4.5 Article

Examining LightGBM and CatBoost models for wadi flash flood susceptibility prediction

Journal

GEOCARTO INTERNATIONAL
Volume 37, Issue 25, Pages 7462-7487

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10106049.2021.1974959

Keywords

Machine learning algorithms; LightGBM; CatBoost; random forest; flash flood susceptibility mapping; Wadi System

Funding

  1. JSPS [20KK0094]
  2. Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [20KK0094] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study introduces the use of LightGBM and CatBoost machine learning models for predicting flash flood susceptibility in the Wadi System in Hurghada, Egypt. The results demonstrate that LightGBM outperforms other models in terms of classification metrics and processing time.
This study presents two machine learning models, namely, the light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM) and categorical boosting (CatBoost), for the first time for predicting flash flood susceptibility (FFS) in the Wadi System (Hurghada, Egypt). A flood inventory map with 445 flash flood sites was produced and randomly divided into two groups for training (70%) and testing (30%). Fourteen flood controlling factors were selected and evaluated for their relative importance in flood occurrence prediction. The performance of the two models was assessed using various indexes in comparison to the common random forest (RF) method. The results show areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC) of above 97% for all models and that LightGBM outperforms other models in terms of classification metrics and processing time. The developed FFS maps demonstrate that highly populated areas are the most susceptible to flash floods. The present study proves that the employed algorithms (LightGBM and CatBoost) can be efficiently used for FFS mapping.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available