Performance Evaluation of GIS-Based Artificial Intelligence Approaches for Landslide Susceptibility Modeling and Spatial Patterns Analysis

The main purpose of this study was to apply the novel bivariate weights-of-evidence-based SysFor (SF) for landslide susceptibility mapping, and two machine learning techniques, namely the naïve Bayes (NB) and Radial basis function networks (RBFNetwork), as benchmark models. Firstly, by using aerial photos and geological field surveys, the 263 landslide locations in the study area were obtained. Next, the identified landslides were randomly classified according to the ratio of 70/30 to construct training data and validation models, respectively. Secondly, based on the landslide inventory map, combined with the geological and geomorphological characteristics of the study area, 14 affecting factors of the landslide were determined. The predictive ability of the selected factors was evaluated using the LSVM model. Using the WoE model, the relationship between landslides and affecting factors was analyzed by positive and negative correlation methods. The above three hybrid models were then used to map landslide susceptibility. Thirdly, the ROC curve and various statistical data (SE, 95% CI and MAE) were used to verify and compare the predictive power of the model. Compared with the other two models, the Sysfor model had a larger area under the curve (AUC) of 0.876 (training dataset) and 0.783 (validation dataset). Finally, by quantitatively comparing the susceptibility values of each pixel, the differences in spatial morphology of landslide susceptibility maps were compared, and the model was found to have limitations and effectiveness. The landslide susceptibility maps obtained by the three models are reasonable, and the landslide susceptibility maps generated by the SysFor model have the highest comprehensive performance. The results obtained in this paper can help local governments in land use planning, disaster reduction and environmental protection

GIS-Based Machine Learning Algorithms for Gully Erosion Susceptibility Mapping in a Semi-Arid Region of Iran

In the present study, gully erosion susceptibility was evaluated for the area of the Robat Turk Watershed in Iran. The assessment of gully erosion susceptibility was performed using four state-of-the-art data mining techniques: random forest (RF), credal decision trees (CDTree), kernel logistic regression (KLR), and best-first decision tree (BFTree). To the best of our knowledge, the KLR and CDTree algorithms have been rarely applied to gully erosion modeling. In the first step, from the 242 gully erosion locations that were identified, 70% (170 gullies) were selected as the training dataset, and the other 30% (72 gullies) were considered for the result validation process. In the next step, twelve gully erosion conditioning factors, including topographic, geomorphological, environmental, and hydrologic factors, were selected to estimate gully erosion susceptibility. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was used to estimate the performance of the models. The results revealed that the RF model had the best performance (AUC = 0.893), followed by the KLR (AUC = 0.825), the CDTree (AUC = 0.808), and the BFTree (AUC = 0.789) models. Overall, the RF model performed significantly better than the others, which may support the application of this method to a transferable susceptibility model in other areas. Therefore, we suggest using the RF, KLR, and CDT models for gully erosion susceptibility mapping in other prone areas to assess their reproducibility

Full Paper Regioselective Synthesis of 1-(2,6-Dichloro-4-Trifluoromethylphenyl)-4-Alkyl-1H-[1,2,3]-Triazoles

Abstract: A new and efficient method for the synthesis of 1-(2,6-dichloro-4-trifluoromethylphenyl)-4-alkyl-1H-[1,2,3]-triazoles by the room temperature 1,3-dipolar cycloaddition of (2-azido-1,3-dichloro-5-trifluoromethyl)benzene with terminal alkynes in the presence of Cu (I) salt as catalyst is reported. All the reactions gave 1,4-disubstituted products with high regioselectivity, as no 1,5-disubstituted product was formed. The structures of all the title compounds have been confirmed by elemental analysis, 1 H- and 13 C-NMR and in addition, the structure of compound 5a was investigated by X-ray crystallography