Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 615

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessment of advanced random forest and decision tree algorithms for modeling rainfall-induced landslide susceptibility in the Izu-Oshima Volcanic Island, Japan

Dou, Jie, Yunus, Ali P., Tien Bui, Dieu, Merghadi, Abdelaziz, Sahana, Mehebub, Zhu, Zhongfan, Chen, Chi-Wen, Khosravi, Khabat, Yang, Yong, Pham, Binh Thai·2019·Science of The Total Environment

Abstract

Landslides represent a part of the cascade of geological hazards in a wide range of geo-environments. In this study, we aim to investigate and compare the performance of two state-of-the-art machine learning models, i.e., decision tree (DT) and random forest (RF) approaches to model the massive rainfall-triggered landslide occurrences in the Izu-Oshima Volcanic Island, Japan at a regional scale. At first, a landslide inventory map is prepared consisting of 44 landslide polygons (10,444 pixels) from aerial photo-interpretation and field surveys. To estimate the robustness of the models, we randomly adapted two different samples (S1 and S2), comprising of both positive and negative cells (70% of total landslides - 7293 pixels) for training and remaining (30%-3151 pixels) for validation. Twelve causative factors including altitude, slope angle, slope aspect, plan curvature, total curvature, compound topographic index, stream power index, distance to drainage network, drainage density, distance to geological boundaries, lithology and cumulative rainfall were selected as predictors to implement the landslide susceptibility model. The area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves (AUC) and other statistical signifiers were used to verify the model accuracies. The result shows that the DT and RF models achieved remarkable predictive performance (AUC > 0.9), producing near accurate susceptibility maps. The overall efficiency of RF (AUC = 0.956) is found significantly higher than the DT (AUC = 0.928) results. Additionally, we noticed that the performance of RF for modeling landslide susceptibility is very robust even though the training and validation samples are altered. Considering the performances, we suggest that both RF and DT models can be used in other similar non-eruption-related landslide studies in the tephra-deposited rich volcanoes, as they are capable of rapidly generating accurate and stable LSM maps for risk mitigation, management practices, and decision-making. Moreover, the RF-based model is promising and enough to be recommended as a method to map regional landslide susceptibility.

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.scitotenv.2019.01.221

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

See all 615

Metadata

Authors
Dou, J., Yunus, A. P., Tien Bui, D., Merghadi, A., Sahana, M., Zhu, Z., Chen, C.-W., Khosravi, K., Yang, Y., & Pham, B. T.
Venue
Science of The Total Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-04
Volume
662
Pages
332-346
ISSN
0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2911424673
Cited by
615
References
1
FWCI
100.72
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: Assessment of advanced random forest and decision tree algorithms for modeling rainfall-induced landslide susceptibility in the Izu-Oshima Volcanic Island, Japan. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.01.221
The paper
Dou, J., Yunus, A. P., Tien Bui, D., Merghadi, A., Sahana, M., Zhu, Z., Chen, C.-W., Khosravi, K., Yang, Y., & Pham, B. T. (2019). Assessment of advanced random forest and decision tree algorithms for modeling rainfall-induced landslide susceptibility in the Izu-Oshima Volcanic Island, Japan. Science of The Total Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.01.221

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.