The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Flash-flood hazard assessment using ensembles and Bayesian-based machine learning models: Application of the simulated annealing feature selection method
Abstract
Flash-floods are increasingly recognized as a frequent natural hazard worldwide. Iran has been among the mostdevastated regions affected by the major floods. While the temporal flash-flood forecasting models are mainly developed for warning systems, the models for assessing hazardous areas can greatly contribute to adaptation and mitigation policy-making and disaster risk reduction. Former researches in the flash-flood hazard mapping have heightened the urge for the advancement of more accurate models. Thus, the current research proposes the state-of-the-art ensemble models of boosted generalized linear model (GLMBoost) and random forest (RF), and Bayesian generalized linear model (BayesGLM) methods for higher performance modeling. Furthermore, a pre-processing method, namely simulated annealing (SA), is used to eliminate redundant variables from the modeling process. Results of the modeling based on the hit and miss analysis indicates high performance for both models (accuracy = 90-92%, Kappa = 79-84%, Success ratio = 94-96%, Threat score = 80-84%, and Heidke skill score = 79-84%). The variables of distance from the stream, vegetation, drainage density, land use, and elevation have shown more contribution among others for modeling the flash-flood. The results of this study can significantly facilitate mapping the hazardous areas and further assist watershed managers to control and remediate induced damages of flood in the data-scarce regions.
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
Ensemble methods in machine learning
Dietterich, T. G. (2000) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/3-540-45014-9_1 · Cited by 8,408
Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. (1986) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/ss/1177013815 · Cited by 6,033
Ensemble flood risk assessment in Europe under high end climate scenarios
Alfieri, L., Feyen, L., Dottori, F., & Bianchi, A. (2015) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.09.004 · Cited by 346
Future drought risk in Africa: integrating vulnerability, climate change, and population growth
Ahmadalipour, A., Moradkhani, H., Castelletti, A., & Magliocca, N. (2019) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.01.278 · Cited by 318
Cited by
Applications of artificial intelligence for disaster management
Sun, W., Bocchini, P., & Davison, B. D. (2020) · Natural Hazards · doi:10.1007/s11069-020-04124-3 · Cited by 491
A novel community detection based genetic algorithm for feature selection
(2021) · doi:10.1186/s40537-020-00398-3 · Cited by 197
Metadata
- Authors
- Hosseini, F. S., Choubin, B., Mosavi, A., Nabipour, N., Shamshirband, S., Darabi, H., & Haghighi, A. T.
- Venue
- Science of The Total Environment
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-04
- Volume
- 711
- Pages
- 135161
- ISSN
- 0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2989700724
- Cited by
- 342
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 20.92
- 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
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.