4.6 Article

Enhancing flood risk assessment through integration of ensemble learning approaches and physical-based hydrological modeling

期刊

GEOMATICS NATURAL HAZARDS & RISK
卷 14, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/19475705.2023.2203798

关键词

Machine learning; random forest; LightGBM; CatBoost; flood susceptibility mapping; rainfall-runoff inundation model

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compares the performance of three machine learning techniques (random forest, LightGBM, and CatBoost) in predicting flooding susceptibility maps in the Vu Gia-Thu Bon region of Vietnam, and compares them with a rainfall-runoff model. The results show that all three machine learning methods can accurately predict flooding susceptibility maps, consistent with the rainfall-runoff model.
This study aims to examine three machine learning (ML) techniques, namely random forest (RF), LightGBM, and CatBoost for flooding susceptibility maps (FSMs) in the Vietnamese Vu Gia-Thu Bon (VGTB). The results of ML are compared with those of the rainfall-runoff model, and different training dataset sizes are utilized in the performance assessment. Ten independent factors are assessed. An inventory map with approximately 850 flooding sites is based on several post-flood surveys. The inventory dataset is randomly split between training (70%) and testing (30%). The AUC-ROC results are 97.9%, 99.5%, and 99.5% for CatBoost, LightGBM, and RF, respectively. The FSMs developed by the ML methods show good agreement in terms of an extension with flood inundation maps developed using the rainfall-runoff model. The models' FSMs showed 10-13% of the total area to be highly susceptible to flooding, consistent with RRI's flood map. The FSMs show that downstream areas (both urbanized and agricultural) are under high and very high levels of susceptibility. Additionally, different sizes of the input datasets are tested to determine the least number of data points having acceptable reliability. The results demonstrate that the ML methods can realistically predict FSMs, regardless of the number of training samples.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据