Journal cover Journal topic
Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 2.883 IF 2.883
  • IF 5-year value: 3.321 IF 5-year
    3.321
  • CiteScore value: 3.07 CiteScore
    3.07
  • SNIP value: 1.336 SNIP 1.336
  • IPP value: 2.80 IPP 2.80
  • SJR value: 1.024 SJR 1.024
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 81 Scimago H
    index 81
  • h5-index value: 43 h5-index 43
Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2020-124
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2020-124
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Submitted as: research article 19 May 2020

Submitted as: research article | 19 May 2020

Review status
This preprint is currently under review for the journal NHESS.

Construct and evaluate the classification models of six types of geological hazards in Bijie city, Guizhou province, China

JieQing Shi1, Jin Zhang1, and ChaoYong Shen2 JieQing Shi et al.
  • 1Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan 030024, China
  • 2The Third Surveying and Mapping Institute of Guizhou Province, Guiyang 550004, China

Abstract. Debris flow, landslide, ground collapse, collapse and ground collapse are the dominating geological hazards in Bijie city, Guizhou province, which is situated in the area with high natural hazards in China. The primary purpose of this study is to construct different classification models by using the disaster conditioning factors of geological hazards and to evaluate the performance of the models in the classification of geological hazards in Bijie city. At the same time, the nonlinear relationship between various geological hazards and conditioning factors will be discussed. Firstly, the manual field survey data of Bijie city in 2019 were applied to construct and draw inventory map of six geological hazards. Then 16 conditioning factors were established from various data sources. According to the ratio of 70:30, the geological hazard location points were randomly divided into the training and validation set to complete the training and verification process of the classification models. In order to select the optimal subset of the conditioning factors, the multicollinearity of these factors was assessed using tolerances and variance inflation factors(VIF) and Pearson’s correlation coefficient, and factors with multicollinearity were excluded to optimize the model. Subsequently, ten classification models were structured, and the models were verified and compared by using the receiver operating characteristic(ROC), precision, sensitivity, Kappa coefficient and F1 values.In addition, the Friedman test was used to identify statistically significant differences between the results of the classification model used in this research. In general, average Area Under Curve (AUC) values under the ROC curves of the 10 classification models is above 0.8, indicating that all models have a corresponding high prediction ability. Among them, the average AUC value(0.941), AUC values for individual geological hazards (collapse: 0.949, ground crack: 0.907, ground collapse: 0.952, landslide: 0.830, displacement flow: 0.963, slope: 0.922), Kappa coefficient (0.845), Macro F1(0.851) and Micro F1(0.878) of SVM all had the highest values.

JieQing Shi et al.

Interactive discussion

Status: open (until 30 Jun 2020)
Status: open (until 30 Jun 2020)
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
[Subscribe to comment alert] Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
  • RC1: 'Review', Anonymous Referee #1, 25 May 2020 Printer-friendly Version

JieQing Shi et al.

JieQing Shi et al.

Metrics will be available soon.
Latest update: 31 May 2020
Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
We attempted to establish diverse classifiers for all geological hazards in the area with high incidence of geological hazards, analyzed and compared the performance of all the classifiers. What’s more, we further discussed the relationship between the disparate conditioning factors and various geological disasters in the study area. Among them, the conditioning factors used in the establishment of the model are selected from the original conditioning factors library by scientific methods.
We attempted to establish diverse classifiers for all geological hazards in the area with high...
Citation