Comparative evaluation of landslide susceptibility in Minamata area, Japan
Comparative evaluation of landslide susceptibility in Minamata area, Japan
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s00254-005-1225-2
复制
发表时间：
2005-02
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
H. Wang;K. Sassa
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
H. Wang;K. Sassa
滑坡是不可预测的;然而，滑坡发生的敏感性可以通过基于地理信息系统（GIS）技术的定性和定量方法进行评估。从水俣地区以前的工作中获得了滑坡清单地图，并对1999年和2002年拍摄的航空照片进行了解释。在四个时期共确定了160处山体滑坡。在建立了包括岩性、地形、土壤沉积、土地使用等在内的地理空间数据库之后，该研究旨在探讨山泥倾泻与影响山泥倾泻发生的因素之间的关系。然后采用逻辑回归分析和信息值模型两种不同的方法制作滑坡发生的敏感性图。在应用每一种方法之后，两个生成的地图将敏感性分为高、中、低和极低四类。这两项研究都产生了可接受的结果，因为它们都将大多数发生滑坡的单元划分为高或中等敏感性类别，可以认为这是成功的。综合两种方法生成的危险性图，将敏感性划分为高-中和低-极低级别，其中高敏感性级别占总面积的6.5%，而预测为不稳定的区域占总面积的50.5%，被划分为低敏感性级别。然而，比较两种方法的结果，43%的地区被错误分类，从高中到低-非常低或低-非常低到高中。由于分类错误，8%和3.28%的地区，这应该是稳定的或免费的滑坡，评价为高-中等敏感性，使用逻辑回归分析和信息值模型，分别。此外，在类等级变化的情况下，从高-中等敏感性低-非常低，35%和39.72%的所有映射区域被预测为稳定使用这两种方法，分别，但在这些地区的滑坡可能发生或实际上被确认。
Landslides are unpredictable; however, the susceptibility of landslide occurrence can be assessed using qualitative and quantitative methods based on the technology of the Geographic Information Systems (GIS). A map of landslide inventory was obtained from the previous work in the Minamata area, the interpretation from aerial photographs taken in 1999 and 2002. A total of 160 landslides was identified in four periods. Following the construction of geospatial databases, including lithology, topography, soil deposits, land use, etc., the study documents the relationship between landslide hazard and the factors that affect the occurrence of landslides. Different methods, namely the logistic regression analysis and the information value model, were then adopted to produce susceptibility maps of landslide occurrence. After the application of each method, two resultant maps categorize the four classes of susceptibility as high, medium, low and very low. Both of them generated acceptable results as both classify the majority of the cells with landslide occurrence in high or medium susceptibility classes, which could be believed to be a success. By combining the hazard maps generated from both methods, the susceptibility was classified as high–medium and low–very low levels, in which the classification of high susceptibility level covers 6.5% of the area, while the areas predicted to be unstable, which are 50.5% of the total area, are classified as the low susceptibility level. However, comparing the results from both the approaches, 43% of the areas were misclassified, either from high–medium to low–very low or low–very low to high–medium classes. Due to the misclassification, 8% and 3.28% of all the areas, which should be stable or free of landsliding, were evaluated as high–medium susceptibility using the logistic regression analysis and the information value model, respectively. Moreover, in the case of the class rank change from high–medium susceptibility to low–very low, 35% and 39.72% of all mapping areas were predicted as stable using both the approaches, respectively, but in these areas landslides were likely to occur or were actually recognized.