The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparison of GIS-based landslide susceptibility models using frequency ratio, logistic regression, and artificial neural network in a tertiary region of Ambon, Indonesia
Abstract
Abstract This study aims to evaluate landslide causative factors in landslide susceptibility assessments and to compare landslide susceptibility models based on the bivariate frequency ratio (FR), multivariate logistic regression (LR), and artificial neural network (ANN). The majority of landslide occurrences in Ambon, Indonesia is induced by heavy rainfall events where slope failures occur mostly on steep slopes thereby endangering municipality areas at the base of the hills. Eight landslide causative factors were considered in the landslide susceptibility assessments. The causative factors were elevation, slope angle, slope aspect, proximity to stream network, lithology, density of geological boundaries, proximity to faults, and proximity to the road network. The output susceptibility maps were reclassified into five classes ranging from very low to very high susceptibility using Jenks natural breaks method. Twenty percent of all mapped landslides were used as the validation of the susceptibility models. The validity and the accuracy of each model were tested by calculating areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (ROCs), and the areas under the curve (AUC) for the success rate curves of FR, LR, and ANN were 0.688, 0.687, and 0.734, respectively. The AUC for the prediction rate curve of FR, LR, and ANN were 0.668, 0.667, and 0.717, respectively. All findings of the models show good results with the accuracy of all models being higher than 66%. The ANN method proved to be superior in explaining the relationship of landslide with each factor studied.
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
Cited by
Deep learning-based landslide susceptibility mapping
Azarafza, M., Azarafza, M., Akgün, H., Atkinson, P. M., & Derakhshani, R. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-03585-1 · Cited by 412
Fang, Z., Wang, Y., Peng, L., & Hong, H. (2020) · Computers & Geosciences · doi:10.1016/j.cageo.2020.104470 · Cited by 322
Kardani, N., Zhou, A., Nazem, M., & Shen, S.-L. (2021) · Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jrmge.2020.05.011 · Cited by 285
Environmental Carrying Capacity Assessment for Coastal Tourism Hub in Sekotong, West Lombok
Farhan, L. A., Buchori, I., & Sari, S. R. (2023) · IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science · doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1264/1/012005 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Aditian, A., Kubota, T., & Shinohara, Y.
- Venue
- Geomorphology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-10
- Volume
- 318
- Pages
- 101-111
- ISSN
- 0169-555X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2808860853
- Cited by
- 534
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 76.45
- 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: Comparison of GIS-based landslide susceptibility models using frequency ratio, logistic regression, and artificial neural network in a tertiary region of Ambon, Indonesia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.geomorph.2018.06.006
- The paper
- Aditian, A., Kubota, T., & Shinohara, Y. (2018). Comparison of GIS-based landslide susceptibility models using frequency ratio, logistic regression, and artificial neural network in a tertiary region of Ambon, Indonesia. Geomorphology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2018.06.006
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.