Quantitative comparison between two different methodologies to define rainfall thresholds for landslide forecasting

被引:51
|
作者
Lagomarsino, D. [1 ]
Segoni, S. [1 ]
Rosi, A. [1 ]
Rossi, G. [1 ]
Battistini, A. [1 ]
Catani, F. [1 ]
Casagli, N. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Florence, Dept Earth Sci, Florence, Italy
关键词
SHALLOW LANDSLIDES; DEBRIS FLOWS; DURATION CONTROL; INTENSITY; DEFINITION; INITIATION; TUSCANY; SYSTEM;
D O I
10.5194/nhess-15-2413-2015
中图分类号
P [天文学、地球科学];
学科分类号
07 ;
摘要
This work proposes a methodology to compare the forecasting effectiveness of different rainfall threshold models for landslide forecasting. We tested our methodology with two state-of-the-art models, one using intensity-duration thresholds and the other based on cumulative rainfall thresholds. The first model identifies rainfall intensity-duration thresholds by means of a software program called MaCumBA (MAssive CUMulative Brisk Analyzer) (Segoni et al., 2014a) that analyzes rain gauge records, extracts intensity (I) and duration (D) of the rainstorms associated with the initiation of landslides, plots these values on a diagram and identifies the thresholds that define the lower bounds of the I-D values. A back analysis using data from past events is used to identify the threshold conditions associated with the least number of false alarms. The second model (SIGMA) (Sistema Integrato Gestione Monitoraggio Allerta) (Martelloni et al., 2012) is based on the hypothesis that anomalous or extreme values of accumulated rainfall are responsible for landslide triggering: the statistical distribution of the rainfall series is analyzed, and multiples of the standard deviation (sigma) are used as thresholds to discriminate between ordinary and extraordinary rainfall events. The name of the model, SIGMA, reflects the central role of the standard deviations. To perform a quantitative and objective comparison, these two models were applied in two different areas, each time performing a site-specific calibration against available rainfall and landslide data. For each application, a validation procedure was carried out on an independent data set and a confusion matrix was built. The results of the confusion matrixes were combined to define a series of indexes commonly used to evaluate model performances in natural hazard assessment. The comparison of these indexes allowed to identify the most effective model in each case study and, consequently, which threshold should be used in the local early warning system in order to obtain the best possible risk management. In our application, none of the two models prevailed absolutely over the other, since each model performed better in a test site and worse in the other one, depending on the characteristics of the area. We conclude that, even if state-of-the-art threshold models can be exported from a test site to another, their employment in local early warning systems should be carefully evaluated: the effectiveness of a threshold model depends on the test site characteristics (including the quality and quantity of the input data), and a validation procedure and a comparison with alternative models should be performed before its implementation in operational early warning systems.
引用
收藏
页码:2413 / 2423
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Comparison of different methodologies for rainfall–runoff modeling: machine learning vs conceptual approach
    Rana Muhammad Adnan
    Andrea Petroselli
    Salim Heddam
    Celso Augusto Guimarães Santos
    Ozgur Kisi
    Natural Hazards, 2021, 105 : 2987 - 3011
  • [22] Comparison of two different methodologies for correcting refraction in vertical angles
    Nikolitsas, K.
    Lambrou, E.
    APPLIED GEOMATICS, 2021, 13 (01) : 119 - 129
  • [23] Comparison of two different methodologies for correcting refraction in vertical angles
    K. Nikolitsas
    E. Lambrou
    Applied Geomatics, 2021, 13 : 119 - 129
  • [24] A comparison of two skin test methodologies and allergens from two different manufacturers
    Rhodius, R
    Wickens, K
    Cheng, S
    Crane, J
    ANNALS OF ALLERGY ASTHMA & IMMUNOLOGY, 2002, 88 (04) : 374 - 379
  • [25] Comparison between Different Analysis Methodologies for LLC Resonant Converter
    Wei, Yuqi
    Luo, Quanming
    Wang, Zhiqing
    Mantooth, Alan
    Zhao, Xingchen
    2019 IEEE ENERGY CONVERSION CONGRESS AND EXPOSITION (ECCE), 2019, : 4429 - 4434
  • [26] Comparison of Two Local Rainfall Forecasting Models Applied for Smart Irrigation Systems
    li, Ching-Lieh
    Ke, Bo-Lin
    Chi, Yu-Jen
    PROCEEDINGS OF 2023 8TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INTELLIGENT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, ICIIT 2023, 2023, : 279 - 285
  • [27] A comparison of linear and nonlinear model performance of shia_landslide: a forecasting model for rainfall-induced landslides
    Vicente Aristizabal-Giraldo, Edier
    Ignacio Velez-Upegui, Jaime
    Eduardo Martinez-Carvajal, Hernan
    REVISTA FACULTAD DE INGENIERIA-UNIVERSIDAD DE ANTIOQUIA, 2016, (80): : 74 - 88
  • [28] Comparison between two methodologies for urban drainage decision aid
    Moura, P. M.
    Baptista, M. B.
    Barraud, S.
    WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2006, 54 (6-7) : 493 - 499
  • [29] The Comparison Between Two Different Algorithms of Spatio-Temporal Forecasting for Traffic Flow Prediction
    Shi, Haochen
    Yue, Yufeng
    Zhou, Yunqi
    COMPUTATIONAL URBAN PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT FOR SMART CITIES, 2019, : 321 - 345
  • [30] Comparison of different methodologies for rainfall-runoff modeling: machine learning vs conceptual approach
    Adnan, Rana Muhammad
    Petroselli, Andrea
    Heddam, Salim
    Santos, Celso Augusto Guimaraes
    Kisi, Ozgur
    NATURAL HAZARDS, 2021, 105 (03) : 2987 - 3011