Journal cover Journal topic
Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

IF value: 3.102
IF3.102
IF 5-year value: 3.284
IF 5-year
3.284
CiteScore value: 5.1
CiteScore
5.1
SNIP value: 1.37
SNIP1.37
IPP value: 3.21
IPP3.21
SJR value: 1.005
SJR1.005
Scimago H <br class='widget-line-break'>index value: 90
Scimago H
index
90
h5-index value: 42
h5-index42
Volume 15, issue 4
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 735–746, 2015
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-735-2015
© Author(s) 2015. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 735–746, 2015
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-735-2015
© Author(s) 2015. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Research article 07 Apr 2015

Research article | 07 Apr 2015

A comparative assessment of two different debris flow propagation approaches – blind simulations on a real debris flow event

L. M. Stancanelli and E. Foti

Download

Interactive discussion

Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
The performances of a mono-phase model and of a two-phase model have been evaluated carrying out a blind test. As a benchmark test the event that struck Sicily (2009) was chosen. Prediction accuracies have been evaluated determining statistical indicators and applying the ROC approach. For the simulated event the two-phase model is more accurate than the mono-phase one, though both models show limits when applied in a highly urbanized area, where some constrains cannot be properly reproduced.
The performances of a mono-phase model and of a two-phase model have been evaluated carrying out...
Citation
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint