The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Review on landslide susceptibility mapping using support vector machines
Abstract
Abstract Landslides are natural phenomena that can cause great loss of life and damage to property. A landslide susceptibility map is a useful tool to help with land management in landslide-prone areas. A support vector machine (SVM) is a machine learning algorithm that uses a small number of samples for prediction and has been widely used in recent years. This paper presents a review of landslide susceptibility mapping using SVM. It presents the basic concept of SVM and its application in landslide susceptibility assessment and mapping. Then it compares the SVM method with four other methods (analytic hierarchy process, logistic regression, artificial neural networks and random forests) used in landslide susceptibility mapping. The application of SVM in landslide susceptibility assessment and mapping is discussed and suggestions for future research are presented. Compared with some of the methods commonly used in landslide susceptibility assessment and mapping, SVM has its strengths and weaknesses owing to its unique theoretical basis. The combination of SVM and other techniques may yield better performance in landslide susceptibility assessment and mapping. A high-quality informative database is essential and classification of landslide types prior to landslide susceptibility assessment is important to help improve model performance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Breiman, L. (2001) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1023/a:1010933404324 · Cited by 133,538
The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory
Vapnik, V. N. (1995) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-2440-0 · Cited by 39,138
Classification and Regression Trees.
Gordon, A. D., Breiman, L., Friedman, J. H., Olshen, R. A., & Stone, C. J. (1984) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2530946 · Cited by 23,522
Classification And Regression Trees
Breiman, L., Friedman, J. H., Olshen, R. A., & Stone, C. J. (2017) · doi:10.1201/9781315139470 · Cited by 11,417
A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures
Saaty, T. L. (1977) · Journal of Mathematical Psychology · doi:10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5 · Cited by 10,360
Classification and regression trees
Praagman, J. (1985) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/0377-2217(85)90321-2 · Cited by 10,053
Chai, T., & Draxler, R. R. (2014) · Geoscientific Model Development · doi:10.5194/gmd-7-1247-2014 · Cited by 7,178
The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory
Sain, S. R. (1996) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1996.10484565 · Cited by 5,434
Ayalew, L., & Yamagishi, H. (2005) · Geomorphology · doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2004.06.010 · Cited by 1,913
Moutinho, L., & Curry, B. (1994) · ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) · Cited by 1,813
Cited by
Wu, Y., Ke, Y., Chen, Z., Liang, S., Zhao, H., & Hong, H. (2020) · CATENA · doi:10.1016/j.catena.2019.104396 · Cited by 396
Metadata
- Authors
- Huang, Y., & Zhao, L.
- Venue
- CATENA
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-06
- Volume
- 165
- Pages
- 520-529
- ISSN
- 0341-8162 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2789555074
- Cited by
- 729
- References
- 57
- FWCI
- 77.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Review on landslide susceptibility mapping using support vector machines. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.catena.2018.03.003
- The paper
- Huang, Y., & Zhao, L. (2018). Review on landslide susceptibility mapping using support vector machines. CATENA. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2018.03.003
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.