4.7 Review

Flood susceptibility mapping with machine learning, multi-criteria decision analysis and ensemble using Dempster Shafer Theory

期刊

JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY
卷 590, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125275

关键词

Flood susceptibility; Dempster Shafer Theory (DST); Random forest (RF); Support vector machine (SVM); Analytical hierarchical process (AHP); Analytical network process (ANP)

资金

  1. Austrian Science Fund FWF through the GIScience Doctoral College at the University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria [DK W 1237-N23]
  2. Austrian Science Fund (FWF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Floods are one of the most widespread natural hazards occurring across the globe. The main objective of this study was to produce flood susceptibility maps for the province of Salzburg, Austria, using two multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) models including analytical hierarchical process (AHP) and analytical network process (ANP) and two machine learning (ML) models including random forest (RF) and support vector machine (SVM). Additionally, we compare which of the MCDA and ML models are better suited for flood susceptibility and evaluate the use of Dempster Shafer Theory (DST) for optimising the resulting flood susceptibility maps based on eleven flood conditioning factors: elevation, slope, aspect, topographic wetness index (TWI), stream power index (SPI), normalised difference vegetation index (NDVI), geology, rainfall, land cover, distance to roads and distance to drainage. The accuracy evaluation of the flood susceptibility maps through the AUC (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) method along with the relative flood density (R-Index) shows that RF (AUC = 87.8%) and SVM (AUC = 87%) outperform the ANP (AUC = 86.6%) and AHP (AUC = 85.9%) models. Therefore, the predictive performance of ML models was slightly better than the MCDA models. The DST could further increase the accuracy of both ML models (AUC = 88.3%) and MCDA models (AUC = 87.3%). However, the best accuracy (AUC = 89.3%) is reached through an ensemble of all four models.

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

4.7
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