Abstract
Landslide is one of the important disasters taking place on earth, which may be either a natural or man-made process. Landslides are more active and disastrous in hilly and mountainous regions. The present study aims to identify the landslide susceptibility areas in the Relli river basin in Darjeeling Himalaya using logistic regression (LR) and frequency ratio (FR) models. The GIS techniques have been used for landslide susceptibility mapping. A total number of 67 landslide locations have been identified from Google Earth images and multiple field surveys. 70% of landslide locations have been randomly selected and used as training data set for preparing landslide susceptibility map, and the remaining 30% have been used as validation data set. For the present study, 20 different factors like drainage density, drainage texture, infiltration number, stream frequency, stream junction frequency, stream power index, lithology, soil, relative relief, slope, maximum relief, drainage intensity, ruggedness number, rainfall, dissection index, aspect, relief class, and distance from stream, topographic wetness index and land use land cover have been used. The application of the logistic regression and frequency ratio model has demonstrated that the lower catchment of the basin has been widely dominated by the most landslide susceptibility areas than other parts of the catchment. Almost 6.92 sq km (4.05%) and 7.44 sq km (4.36%) areas out of 170.61 sq km area of the basin have been observed as very high and high landslide susceptibility categories, respectively, for FR model and 5.75 sq km (3.37%) and 1.86 sq km (1.09%) areas have been under very high and high landslide susceptibility zones for LR model. Finally, the ROC curve has been used to validate the models. The prediction capabilities of the models seem significant as the area under the curve value ranges from 75 to 81%.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Unexpected environmental conditions like tsunami, flood, earthquake, landslides, etc., that cause significant environmental and human loss on the surface of the earth are called natural disaster [48]. Landslide is one of the most dangerous and costly natural disasters of the earth, and it is a form of mass wasting also known as landslip or mudslide which may cause a wide range of ground movements [99]. Gravity of the earth is the main driving force for landslides occurrences [56]. It is estimated that almost 9 percentages of worldwide natural disasters constitute landslides during the 1990s [35]. Almost 600 people are killed every year throughout the world as a result of slope instability [100]; Xie et al. [102]. Both people and the properties such as building, roads, communication networks, houses, agricultural land, forest are destroyed, every year due to landslides; thus, a huge amount of money is spent globally to mitigate the destruction of landslides [14].
Himalayan region frequently faced different types of natural hazards, and landslide is one of the prominent which damages property, agriculture and human lives [9]. The area selected for the present study has also suffered a lot of damages due to landslides, triggered by heavy rainfall; thus, the area seems suitable site to evaluate the frequency and distribution of landslides [28]. Rai et al. [78] stated that more than 20,000 landslides were recorded in one day. According to Basu and Pal [9], several landslides have been induced in different parts of Darjeeling Himalaya due to intensive rainfall, earthquake and expansion of anthropogenic activities such as road construction, building construction, resort formation. In 2015 more than 38 people were killed and 500 people were displaced due to landslides during monsoon season in this area [92]. Thus, the landslide mitigation and susceptibility studies become one of the most required fields of studies in this region.
There are several quantitative and qualitative methods for preparing landslide susceptibility maps [3]. Quantitative approaches have been used by number of researchers such as bivariate regression analysis [11, 51], multivariate regression analysis [62, 75, 74], logistic regression analysis [73, 2, 32], fuggy logic [71], artificial neural network [57, 72]. Many researchers have worked with more than one model and compared to find out which one is most accurate [9]. Recently, machine learning (ML) techniques have become popular in spatial prediction of natural hazards studies such as wildfire [45], sinkhole [91], groundwater and flood [1, 12, 16, 17, 40, 49, 50, 59, 76, 77, 82, 93], droughtiness [80], gully erosion [7, 98], earthquake [4], land/ground subsidence [96] and landslide studies [68, 70, 79, 87, 67, 97]. ML is a subdivision of artificial intelligence (AI) that uses computer techniques to analyze and forecast information by learning from training data. ML algorithms that have been used for landslide prediction include support vector machine [20, 30, 47, 69, 95], artificial neural network [31, 86], decision trees such as naïve Bayes tree (NBT) [22, 85], radial basis function (RBF) [38], kernel logistic regression (KLR) [13, 21], Bayes’ net (BN) [19], bivariate statistical index (SI) [23], stochastic gradient descent (SGD) [94], particle swarm optimization (PSO) [18], best-first decision tree (BFDT) [24], random subspace-based support vector machines (RSSVM) [39] and logistic model tree (LMT) [20]. Ensemble models have been used in landslide susceptibility mapping due to their novelty and their ability to comprehensively asses landslide-related parameters for discrete classes of independent factor [15, 16, 25, 44, 49, 63, 67, 87, 93] . To achieve this, a frequency ratio (FR) and logistic regression (LR) models have been applied to obtain maps of landslide susceptibility (spatial prediction) using the ArcGIS software (version 10.2) for the area. The frequency ratio model is useful to analyze the slope instability and treated as one of the best quantitative approaches [43]. Literature reviews show that the logistic regression model is so accurate to support vector machine, classification tree and likelihood ratios [29, 83]. The logistic regression model is one of the most effective mathematical methods which are useful to find out the relationship between landslide causative factors and landslide locations [8, 28].
Landslide susceptibility mapping is important to ensure the safety of human life and mitigate the negative impact on regional as well as the national economy of a country [48]. This map helps government agencies, policymakers and planners to reduce the damages that a landslide incident can cause. The main objective of this study is to locate probable landslide susceptible areas within the basin using FR and LR models and compare the results using the ROC curve for the most suitable or acceptable method between these two (FR & LR) models.
2 Study area
Relli Khola river basin or Relli River is a small Himalayan river of the Indian States of West Bengal flowing through Kalimpong district. The river originates between the Alagara and Lava forest range at an elevation of 2400 meters known as t’Tiffin Dara and joins Teesta River as one of its tributaries. The length of the river is almost 27.38 km. A small village known as Relli is situated on its bank. During Makar Sankranti (January 14), a fair is held annually at the Relli. The basin extends from 26°58′2″ to 27°5′31″N and from 88°26′32″ to 88°39′14″E which is about 170.61 sq km. Relli Khola river basin is the left bank tributary of the Teesta River. Being a part of the Himalayan region, the area is characterized by intensive rainfall. The total basin is situated over two geological units. From top to bottom, the two geological units are Darjeeling Gneiss, and slate, schists, quartzite. The basin has natural beauty for its surrounding environment. Its culture is full of diversity, people from different parts live in the area. But the area is not safe from natural difficulties. So many natural disturbances such as earthquakes and landslides are common phenomena of the basin. Intensive rainfall (200–250 cm/annually) and a moderate-type temperature are the common characters of the basin. Being a forested area the basin is suffered few for landslide incidents. But where lands are open and deforestation takes place, landslides damage the area. In the lower course of the river, Komesi forest, Suruk Khasmahal and Mezok forest landslides have mainly been observed. But due to low habited place, damages are not found big. The portion that is close to Kalimpong town is a highly settled area and this portion is characterized as a gentle uniform slope, and thus, no such noticeable landslides are found in this portion (Fig. 1).
3 Data and methods
A digital elevation model (DEM) with the resolution of 30 m × 30 m has been extracted from the ASTER GDEM data of October 2011 and downloaded from USGS Earth Explorer on January 18, 2018. The DEM data have been applied to extract slope, aspect, relief parameters (relative relief, maximum relief, dissection index, TWI, stream power index, etc.) and drainage parameters such as drainage density, drainage frequency, stream junction frequency, stream junction angle and infiltration number of the study area using ArcGIS 10.2 software. To apply the models, 20 parameters have been selected. These are (a) drainage density, (b) drainage texture, (c) infiltration number, (d) stream frequency, (e) stream junction frequency, (f) stream power, (g) lithology, (h) soil, (i) relative relief, (j) slope, (k) maximum relief, (l) drainage intensity, (m) ruggedness number, (n) rainfall, (o) dissection index, (p) aspect, (q) relief class and (r) distance from stream, (s) TWI and (t) land use land cover (lulc). These factors have been further classified into five subclasses such as (1) drainage factors, (2) relief factors, (3) hydrological factors, (4) lithological factors and (5) triggering factors. The methodologies for each parameter as stated above have been provided in detail in the following sections (Table 1).
3.1 Drainage factors
3.1.1 Drainage density (Dd)
Drainage density is the length of stream per unit area of a river basin. Landslides are prominent in such areas where drainage density is high and the soil layer is too thin [65]. Figure 2a shows the drainage density of the Relli Khola river basin. The drainage density of the basin ranges from 0.13 to 5.84 km/sq km (Fig. 2a). The formula is given below [41].
where Dd is drainage density, Lµ is the length of the stream and A is the total area. The grid method has been used to calculate the specific drainage density of the basin.
3.1.2 Stream frequency (Fs)
Stream frequency is one of the important factors for landslide susceptibility measuring. Stream frequency (Fs) is the number of streams per unit area of the basin [41]. The stream frequency of the basin ranges from 0 to 20 stream/sq km (Fig. 2b). The value close to 0 means less diversity of slope and less landslide susceptible areas, and the higher value means high diversity of slope and high probability of landslides. Stream frequency is calculated in the following way [41]
where Fs is stream frequency, Nµ is the total number of stream and A is the total area of the basin or region adopted for the present study.
3.1.3 Drainage intensity (Id)
Drainage intensity (Id) denotes the ratio between stream frequency (Fs) and drainage density (Dd) [33]. The value ranges from 0.26 to 8.86 (Fig. 2c). High drainage intensity indicates a high probability of landslide, and low drainage intensity indicates less probability of landslide. Faniran [33] calculated drainage intensity in the following way.
where Id is drainage intensity, Fs is the stream frequency and Dd is the drainage density.
3.1.4 Drainage texture (T)
Drainage texture is also an important morphometric factor that indicates a relative spacing of streams per unit length. Drainage texture is the ratio between the number of streams and the length of the perimeter of the basin [42]. The value of drainage texture ranges from 0 to 6 stream per km (Fig. 2d). Horton [42] gave the formula for calculating drainage texture as stated below.
where T is the drainage texture of the basin, Nµ is the number of streams and P is the perimeter of the basin.
3.1.5 Stream junction frequency
Stream junction frequency is the number of stream junction points within a unit area of a drainage basin. Being a part of the source region, i.e., mountainous region, the river has many stream junction points throughout the basin. Stream junction frequency indirectly indicates the slope’s instability, because the break of slope occurs where two or more streams join in a single point. The value ranges from 0 to 10 stream junctions/sq km (Fig. 2e). Stream junction frequency is calculated in the following formula.
where Fsj is the frequency of stream junctions, fj is the number of stream junction points and A is the area of the basin
3.1.6 Infiltration number (If)
Faniran [33] also defines infiltration number (If) as the multiplication of both stream frequency (Fs) and drainage density (Dd). The infiltration number value of the basin ranges from 0 to 176.19 (Fig. 2f). The value close to 0 indicates the high infiltration and low surface runoff and higher value indicate the opposite, i.e., low infiltration and high surface runoff. The infiltration number is calculated in the following ways [33].
where If is the infiltration number, Fs is the stream frequency and Dd is drainage density.
3.2 Relief parameter
3.2.1 Slope
Slope is one of the most dominant factors of landslide occurrences [27, 6, 36]. Occurrences of landslides are directly affected by the slope angle of an area [53]. ASTER GDEM data have been used for preparing the slope map of the basin with 30 m resolution in ArcGIS 10.2 in degree form. The slope of the basin ranges from 0 to 67.48 (Fig. 3a)
3.2.2 Aspect
Aspect of slope describes the slope direction of an area. This is also an important factor of landslide and exposure to sunlight, drying winds, rainfall (degree of saturation), discontinuities are the aspect-associated parameters are also important factors of landslides [52]. Aspect map of the basin has been prepared from ASTER GDEM data with 30 m resolution in ArcGIS 10.2. Figure 3b shows the aspect map of the basin.
3.2.3 Dissection index
Dissection index is one of the most important factors to understand the relief as it is defined as the ratio between relative relief and absolute relief [64]. The value of DI of the area ranges from 0.06 to 0.58 (Fig. 3c). The lower portion of the basin is highly dissected, whereas the upper portion is less dissected which indicates the relative relief is low in case of the upper portion and high in case of lower portion of the basin. It is calculated in the following formula [64].
where DI is the dissection index of the basin, Rr is relative relief and Ar is the absolute relief of the basin. The value of DI ranges from 0 to 1. 0 means complete absence of dissection, and 1 means vertical cliff.
3.2.4 Distance from stream
Distances from stream have been measured by using ArcGIS 10.2 software. It is also an important factor for landslides. The area close to streams can get water from the streams that help the rock or soil to be fragile for eroding or sliding. Therefore, there is a possibility of landslides close to the streams. The map shows that the value of the distance from the stream of the basin ranges from 0 to 704.96 m (Fig. 3d)
3.2.5 Maximum relief
Maximum relief is simply defined as the highest altitude of an area. It is also known as absolute relief. The map is prepared by using the grid method in ArcGIS 10.2. The maximum relief of each grid has then been used to prepare the maximum relief map using IDW (inverse distance weighted) method. The value of maximum relief ranges from 286 to 2378 ms (Fig. 3e). The source region shows the maximum relief of the basin.
3.2.6 Relative relief
Relative relief is another form of representing the slope of a terrain. It is the difference between the highest altitude and lowest altitude. Therefore, a high relative relief zone has a chance of landslide. This map is also prepared using the grid method and IDW technique in ArcGIS. The formula is given in the equation. The maximum and minimum values of relative relief of the basin are 489 and 88 meters, respectively (Fig. 3f). Smith [88] gave the formula for calculating relative relief in this way.
where RR is relative relief, H is the highest altitude and the lowest altitude of the basin.
3.2.7 Relief class
Relief class has been done based on the DEM classification of the basin. It is done basically to understand what range of relief class has been dominating the high landslide areas. The minimum and maximum reliefs of the basin are 179 and 2378 meters, respectively (Fig. 3g).
3.2.8 Ruggedness number (Nr)
Ruggedness number is a unitless value as both relative relief and drainage density are expressed in the same units and help to combine the slope steepness and [90]. The value of the ruggedness number of the basin ranges from 0 to 1.88 (Fig. 3h). The ruggedness number is calculated by using the following formula.
where Dd is drainage density and K is a conversion constant (5280 in case of mile grid and when relative relief is expressed in feet and drainage density in miles/sq. mile and is 1000 when relative relief is expressed in meter and drainage density in meter/sq meter
3.3 Hydrological parameters
3.3.1 Stream power index (SPI)
Stream power index is the power of stream to move sediment, and thus, it is the potential of flowing water to complete geomorphic works such as incise, widen or aggrades of channel. It is estimated that if discharge or slope is increased, stream power is also increased proportionally. Stream power is low in the case of flat areas and high in the case of rugged topography. The stream power index is calculated with the following equation (Fig. 4a) [61]
where As is the specific catchment’s area (sq m/m) and β is the slope gradient
3.3.2 Topographic wetness index (TWI)
Beven and Kirkby [10] developed the topographic wetness index (TWI) which is commonly used to measure and quantify the topographic control on hydrological processes [89]. If the moisture in the soil is high, the strength of soil will decrease and this enhances landslides. Wilson and Gallant [101] defined TWI in the following way (Fig. 4b).
where As is the specific catchment’s area (sq m/m) and β is the slope gradient.
3.4 Lithological factors
3.4.1 Lithology
Himalayan mountain region belongs to a very special convergence zone of two plates, e.g., (a) Indian Plate and (b) Eurasian Plate. Therefore, small and medium earthquakes have been occurring throughout the years. Landslide is also related to the earthquake. An earthquake can increase the rate and dimension of landslide. The lithological unit map has been collected from the Geological Survey of India and was grouped into two classes according to their character and lithological ages (Fig. 5a).
3.4.2 Soil
Five soil classes are observed in the basin (Fig. 6b). Soil demarcates the land use pattern. Soils having shallow depth on steep slopes are affected most by landslides [84]. Soil map has been collected from the National Bureau of Soil Survey (NBSS) and Land Use Planning (LUP), Kolkata.
3.5 Triggering factors
3.5.1 Rainfall
The most important triggering factor of landslide is rainfall. In Darjeeling Himalaya, intensive rainfall (almost 300 to 350 cm annually) is recorded every year. The duration of rainfall is also important for landslide. Landslides mainly occur during the monsoon season (July–Aug). The mean annual rainfall map has been prepared using TRMM (Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission) data of the last 19 years (1998–2017) for the study area and downloaded from https://pmm.nasa.gov/data-access/downloads/trmm website. The thematic layer of rainfall has been prepared using the interpolation method of IDW (Inverse Distance Weighted) in a GIS platform. Figure 6a shows the annual rainfall map of the basin.
3.5.2 Land use land cover (lulc)
The upper layer of the earth’s crust is used for different purposes by man. Each land use land cover has different intensities of landslide, e.g., forest can reduce landslide rate and open bare surface; build-up areas can increase the rate of the landslide. Five land use classes have been identified based on supervised image classification (Fig. 6b). The Landsat 8 OLI images with the resolution of 30 m × 30 m have been used to extract land use map using ArcGIS 10.2 software. The Landsat 8 OLI images have been downloaded from USGS Earth Explorer on January 18, 2018.
3.6 Landslide inventory map
Guzzetti et al. [37] stated that the landslide inventory map is an important part of analyzing landslide susceptibility, hazard as well as risk assessment. A landslide distribution map or landslide inventory map (Fig. 2) has been prepared to determine the landslide affected areas (%) and frequency of landslides of each class of possible landslide causing factors [60]. The landslide locations have been identified using Google Earth imagery and multiple field survey to cross-check the prepared landslide map. Ten-day (December 30, 2017, to January 8, 2018) extensive field survey and observing Google Earth imagery have been done for identifying landslide locations. In this current study, a total of 67 landslides have been identified. Out of the total, 47 (70%) landslides have been used as a training data set and 20 (30%) landslides have been used as validation data set. After that landslide inventory map has been prepared in the GIS environment to run the models and identify the probable landslide susceptible areas (Fig. 7). All the possible landslide causing factors have been incorporated with this landslide inventory map to understand the degree of importance of each possible landslide causing factors [60].
3.7 Frequency ratio model
The frequency ratio model is a well-accepted and popular quantitative approach for preparing landslide susceptibility mapping [60]. Lee and Talib [55], Lee and Pradhan [54], Jadda etal. [46], Avinash and Ashamanjari [5], Mondal and Maiti [60] successfully applied frequency ratio model for preparing susceptible map. To obtain the frequency ratio of each class of all the data layers, the following equation has been applied.
where \(N_{{{\text{pix}}(S_{i} )}}\) is the number of landslide pixels containing in class i, \(N_{{{\text{pix}}(N_{i} )}}\) is the total number of landslide pixels having class i in the watershed, \(\sum\nolimits_{i} {N_{{{\text{pix}}(S_{i} )}} }\) is the total number of pixels containing landslide and \(\sum\nolimits_{i} {N_{{{\text{pix}}(N_{i} )}} }\) is the total number of pixels in the watershed. The total number of pixels containing landslide is 400 out of 189,500 pixels (almost 170.61 sq km) in the watershed. Most of the landslides in the study area are rainfall-induced shallow types. The derived frequency ratio value of more than 1 means strong and positive relationship between landslide occurrences and concerned class of the selected data layers and high landslide probability; on the other hand, frequency ratio value of less than 1 means poor and negative correlation between landslide occurrences and concerned class of the data layer and low landslide probability, whereas 1 means moderate relationship. After calculating the frequency ratio, all the raster map parameters of frequency ratio have been summed up to make landslide susceptibility index value (LSIV) using the following equation.
where LSIV is landslide susceptibility index value and Fr1, Fr2, Frn is the frequency ratio of the raster data layers and n is the total number of factors for the study [20]. Higher value indicates high landslide susceptibility, and lower value indicates low susceptibility and vice versa.
3.7.1 Logistic regression model
The logistic regression model is also known as multivariate analysis is measured with dichotomous variables such as 1 or 0 (presence or absence), and it is determined by one or more independent variables [58]. The general purpose of the study is to determine the best-fitting model to describe the relationship between dependent variables (Landslide occurrence) and many independent variables, e.g., slope, lulc, lithology, rainfall, etc. (Kavzoglu et al. 2013). Dai and Lee [27] argued that the advantage of the model is that the dependent variable can have only two values, presence (Value 1) or not presence (Value 0). The logistic regression model is based on the generalized linear model and can be calculated by the following equation.
where p is the probability of landslide occurrence and z is the linear regression model.
b0 is the intercept of the model, n is the number of independent variables, b1, b2…bn are the coefficients and x1, x2,…xn are the landslide causing factors.
P, probability of vulnerability, varies from 0 to 1. Whenever it is nearer to 1, it indicates high vulnerable, and whenever it is nearer to 0, it indicates very low vulnerable. The entire calculation of logistic regression has been done in SPSS software (Fig. 8).
4 Results and analysis
FR and LR models have been developed to prepare two landslide vulnerability maps (Fig. 9) based on raster inputs, and each vulnerable map has been classified into five subtypes indicating varying intensity of vulnerability [66]
4.1 Frequency ratio model
The susceptibility map based on the frequency ratio model has been classified into 5 groups such as very high, high, moderate, low and very low which represent 4.05%, 4.36%, 9.12%, 14.34 and 68.11% area of the total basin, respectively (see Table 2). The lower portion of the basin has mainly been characterized as high landslide-prone area (Fig. 9). The landslide areas have been mostly dominated along the river channel of the basin.
The frequency ratio for different classes of each parameter helps us to understand the importance or probability of subclass under landslide occurrences. For example, frequency ratio of river and barren land (subcategories of lulc) is 12.84 and 5.74 indicating landslide vulnerable of these zones (Table 3). That is the significance of this model. The frequency ratio of the fourth class (5.56–8.17) of topographic wetness index (TWI) is high (2.04) compared to other subclasses of this parameter (Table 3). Therefore, it can be said that this zone is highly landslide prone and this zone is more responsible for landslide occurrences. Thus, this model helps us to understand the importance of each subclass.
Slope is a major parameter of landslide. The higher slope indicates the risk of landslide. In Table 3 it is observed that the frequency ratio of fifth (38.37 to 67.48 degrees) subclass of the slope is high (2.97). In the case of maximum relief, the result is different, i.e., higher value represents a low-frequency ratio and the lower value represents a high-frequency ratio (Table 3). It seems that not only maximum altitude is responsible for landslide but also other parameters are playing the dominant role for the basin’s landslide. In the case of relative relief, it gives a good result with our view that higher relative relief (rugged topography) represents a high-frequency ratio, i.e., high probability of landslides (Table 3). The two classes of land use land cover (lulc), i.e., (a) river and water body and (b) barren land, have been dominated with high landslides as a frequency ratio of these two subclasses are 12.84 and 5.74 respectively (Table 3). Vegetation cover is the least subclass of land use land cover which interrupts landslide incidents. Slate, Schists, Quartzite rock is dominated by a high-frequency ratio (Table 3). The higher value of stream power index (SPI) indicates a high risk of landslide occurrences. It has been noticed that the frequency ratio of the fifth class of ruggedness number value is maximum (1.72) and lower classes have been gradually decreased. It seems that high ruggedness number values play a significant role in landslide occurrences.
4.2 Logistic regression model
Logistic regression is a useful method to determine the magnitude of the correlation between landslide locations and affective factors [34]. Table 2 shows that 5.75 sq km (3.37%) and 1.86 sq km (1.09%) areas of the total area of the Relli Khola basin are under very high and high landslide susceptibility zones, respectively. This map also shows almost the same result that the lower portion of the basin has been dominated by a highly landslide-prone area. Landslide is dependent on different factors (it can be physiographic or it can be anthropogenic), and logistic regression is useful to predict the future landslide trend based on the factors, and it also helps us to predict the most dominating factors of landslide occurrences [34]. Among the 20 parameters drainage density, slope, aspect, lulc, soil and rainfall have been identified as dominating factors of landslide occurrences (Table 4). The significance levels of these 3 parameters are 95 to 100. The steep slope is responsible for slope failure. The areas which have steep slope represent rugged topography and high gravity power and hence are at high risk of landslide occurrences. Lulc is also a major factor of landslide occurrences. It is the upper layer of the soil.
A particular land use has a high capability to slide such as bare land or open land tends high landslide. On the other hand, the forest cover area has a low tendency of landslide. Rainfall can increase the rate of landslide as it can make the soil fragile and detach soil from other soil molecules.
Table 4 shows the logistic regression result calculated in SPSS software. This result shows that the rate of landslide occurrences is noticeably and positively determined by stream frequency (Wald = 0.028, Exp(B) = 7.067, df = 1), stream power (Wald = 0.001, Exp(B) = 1.001, df = 1), lithology (Wald = 0.604, Exp(B) = 1.830, df = 1), relative relief (Wald = 0.005, Exp(B) = 1.005, df = 1), Slope (Wald = 0.048, Exp(B) = 1.049, df = 1), ruggedness number (Wald = 2.152, Exp(B) = 8.604, df = 1 and rainfall (Wald = 0.004, Exp(B) = 1.004, df = 1) (Table 4). For the categorical factors of soil, aspect, some subclasses have been categorized as positively determined and some subclasses have been categorized as negatively determined. But for lulc it has been positively determined (Table 4). Other parameters and their logistic results are shown in Table 3. This result denotes that landslide occurrence is not controlled by a single parameter; rather, it is the result of multiple factors.
5 Validation of FR and LR models
After preparing landslide susceptibility, map validation is necessary. Otherwise, it has no use and has no scientific importance [26]. A receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) has been used to validate these models. The ROC curve measures the goodness of fit from the area it falls under the curve [9]. There are five categories of AUC (area under the curve) value under the ROC curve such as excellent (0.90–1.00), good (0.80–0.90), fair (0.70–0.80), poor (0.60–0.70) and fail (0.50–0.60) to understand the accuracy level [81].
Figure 10 shows the ROC curves of landslide maps using FR and LR models. The ROC curves of both models have been prepared using SPSS software. The values of AUC (area under the curve) of the FR model and LR model are 0.814 and 0.751, respectively. The value of the FR model has indicated a good accuracy level with 81% area under the curve, and the value of the LR model has indicated a fair accuracy level having 75% area under the curve. Thus, it can be said that these two models have a considerable amount of accuracy and that can be used for further study.
6 Conclusion
Logistic regression and frequency ratio models have been used for the present study of landslide susceptibility of the Relli Khola river basin, a small tributary of the Teesta River in Darjeeling Himalaya. A total number of 20 possible parameters have been identified to prepare landslide susceptibility maps of the basin. Out of the total basin area, almost 7–14 sq km area has come under high landslide susceptible zones. Both the maps have shown that high landslide susceptibility zones have been located at the lower portion of the basin and along the river channel where the soil is saturated, open to sky and surface is unprotected, whereas the upper portion of the basin has very less susceptible as this portion has been covered with healthy forest cover that protects the soil from sliding. The susceptibility maps have been proved with satisfying accuracy of the ROC curve (Fig. 10). The resulting maps have provided the spatial distribution of landslide occurrences, but it cannot forecast the time, degree of landslide occurrences and how often it can occur. Therefore, the government and responsible authorities should take responsibility and steps to mitigate the problem. The government and higher authorities should keep notice so that any kind of development project or market, towns, roads, tourist places, etc., will not grow in the future in the susceptible areas within the basin. These maps will be also useful for the planners and decision-makers to build up policies to restrict and save the destruction from landslides.
References
Ahmadlou M, Karimi M, Alizadeh S, Shirzadi A, Parvinnejhad D, Shahabi H, Panahi M (2019) Flood susceptibility assessment using integration of adaptive network-based fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) and biogeography-based optimization (BBO) and BAT algorithms (BA). Geocarto International 34(11):1252–1272
Akgun A (2012) A comparison of landslide susceptibility maps produced by logistic regression, multi-criteria decision, and likelihood ratio methods: a case study at İzmir. Turkey. Landslides 9(1):93–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-011-0283-7
Aleotti P, Chowdhury R (1999) Landslide hazard assessment: summary review and new perspectives. Bull Eng Geol Environ 58(1):21–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s100640050066
Alizadeh M, Alizadeh E, Asadollahpour Kotenaee S, Shahabi H, Beiranvand Pour A, Panahi M, Saro L (2018) Social vulnerability assessment using artificial neural network (ANN) model for earthquake hazard in Tabriz city Iran. Sustainability 10(10):3376
Avinash KG, Ashamanjari KG (2010) A GIS and frequency ratio based landslide susceptibility mapping: aghnashini river catchment, Uttara Kannada, India. Int J Geomatics Geosci 1(3):343
Ayalew L, Yamagishi H, Ugawa N (2004) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS-based weighted linear combination, the case in Tsugawa area of Agano River, Niigata Prefecture Japan. Landslides 1(1):73–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-003-0006-9
Azareh A, Rahmati O, Rafiei-Sardooi E, Sankey JB, Lee S, Shahabi H, Ahmad BB (2019) Modelling gully-erosion susceptibility in a semi-arid region, Iran: investigation of applicability of certainty factor and maximum entropy models. Sci Total Environ 655:684–696
Bai SB, Wang J, Lü GN, Zhou PG, Hou SS, Xu SN (2010) GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping of the Zhongxian segment in the Three Gorges area China. Geomorphology 115(1–2):23–31
Basu T, Pal S (2017) Identification of landslide susceptibility zones in Gish River basin, West Bengal, India. Georisk: Assess Manag Risk Eng Syst Geohazards 12(1):14–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17499518.2017.1343482
Beven KJ, Kirkby MJ (1979) A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology/Un modèle à base physique de zone dappel variable de lhydrologie du bassin versant. Hydrol Sci Bull 24(1):43–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667909491834
Bijukchhen SM, Kayastha P, Dhital MR (2012) A comparative evaluation of heuristic and bivariate statistical modelling for landslide susceptibility mappings in Ghurmi-Dhad Khola, east Nepal. Arab J Geosci 6(8):2727–2743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-012-0569-7
Bui DT, Panahi M, Shahabi H, Singh VP, Shirzadi A, Chapi K, Ahmad BB (2018) Novel hybrid evolutionary algorithms for spatial prediction of floods. Sci Rep 8(1):15364
Bui DT, Tuan TA, Klempe H, Pradhan B, Revhaug I (2016) Spatial prediction models for shallow landslide hazards: a comparative assessment of the efficacy of support vector machines, artificial neural networks, kernel logistic regression, and logistic model tree. Landslides 13(2):361–378
Burns WM, Mickelson KA, Saint-Pierre CE (2013) Landslide inventory maps. Portland: Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries. Interpretive map 54–55, 2 pls., scale 1:8,000
Chang KT, Hwang JT, Liu JK, Wang EH, Wang CI (2011) Apply two hybrid methods on the rainfall-induced landslides interpretation. In: 2011 19th international conference on geoinformatics, IEEE, pp 1–5
Chapi K, Singh VP, Shirzadi A, Shahabi H, Bui DT, Pham BT, Khosravi K (2017) A novel hybrid artificial intelligence approach for flood susceptibility assessment. Environ Model Softw 95:229–245
Chen W, Hong H, Li S, Shahabi H, Wang Y, Wang X, Ahmad BB (2019a) Flood susceptibility modelling using novel hybrid approach of reduced-error pruning trees with bagging and random subspace ensembles. J Hydrol
Chen W, Panahi M, Tsangaratos P, Shahabi H, Ilia I, Panahi S, Ahmad BB (2019) Applying population-based evolutionary algorithms and a neuro-fuzzy system for modeling landslide susceptibility. CATENA 172:212–231
Chen W, Peng J, Hong H, Shahabi H, Pradhan B, Liu J, Duan Z (2018) Landslide susceptibility modelling using GIS-based machine learning techniques for Chongren County, Jiangxi Province, China. Sci Total Environ 626:1121–1135
Chen W, Shahabi H, Shirzadi A, Hong H, Akgun A, Tian Y, Li S (2018b) Novel hybrid artificial intelligence approach of bivariate statistical-methods-based kernel logistic regression classifier for landslide susceptibility modeling. Bull Eng Geol Environ:1–23
Chen W, Shahabi H, Shirzadi A, Li T, Guo C, Hong H, Xi M (2018) A novel ensemble approach of bivariate statistical-based logistic model tree classifier for landslide susceptibility assessment. Geocarto Int 33(12):1398–1420
Chen W, Shirzadi A, Shahabi H, Ahmad BB, Zhang S, Hong H, Zhang N (2017) A novel hybrid artificial intelligence approach based on the rotation forest ensemble and naïve Bayes tree classifiers for a landslide susceptibility assessment in Langao County, China. Geomatics, Nat Hazards Risk 8(2):1955–1977
Chen W, Xie X, Peng J, Shahabi H, Hong H, Bui DT, Zhu AX (2018) GIS-based landslide susceptibility evaluation using a novel hybrid integration approach of bivariate statistical based random forest method. CATENA 164:135–149
Chen W, Zhang S, Li R, Shahabi H (2018) Performance evaluation of the GIS-based data mining techniques of best-first decision tree, random forest, and naïve Bayes tree for landslide susceptibility modeling. Sci Total Environ 644:1006–1018
Chen W, Zhao X, Shahabi H, Shirzadi A, Khosravi K, Chai H, Wang, X (2019c) Spatial prediction of landslide susceptibility by combining evidential belief function, logistic regression and logistic model tree. Geocarto Int (just-accepted) 1–25
Chung CF, Fabbri AG (2003) Validation of spatial prediction models for landslide hazard mapping. Nat Hazards 30(3):451–472. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:nhaz.0000007172.62651.2b
Dai F, Lee C (2002) Landslide characteristics and slope instability modeling using GIS, Lantau Island Hong Kong. Geomorphology 42(3–4):213–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-555x(01)00087-3
Das I, Sahoo S, Westen CV, Stein A, Hack R (2010) Landslide susceptibility assessment using logistic regression and its comparison with a rock mass classification system, along a road section in the northern Himalayas (India). Geomorphology 114(4):627–637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.09.023
Demir G, Aytekin M, Akgun A (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping by frequency ratio and logistic regression methods: an example from Niksar-Resadiye (Tokat, Turkey). Arab J Geosci 8(3):1801–1812. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-014-1332-z
Dou J, Paudel U, Oguchi T, Uchiyama S, Hayakavva YS (2015) Shallow and deep-seated landslide differentiation using support vector machines: a case study of the chuetsu area, Japan. Terr Atmosp Ocean Sci 26(2)
Dou J, Yamagishi H, Zhu Z, Yunus AP, Chen CW (2018) TXT-tool 1.081-6.1 A comparative study of the binary logistic regression (BLR) and artificial neural network (ANN) models for GIS-based spatial predicting landslides at a regional scale. In: Landslide dynamics: ISDR-ICL landslide interactive teaching tools. Springer, Cham pp 139–151
Eker R, Aydin A (2014) Assessment of forest road conditions in terms of landslide susceptibility: a case study in Yığılca Forest Directorate (Turkey). Turk J Agric For 38:281–290. https://doi.org/10.3906/tar-1303-12
Faniran A (1968) The index of drainage intensity-A provisional new drainage factor. Aust J Sci 31:328–330
Gayen A, Saha S (2018) Deforestation probable area predicted by logistic regression in Pathro river basin: a tributary of Ajay River. Spat Inf Res 26(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41324-017-0151-1
Gokceoglu C, Sonmez H, Nefeslioglu HA, Duman TY, Can T (2005) The 17 March 2005 Kuzulu landslide (Sivas, Turkey) and landslide-susceptibility map of its near vicinity. Eng Geol 81(1):65–83
Gómez H, Kavzoglu T (2005) Assessment of shallow landslide susceptibility using artificial neural networks in Jabonosa River Basin Venezuela. Eng Geol 78(1–2):11–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2004.10.004
Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P, Ardizzone F, Cardinali M, Galli M (2006) Estimating the quality of landslide susceptibility models. Geomorphology 81(1–2):166–184
He Q, Shahabi H, Shirzadi A, Li S, Chen W, Wang N, Wang X (2019) Landslide spatial modelling using novel bivariate statistical based Naïve Bayes, RBF Classifier, and RBF Network machine learning algorithms. Sci Total Environ 663:1–15
Hong H, Liu J, Zhu AX, Shahabi H, Pham BT, Chen W, Bui DT (2017) A novel hybrid integration model using support vector machines and random subspace for weather-triggered landslide susceptibility assessment in the Wuning area (China). Environ Earth Sci 76(19):652
Hong H, Panahi M, Shirzadi A, Ma T, Liu J, Zhu AX, Kazakis N (2018) Flood susceptibility assessment in Hengfeng area coupling adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system with genetic algorithm and differential evolution. Sci Total Environ 621:1124–1141
Horton RE (1932) Drainage-basin characteristics. Trans Am Geophys Union 13(1):350. https://doi.org/10.1029/tr013i001p00350
Horton RE (1945) Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins; hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology. Geol Soc Am Bull 56(3):275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1945)56[275:edosat]2.0.co;2
Intrawichian N, Dasananda S (2011) Frequency ratio model based landslide susceptibility mapping in lower Mae Chaem watershed Northern Thailand. Environ Earth Sci 64(8):2271–2285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-011-1055-3
Jaafari A, Panahi M, Pham BT, Shahabi H, Bui DT, 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 175:430–445
Jaafari A, Zenner EK, Panah M, Shahabi H (2019) Hybrid artificial intelligence models based on a neuro-fuzzy system and metaheuristic optimization algorithms for spatial prediction of wildfire probability. Agric For Meteorol 266:198–207
Jadda M, Shafri HZ, Mansor SB, Sharifikia M, Pirasteh S (2009) Landslide susceptibility evaluation and factor effect analysis using probabilistic-frequency ratio model. Eur J Sci Res 33(4):654–668
Kavzoglu T, Colkesen I, Sahin, EK (2019) Machine learning techniques in landslide susceptibility mapping: a survey and a case study. In: Landslides: theory, practice and modelling. Springer, Cham pp 283–301
Kavzoglu T, Sahin EK, Colkesen I (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis, support vector machines, and logistic regression. Landslides 11(3):425–439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-013-0391-7
Khosravi K, Pham BT, Chapi K, Shirzadi A, Shahabi H, Revhaug I, Bui DT (2018) A comparative assessment of decision trees algorithms for flash flood susceptibility modeling at Haraz watershed, northern Iran. Sci Total Environ 627:744–755
Khosravi K, Shahabi H, Pham BT, Adamowski J, Shirzadi A, Pradhan B, Hong H (2019) A comparative assessment of flood susceptibility modeling using multi-criteria decision-making analysis and machine learning methods. J Hydrol 573:311–323
Kayastha P, Dhital MR, Smedt FD (2013) Evaluation and comparison of GIS based landslide susceptibility mapping procedures in Kulekhani watershed Nepal. J Geol Soc India 81(2):219–231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12594-013-0025-7
Lee CF, Li J, Xu ZW, Dai FC (2001) Assessment of landslide susceptibility on the natural terrain of Lantau Island Hong Kong. Environ Geol 40(3):381–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002540000163
Lee S, Min K (2001) Statistical analysis of landslide susceptibility at Yongin Korea. Environ Geol 40(9):1095–1113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002540100310
Lee S, Pradhan B (2007) Landslide hazard mapping at Selangor, Malaysia using frequency ratio and logistic regression models. Landslides 4(1):33–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-006-0047-y
Lee S, Talib JA (2005) Probabilistic landslide susceptibility and factor effect analysis. Environ Geol 47(7):982–990. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-005-1228-z
Mangeney A (2011) Geomorphology: landslide boost from entrainment. Nat Geosci 4(2):77
Melchiorre C, Matteucci M, Azzoni A, Zanchi A (2008) Artificial neural networks and cluster analysis in landslide susceptibility zonation. Geomorphology 94(3–4):379–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.10.035
Menard S (2001) Applied logistic regression analysis, vol 106, 2nd edn. Sage Publication Thousand Oaks, California
Miraki S, Zanganeh SH, Chapi K, Singh VP, Shirzadi A, Shahabi H, Pham BT (2019) Mapping groundwater potential using a novel hybrid intelligence approach. Water Resour Manage 33(1):281–302
Mondal S, Maiti R (2013) Integrating the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and the frequency ratio (FR) model in landslide susceptibility mapping of Shiv-khola watershed, Darjeeling Himalaya. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 4(4):200–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-013-0021-y
Moore ID, Grayson RB, Ladson AR (1991) Digital terrain modelling: a review of hydrological, geomorphological, and biological applications. Hydrol Process 5(1):3–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.3360050103
Nandi A, Shakoor A (2010) A GIS-based landslide susceptibility evaluation using bivariate and multivariate statistical analyses. Eng Geol 110(1–2):11–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2009.10.001
Nguyen VV, Pham BT, Vu BT, Prakash I, Jha S, Shahabi H, Tien Bui D (2019) Hybrid machine learning approaches for landslide susceptibility modeling. Forests 10(2):157
Nir D (1957) The ratio of relative and absolute altitudes of Mt. Carmel: a contribution to the problem of relief analysis and relief classification. Geogr Rev 47(4):564. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/211866
Onda Y (1993) Underlying rock type controls of hydrological processes and shallow landslide occurrence. Sedim Probl Strateg Monit Predict Control 217:47–55
Pal S, Talukdar S (2018) Application of frequency ratio and logistic regression models for assessing physical wetland vulnerability in Punarbhaba river basin of Indo-Bangladesh. Human and Ecol Risk Assess Int J 24(5):1291–1311. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2017.1411781
Pham BT, Bui DT, Prakash I (2018) Bagging based support vector machines for spatial prediction of landslides. Environ Earth Sci 77(4):146
Pham BT, Prakash I, Dou J, Singh SK, Trinh PT, Tran HT, Bui DT (2019) A novel hybrid approach of landslide susceptibility modelling using rotation forest ensemble and different base classifiers. Geocarto Int:1–25
Pham BT, Prakash I, Khosravi K, Chapi K, Trinh PT, Ngo TQ, Bui DT (2018b) A comparison of Support Vector Machines and Bayesian algorithms for landslide susceptibility modelling. Geocarto Int:1–23
Pham BT, Prakash I, Singh SK, Shirzadi A, Shahabi H, Bui DT (2019) Landslide susceptibility modeling using Reduced Error Pruning Trees and different ensemble techniques: hybrid machine learning approaches. CATENA 175:203–218
Pourghasemi HR, Pradhan B, Gokceoglu C (2012) Application of fuzzy logic and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed Iran. Natural Hazards 63(2):965–996. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-012-0217-2
Pradhan B, Buchroithner MF (2010) Comparison and validation of landslide susceptibility maps using an artificial neural network model for three test areas in Malaysia. Environ Eng Geosci 16(2):107–126. https://doi.org/10.2113/gseegeosci.16.2.107
Pradhan B, Lee S (2010) Landslide susceptibility assessment and factor effect analysis: backpropagation artificial neural networks and their comparison with frequency ratio and bivariate logistic regression modelling. Environ Model Softw 25(6):747–759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2009.10.016
Pradhan B, Mansor S, Pirasteh S, Buchroithner MF (2011) Landslide hazard and risk analyses at a landslide prone catchment area using statistical based geospatial model. Int J Remote Sens 32(14):4075–4087
Pradhan B, Youssef AM (2009) Manifestation of remote sensing data and GIS on landslide hazard analysis using spatial-based statistical models. Arab J Geosci 3(3):319–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-009-0089-2
Rahmati O, Naghibi SA, Shahabi H, Bui DT, Pradhan B, Azareh A, Melesse AM (2018) Groundwater spring potential modelling: comprising the capability and robustness of three different modeling approaches. J Hydrol 565:248–261
Rahmati O, Samadi M, Shahabi H, Azareh A, Rafiei-Sardooi E, Alilou H, Shirzadi A (2019) SWPT: An automated GIS-based tool for prioritization of sub-watersheds based on morphometric and topo-hydrological factors. Geosci Front
Rai PK, Mohan K, Kumra VK (2014) Landslide hazard and its mapping using remote sensing and GIS. J Sci Res 58:1–13
Rodriguez-Galiano V, Sanchez-Castillo M, Chica-Olmo M, Chica-Rivas M (2015) Machine learning predictive models for mineral prospectivity: an evaluation of neural networks, random forest, regression trees and support vector machines. Ore Geol Rev 71:804–818
Roodposhti MS, Safarrad T, Shahabi H (2017) Drought sensitivity mapping using two one-class support vector machine algorithms. Atmos Res 193:73–82
Rasyid AR, Bhandary NP, Yatabe R (2016) Performance of frequency ratio and logistic regression model in creating GIS based landslides susceptibility map at Lompobattang Mountain, Indonesia. Geoenviron Disasters, 3(1). http://dx.doi.org/oi:10.1186/s40677-016-0053-x
Shafizadeh-Moghadam H, Valavi R, Shahabi H, Chapi K, Shirzadi A (2018) Novel forecasting approaches using combination of machine learning and statistical models for flood susceptibility mapping. J Environ Manage 217:1–11
Shahabi H, Khezri S, Ahmad BB, Hashim M (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping at central Zab basin, Iran: a comparison between analytical hierarchy process, frequency ratio and logistic regression models. CATENA 115:55–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2013.11.014
Sharma LP, Patel N, Debnath P, Ghose MK (2012) Assessing landslide vulnerability from soil characteristics—a GIS-based analysis. Arab J Geosci 5(4):789–796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-010-0272-5
Shirzadi A, Bui DT, Pham BT, Solaimani K, Chapi K, Kavian A, Revhaug I (2017) Shallow landslide susceptibility assessment using a novel hybrid intelligence approach. Environ Earth Sci 76(2):60
Shirzadi A, Shahabi H, Chapi K, Bui DT, Pham BT, Shahedi K, Ahmad BB (2017) A comparative study between popular statistical and machine learning methods for simulating volume of landslides. CATENA 157:213–226
Shirzadi A, Soliamani K, Habibnejhad M, Kavian A, Chapi K, Shahabi H, Ahmad A (2018) Novel GIS based machine learning algorithms for shallow landslide susceptibility mapping. Sensors 18(11):3777
Smith G (1935) The relative relief of Ohio. Geogr Rev 25(2):272. https://doi.org/10.2307/209602
Sörensen R, Zinko U, Seibert J (2006) on the calculation of the topographic wetness index: evaluation of different methods based on field observations. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Dis 10(1):101–112
Strahler AN (1957) Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology. Trans Am Geophys Union 38(6):913. https://doi.org/10.1029/tr038i006p00913
Taheri K, Shahabi H, Chapi K, Shirzadi A, Gutiérrez F, Khosravi K (2019) Sinkhole susceptibility mapping: a comparison between Bayes-based machine learning algorithms. Land Degrad Dev 30(7):730–745
The Indian Express. July 2, 2015. http://indianexpress.com/article/india/west-bengal/landslides-claim-18-lives-in-darjeeling/
Tien Bui D, Khosravi K, Li S, Shahabi H, Panahi M, Singh V, Bin Ahmad B (2018) New hybrids of anfis with several optimization algorithms for flood susceptibility modeling. Water 10(9):1210
Tien Bui D, Shahabi H, Omidvar E, Shirzadi A, Geertsema M, Clague JJ, Barati Z (2019) Shallow landslide prediction using a novel hybrid functional machine learning algorithm. Remote Sens 11(8):931
Tien Bui D, Shahabi H, Shirzadi A, Chapi K, Alizadeh M, Chen W, Tian Y (2018) Landslide detection and susceptibility mapping by airsar data using support vector machine and index of entropy models in cameron highlands, malaysia. Remote Sens 10(10):1527
Tien Bui D, Shahabi H, Shirzadi A, Chapi K, Pradhan B, Chen W, Saro L (2018) Land subsidence susceptibility mapping in south korea using machine learning algorithms. Sensors 18(8):2464
Tien Bui D, Shahabi H, Shirzadi A, Kamran Chapi K, Hoang ND, Pham B, Saro L et al (2019) Erratum: dieu, TB A Novel Integrated Approach of Relevance Vector Machine Optimized by Imperialist Competitive Algorithm for Spatial Modeling of Shallow Landslides. Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 1538. Remote Sens 11(1):57
Tien Bui D, Shirzadi A, Shahabi H, Chapi K, Omidavr E, Pham BT, Talebpour Asl D, Khaledian H, Pradhan B, Panahi M (2019) A novel ensemble artificial intelligence approach for gully erosion mapping in a semi-arid watershed (Iran). Sensors 19:2444
Varnes DJ (1978) Slope movement types and processes. Spe Rep 176:11–33
Varnes DJ (1981) Slope-stability problems of circum-Pacific region as related to mineral and energy resources
Wilson JP, Gallant JC (eds) (2000) Terrain analysis: principles and applications. Wiley, Hoboken
Xie M, Esaki T, Zhou G, Mitani Y (2003) Geographic information systems-based three-dimensional critical slope stability analysis and landslide hazard assessment. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 129(12):1109–1118
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express cordial thanks to our respected teachers of the Department of Geography, University of Gour Banga, who have always been mentally, economically and infrastructurally supported ourselves. At last, authors would like to acknowledge all of the agencies and individuals, especially the Irrigation and Waterways Department (Govt. of West Bengal), Survey of India (SOI), Geological Survey of India (GSI) and USGS for obtaining the maps and data required for the study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Das, G., Lepcha, K. Application of logistic regression (LR) and frequency ratio (FR) models for landslide susceptibility mapping in Relli Khola river basin of Darjeeling Himalaya, India. SN Appl. Sci. 1, 1453 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-1499-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-1499-8