016. https://doi.org/10.3208/jgssp.kor-01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan AMS, Kang HS, Lee JS, Kim YT (2019) An ensemble landslide hazard model incorporating rainfall threshold for Mt. Umyeon, South Korea. Bull Eng Geol Environ 78(1):131–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-017-1055-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rathje EM, Bray JD (2000) Nonlinear coupled seismic sliding analysis of earth structures. J Geotech Geoenviron 126(11):1002–1014

    Google Scholar 

  • Saldivar-Sali A, Einstein HH (2007) A landslide risk rating system for Baguio, Philippines. Eng Geol 91(2–4):85–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Sameen MI, Pradhan B, Lee S (2020) Application of convolutional neural networks featuring Bayesian optimization for landslide susceptibility assessment. Catena 186:104249

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar S, Kanungo DP (2004) An integrated approach for landslide susceptibility mapping using remote sensing and GIS. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 70(5):617–625

    Google Scholar 

  • Schicker R, Moon V (2012) Comparison of bivariate and multivariate statistical approaches in landslide susceptibility mapping at a regional scale. Geomorphology 161:40–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharif Razavian, A., Azizpour, H., Sullivan, J., & Carlsson, S. (2014). CNN features off-the-shelf: an astounding baseline for recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops, 806–813

  • Shin H-C, Roth HR, Gao M, Lu L, Xu Z, Nogues I, Yao J, Mollura D, Summers RM (2016) Deep convolutional neural networks for computer-aided detection: CNN architectures, dataset characteristics and transfer learning. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 35(5):1285–1298

    Google Scholar 

  • SI (The Seoul Institute) (2014). Final Report on the Cause of Landslides in Umyeonsan (Mt.)–Complementary Investigation. Report No. 51-6110000-000649-01 (In Korean)

  • Simoni S, Zanotti F, Bertoldi G, Rigon R (2008) Modelling the probability of occurrence of shallow landslides and channelized debris flows using GEOtop-FS. Hydrological Processes: An International Journal 22(4):532–545

    Google Scholar 

  • Šimundić A-M (2008) Measures of diagnostic accuracy: basic definitions. Medical and Biological Sciences 22(4):61

    Google Scholar 

  • Speight JG (1980) The role of topography in controlling throughflow generation: a discussion. Earth Surface Processes 5(2):187–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Tallarida RJ, Murray RB (1987) Chi-square test. In Manual of pharmacologic calculations, Springer, pp. 140–142

  • Tarolli P, Borga M, Chang K-T, Chiang S-H (2011) Modeling shallow landsliding susceptibility by incorporating heavy rainfall statistical properties. Geomorphology 133(3–4):199–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Tien Bui D, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick O (2011) Landslide susceptibility analysis in the Hoa Binh province of Vietnam using statistical index and logistic regression. Nat Hazards 59(3):1413

    Google Scholar 

  • Tien Bui D, Ho T-C, Pradhan B, Pham B-T, Nhu V-H, Revhaug I (2016a) GIS-based modeling of rainfall-induced landslides using data mining-based functional trees classifier with AdaBoost, Bagging, and MultiBoost ensemble frameworks. Environ Earth Sci 75(14):1101

    Google Scholar 

  • Tien Bui D, Tuan TA, Klempe H, Pradhan B, Revhaug I (2016b) 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(2):361–378

    Google Scholar 

  • Tien Bui D, Tsangaratos P, Nguyen V-T, Van Liem N, Trinh PT (2020) Comparing the prediction performance of a Deep Learning Neural Network model with conventional machine learning models in landslide susceptibility assessment. Catena 188:104426

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsangaratos P, Ilia I (2016) Comparison of a logistic regression and Naïve Bayes classifier in landslide susceptibility assessments: The influence of models complexity and training dataset size. Catena 145:164–179

    Google Scholar 

  • van Beek LPH (2002) Assessment of the influence of changes in land use and climate on landslide activity in a Mediterranean environment

  • Van Dao D, Jaafari A, Bayat M, Mafi-Gholami D, Qi C, Moayedi H, Van Phong T, Ly H-B, Le T-T, Trinh PT (2020) A spatially explicit deep learning neural network model for the prediction of landslide susceptibility. Catena 188:104451

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Westen CJ (2000) The modeling of landslide hazards using GIS. Surv Geophys 21(2–3):241–255. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006794127521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasu NN, Lee S-R (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 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Y, Fang Z, Hong H (2019) Comparison of convolutional neural networks for landslide susceptibility mapping in Yanshan County, China. Sci Total Environ 666:975–993

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Y, Li Y, Song Y, Rong X (2020) The influence of the activation function in a convolution neural network model of facial expression recognition. Appl Sci 10(5):1897

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu C, Xu X, Dai F, Saraf AK (2012) Comparison of different models for susceptibility mapping of earthquake triggered landslides related with the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in China. Comput Geosci 46:317–329

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamagishi H, Yamazaki F (2018) Landslides by the 2018 Hokkaido Iburi-Tobu Earthquake on September 6. Landslides 15(12):2521–2524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-018-1092-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang B, Yin K, Lacasse S, Liu Z (2019) Time series analysis and long short-term memory neural network to predict landslide displacement. Landslides 16(4):677–694

    Google Scholar 

  • 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(4):821–836

    Google Scholar 

  • Youssef AM, Pourghasemi HR, Pourtaghi ZS, Al-Katheeri MM (2016) Landslide susceptibility mapping using random forest, boosted regression tree, classification and regression tree, and general linear models and comparison of their performance at Wadi Tayyah Basin, Asir Region, Saudi Arabia. Landslides 13(5):839–856

    Google Scholar 

  • Zare M, Pourghasemi HR, Vafakhah M, Pradhan B (2013) Landslide susceptibility mapping at Vaz Watershed (Iran) using an artificial neural network model: a comparison between multilayer perceptron (MLP) and radial basic function (RBF) algorithms. Arab J Geosci 6(8):2873–2888

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang H, Su J (2004) Naive bayesian classifiers for ranking. European Conference on Machine Learning:501–512

  • Zhao X, Chen W (2020a) GIS-based evaluation of landslide susceptibility models using certainty factors and functional trees-based ensemble techniques. Appl Sci 10(1):16

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao X, Chen W (2020b) Optimization of computational intelligence models for landslide susceptibility evaluation. Remote Sens 12(14):2180

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou J w, Cui P, Fang H (2013) Dynamic process analysis for the formation of Yangjiagou landslide-dammed lake triggered by the Wenchuan earthquake, China. Landslides 10(3):331–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-013-0387-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Korean Ministry of Education (grant no. 2018R1D1A1B07049360), and the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) and the Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE) of the Republic of Korea (No.20201510100020), and the Brain Korea 21 Plus (BK 21 Plus) initiative.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ocean Engineering, Pukyong National Univ., Busan, 48513, Korea

    Ba-Quang-Vinh Nguyen & Yun-Tae Kim

Authors
  1. Ba-Quang-Vinh Nguyen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yun-Tae Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yun-Tae Kim.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nguyen, BQV., Kim, YT. Landslide spatial probability prediction: a comparative assessment of naïve Bayes, ensemble learning, and deep learning approaches. Bull Eng Geol Environ 80, 4291–4321 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-021-02194-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-021-02194-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation