Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2) (remove)
Year of publication
- 2020 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Postprint (2)
Language
- English (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- Bayes’ rule (1)
- Landslide inventory (1)
- Landslide susceptibility (1)
- Southern Kyrgyzstan (1)
- logistic regression (1)
- prediction (1)
- probability (1)
- remote sensing (1)
- uncertainty (1)
Bayesian geomorphology
(2020)
The rapidly growing amount and diversity of data are confronting us more than ever with the need to make informed predictions under uncertainty. The adverse impacts of climate change and natural hazards also motivate our search for reliable predictions. The range of statistical techniques that geomorphologists use to tackle this challenge has been growing, but rarely involves Bayesian methods. Instead, many geomorphic models rely on estimated averages that largely miss out on the variability of form and process. Yet seemingly fixed estimates of channel heads, sediment rating curves or glacier equilibrium lines, for example, are all prone to uncertainties. Neighbouring scientific disciplines such as physics, hydrology or ecology have readily embraced Bayesian methods to fully capture and better explain such uncertainties, as the necessary computational tools have advanced greatly. The aim of this article is to introduce the Bayesian toolkit to scientists concerned with Earth surface processes and landforms, and to show how geomorphic models might benefit from probabilistic concepts. I briefly review the use of Bayesian reasoning in geomorphology, and outline the corresponding variants of regression and classification in several worked examples.
Much of contemporary landslide research is concerned with predicting and mapping susceptibility to slope failure. Many studies rely on generalised linear models with environmental predictors that are trained with data collected from within and outside of the margins of mapped landslides. Whether and how the performance of these models depends on sample size, location, or time remains largely untested. We address this question by exploring the sensitivity of a multivariate logistic regression-one of the most widely used susceptibility models-to data sampled from different portions of landslides in two independent inventories (i.e. a historic and a multi-temporal) covering parts of the eastern rim of the Fergana Basin, Kyrgyzstan. We find that considering only areas on lower parts of landslides, and hence most likely their deposits, can improve the model performance by >10% over the reference case that uses the entire landslide areas, especially for landslides of intermediate size. Hence, using landslide toe areas may suffice for this particular model and come in useful where landslide scars are vague or hidden in this part of Central Asia. The model performance marginally varied after progressively updating and adding more landslides data through time. We conclude that landslide susceptibility estimates for the study area remain largely insensitive to changes in data over about a decade. Spatial or temporal stratified sampling contributes only minor variations to model performance. Our findings call for more extensive testing of the concept of dynamic susceptibility and its interpretation in data-driven models, especially within the broader framework of landslide risk assessment under environmental and land-use change.