Fiche du document
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1007/s11004-013-9511-0
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/pissn/1874-8961
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/eissn/1874-8953
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/urn/urn:nbn:ch:serval-BIB_4A344D07E4EC7
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess , Copying allowed only for non-profit organizations , https://serval.unil.ch/disclaimer
Sujets proches
Land slides Slides (Landslides) Landsliding LandslipsCiter ce document
Natan Micheletti et al., « Machine Learning Feature Selection Methods for Landslide Susceptibility Mapping », Serveur académique Lausannois, ID : 10.1007/s11004-013-9511-0
Métriques
Partage / Export
Résumé
This paper explores the use of adaptive support vector machines, random forests and AdaBoost for landslide susceptibility mapping in three separated regions of Canton Vaud, Switzerland, based on a set of geological, hydrological and morphological features. The feature selection properties of the three algorithms are studied to analyze the relevance of features in controlling the spatial distribution of landslides. The elimination of irrelevant features gives simpler, lower dimensional models while keeping the classification performance high. An object-based sampling procedure is considered to reduce the spatial autocorrelation of data and to estimate more reliably generalization skills when applying the model to predict the occurrence of new unknown landslides. The accuracy of the models, the relevance of features and the quality of landslide susceptibility maps were found to be high in the regions characterized by shallow landslides and low in the ones with deep-seated landslides. Despite providing similar skill, random forests and AdaBoost were found to be more efficient in performing feature selection than adaptive support vector machines. The results of this study reveal the strengths of the classification algorithms, but evidence: (1) the need for relying on more than one method for the identification of relevant variables; (2) the weakness of the adaptive scaling algorithm when used with landslide data; and (3) the lack of additional features which characterize the spatial distribution of deep-seated landslides.