Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 253

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Meta optimization of an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system with grey wolf optimizer and biogeography-based optimization algorithms for spatial prediction of landslide susceptibility

Jaafari, Abolfazl, Panahi, Mahdi, Pham, Binh Thai, Shahabi, Himan, Bui, Dieu Tien, Rezaie, Fatemeh, Lee, Saro·2019·CATENA

Abstract

Abstract Estimation of landslide susceptibility is still an ongoing requirement for land use management plans. Here, we proposed two novel intelligence hybrid models that rely on an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) and two metaheuristic optimization algorithms, i.e., grey wolf optimizer (GWO) and biogeography-based optimization (BBO), for obtaining a reliable estimate of landslide susceptibility. Sixteen causative factors and 391 historical landslide events from a landslide-prone area of the State of Uttarakhand, northern India, were used to generate a geospatial database. The ANFIS model was employed to develop an initial landslide susceptibility model that was then optimized using the GWO and BBO algorithms. This resulted in two novel models, i.e., ANFIS-BBO and ANFIS-GWO, that benefited from an intelligent approach to automatically and properly adjust the best parameters of the base ANFIS model for the prediction of landslide susceptibilities. The robustness of the models was verified through a large number of runs using different splits of training and validation datasets. Although few differences observed between the predictive capability of the models (AUCANFIS-BBO = 0.95; RMSEANFIS-BBO = 0.316 vs. ACUANFIS-GWO = 0.94; RMSEANFIS-GWO = 0.322), the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicated a significant difference between the model performances in both training and validation datasets. Overall, our proposed models demonstrated an improved prediction of landslides compared to those achieved in previous studies with other methods. Therefore, these novel models can be recommended for modeling landslide susceptibility, and the modelers can easily tailor their use based on their individual circumstances.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.catena.2018.12.033

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 51 references

Metadata

Authors
Jaafari, A., Panahi, M., Pham, B. T., Shahabi, H., Bui, D. T., Rezaie, F., & Lee, S.
Venue
CATENA
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-04
Volume
175
Pages
430-445
ISSN
0341-8162 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2909188960
Cited by
253
References
51
FWCI
58.44
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: Meta optimization of an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system with grey wolf optimizer and biogeography-based optimization algorithms for spatial prediction of landslide susceptibility. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.catena.2018.12.033
The paper
Jaafari, A., Panahi, M., Pham, B. T., Shahabi, H., Bui, D. T., Rezaie, F., & Lee, S. (2019). Meta optimization of an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system with grey wolf optimizer and biogeography-based optimization algorithms for spatial prediction of landslide susceptibility. CATENA. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2018.12.033

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.