2021
DOI: 10.1007/s10346-021-01675-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparative machine learning approach to identify landslide triggering factors in northern Chilean Patagonia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 116 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The challenge many researchers face is selecting the most appropriate method. Thus, comparative analysis of the predictive performance of different machine-learning methods is a major topic in the landslide literature [115,116]. With a desire to produce a landslide susceptibility map with high prediction accuracy, we compared the predictive performance of four machine-learning methods.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The challenge many researchers face is selecting the most appropriate method. Thus, comparative analysis of the predictive performance of different machine-learning methods is a major topic in the landslide literature [115,116]. With a desire to produce a landslide susceptibility map with high prediction accuracy, we compared the predictive performance of four machine-learning methods.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Instead, dominant forest disturbance comes from frequent windstorms (Parra et al, 2021), and less frequent earthquakes (Sepulveda et al, 2010) and volcanic eruptions (Mohr et al, 2017) the latter both are a result of active 105 subduction and intra-arc strike-slip motion along the Liquiñe-Ofqui Fault zone (Cembrano et al, 1996). All these disturbances have in common that they may trigger mostly shallow landslides (Korup et al, 2019;Morales et al, 2021). As landslides are largely, though not entirely, controlled by topography and thus independent from vegetation composition (Veblen and Alaback, 1996;DellaSala, 2011;Buma and Johnson, 2015;Parra et al, 2021), we assume them as largely constrained (and predictable) by topography which in turn allows us to explore the efficacy of disturbance-driven surface processes on carbon cycling without too 110 many assumptions that are often hard to justify.…”
Section: Pumalin Czo -Scope and Instrumentationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Following the approach by Dietze et al (2020) we automatically picked potential landslide events by a classic STA-LTA picker (short term window 0.5 s, long term window 300 s, on-ratio 3, off-ratio 1.1). For all detected events we calculated the spectrograms of all seismic stations and located the event using the signal migration technique (Burtin et 235 We emphasize that this particular hillslope event occurred during presumably 'dry' antecedent conditions as it happened during 240 the transition from Austral summer to Austral autumn (2022-03-22) and that landslide activity is concentrated during the rainy season (Morales et al, 2021). Our CZO may assist in improving rainfall duration-intensity thresholds (Guzzetti et al, 2008) , thus providingtogether with the wind dataa contribution for early warning, considering known limitations in the spatial variability of 245 storms (Fustos-Toribio et al, 2022).…”
Section: Carbon Mobilization By Landsliding 230mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Reichenbach et al (2018) found that a total of 596 conditioning factors were considered in the existing work, with an average of nine condition factors in each model. In the existing research, the selection of condition factors is mostly determined by expert experience, which is very subjective (Bourenane et al, 2015;Morales et al, 2021;Zhao et al, 2021). The current research lacks a general framework to objectively select the condition factors.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%