Cargando…

Flash-Flood Potential Mapping Using Deep Learning, Alternating Decision Trees and Data Provided by Remote Sensing Sensors

There is an evident increase in the importance that remote sensing sensors play in the monitoring and evaluation of natural hazards susceptibility and risk. The present study aims to assess the flash-flood potential values, in a small catchment from Romania, using information provided remote sensing...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Costache, Romulus, Arabameri, Alireza, Blaschke, Thomas, Pham, Quoc Bao, Pham, Binh Thai, Pandey, Manish, Arora, Aman, Linh, Nguyen Thi Thuy, Costache, Iulia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7796316/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33406613
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21010280
_version_ 1783634653428580352
author Costache, Romulus
Arabameri, Alireza
Blaschke, Thomas
Pham, Quoc Bao
Pham, Binh Thai
Pandey, Manish
Arora, Aman
Linh, Nguyen Thi Thuy
Costache, Iulia
author_facet Costache, Romulus
Arabameri, Alireza
Blaschke, Thomas
Pham, Quoc Bao
Pham, Binh Thai
Pandey, Manish
Arora, Aman
Linh, Nguyen Thi Thuy
Costache, Iulia
author_sort Costache, Romulus
collection PubMed
description There is an evident increase in the importance that remote sensing sensors play in the monitoring and evaluation of natural hazards susceptibility and risk. The present study aims to assess the flash-flood potential values, in a small catchment from Romania, using information provided remote sensing sensors and Geographic Informational Systems (GIS) databases which were involved as input data into a number of four ensemble models. In a first phase, with the help of high-resolution satellite images from the Google Earth application, 481 points affected by torrential processes were acquired, another 481 points being randomly positioned in areas without torrential processes. Seventy percent of the dataset was kept as training data, while the other 30% was assigned to validating sample. Further, in order to train the machine learning models, information regarding the 10 flash-flood predictors was extracted in the training sample locations. Finally, the following four ensembles were used to calculate the Flash-Flood Potential Index across the Bâsca Chiojdului river basin: Deep Learning Neural Network–Frequency Ratio (DLNN-FR), Deep Learning Neural Network–Weights of Evidence (DLNN-WOE), Alternating Decision Trees–Frequency Ratio (ADT-FR) and Alternating Decision Trees–Weights of Evidence (ADT-WOE). The model’s performances were assessed using several statistical metrics. Thus, in terms of Sensitivity, the highest value of 0.985 was achieved by the DLNN-FR model, meanwhile the lowest one (0.866) was assigned to ADT-FR ensemble. Moreover, the specificity analysis shows that the highest value (0.991) was attributed to DLNN-WOE algorithm, while the lowest value (0.892) was achieved by ADT-FR. During the training procedure, the models achieved overall accuracies between 0.878 (ADT-FR) and 0.985 (DLNN-WOE). K-index shows again that the most performant model was DLNN-WOE (0.97). The Flash-Flood Potential Index (FFPI) values revealed that the surfaces with high and very high flash-flood susceptibility cover between 46.57% (DLNN-FR) and 59.38% (ADT-FR) of the study zone. The use of the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve for results validation highlights the fact that FFPI(DLNN-WOE) is characterized by the most precise results with an Area Under Curve of 0.96.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7796316
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77963162021-01-10 Flash-Flood Potential Mapping Using Deep Learning, Alternating Decision Trees and Data Provided by Remote Sensing Sensors Costache, Romulus Arabameri, Alireza Blaschke, Thomas Pham, Quoc Bao Pham, Binh Thai Pandey, Manish Arora, Aman Linh, Nguyen Thi Thuy Costache, Iulia Sensors (Basel) Article There is an evident increase in the importance that remote sensing sensors play in the monitoring and evaluation of natural hazards susceptibility and risk. The present study aims to assess the flash-flood potential values, in a small catchment from Romania, using information provided remote sensing sensors and Geographic Informational Systems (GIS) databases which were involved as input data into a number of four ensemble models. In a first phase, with the help of high-resolution satellite images from the Google Earth application, 481 points affected by torrential processes were acquired, another 481 points being randomly positioned in areas without torrential processes. Seventy percent of the dataset was kept as training data, while the other 30% was assigned to validating sample. Further, in order to train the machine learning models, information regarding the 10 flash-flood predictors was extracted in the training sample locations. Finally, the following four ensembles were used to calculate the Flash-Flood Potential Index across the Bâsca Chiojdului river basin: Deep Learning Neural Network–Frequency Ratio (DLNN-FR), Deep Learning Neural Network–Weights of Evidence (DLNN-WOE), Alternating Decision Trees–Frequency Ratio (ADT-FR) and Alternating Decision Trees–Weights of Evidence (ADT-WOE). The model’s performances were assessed using several statistical metrics. Thus, in terms of Sensitivity, the highest value of 0.985 was achieved by the DLNN-FR model, meanwhile the lowest one (0.866) was assigned to ADT-FR ensemble. Moreover, the specificity analysis shows that the highest value (0.991) was attributed to DLNN-WOE algorithm, while the lowest value (0.892) was achieved by ADT-FR. During the training procedure, the models achieved overall accuracies between 0.878 (ADT-FR) and 0.985 (DLNN-WOE). K-index shows again that the most performant model was DLNN-WOE (0.97). The Flash-Flood Potential Index (FFPI) values revealed that the surfaces with high and very high flash-flood susceptibility cover between 46.57% (DLNN-FR) and 59.38% (ADT-FR) of the study zone. The use of the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve for results validation highlights the fact that FFPI(DLNN-WOE) is characterized by the most precise results with an Area Under Curve of 0.96. MDPI 2021-01-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7796316/ /pubmed/33406613 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21010280 Text en © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Costache, Romulus
Arabameri, Alireza
Blaschke, Thomas
Pham, Quoc Bao
Pham, Binh Thai
Pandey, Manish
Arora, Aman
Linh, Nguyen Thi Thuy
Costache, Iulia
Flash-Flood Potential Mapping Using Deep Learning, Alternating Decision Trees and Data Provided by Remote Sensing Sensors
title Flash-Flood Potential Mapping Using Deep Learning, Alternating Decision Trees and Data Provided by Remote Sensing Sensors
title_full Flash-Flood Potential Mapping Using Deep Learning, Alternating Decision Trees and Data Provided by Remote Sensing Sensors
title_fullStr Flash-Flood Potential Mapping Using Deep Learning, Alternating Decision Trees and Data Provided by Remote Sensing Sensors
title_full_unstemmed Flash-Flood Potential Mapping Using Deep Learning, Alternating Decision Trees and Data Provided by Remote Sensing Sensors
title_short Flash-Flood Potential Mapping Using Deep Learning, Alternating Decision Trees and Data Provided by Remote Sensing Sensors
title_sort flash-flood potential mapping using deep learning, alternating decision trees and data provided by remote sensing sensors
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7796316/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33406613
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21010280
work_keys_str_mv AT costacheromulus flashfloodpotentialmappingusingdeeplearningalternatingdecisiontreesanddataprovidedbyremotesensingsensors
AT arabamerialireza flashfloodpotentialmappingusingdeeplearningalternatingdecisiontreesanddataprovidedbyremotesensingsensors
AT blaschkethomas flashfloodpotentialmappingusingdeeplearningalternatingdecisiontreesanddataprovidedbyremotesensingsensors
AT phamquocbao flashfloodpotentialmappingusingdeeplearningalternatingdecisiontreesanddataprovidedbyremotesensingsensors
AT phambinhthai flashfloodpotentialmappingusingdeeplearningalternatingdecisiontreesanddataprovidedbyremotesensingsensors
AT pandeymanish flashfloodpotentialmappingusingdeeplearningalternatingdecisiontreesanddataprovidedbyremotesensingsensors
AT aroraaman flashfloodpotentialmappingusingdeeplearningalternatingdecisiontreesanddataprovidedbyremotesensingsensors
AT linhnguyenthithuy flashfloodpotentialmappingusingdeeplearningalternatingdecisiontreesanddataprovidedbyremotesensingsensors
AT costacheiulia flashfloodpotentialmappingusingdeeplearningalternatingdecisiontreesanddataprovidedbyremotesensingsensors