Menu
×
John's Island Library
9 a.m. - 4 p.m.
Phone: (843) 559-1945
Main Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 805-6930
West Ashley Library
9 a.m. - 7 p.m.
Phone: (843) 766-6635
Wando Mount Pleasant Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 805-6888
Village Library
9 a.m. - 6 p.m.
Phone: (843) 884-9741
St. Paul's/Hollywood Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 889-3300
Otranto Road Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 572-4094
Mt. Pleasant Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 849-6161
McClellanville Library
9 a.m. - 6 p.m.
Phone: (843) 887-3699
Keith Summey North Charleston Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 744-2489
Hurd/St. Andrews Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 766-2546
Folly Beach Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 588-2001
Edisto Island Library
9 a.m. - 6 p.m.
Phone: (843) 869-2355
Dorchester Road Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 552-6466
John L. Dart Library
9 a.m. - 7 p.m.
Phone: (843) 722-7550
Baxter-Patrick James Island
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 795-6679
Bees Ferry West Ashley Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 805-6892
Edgar Allan Poe/Sullivan's Island Library
Closed for renovations
Phone: (843) 883-3914
Mobile Library
9 a.m. - 5 p.m.
Phone: (843) 805-6909
Today's Hours
John's Island Library
9 a.m. - 4 p.m.
Phone: (843) 559-1945
Main Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 805-6930
West Ashley Library
9 a.m. - 7 p.m.
Phone: (843) 766-6635
Wando Mount Pleasant Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 805-6888
Village Library
9 a.m. - 6 p.m.
Phone: (843) 884-9741
St. Paul's/Hollywood Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 889-3300
Otranto Road Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 572-4094
Mt. Pleasant Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 849-6161
McClellanville Library
9 a.m. - 6 p.m.
Phone: (843) 887-3699
Keith Summey North Charleston Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 744-2489
Hurd/St. Andrews Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 766-2546
Folly Beach Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 588-2001
Edisto Island Library
9 a.m. - 6 p.m.
Phone: (843) 869-2355
Dorchester Road Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 552-6466
John L. Dart Library
9 a.m. - 7 p.m.
Phone: (843) 722-7550
Baxter-Patrick James Island
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 795-6679
Bees Ferry West Ashley Library
9 a.m. - 8 p.m.
Phone: (843) 805-6892
Edgar Allan Poe/Sullivan's Island Library
Closed for renovations
Phone: (843) 883-3914
Mobile Library
9 a.m. - 5 p.m.
Phone: (843) 805-6909
Patron Login
menu
Item request has been placed!
×
Item request cannot be made.
×
Processing Request
Influence of buffer distance on environmental geological hazard susceptibility assessment.
Item request has been placed!
×
Item request cannot be made.
×
Processing Request
- Author(s): Wang Z;Wang Z;Wang Z;Wang Z;Wang Z; Chen J; Chen J; Lian Z; Lian Z; Li F; Li F; Pang L; Pang L; Xin Y; Xin Y
- Source:
Environmental science and pollution research international [Environ Sci Pollut Res Int] 2024 Feb; Vol. 31 (6), pp. 9582-9595. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jan 09.- Publication Type:
Journal Article- Language:
English - Source:
- Additional Information
- Source: Publisher: Springer Country of Publication: Germany NLM ID: 9441769 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1614-7499 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 09441344 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int Subsets: MEDLINE
- Publication Information: Publication: <2013->: Berlin : Springer
Original Publication: Landsberg, Germany : Ecomed - Subject Terms:
- Abstract: Previous researches seldom studied the selection of buffer distance between geological hazards (positive samples) and non-geological hazards (negative samples), and its reasonable selection plays a very important role in improving the accuracy of susceptibility zoning, protecting the environment and reducing the cost of hazard management. Based on GIS technology and random forest (RF) and frequency-ratio random forest (FR-RF) models, this study innovatively explored the influence of randomly selected non-geological hazard samples outside different buffer distances on the susceptibility evaluation results, with buffer distances of 100 m, 500 m, 1000 m and 2000 m in sequence. The results show that through the confusion matrix and ROC curve test, the accuracy of the model increases first and then decreases with the increase of buffer distance. Both RF and FR-RF models have the highest accuracy when the buffer distance is 1000 m, and the accuracy of the RF model is generally higher than that of the FR-RF model under the same buffer distance. Similar attribute values of positive samples and randomly selected negative samples or "extreme" attribute values of negative samples are the main reasons for the differences in evaluation results of different buffer distances. According to the weight analysis of causative factors, the distance from road, the distance from river and the normalized vegetation index (NDVI) are the main factors affecting the occurrence of hazards. The high and very high susceptibility areas in the study area are mainly distributed on both sides of roads and water systems, which are the key areas for hazard prevention and reduction. The HMC of RF-1000m decreased by 3.55% on average compared with other models. The results of this study improve the accuracy of geological hazard susceptibility assessment, maintain the safety of ecological environment, and provide a scientific basis for the selection of buffer distance index in local and surrounding areas in the future.
(© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.) - References: Aditian A, Kubota T, Shinohara Y (2018) Comparison of GIS-based landslide susceptibility models using frequency ratio, logistic regression, and artificial neural network in a tertiary region of Ambon, Indonesia. Geomorphology 318:101–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2018.06.006. (PMID: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2018.06.006)
Akinci H, Kilicoglu C, Dogan S (2020) Random forest-based landslide susceptibility mapping in coastal regions of Artvin. Turkey. Isprs Int J Geo-Inf 9:553. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9090553. (PMID: 10.3390/ijgi9090553)
Ba QQ, Chen YM, Deng SS, Wu QJ, Yang JX, Zhang JY (2017) An improved information value model based on gray clustering for landslide susceptibility mapping. Isprs Int J Geo-Inf 6:18. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi6010018. (PMID: 10.3390/ijgi6010018)
Biswas A, Si BC (2011) Scales and locations of time stability of soil water storage in a hummocky landscape. J Hydrol 408:100–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.07.027. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.07.027)
Bordoni M, Galanti Y, Bartelletti C, Persichillo MG, Barsanti M, Giannecchini R, Avanzi GD, Cevasco A, Brandolini P, Galve JP, Meisina C (2020) The influence of the inventory on the determination of the rainfall-induced shallow landslides susceptibility using generalized additive models. Catena 193:104630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2020.104630. (PMID: 10.1016/j.catena.2020.104630)
Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45:5–32. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324. (PMID: 10.1023/A:1010933404324)
Catani F, Lagomarsino D, Segoni S, Tofani V (2013) Landslide susceptibility estimation by random forests technique: sensitivity and scaling issues. Nat Hazard Earth Sys 13:2815–2831. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-13-2815-2013. (PMID: 10.5194/nhess-13-2815-2013)
Chang SH, Wan SA (2015) Discrete rough set analysis of two different soil-behavior-induced landslides in National Shei-Pa Park, Taiwan. Geosci Front 6:807–816. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2013.12.010. (PMID: 10.1016/j.gsf.2013.12.010)
Chen JP, Wang ZP, Chen W, Wan CY, Liu YY, Huang JJ (2023) The influence of the selection of non-geological disasters sample spatial range on the evaluation of environmental geological disasters susceptibility: a case study of Liulin County. Environ Sci Pollut R:36697985. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25454-2.
Chen S, Miao ZL, Wu LX, Zhang AS, Li QR, He YG (2021) A one-class-classifier-based negative data generation method for rapid earthquake-induced landslide susceptibility mapping. Front Earth Sc-Switz 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2021.609896.
Chen W, Chen YZ, Tsangaratos P, Ilia I, Wang XJ (2020) Combining evolutionary algorithms and machine learning models in landslide susceptibility assessments. Remote Sens-Basel 12:3854. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12233854. (PMID: 10.3390/rs12233854)
Chen W, Panahi M, Tsangaratos P, Shahabi H, Ilia I, Panahi S, Li SJ, Jaafari A, Bin Ahmad B (2019) Applying population-based evolutionary algorithms and a neuro-fuzzy system for modeling landslide susceptibility. Catena 172:212–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2018.08.025. (PMID: 10.1016/j.catena.2018.08.025)
Chen W, Xie XS, Wang JL, Pradhan B, Hong HY, Bui DT, Duan Z, Ma JQ (2017) 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2016.11.032. (PMID: 10.1016/j.catena.2016.11.032)
Conoscenti C, Rotigliano E, Cama M, Caraballo-Arias NA, Lombardo L, Agnesi V (2016) Exploring the effect of absence selection on landslide susceptibility models: a case study in Sicily, Italy. Geomorphology 261:222–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2016.03.006. (PMID: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2016.03.006)
Du GL, Zhang YS, Yang ZH, Guo CB, Yao X, Sun DY (2019) Landslide susceptibility mapping in the region of eastern Himalayan syntaxis, Tibetan Plateau, China: a comparison between analytical hierarchy process information value and logistic regression-information value methods. B Eng Geol Environ 78:4201–4215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-018-1393-4. (PMID: 10.1007/s10064-018-1393-4)
Erener A, Duzgun HBS (2013) A regional scale quantitative risk assessment for landslides: case of Kumluca watershed in Bartin, Turkey. Landslides 10:55–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-012-0317-9. (PMID: 10.1007/s10346-012-0317-9)
Frattini P, Crosta G, Carrara A (2010) Techniques for evaluating the performance of landslide susceptibility models. Eng Geol 111:62–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2009.12.004. (PMID: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2009.12.004)
Froude MJ, Petley DN (2018) Global fatal landslide occurrence from 2004 to 2016. Nat Hazard Earth Sys 18:2161–2181. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2161-2018. (PMID: 10.5194/nhess-18-2161-2018)
Guo YJ (2020) Assessment of landslide susceptibility based on ensemble learning algorithm in Xi'an city. Dissertation, Xi'an University of Science and Technology. https://doi.org/10.27397/d.cnki.gxaku.2020.000053. (PMID: 10.27397/d.cnki.gxaku.2020.000053)
He SW, Pan P, Dai L, Wang HJ, Liu JP (2012) Application of kernel-based Fisher discriminant analysis to map landslide susceptibility in the Qinggan River delta, Three Gorges, China. Geomorphology 171:30–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2012.04.024. (PMID: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2012.04.024)
Hong HY, Pradhan B, Xu C, Tien Bui D (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 133:266–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2015.05.019. (PMID: 10.1016/j.catena.2015.05.019)
Hu XD, Huang C, Mei HB, Zhang H (2021) Landslide susceptibility mapping using an ensemble model of Bagging scheme and random subspace-based naive Bayes tree in Zigui County of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China. B Eng Geol Environ 80:5315–5329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-021-02275-6. (PMID: 10.1007/s10064-021-02275-6)
Huang Y, Zhao L (2018) Review on landslide susceptibility mapping using support vector machines. Catena 165:520–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2018.03.003. (PMID: 10.1016/j.catena.2018.03.003)
Hussain MA, Chen ZL, Wang R, Shoaib M (2021) PS-InSAR-based validated landslide susceptibility mapping along Karakorum Highway. Pakistan. Remote Sens-Basel 13:4129. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13204129. (PMID: 10.3390/rs13204129)
Jiang WG, Rao PZ, Cao R, Tang ZH, Chen K (2017) Comparative evaluation of geological disaster susceptibility using multi-regression methods and spatial accuracy validation. J Geogr Sci 27:439–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11442-017-1386-4. (PMID: 10.1007/s11442-017-1386-4)
Kalantar B, Pradhan B, Naghibi SA, Motevalli A, Mansor S (2018) Assessment of the effects of training data selection on the landslide susceptibility mapping: a comparison between support vector machine (SVM), logistic regression (LR) and artificial neural networks (ANN). Geomat Nat Haz Risk 9:49–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2017.1407368. (PMID: 10.1080/19475705.2017.1407368)
Kanwal S, Atif S, Shafiq M (2017) GIS based landslide susceptibility mapping of northern areas of Pakistan, a case study of Shigar and Shyok Basins. Geomat Nat Haz Risk 8:348–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2016.1220023. (PMID: 10.1080/19475705.2016.1220023)
Kavzoglu T, Sahin EK, Colkesen I (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis, support vector machines, and logistic regression. Landslides 11:425–439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-013-0391-7. (PMID: 10.1007/s10346-013-0391-7)
Khan H, Shafique M, Khan MA, Bacha MA, Shah SU, Calligaris C (2019) Landslide susceptibility assessment using frequency ratio, a case study of Northern Pakistan. Egypt J Remote Sens 22:11–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrs.2018.03.004. (PMID: 10.1016/j.ejrs.2018.03.004)
Li CX, Ma Y, He YX (2020) Sensitivity analysis of debris flow to environmental factors: a case of Longxi River basin in Duijiangyan, Sichuan Province. Chinese J Geol Hazard Contr 31:32–39. https://doi.org/10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.2020.05.05. (PMID: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.2020.05.05)
Li WB, Fan XM, Huang FM, Wu XL, Yin KL, Chang ZL (2021) Uncertainties of landslide susceptibility modeling under different environmental factor connections and prediction models. Earth Sci 46:3777–3795. https://doi.org/10.3799/dqkx.2021.042. (PMID: 10.3799/dqkx.2021.042)
Lin JH, Chen WH, Qi XH, Hou HR (2021) Risk assessment and its influencing factors analysis of geological hazards in typical mountain environment. J Clean Prod 309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127077.
Liu J, Li SL, Chen T (2018) Landslide susceptibility assesment based on optimized random forest model. Geomat Inf Sci Wuhan Univ 43:1085–1091. https://doi.org/10.13203/j.whugis20160515. (PMID: 10.13203/j.whugis20160515)
Liu MM, Liu JP, Xu SH, Zhou T, Ma Y, Zhang FH, Konecny M (2021) Landslide susceptibility mapping with the fusion of multi-feature SVM model based FCM sampling strategy: a case study from Shaanxi Province. Int J Image Data Fus 12:349–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/19479832.2021.1961316. (PMID: 10.1080/19479832.2021.1961316)
Ma X, Wang NQ, Li XK, Yan.D., Li JL (2022) Assessment of landslide susceptibility based on RF-FR model: taking Lueyang County as an example. Northwest Geo 55: 335-344. https://doi.org/10.19751/j.cnki.61-1149/p.2022.03.028.
Meinhardt M, Fink M, Tunschel H (2015) Landslide susceptibility analysis in central Vietnam based on an incomplete landslide inventory: comparison of a new method to calculate weighting factors by means of bivariate statistics. Geomorphology 234:80–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2014.12.042. (PMID: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2014.12.042)
Mondini AC, Chang KT (2014) Combining spectral and geoenvironmental information for probabilistic event landslide mapping. Geomorphology 213:183–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2014.01.007. (PMID: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2014.01.007)
Nicu IC (2017) Frequency ratio and GIS-based evaluation of landslide susceptibility applied to cultural heritage assessment. J Cult Herit 28:172–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cuther.2017.06.002. (PMID: 10.1016/j.cuther.2017.06.002)
Nun I, Pichara K, Protopapas P, Kim DW (2014) Supervised detection of anomalous light curves in massive astronomical catalogs. ApJ 793. https://doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/793/1/23.
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-Basel 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11205659.
Pawluszek K, Borkowski A (2017) Impact of DEM-derived factors and analytical hierarchy process on landslide susceptibility mapping in the region of Roznow Lake, Poland. Nat Hazards 86:919–952. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2725-y. (PMID: 10.1007/s11069-016-2725-y)
Peng L, Niu RQ, Huang B, Wu XL, Zhao YN, Ye RQ (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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2013.08.013. (PMID: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2013.08.013)
Polykretis C, Chalkias C (2018) Comparison and evaluation of landslide susceptibility maps obtained from weight of evidence, logistic regression, and artificial neural network models. Nat Hazards 93:249–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3299-7. (PMID: 10.1007/s11069-018-3299-7)
Posner AJ, Georgakakos KP (2015) Normalized landslide index method for susceptibility map development in El Salvador. Nat Hazards 79:1825–1845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1930-4. (PMID: 10.1007/s11069-015-1930-4)
Pourghasemi HR, Gayen A, Park S, Lee CW, Lee S (2018) Assessment of landslide-prone areas and their zonation using logistic regression, LogitBoost, and Naive Bayes machine-learning algorithms. Sustainability-Basel 10:3697. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103697. (PMID: 10.3390/su10103697)
Pourghasemi HR, Rahmati O (2018) Prediction of the landslide susceptibility: which algorithm, which precision? Catena 162:177–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2017.11.022. (PMID: 10.1016/j.catena.2017.11.022)
Sahin EK, Colkesen I, Kavzoglu T (2020) A comparative assessment of canonical correlation forest, random forest, rotation forest and logistic regression methods for landslide susceptibility mapping. GeoIn 35:341–363. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2018.1516248. (PMID: 10.1080/10106049.2018.1516248)
Sarda VK, Pandey DD (2019) Landslide susceptibility mapping using information value method. Jordan J Civ Eng 13:335–350.
Su CX, Wang BJ, Lv YH, Zhang MP, Peng DL, Bate B, Zhang S (2022) Improved landslide susceptibility mapping using unsupervised and supervised collaborative machine learning models. Georisk. https://doi.org/10.1080/17499518.2022.2088802.
Su QM, Zhang J, Zhao SM, Wang L, Liu J, Guo JL (2017) Comparative assessment of three nonlinear approaches for landslide susceptibility mapping in a coal mine area. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi6070228.
Sun XH, Chen JP, Bao YD, Han XD, Zhan JW, Peng W (2018) Landslide susceptibility mapping using logistic regression analysis along the Jinsha River and its tributaries close to Derong and Deqin County Southwestern China. ISPRS Int J Geo-Inf 7:438. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi7110438. (PMID: 10.3390/ijgi7110438)
Taalab K, Cheng T, Zhang Y (2018) Mapping landslide susceptibility and types using random forest. Big Earth Data 2:159–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/20964471.2018.1472392. (PMID: 10.1080/20964471.2018.1472392)
Tsangaratos P, Ilia I (2016) Landslide susceptibility mapping using a modified decision tree classifier in the Xanthi Perfection, Greece. Landslides 13:305–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-015-0565-6. (PMID: 10.1007/s10346-015-0565-6)
Wang C, Wang XD, Zhang HY, Meng FQ, Li XL (2022) Assessment of environmental geological disaster susceptibility under a multimodel comparison to aid in the sustainable development of the regional economy. Environ Sci Pollut R. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-22649-x.
Wang JJ, Kl Y, Xiao LL (2014) Landslide susceptibility assessment based on GIS and weighted information value: a case study of Wanzhou district, Three Gorges Reservoir. Chinese J Rock Mech Eng 33:797–808. https://doi.org/10.13722/j.cnki.jrme.2014.04.012. (PMID: 10.13722/j.cnki.jrme.2014.04.012)
Wang JZ, Gao YC, Tie YB, Xu W, Bai YJ, Zhang YF (2021a) Evaluation of the susceptibility to landslide in mountainous towns based on slope unit: taking Kangding as an example. Sediment Geol Tethyan Geol:1–17. https://doi.org/10.19826/j.cnki.1009-3850.2021.03001.
Wang XD, Zhang CB, Wang C, Liu GW, Wang HX (2021b) GIS-based for prediction and prevention of environmental geological disaster susceptibility: from a perspective of sustainable development. Ecotox Environ Safe 226:112881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2021.112881. (PMID: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2021.112881)
Wang Y, Sun DL, Wen HJ, Zhang H, Zhang FT (2020) Comparison of random forest model and frequency ratio model for landslide susceptibility mapping (LSM) in Yunyang County (Chongqing, China). Int J Env Res Pub He 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17124206.
Xiong JN, Wei FQ, Liu ZQ (2017) Hazard assessment of debris flow in Sichuan Province. J Geo-inform Sci 19:1604–1612 https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.5809.P.20171228.1447.020.html.
Yang Y, Hu N (2019) The spatial and temporal evolution of coordinated ecological and socioeconomic development in the provinces along the Silk Road Economic Belt in China. Sustain Cities Soc 47:101466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101466. (PMID: 10.1016/j.scs.2019.101466)
Yu JN, Liu K, Zhang BY, Huang Y, Fan CY, Song CQ, Tang GA (2021) Vertical accuracy assessment and applicability analysis of TanDEM-X 90 m DEM in China. J Geo-inform Sci 23:646–657.
Yum SG, Ahn S, Bae J, Kim JM (2020) Assessing the risk of natural disaster-induced losses to tunnel-construction projects using empirical financial-loss data from South Korea. Sustainability-Basel 12:8026. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198026. (PMID: 10.3390/su12198026)
Zhang Q, Yu H, Li ZN, Zhang GH, Ma DT (2020) Assessing potential likelihood and impacts of landslides on transportation network vulnerability. Transport Res D-Tr E 82:102304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102304. (PMID: 10.1016/j.trd.2020.102304)
Zhang WA, He YW, Wang LQ, Liu SL, Meng XY (2023) Landslide susceptibility mapping using random forest and extreme gradient boosting: a case study of Fengjie. GeolJ, Chongqing. https://doi.org/10.1002/gj.4683. (PMID: 10.1002/gj.4683)
Zhao BB, Ge YF, Chen HZ (2021) Landslide susceptibility assessment for a transmission line in Gansu Province, China by using a hybrid approach of fractal theory, information value, and random forest models. Environ Earth Sci 80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-021-09737-w.
Zhao LR, Wu XL, Niu RQ, Wang Y, Zhang KX (2020) Using the rotation and random forest models of ensemble learning to predict landslide susceptibility. Geomat Nat Haz Risk 11:1542–1564. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2020.1803421. (PMID: 10.1080/19475705.2020.1803421)
Zhao Q (2017) Types and causes of geological calamity of mountain region of Linfen in Shanxi Province. J Taiyuan Normal Univ (NaturalScience Edition) 16:93–96.
Zhao YZ, Zou XY, Cheng H, Jia HK, Wu YQ, Wang GY, Zhang CL, Gao SY (2006) Assessing the ecological security of the Tibetan plateau: methodology and a case study for Lhaze County. J Environ Manage 80:120–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.08.019. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.08.019)
Zhao ZB, Han JQ, Chen S (2016) Analysis of geological disasters and its harmfulness in Linfen. J Shanxi Norm Univ(Nat Sci Edit) 30:117–123. https://doi.org/10.16207/j.cnki.1009-4490.2016.02.024. (PMID: 10.16207/j.cnki.1009-4490.2016.02.024)
Zhou XT, Wu WC, Lin ZY, Zhang GL, Chen RX, Song Y, Wang ZL, Lang T, Qin YZ, Ou PH, Wenchao HF, Zhang Y, Xie LF, Huang XL, Fu X, Li J, Jiang JH, Zhang M, Liu YX et al (2021) Zonation of landslide susceptibility in Ruijin, Jiangxi, China. Int J Env Res Pub He 18:5906. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18115906. (PMID: 10.3390/ijerph18115906) - Contributed Indexing: Keywords: Buffer distance; Environmental safety; Frequency ratio; Geological hazard; Negative sample; Random forest
- Publication Date: Date Created: 20240109 Date Completed: 20240131 Latest Revision: 20240131
- Publication Date: 20240131
- Accession Number: 10.1007/s11356-023-31739-3
- Accession Number: 38194173
- Source:
Contact CCPL
Copyright 2022 Charleston County Public Library Powered By EBSCO Stacks 3.3.0 [350.3] | Staff Login
No Comments.