Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://dspace.iiti.ac.in/handle/123456789/6251
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorAbraham, Minu Treesaen_US
dc.contributor.authorSatyam D., Neelimaen_US
dc.contributor.authorJain, Prashitaen_US
dc.contributor.authorPradhan, Biswajeet K.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-03-17T01:00:00Z-
dc.date.accessioned2022-03-21T10:46:01Z-
dc.date.available2022-03-17T01:00:00Z-
dc.date.available2022-03-21T10:46:01Z-
dc.date.issued2021-
dc.identifier.citationAbraham, M. T., Satyam, N., Jain, P., Pradhan, B., & Alamri, A. (2021). Effect of spatial resolution and data splitting on landslide susceptibility mapping using different machine learning algorithms. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 12(1), 3381-3408. doi:10.1080/19475705.2021.2011791en_US
dc.identifier.issn1947-5705-
dc.identifier.otherEID(2-s2.0-85121545606)-
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2021.2011791-
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.iiti.ac.in/handle/123456789/6251-
dc.description.abstractWith the increasing computational facilities and data availability, machine learning (ML) models are gaining wide attention in landslide modeling. This study evaluates the effect of spatial resolution and data splitting, using five different ML algorithms (naïve bayes (NB), K nearest neighbors (KNN), logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF) and support vector machines (SVM)). The maps were developed using twelve landslide conditioning factors at two different resolutions, 12.5 m and 30 m. To identify the effect of data splitting on model performance, 2162 landslide points and an equal number of non-landslide points were used for training and testing the models using k-fold cross-validation, by varying the number of folds from two to ten. Results indicated that the spatial resolution of the dataset affects the performance of all the algorithms considered, while the effect of data splitting is significant in KNN and RF algorithms. All the algorithms yielded better performance while using the dataset with 12.5 m resolution for the same number of folds. It was also observed that the accuracy and area-under-the-curve values of 7, 8, 9, and 10-fold cross-validations with 30 m resolution was better than 2 and 3-fold cross-validations using 12.5 m resolution, in the case of RF algorithm. © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherTaylor and Francis Ltd.en_US
dc.sourceGeomatics, Natural Hazards and Risken_US
dc.subjectDecision treesen_US
dc.subjectImage resolutionen_US
dc.subjectLandslidesen_US
dc.subjectLearning algorithmsen_US
dc.subjectLogistic regressionen_US
dc.subjectNearest neighbor searchen_US
dc.subjectSupport vector machinesen_US
dc.subjectData splittingen_US
dc.subjectIdukkien_US
dc.subjectLandslide susceptibility mappingen_US
dc.subjectMachine learning algorithmsen_US
dc.subjectNearest-neighbouren_US
dc.subjectPerformanceen_US
dc.subjectRandom forest algorithmen_US
dc.subjectSpatial dataen_US
dc.subjectSpatial resolutionen_US
dc.subjectSusceptibilityen_US
dc.subjectGeographic information systemsen_US
dc.titleEffect of spatial resolution and data splitting on landslide susceptibility mapping using different machine learning algorithmsen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.rights.licenseAll Open Access, Gold-
Appears in Collections:Department of Civil Engineering

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Altmetric Badge: