Landslide displacement forecasting using deep learning and monitoring data across selected sites
Accurate early warning systems for landslides are a reliable risk-reduction strategy that may significantly reduce fatalities and economic losses. Several machine learning methods have been examined for this purpose, underlying deep learning (DL) models’ remarkable prediction capabilities. The long...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Landslides 2023-10, Vol.20 (10), p.2111-2129 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 2129 |
---|---|
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | 2111 |
container_title | Landslides |
container_volume | 20 |
creator | Nava, Lorenzo Carraro, Edoardo Reyes-Carmona, Cristina Puliero, Silvia Bhuyan, Kushanav Rosi, Ascanio Monserrat, Oriol Floris, Mario Meena, Sansar Raj Galve, Jorge Pedro Catani, Filippo |
description | Accurate early warning systems for landslides are a reliable risk-reduction strategy that may significantly reduce fatalities and economic losses. Several machine learning methods have been examined for this purpose, underlying deep learning (DL) models’ remarkable prediction capabilities. The long short-term memory (LSTM) and gated recurrent unit (GRU) algorithms are the sole DL model studied in the extant comparisons. However, several other DL algorithms are suitable for time series forecasting tasks. In this paper, we assess, compare, and describe seven DL methods for forecasting future landslide displacement: multi-layer perception (MLP), LSTM, GRU, 1D convolutional neural network (1D CNN), 2xLSTM, bidirectional LSTM (bi-LSTM), and an architecture composed of 1D CNN and LSTM (Conv-LSTM). The investigation focuses on four landslides with different geographic locations, geological settings, time step dimensions, and measurement instruments. Two landslides are located in an artificial reservoir context, while the displacement of the other two is influenced just by rainfall. The results reveal that the MLP, GRU, and LSTM models can make reliable predictions in all four scenarios, while the Conv-LSTM model outperforms the others in the Baishuihe landslide, where the landslide is highly seasonal. No evident performance differences were found for landslides inside artificial reservoirs rather than outside. Furthermore, the research shows that MLP is better adapted to forecast the highest displacement peaks, while LSTM and GRU are better suited to model lower displacement peaks. We believe the findings of this research will serve as a precious aid when implementing a DL-based landslide early warning system (LEWS). |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10346-023-02104-9 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2864385161</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2864385161</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-519b4cf0963b1af1c36cf6e4ccb5c154943808e1e867cd7229feb11213d8afb33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1PxCAQQInRxHX1D3gi8VxloO2Wo9n4lWziRRNvSOlguum2lWEP_nvp1ujNAzDAvGF4jF2CuAYhVjcEQuVlJqRKA0Se6SO2gBJkVgBUx7-xeDtlZ0RbIaQWSi_Y-8b2DXVtg7xpaeyswx32kfshoLMU2_6D72maG8SRd2hDP-0SxXdD38YhHC5ttNy6MBBxwg5dxIZTG5HO2Ym3HeHFz7pkr_d3L-vHbPP88LS-3WROlSqm1nSdOy90qWqwHtKp8yXmztWFgyLXuapEhYBVuXLNSkrtsQaQoJrK-lqpJbua645h-NwjRbMd9qFPTxpZlYkukoKUJeesQ6sBvRlDu7Phy4Awk0kzmzTJpDmYNDpBaoZonD6L4a_0P9Q3wNp3xQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2864385161</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Landslide displacement forecasting using deep learning and monitoring data across selected sites</title><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Nava, Lorenzo ; Carraro, Edoardo ; Reyes-Carmona, Cristina ; Puliero, Silvia ; Bhuyan, Kushanav ; Rosi, Ascanio ; Monserrat, Oriol ; Floris, Mario ; Meena, Sansar Raj ; Galve, Jorge Pedro ; Catani, Filippo</creator><creatorcontrib>Nava, Lorenzo ; Carraro, Edoardo ; Reyes-Carmona, Cristina ; Puliero, Silvia ; Bhuyan, Kushanav ; Rosi, Ascanio ; Monserrat, Oriol ; Floris, Mario ; Meena, Sansar Raj ; Galve, Jorge Pedro ; Catani, Filippo</creatorcontrib><description>Accurate early warning systems for landslides are a reliable risk-reduction strategy that may significantly reduce fatalities and economic losses. Several machine learning methods have been examined for this purpose, underlying deep learning (DL) models’ remarkable prediction capabilities. The long short-term memory (LSTM) and gated recurrent unit (GRU) algorithms are the sole DL model studied in the extant comparisons. However, several other DL algorithms are suitable for time series forecasting tasks. In this paper, we assess, compare, and describe seven DL methods for forecasting future landslide displacement: multi-layer perception (MLP), LSTM, GRU, 1D convolutional neural network (1D CNN), 2xLSTM, bidirectional LSTM (bi-LSTM), and an architecture composed of 1D CNN and LSTM (Conv-LSTM). The investigation focuses on four landslides with different geographic locations, geological settings, time step dimensions, and measurement instruments. Two landslides are located in an artificial reservoir context, while the displacement of the other two is influenced just by rainfall. The results reveal that the MLP, GRU, and LSTM models can make reliable predictions in all four scenarios, while the Conv-LSTM model outperforms the others in the Baishuihe landslide, where the landslide is highly seasonal. No evident performance differences were found for landslides inside artificial reservoirs rather than outside. Furthermore, the research shows that MLP is better adapted to forecast the highest displacement peaks, while LSTM and GRU are better suited to model lower displacement peaks. We believe the findings of this research will serve as a precious aid when implementing a DL-based landslide early warning system (LEWS).</description><identifier>ISSN: 1612-510X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1612-5118</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10346-023-02104-9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Agriculture ; Algorithms ; Artificial neural networks ; Civil Engineering ; Deep learning ; Early warning systems ; Earth and Environmental Science ; Earth Sciences ; Economic impact ; Forecasting ; Geographical locations ; Geography ; Landslide warnings ; Landslides ; Landslides & mudslides ; Long short-term memory ; Machine learning ; Mathematical models ; Measuring instruments ; Modelling ; Multilayers ; Natural Hazards ; Neural networks ; Original Paper ; Rainfall ; Reservoirs ; Risk reduction ; Warning systems</subject><ispartof>Landslides, 2023-10, Vol.20 (10), p.2111-2129</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2023</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2023. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-519b4cf0963b1af1c36cf6e4ccb5c154943808e1e867cd7229feb11213d8afb33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-519b4cf0963b1af1c36cf6e4ccb5c154943808e1e867cd7229feb11213d8afb33</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-2327-8721</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10346-023-02104-9$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10346-023-02104-9$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nava, Lorenzo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carraro, Edoardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reyes-Carmona, Cristina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Puliero, Silvia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bhuyan, Kushanav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosi, Ascanio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monserrat, Oriol</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Floris, Mario</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meena, Sansar Raj</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Galve, Jorge Pedro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Catani, Filippo</creatorcontrib><title>Landslide displacement forecasting using deep learning and monitoring data across selected sites</title><title>Landslides</title><addtitle>Landslides</addtitle><description>Accurate early warning systems for landslides are a reliable risk-reduction strategy that may significantly reduce fatalities and economic losses. Several machine learning methods have been examined for this purpose, underlying deep learning (DL) models’ remarkable prediction capabilities. The long short-term memory (LSTM) and gated recurrent unit (GRU) algorithms are the sole DL model studied in the extant comparisons. However, several other DL algorithms are suitable for time series forecasting tasks. In this paper, we assess, compare, and describe seven DL methods for forecasting future landslide displacement: multi-layer perception (MLP), LSTM, GRU, 1D convolutional neural network (1D CNN), 2xLSTM, bidirectional LSTM (bi-LSTM), and an architecture composed of 1D CNN and LSTM (Conv-LSTM). The investigation focuses on four landslides with different geographic locations, geological settings, time step dimensions, and measurement instruments. Two landslides are located in an artificial reservoir context, while the displacement of the other two is influenced just by rainfall. The results reveal that the MLP, GRU, and LSTM models can make reliable predictions in all four scenarios, while the Conv-LSTM model outperforms the others in the Baishuihe landslide, where the landslide is highly seasonal. No evident performance differences were found for landslides inside artificial reservoirs rather than outside. Furthermore, the research shows that MLP is better adapted to forecast the highest displacement peaks, while LSTM and GRU are better suited to model lower displacement peaks. We believe the findings of this research will serve as a precious aid when implementing a DL-based landslide early warning system (LEWS).</description><subject>Agriculture</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Artificial neural networks</subject><subject>Civil Engineering</subject><subject>Deep learning</subject><subject>Early warning systems</subject><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Earth Sciences</subject><subject>Economic impact</subject><subject>Forecasting</subject><subject>Geographical locations</subject><subject>Geography</subject><subject>Landslide warnings</subject><subject>Landslides</subject><subject>Landslides & mudslides</subject><subject>Long short-term memory</subject><subject>Machine learning</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Measuring instruments</subject><subject>Modelling</subject><subject>Multilayers</subject><subject>Natural Hazards</subject><subject>Neural networks</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><subject>Rainfall</subject><subject>Reservoirs</subject><subject>Risk reduction</subject><subject>Warning systems</subject><issn>1612-510X</issn><issn>1612-5118</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1PxCAQQInRxHX1D3gi8VxloO2Wo9n4lWziRRNvSOlguum2lWEP_nvp1ujNAzDAvGF4jF2CuAYhVjcEQuVlJqRKA0Se6SO2gBJkVgBUx7-xeDtlZ0RbIaQWSi_Y-8b2DXVtg7xpaeyswx32kfshoLMU2_6D72maG8SRd2hDP-0SxXdD38YhHC5ttNy6MBBxwg5dxIZTG5HO2Ym3HeHFz7pkr_d3L-vHbPP88LS-3WROlSqm1nSdOy90qWqwHtKp8yXmztWFgyLXuapEhYBVuXLNSkrtsQaQoJrK-lqpJbua645h-NwjRbMd9qFPTxpZlYkukoKUJeesQ6sBvRlDu7Phy4Awk0kzmzTJpDmYNDpBaoZonD6L4a_0P9Q3wNp3xQ</recordid><startdate>20231001</startdate><enddate>20231001</enddate><creator>Nava, Lorenzo</creator><creator>Carraro, Edoardo</creator><creator>Reyes-Carmona, Cristina</creator><creator>Puliero, Silvia</creator><creator>Bhuyan, Kushanav</creator><creator>Rosi, Ascanio</creator><creator>Monserrat, Oriol</creator><creator>Floris, Mario</creator><creator>Meena, Sansar Raj</creator><creator>Galve, Jorge Pedro</creator><creator>Catani, Filippo</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2327-8721</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20231001</creationdate><title>Landslide displacement forecasting using deep learning and monitoring data across selected sites</title><author>Nava, Lorenzo ; Carraro, Edoardo ; Reyes-Carmona, Cristina ; Puliero, Silvia ; Bhuyan, Kushanav ; Rosi, Ascanio ; Monserrat, Oriol ; Floris, Mario ; Meena, Sansar Raj ; Galve, Jorge Pedro ; Catani, Filippo</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-519b4cf0963b1af1c36cf6e4ccb5c154943808e1e867cd7229feb11213d8afb33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Agriculture</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Artificial neural networks</topic><topic>Civil Engineering</topic><topic>Deep learning</topic><topic>Early warning systems</topic><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Earth Sciences</topic><topic>Economic impact</topic><topic>Forecasting</topic><topic>Geographical locations</topic><topic>Geography</topic><topic>Landslide warnings</topic><topic>Landslides</topic><topic>Landslides & mudslides</topic><topic>Long short-term memory</topic><topic>Machine learning</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Measuring instruments</topic><topic>Modelling</topic><topic>Multilayers</topic><topic>Natural Hazards</topic><topic>Neural networks</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><topic>Rainfall</topic><topic>Reservoirs</topic><topic>Risk reduction</topic><topic>Warning systems</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nava, Lorenzo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carraro, Edoardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reyes-Carmona, Cristina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Puliero, Silvia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bhuyan, Kushanav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosi, Ascanio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monserrat, Oriol</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Floris, Mario</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meena, Sansar Raj</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Galve, Jorge Pedro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Catani, Filippo</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Landslides</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nava, Lorenzo</au><au>Carraro, Edoardo</au><au>Reyes-Carmona, Cristina</au><au>Puliero, Silvia</au><au>Bhuyan, Kushanav</au><au>Rosi, Ascanio</au><au>Monserrat, Oriol</au><au>Floris, Mario</au><au>Meena, Sansar Raj</au><au>Galve, Jorge Pedro</au><au>Catani, Filippo</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Landslide displacement forecasting using deep learning and monitoring data across selected sites</atitle><jtitle>Landslides</jtitle><stitle>Landslides</stitle><date>2023-10-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>2111</spage><epage>2129</epage><pages>2111-2129</pages><issn>1612-510X</issn><eissn>1612-5118</eissn><abstract>Accurate early warning systems for landslides are a reliable risk-reduction strategy that may significantly reduce fatalities and economic losses. Several machine learning methods have been examined for this purpose, underlying deep learning (DL) models’ remarkable prediction capabilities. The long short-term memory (LSTM) and gated recurrent unit (GRU) algorithms are the sole DL model studied in the extant comparisons. However, several other DL algorithms are suitable for time series forecasting tasks. In this paper, we assess, compare, and describe seven DL methods for forecasting future landslide displacement: multi-layer perception (MLP), LSTM, GRU, 1D convolutional neural network (1D CNN), 2xLSTM, bidirectional LSTM (bi-LSTM), and an architecture composed of 1D CNN and LSTM (Conv-LSTM). The investigation focuses on four landslides with different geographic locations, geological settings, time step dimensions, and measurement instruments. Two landslides are located in an artificial reservoir context, while the displacement of the other two is influenced just by rainfall. The results reveal that the MLP, GRU, and LSTM models can make reliable predictions in all four scenarios, while the Conv-LSTM model outperforms the others in the Baishuihe landslide, where the landslide is highly seasonal. No evident performance differences were found for landslides inside artificial reservoirs rather than outside. Furthermore, the research shows that MLP is better adapted to forecast the highest displacement peaks, while LSTM and GRU are better suited to model lower displacement peaks. We believe the findings of this research will serve as a precious aid when implementing a DL-based landslide early warning system (LEWS).</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><doi>10.1007/s10346-023-02104-9</doi><tpages>19</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2327-8721</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1612-510X |
ispartof | Landslides, 2023-10, Vol.20 (10), p.2111-2129 |
issn | 1612-510X 1612-5118 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2864385161 |
source | SpringerNature Journals |
subjects | Agriculture Algorithms Artificial neural networks Civil Engineering Deep learning Early warning systems Earth and Environmental Science Earth Sciences Economic impact Forecasting Geographical locations Geography Landslide warnings Landslides Landslides & mudslides Long short-term memory Machine learning Mathematical models Measuring instruments Modelling Multilayers Natural Hazards Neural networks Original Paper Rainfall Reservoirs Risk reduction Warning systems |
title | Landslide displacement forecasting using deep learning and monitoring data across selected sites |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T17%3A36%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Landslide%20displacement%20forecasting%20using%20deep%20learning%20and%20monitoring%20data%20across%20selected%20sites&rft.jtitle=Landslides&rft.au=Nava,%20Lorenzo&rft.date=2023-10-01&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=2111&rft.epage=2129&rft.pages=2111-2129&rft.issn=1612-510X&rft.eissn=1612-5118&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10346-023-02104-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2864385161%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2864385161&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |