<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">NHESS</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">NHESS</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1684-9981</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/nhess-20-2379-2020</article-id><title-group><article-title>A spaceborne SAR-based procedure <?xmltex \hack{\break}?> to support the detection of landslides</article-title><alt-title>A spaceborne SAR-based procedure to support the detection of landslides</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{A spaceborne SAR-based procedure to support the detection of landslides}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{G.~Esposito et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Esposito</surname><given-names>Giuseppe</given-names></name>
          <email>giuseppe.esposito@irpi.cnr.it</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5638-657X</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Marchesini</surname><given-names>Ivan</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8342-3134</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Mondini</surname><given-names>Alessandro Cesare</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Reichenbach</surname><given-names>Paola</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Rossi</surname><given-names>Mauro</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0252-4321</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Sterlacchini</surname><given-names>Simone</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>National Research Council, Research Institute for Geo-Hydrological
Protection (CNR-IRPI), Rende (CS), 87036, Italy</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>National Research Council, Research Institute for Geo-Hydrological
Protection (CNR-IRPI), Perugia, 06128, Italy</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>National Research Council, Research Institute of Environmental Geology and Geoengineering (CNR-IGAG), <?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Milan, 20126, Italy</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Giuseppe Esposito (giuseppe.esposito@irpi.cnr.it)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>10</day><month>September</month><year>2020</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>20</volume>
      <issue>9</issue>
      <fpage>2379</fpage><lpage>2395</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>19</day><month>February</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>26</day><month>February</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>15</day><month>July</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>21</day><month>July</month><year>2020</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2020 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2020</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/.html">This article is available from https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e143">The increasing availability of free-access satellite data represents a relevant opportunity for the analysis and assessment of natural hazards. The systematic acquisition of spaceborne imagery allows for monitoring areas prone to geohydrological disasters, providing relevant information for risk evaluation and management. In cases of major landslide events, for example, spaceborne radar data can provide an effective solution for the
detection of slope failures, even in cases with persistent cloud cover. The
information about the extension and location of the landslide-affected areas may support decision-making processes during emergency responses.</p>
    <p id="d1e146">In this paper, we present an automatic procedure based on Sentinel-1
Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) images, aimed at facilitating the detection of
landslides over wide areas. Specifically, the procedure evaluates changes of radar backscattered signals associated with land cover modifications that may be also caused by mass movements. After a one-time calibration of some
parameters, the processing chain is able to automatically execute the
download and preprocessing of images, the detection of SAR amplitude
changes, and the identification of areas potentially affected by landslides, which are then displayed in a georeferenced map. This map should help decision makers and emergency managers to organize field investigations. The process of automatization is implemented with specific scripts running on a GNU/Linux operating system and exploiting modules of open-source software.</p>
    <p id="d1e149">We tested the processing chain, in back analysis, on an area of about 3000 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in central Papua New Guinea that was struck by a severe seismic sequence in February–March 2018. In the area, we simulated a periodic survey of about 7 months, from 12 November 2017 to 6 June 2018, downloading 36 Sentinel-1 images and performing 17 change detection analyses automatically. The procedure resulted in statistical and graphical evidence of widespread land cover changes that occurred just after the most severe seismic events. Most of the detected changes can be interpreted as mass movements triggered by the seismic shaking.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e170">Landslide recognition and mapping in rural areas represents one of the main
challenges faced by the research community. The spatial and temporal
distribution of landslides is well known mainly in urban areas, where they
often cause severe consequences to anthropic structures and population. On
the contrary, landslides in rural and remote areas often remain unknown,
limiting environmental evaluations like hazard and risk assessments (Guzzetti
et al., 2012). Understanding where landslides have occurred may provide
useful indications to forecast future events. In particular, the knowledge
of the spatial distribution of landslides in a given region is essential to
implement, calibrate, and validate statistically and physically based methods
(Rossi and Reichenbach,<?pagebreak page2380?> 2016; Mergili et al., 2014a, b) aimed at predicting the possible location of future mass movements or identifying areas where the probability of failure is negligible (Marchesini et al., 2014). As stated by Reichenbach et al. (2018), the quality and completeness of the landslide inventories may affect the reliability of the landslide susceptibility assessment (Steger et al., 2016). To produce inventory maps with limited errors and uncertainties (Santangelo et al., 2015), the mapping techniques should be selected by taking into account a series of factors: the purpose of the inventory, the extent of the study area (Bornaetxea et al., 2018), the scale of the base maps, the resolution and characteristics of the available data, the skills and experience of the investigators, and the available resources (Guzzetti et al., 2000; van Westen et al., 2006; Casagli et al., 2017).</p>
      <p id="d1e173">Besides conventional techniques (field mapping, visual interpretation of
aerial photographs), remote sensing technologies based on satellite optical
imagery, airborne and terrestrial laser scanning, and digital photogrammetry
represent innovative solutions for landslide detection and mapping. In
addition, multispectral and Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) satellite images
have been also used with great success. To recognize landslides in
multispectral and very high resolution (VHR) optical images, the most commonly
applied methods consist of visual interpretation (Fiorucci et al., 2011;
Ma et al., 2016) or semiautomatic classification (segmentation) that
exploits different radiometric signatures of stable and failed areas (Martha
et al., 2011; Mondini et al., 2011; Alvioli et al., 2018). However, optical
images have some disadvantages and cannot be used when the analyzed areas
are covered by persistent clouds or affected by shadow effects. To overcome
these issues, SAR data can represent an effective alternative, since they
are not influenced much by weather conditions.</p>
      <p id="d1e176">Several techniques allow for extracting information from SAR data to identify
and map slope failures. The Differential Interferometric Synthetic Aperture
Radar (DInSAR) (Gabriel et al., 1989) has been widely used to detect surface
displacements over large areas with sub-centimeter accuracy. DInSAR is aimed
at calculating phase differences between two or more multi-temporal images and
has been successfully applied to analysis of landslides (Calò et al., 2012;
Zhao et al., 2012; Cigna et al., 2013; Calvello et al., 2017; Tessari et
al., 2017), earthquakes, subsidence, soil consolidation, volcanoes and
tectonic deformations (Plank, 2014, and references therein). Other techniques
exploit the amplitude information contained in the pixels of the SAR images.
Amplitude of the backscattered signal is influenced by the type of target
and varies according to several factors, such as the type of land use (e.g.,
water bodies, ice cover, forest type, bare soil), the surface roughness and
the terrain slope. According to Colesanti and Wasowski (2006), amplitude SAR
imagery potentially represents a very useful source of information, which
can complement high-resolution optical imagery and aerial photography in
feature detection. Generally, amplitude-based methods analyze the
correlation of the speckle pattern of two images (e.g., pre- and post-event,
where the terms “event” can refer to a major natural and/or human-induced
hazard affecting a given area, such as an earthquake, a hurricane, a forest fire) to map the land cover changes (Raspini et al., 2017). To date, the
landslide mapping community has shown a poor attitude toward using this type of
product, and thus only a few studies have demonstrated the valuable
contribution of SAR amplitude changes to landslide detection and mapping.
According to Mondini (2017), this is due to a series of problems and
drawbacks represented by (1) the complex preprocessing procedures;
(2) geometric distortions, such as layover and shadowing due to the side-looking acquisition geometry of SAR sensors, which can affect the quality of the images over mountainous areas where landslides are likely to occur; and (3) the difficulty in using the SAR signal in traditional statistical classification approaches mainly due to speckling. A successful example of the use of amplitude variations of the radar signal to analyze landslides is described by Zhao et al. (2013), which inferred the occurrence of the Jiweishan rock slide in China using changes in SAR backscattering intensity in ALOS/PALSAR images. Tessari et al. (2017) verified that when the phase information cannot be exploited, the amplitude of the reflected signal is very useful to detect and map
rapid-moving landslides that cause significant variations in the ground
morphology and land cover. Mondini (2017) proved that both landslides and
flooded areas can be detected by verifying changes in the spatial
autocorrelation in a multi-temporal series of SAR images. Konishi and Suga (2018) also identified a series of landslides in Japan by analyzing
intensity correlation between pre- and post-event SAR images.</p>
      <p id="d1e179">Besides the described techniques, recent advances in SAR technology are
promoting the use of polarimetric SAR data (PolSAR) characterized by
full polarimetric information (i.e., acquired in single-polarization, dual-polarization and fully polarimetric modes) for a target in the form of the
scattering matrix (Skriver, 2012). According to Plank et al. (2016), these
data provide more information on the ground, which enables a better land
cover classification and landslide mapping. Successful applications were
described by Yamaguchi (2012), Shimada et al. (2014), Li et al. (2014) and
Plank et al. (2016).</p>
      <p id="d1e183">The use of SAR data to analyze landslides and/or potentially unstable slopes
should hence increase in relation to a series of other valuable technical
innovations as well. The improved revisiting times and spatial resolution of the
images, for example, represents a key factor during disaster response
operations, when a preliminary localization of areas potentially affected by
major landslides is crucial. Revisiting times have in fact been reduced from
35 d for European Remote Sensing (ERS) and Envisat satellites, to 12 h (at 40<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> latitude, in case of emergency response) for the COSMO-SkyMed constellation (Casagli et al., 2017). The enhanced spatial resolution (azimuth or along-track resolution <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> range<?pagebreak page2381?> or across-track resolution) of images spans
on the order of few meters (i.e., 1–10 m), resulting in more detail with
respect to the coarser resolution of the first-generation satellites
characterized by pixel sizes up to 100 m (Plank, 2014).</p>
      <p id="d1e202">Among the most advanced SAR spaceborne systems (Casagli et al., 2017), there
are those of the mission Sentinel-1 operated by the European Space Agency (ESA) in the frame of the European Union's Copernicus Programme. Satellites Sentinel-1A and 1B acquire images characterized by pixels with sizes ranging from 5 m (range) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 20 m (azimuth) in the default acquisition mode for land observations (Interferometric Wide Swath mode – IW), up to 5 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m in the Strip Map mode. The temporal resolution ranges from 6 to 12 d according to the surveyed geographic area. The Sentinel-related products have a global coverage and are freely available to all users registered on the ESA data hub (<uri>https://scihub.copernicus.eu/</uri>, last access: 24 January 2020). This is a considerable benefit that is leading many research institutions and public administrations to use Sentinel data to investigate landslides and other natural processes (Salvi et al., 2012; Dai et al., 2016; Twele et al., 2016; Intrieri et al., 2018). According to Raspini et al. (2017), the future increased number of available satellites characterized by shorter revisiting times and high spatial resolution will offer relevant information for decision support and early warning systems. Currently, significant limitations concern the real-time and/or quasi-real-time detection of rapid flow-like mass movements, rock failures and flash floods characterized by evolution times ranging from minutes to hours. This poses a challenge for the geohydrological risk management based on satellite technologies.</p>
      <p id="d1e225">In this article, we present an automatic procedure aimed at supporting the
detection of rapidly moving landslides by performing a periodic survey of
unstable slopes using spaceborne radar imagery. We focus on rapidly moving
landslides since they determine evident land cover changes with respect to
slow-moving failures. The main purpose of the implemented procedure is to
emphasize areas where land cover changes (potentially related to slope
failures) have occurred, facilitating the following possible phases of
mapping and/or field surveys. In other words, the procedure allows for producing
a map that highlights the land cover changes observed by comparing two
consecutive spaceborne SAR images. Decision makers and emergency managers
can use this map to organize possible verifications and field
investigations.</p>
      <p id="d1e228">The procedure is implemented in a processing chain based on free data and
software and exploits radar backscattered signals recorded within the
Sentinel-1 SAR images. The values of some parameters related to the used
algorithms must be provided by the user. As an alternative, they can be set
based on the values derived from other similar areas. The processing chain
was applied, in back analysis, to an area in Papua New Guinea that was struck by a severe seismic sequence in
February–March 2018; the most powerful seismic events triggered numerous landslides, generating widespread land cover modifications.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Methodology</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Preprocessing of SAR images</title>
      <p id="d1e246">The implemented procedure is based on Sentinel-1 images available in Level-1
Single Look Complex (SLC), with a VV-VH polarization and Interferometric
Wide (IW) acquisition mode. Level-1 SLC products are images provided in slant
range geometry that are georeferenced using orbit and attitude data from the
satellite. Each image pixel is represented by a complex magnitude value and
contains both amplitude and phase information (ESA, 2018). Preprocessing of
the images is performed using the Graph Processing Tool (GPT) of the
Sentinel-1 Toolbox<fn id="Ch1.Footn1"><p id="d1e249">GPT is the Command Line Interface of the open-source software SNAP Sentinel Application Platform, version 6.0 –
<uri>http://step.esa.int/main/toolboxes/snap/</uri> (last access: 24 January 2020). The source code of SNAP is available at <uri>https://github.com/senbox-org</uri> (last access: 24 January 2020).</p></fn>, and includes the following steps: (1) thermal noise removal, (2) radiometric calibration, (3) TOPSAR de-burst and (4) multi-looking processes.</p>
      <p id="d1e259">The thermal de-noising consists of the removal of dark strips with invalid
data from the original data. This operation is performed with the SNAP
algorithms by subtracting the noise vectors provided by the product
annotations from the power-detected image (ESA, 2017). The radiometric
calibration allows for converting digital pixel values in a radiometric
calibrated backscatter (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (El-Darymli et al., 2014). The
TOPSAR de-burst removes black-fill demarcations between the single bursts,
forming sub-swaths of the IW-SLC products, allowing for the retrieval of single
images. The multi-looking process is carried out to reduce the standard
deviation of the noise level and to obtain approximately square pixels of
about 14 m (mean ground resolution) by applying a factor of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
(azimuth <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mo>:</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> range).</p>
      <p id="d1e292">Consecutive SAR images, selected to detect amplitude changes of the radar
signal (i.e., change detection), are co-registered with a digital elevation model (DEM)-assisted
procedure that uses the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) 1 s
DEM, auto-downloaded by SNAP. After the
co-registration, the resulting stacked images are filtered for speckling
reduction using the adaptive Frost filter (Frost et al., 1982), with a
filter size on the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axes of 5 pixels and a damping factor (defining the
extent of smoothing) of 2.</p><?xmltex \hack{\vspace*{1mm}}?>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Detection of SAR amplitude changes</title>
      <?pagebreak page2382?><p id="d1e318"><?xmltex \hack{\vspace*{1mm}}?>To perform the change detection analysis, the log-ratio (LR) index is
calculated as described by Mondini (2017). This index measures the change in
the backscattering that might be induced by land cover changes related to
both natural (e.g., landslides, floods, snow melting) or human-induced
processes (e.g., mining activities, deforestation) in a defined time
interval. For each pair of corresponding pixels belonging to consecutive
preprocessed SAR images, the LR index is calculated as follows:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M11" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LR</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>ln⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> indicate two consecutive
backscatter values. For each pair of preprocessed images, a LR layer is
computed, and related pixels can be characterized by positive or negative
values, depending on the backscattering changes.</p>
      <p id="d1e401">When the study area (i.e., area of interest, AoI) corresponds to a zone
smaller than the entire LR layer, a subset is extracted by using the <italic>subset</italic>
tool in SNAP.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Segmentation of the LR layer</title>
      <p id="d1e415">The segmentation of the LR layer aims to group pixels with similar LR
values into unique segments. The process is performed with the <italic>i.segment</italic>
module in GRASS GIS 7.4 (Momsen and Metz, 2017), using the “Mean Shift”
algorithm and the adaptive bandwidth option.</p>
      <p id="d1e421">The first step of the Mean Shift algorithm consists of the smoothing process
of the LR layer. To do this, the algorithm requires the
definition of the following parameters from the user: (i) the initial bandwidth size (hr), (ii) the spatial kernel size (hs), (iii) the threshold (th) and (iv) the
maximum number of iterations. We acknowledge that the smoothing considers
the pixel <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (having value LR<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) in the center of a spatial kernel of size hs and assigns to this a mean value calculated using only the pixels that are inside the spatial kernel and with values ranging between (LR<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> hr) and (LR<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> hr). The unit of measurement of hs is in pixels, and hr is a range of LR values. In other words, the smoothing allows each pixel value to be computed considering all pixels that are not farther than the spatial kernel (hs) with a difference that is not larger than hr. This means that pixels that are too different from the considered pixel <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> are not included in the calculation of the new value.</p>
      <p id="d1e480">With the adaptive option, for each pixel <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, hs is fixed, whereas the bandwidth size <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mo>(</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>hr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ad</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is recalculated to account for the variation of the pixel values (LR in this work) across the spatial kernel centered on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. The aim is to avoid the drawbacks of a global bandwidth consisting of under- or over-segmentation. More generally, the adaptive bandwidth size (hr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ad</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>) is calculated using the following equation:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><label>2</label><mml:math id="M26" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hr</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ad</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">avgdiff</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mi>exp⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">avgdiff</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hr</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where “avgdiff” is the average of the differences between the value of the central pixel and the values of other pixels included in the kernel; hr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ad</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is at a maximum if the avgdiff is equal to the user-defined hr, which is also the upper limit of the possible hr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ad</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> values (i.e., hr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ad</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is always smaller than hr). The adaptive option is particularly useful when data are characterized by high and abrupt spatial variability (as is the case of the LR layers) and a smoothing preserving the main discontinuities is required (Comaniciu and Meer, 2002).</p>
      <p id="d1e601">The Mean Shift algorithm recalculates the central pixel values until a
user-defined maximum number of iterations is reached or until the largest
shift (value difference) resulting between the central pixel and the pixels
inside the kernel is smaller than a threshold (th) defined by the user. The
threshold must be bigger than 0.0 and smaller than 1.0: a threshold of 0
would allow only pixels with identical values to be considered similar and
clustered together in a segment, while a threshold of 1 would allow
everything to be merged in a very large segment (Momsen and Metz, 2017). A
more or less conservative threshold needs to be chosen considering the
spectral properties of the analyzed image. After the smoothing, pixels in
the range of the estimated local maxima (Comaniciu and Meer, 2002) that
are close to each other are clustered and included in a new raster map
containing the defined segments. To reduce the “salt and pepper effect”,
the segments containing less than a preferred minimum number of pixels are
eliminated, by specifying the “minsize” parameter within the <italic>i.segment</italic> command.</p>
      <p id="d1e608">To select the appropriate parameter values (i.e., tuning), a specific analysis should be carried out interactively (manually) before the implemented procedure is started. In particular, variability of the segmentation outcomes to the usage of different values for the hs, hr and th parameters must be analyzed. This analysis is event dependent because it can be executed using consecutive SAR images acquired before and after a well-known landslide event occurred in the past, in the area to be surveyed or in areas that are considered similar by geomorphologists, based on the types of land cover and expected types of landslide. The spatial kernel size hs can be heuristically chosen according to the size of the land cover changes that should be detected. Keeping the spatial kernel size constant, hr and th values can be changed iteratively, evaluating the results in terms of number and sizes of segments generated by the Mean Shift algorithm. As general rule, one can expect that large values of hr will correspond to few (but large) segments, whereas small values of hr will determine many small segments. This is due to the fact that smoothing increases when larger values of hr are used. The effect of the variation of the value of th is expected to work in the opposite direction but is much less effective on the segmentation
outcomes. The first scenario (few and very large segments) is useless since
it cannot be used to geo-localize the possible land cover changes. The
second scenario (many and small segments) is the result of the segmentation
of the random noise of the backscattered SAR images and it is also
useless. We assume that a possible criterion for selecting the best values
of th and hr is to search for the combination of values that optimize, at the
same time, the number of<?pagebreak page2383?> segments and their average size with respect to the
expected land cover changes. An example of the procedure for the selection
of the best values for the th and hr parameters is described in Sect. 3.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <label>2.4</label><title>Identification of areas potentially affected by land cover changes</title>
      <p id="d1e619">After the segmentation step, a statistical analysis of the LR pixel values
included in each segment is carried out to identify segments that are related to significant land cover changes with high
probability.</p>
      <p id="d1e622">For each segment, the arithmetic mean (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) of the included LR pixel values is calculated as follows:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><label>3</label><mml:math id="M31" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> indicates the segment, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> the pixel value and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> the number of pixels in the segment. We define the “average layer” as the raster layer where each segment is associated with the corresponding value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Afterwards, in order to filter segments and extract only those representing significant statistical changes, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values have to be compared with reference <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and average standard deviation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula>) related to no-change conditions. These reference figures have to be calculated before the initialization of the processing chain and after the segmentation of the event-related LR image, using preceding SAR images when no heavy rainfall, landslides and earthquakes occurred, by applying the following formulas:

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M39" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E4"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>4</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>m</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>m</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E5"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>5</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>j</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi>j</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E6"><mml:mtd><mml:mtext>6</mml:mtext></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>z</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:munderover><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mi>m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the total number of pixels in the pre-event LR image used as
reference, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the related pixel value, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the total number of segments derived from the segmentation of the event-related LR image, characterized each one by a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e924">In this way, both the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula> are calculated in a kind of “warm-up stage” of the described processing chain. Generally, these
figures can be considered suitable if calculated from three or four
reference LR layers characterized by normally distributed values (i.e., Gaussian). Such a distribution in fact indicates the random nature of the LR values, which is typical when land cover changes are not relevant. We
highlight that in such a case, given that LR values are commonly small and
positive or negative, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value is equal or very close to zero.</p>
      <p id="d1e951"><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>In this way, all the segments of the average layer characterized by
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values larger than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>|</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are
then extracted and classified. Segments with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values lower than a confidence interval of 95 % (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>|</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) are instead discarded. Segments where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is greater than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>|</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
smaller than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>|</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are reclassified to the integer value of 2. Similarly, the values 3 and 4 are used to classify segments with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values included in the range <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>|</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>|</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and larger than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>|</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>|</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
respectively. All these segments form a new raster layer representing a map
of areas characterized by relevant SAR amplitude changes, including those
affected by rapid slope movements.</p>
      <p id="d1e1183">In order to refine this map, all the segments with the same values (i.e., 2,
3, or 4), that are spatially contiguous and are formed by at least a
user-defined minimum arbitrary size in terms of pixels (i.e., minimum
detectable landslide area) are merged together, and the following statistics
are then computed: (1) count of merged segments, (2) maximum number of pixels
included within a single segment and (3) average number of pixels included
within a single segment.</p>
      <p id="d1e1186">The final segment map produced by the processing chain is georeferenced in
the WGS84 reference system (EPSG 4326) by means of the <italic>terrain correction</italic>
tool of SNAP.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS5">
  <label>2.5</label><title>Automatic implementation of the processing chain</title>
      <p id="d1e1201">The processes described before have been implemented in two groups of
scripts that can be executed automatically (in-chain), according to the
flowchart shown in Fig. 1. They are run after a preliminary one-time
calibration phase, operated manually by the user and consisting of (1) the
tuning of the <italic>i.segment</italic> parameters, carried out with the expert-based
segmentation of an event-related LR image (Sect. 2.3), and (2) the computation of reference <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">μ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula> related to no-change conditions, as described in Sect. 2.4.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e1226">Flowchart representing the automatic steps of the processing chain implemented in two groups of scripts (developed using Python and Bash scripting languages). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>I</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>I</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> represent two consecutive SAR images (or set of images).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/20/2379/2020/nhess-20-2379-2020-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1269">The python-based script (Fig. 1, Data ingestion) is devoted to the automatic
querying and downloading of Sentinel-1 SAR images from the ESA Sentinel Data
Hub. The script, based on the <italic>SentinelSat</italic> toolbox (Kersten et al., 2018), is
set to query the Sentinel Data Hub with a daily frequency, even though new
images may be available every 6 or 12 d depending on the geographic area.</p>
      <p id="d1e1276">The consecutive group of scripts written in GNU/Bash programming language
(Fig. 1) is aimed at (i) preprocessing the Sentinel-1 images (Sect. 2.1), (ii) detecting the changes in SAR amplitude and production of LR maps (Sect. 2.2), (iii) segmenting the LR maps (Sect. 2.3), and (iv) identifying areas potentially affected by land cover changes (Sect. 2.4). This group of scripts is executed automatically when new Sentinel-1 images are available and downloaded by the Python-based script.</p>
      <p id="d1e1279">The Bash scripts require the following settings to be defined by the user: (1) the
path of the folder where the downloaded SAR images are stored, (2) values of
the parameters to use for the segmentation (see Sect. 2.3) and (3)<?pagebreak page2384?> the
spatial coordinates of the area of interest (if it is a portion of the
downloaded SAR images). No further information is needed since the commands
are executed in a unique automatic sequence. To survey the same area for an
unlimited time period, all of these settings only have to be defined one time
for the chain initialization.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>The Papua New Guinea test site</title>
      <p id="d1e1291">We selected an area located in central Papua New Guinea (Fig. 2) that was affected by a severe seismic sequence at the beginning of 2018 as a test site. On 25 February, the area was hit by a main seismic event (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) followed by several aftershocks, including a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.7</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>  earthquake on 6 March. The strong mainshock, which was rather superficial with a hypocentral depth at 25.2 km (USGS, 2018), caused buildings to collapse, road damage and widespread landslides, mostly along the Tagari river valley and the slopes of Mount Sisa (McCue et al., 2018). According to the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC, 2018), more than 100 people died, most of them due to landslides.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1318">Location of the test site. The area of interest (AoI) is highlighted with a blue rectangle on the main map and with a red triangle in the inset. The black rectangles show the spatial coverage of the used Sentinel-1 SAR images.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/20/2379/2020/nhess-20-2379-2020-f02.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e1327">To test the implemented procedure, we analyzed an area of about 3000 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in the mountainous region close to the epicenter of the mainshock (AoI in Fig. 2), where preliminary information on landslides were available (Petley, 2018a, b).</p>
      <p id="d1e1340">To simulate a periodic survey covering pre- and post-earthquake periods, we
downloaded 36 Sentinel-1 images from the Sentinel Data Hub
(<uri>https://scihub.copernicus.eu/</uri>, last access: 24 January 2020) acquired along the satellite track no. 82 with a temporal frequency of 12 d, from 12 November 2017 to 6 June 2018. Considering that the majority of the slopes in the study area are exposed towards the west, to limit geometrical distortions in the single images and in the change detection estimation, we preferred to use IW-SLC products acquired in ascending mode, with a VV-VH polarization. Each IW product is collected with a swath characterized by a width of 250 km, subdivided in turn to three sub-swaths containing one image per polarization,<?pagebreak page2385?> consisting of a series of bursts that are processed as independent SLC images.</p>
      <p id="d1e1346">The downloaded images were used to perform a total of 17 change detection
analyses, which resulted in likewise LR layers, with a pixel size of about 14 m. The values of the segmentation parameters were defined with an
interactive manual analysis (see Sect. 2.3) by segmenting the “pre-post
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>   earthquake” LR layer, selecting the spatial kernel size (hs) of 10 pixels (see Sect. 2.3), and setting the maximum number of iterations to 200. This size of the spatial kernel was set to 10 pixels to detect significant differences of LR values during the smoothing stage of the segmentation process, taking into account the approximate expected size of the land cover changes. In the interactive (manual) analysis, we selected bandwidth sizes (hr; see Sect. 2.3) ranging from 0.0005 to 0.016 and thresholds (th) from 0.001 to 0.016 (Fig. 3), obtaining 20 different parameter combinations. For each pair of parameters, the number of generated segments and their average size was plotted in Fig. 3. Points highlight the major impact of the hr parameter with respect to the role played by the threshold (th) parameter in defining the number of total generated segments. Below an hr value of 0.004 over-segmentation occurs, whereas for hr values equal or larger than 0.004, the number of generated segments tends to become small and constant. With the aim of avoiding over-segmentation while maintaining a reasonable average size of the segments (to be able to also delineate small patches of the terrain where changes occurred), and considering a visual inspection of the segmentation results obtained with the different combinations, we decided to run <italic>i.segment</italic> in the automatic processing chain using the following set of parameters values: hs <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10; hr <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.004; th <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.008; minsize <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2; iterations <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 200 (see Sect. 2.3).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e1401">Data analysis aimed at evaluating the best combination of bandwidth (hr) and threshold (th) values. The black rectangle identifies the
selected combination.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/20/2379/2020/nhess-20-2379-2020-f03.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e1410">After the segmentation of the 17 LR layers, areas affected by layover and
shadowing effects were masked out in order to avoid errors in the
statistical analysis described below and in the localization of potential
landslides. The mask was developed in SNAP by means of the <italic>SAR Simulation Terrain Correction</italic> tool, exploiting the SRTM 1Sec DEM.</p>
      <p id="d1e1416">The segments with a minimum size of 5 pixels were extracted in the area of
interest (an example is shown in Fig. 4d), and statistics were calculated
according to the confidence intervals described in the methodology section.
We decided to select only the segments with a minimum size of 5 pixels,
corresponding to a minimum area of about 980 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (i.e., a single-pixel
area roughly equal to 196 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> pixels), after a general
evaluation of the preliminary landslide-related images published on news
websites and social networks and also considering that the detection of smaller
segments in the test area was not significant at the scale of our analysis. It is worth noting that the accuracy of such a minimum
area<?pagebreak page2386?> is not accurate due to the use of a geographic (and thus not projected)
reference system (WGS84).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e1445"><bold>(a)</bold> Optical image of a small sample area affected by
landslides within the AoI. <bold>(b)</bold> The corresponding LR layer.
<bold>(c)</bold> Output of the segmentation algorithm (obtained using the optimized hr and th values), where the different colors are random and have the sole purpose of differentiating the different segments. <bold>(d)</bold> The extracted landslide-related segments (in blue). Optical images have been downloaded from the Planet explorer application (Planet Team, 2017).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/20/2379/2020/nhess-20-2379-2020-f04.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e1467">Statistics of the segments identified for each change detection.
<bold>(a)</bold> Number of segments with more than 5 pixels. <bold>(b, c)</bold> Maximum and average number of pixels per segment. Peaks of the change detections 9 and 10 indicate the occurrence of widespread land cover changes. The dashed lines show the 95<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> percentiles of the distributions (not including change detections 9 and 10).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=298.753937pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/20/2379/2020/nhess-20-2379-2020-f05.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e1493">The location of the epicenters of the two main earthquakes and the distribution of segments representing SAR amplitude changes for the change detections 9 (red) and 10 (blue). Yellow polygons are
areas affected by clusters of landslides, as interpreted from optical data.
The white rectangle identifies the AoI (see Fig. 2).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/20/2379/2020/nhess-20-2379-2020-f06.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e1502">In Fig. 5, statistics of the selected segments are displayed for each
change detection. The analysis of the histograms revealed two main peaks
corresponding to change detections 9 and 10. Change detection 9
considers images acquired before and after the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> earthquake, whereas change detection 10 considers the images acquired on 28 February and 12 March 2018. The first peak highlights widespread changes related to landslides that were extensively documented after the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>   event (Petley, 2018a). The second peak was instead unexpected and was probably due to the occurrence of further landslides triggered by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.7</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> event on 6 March 2018. In Fig. 6, segments related to these two peaks are displayed (red pixels relate to change detection 9; blue pixels relate to change detection 10). To check whether these segments were effectively located in areas characterized by a high concentration of seismically induced landslides, we analyzed optical images available on the Planet explorer application (Planet Team, 2017). By means of a visual interpretation, we identified the zones (the yellow polygons shown in Fig. 6) where clusters of landslides occurred, verifying a general accordance with the spatial distribution of both red and blue segments.</p>
      <p id="d1e1538">Small widespread segments outside the areas affected by landslides, mostly
related to stream changes and noise, also resulted in the AoI. Similar
random segments occurred in the pre- and post-event change detections, as
also displayed by statistics in Fig. 5.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Statistical evidence of landslide-like segments</title>
      <p id="d1e1549">Evidence of the widespread land cover changes induced by the two
earthquakes, as well as the timing of their occurrence, also resulted from a
statistical analysis of the segment areas derived from each change
detection. The comparison of some representative statistics of segment's
areas related to different change detections are shown in Fig. 7. For each
comparison, four types of statistics are displayed: Quantile–Quantile (Q–Q)
plot, Empirical Cumulative Distribution Function (ECDF), Density plot and
Frequency plot.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e1554">Comparison of segment's area statistics related to different change detections.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/20/2379/2020/nhess-20-2379-2020-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1563">The first column in Fig. 7 compares areas of the segments resulted from
the change detections 11 and 7, which we assume to not be affected by
landslides triggered by the earthquake (i.e., NO-EVENT/NO-EVENT, where the
term EVENT refers to the earthquake shocks); the second column shows the
comparison between areas of the segments resulting from change detections 6
and 10, with the<?pagebreak page2387?> second including seismically triggered landslides (i.e.,
NO-EVENT/EVENT); the third column indicates the comparison between areas of
the segments from change detections 9 and 10, both with landslides
(i.e., EVENT/EVENT).</p>
      <p id="d1e1567">Clear differences can be noted between the area's distribution of segments
with and without landslides (change detection 6 – change detection 10)
displayed in the NO-EVENT/EVENT plots. This difference is particularly
highlighted in the Q–Q plot, where the gap between the blue line
representing the real distributions and the theoretical similarity condition
(red line) is evident.</p>
      <p id="d1e1570">Considering the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> values from the Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests carried out for
all the 136 distribution comparisons (the combination of 17 change
detections taken 2 at a time without repetition), a general
similarity arises (i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.05) among 81 of the 105 distributions that were not affected by landslides (NO-EVENT/NO-EVENT) (Fig. 8). On the other hand, among the 30 NO-EVENT/EVENT distributions, the majority (21/30) are different. The EVENT/EVENT distribution is instead the same (Fig. 8).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e1596">Histogram representing the differences between all the compared segment's area distributions, calculated according to the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value of the Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/20/2379/2020/nhess-20-2379-2020-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1612">We have attempted to analyze the distribution of the areas of the segments
derived from the change detections to verify if they followed the empirical
statistical distribution of the landslide size, as described by different
theoretical models (Stark and Hovius, 2001; Malamud et al., 2004; Rossi et
al., 2012; Schlögel et al., 2015).</p>
      <p id="d1e1615">By using the tool implemented by Rossi et al. (2012) for estimating the
probability distribution of landslide areas, we verified that medium and
large-scale areas of segments obtained with change detections 9 and 10
followed a landslide-like behavior. In fact, the two probability
distributions obtained with a Double Pareto Simplified model (Fig. 9)
resulted in inverse power law decay for medium and large areas,
highlighting a moderate agreement with empirical data. A rollover
(inflection) in correspondence in small areas (e.g., Malamud et al., 2004),
however, is not present. This could be due to a consistent detection of small
changes (i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) ascribable to landslides and
other random land cover modifications, as well as some noise. In addition,
it is worth remembering that segments with areas <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 980 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> were not considered.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e1656">Frequency–area distribution of segments resulting in the change detections 9 <bold>(a)</bold> and 10 <bold>(b)</bold> and fitting with a Double Pareto simplified model.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/20/2379/2020/nhess-20-2379-2020-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1671">As shown in Fig. 9, the two analyses did not pass the Kolmogorov–Smirnov
test (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0). This may be explained by the fact that the input
datasets (i.e., segments area) were not obtained with a proper landslide
mapping activity, as described in Guzzetti et al. (2012), but with a
procedure that is not aimed at landslide mapping operations, as clarified in
the Introduction, but at identifying land cover changes also related
to landslides. Despite this, results seem to be fairly consistent with curves
of proper landslide inventory data (Schlögel et al., 2015).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Discussion</title>
      <?pagebreak page2389?><p id="d1e1697">In this article, we describe a processing chain aimed at identifying SAR
amplitude changes that can be partially explained by the occurrence of mass
movements. We have selected SAR data since they have the advantage of not being
affected by the cloud cover disturbance. In fact, as described by Mondini et
al. (2019), the use of SAR amplitude data can mitigate the cloud coverage
issue and can allow for detecting landslides that otherwise might remain
unknown or unnoticed for a long time. In this way, the procedure can be
exploited for a “continuous” (in terms of time) slope monitoring activity,
even if failures occur during long-lasting periods of precipitation and
persistent cloud cover that do not allow us to use optical data for a rapid and
detailed landslide recognition. In the selected study area, widespread
cloud cover persisted for several weeks during and after the seismic
sequence. The first cloudless optical image of the area damaged by the
seismic shaking was published by the daily monitoring service delivered by
© 2019 Planet Labs Inc. (<uri>https://www.planet.com/</uri>, last access: 24 January 2020) on 25 March, almost 1
month after the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mainshock that triggered numerous landslides. The high cloud persistence is quite common in Papua New Guinea, and in fact this is one of the cloudiest regions of the world, with an annual cloud frequency (proportion of days with a positive cloud flag) higher than 80 % percent (Wilson and Jets, 2016; Mondini et al., 2019). As a consequence, the use of optical data in this area, and in other mountainous regions exposed to prolonged rainfall related to monsoons, cyclones, or other persistent meteorological systems, is tricky.</p>
      <?pagebreak page2391?><p id="d1e1714">The obtained results depend on the definition of the image preprocessing
and segmentation parameters that should be calibrated a priori (see Sect. 2.3 and 2.4). While the geometric and radiometric corrections to the images are quite
standard and well-accepted procedures, the SAR multiplicative noise
filtering remains a largely discussed point in the scientific literature, and
there is not a consensus on the selection of strategies. We chose the Frost
filter because it has already been proven to work properly in mountainous
environments (Schellenberger et al., 2012) and it was used successfully in
previous studies dealing with landslides (Mondini, 2017). We acknowledge
that different filters might have produced different results or requested a
different tuning of the segmentation procedure. The impact of different
filters on our procedure might be an interesting follow up to this work.
Another improvement may consist of the use of images acquired in both
ascending and descending geometries. The use of ascending images was only
related to focus this first step of the work on the implementation of the
entire processing chain, which we tried to simplify as much as possible. In
fact, there is no doubt that combining images acquired in ascending and
descending geometries can improve the quality of results, representing a
nontrivial advancement of the procedure that was out of the aim of this
first implementation. The a priori choice of using ascending products was
based on the findings that most of the slopes in the study area are exposed
towards the west, with the aim of limiting the inclusion of geometrical
distortions in the change detection products.</p>
      <p id="d1e1717">The tuning of the segmentation parameters is the key element for identifying
areas affected by significant land cover changes that are also induced by
rapid slope movements. This process is event dependent,
requiring a well-known landslide event that occurred in the past in the analyzed
area or in zones with similar topographic and land use characteristics. In
the case study described here, definite values of the segmentation
parameters were obtained by segmenting the pre-post <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> earthquake LR layer and by testing different value combinations (Fig. 3). This may represent a limit of the proposed procedure if it is applied to different geomorphic settings without past landslide events or for identifying different types of slope failures. On the other hand, if a proper event-based tuning operation is performed, a continuous monitoring of slopes can be efficiently carried out without temporal limitations, exploiting both available pre- and post-event images, as has been done for the current case history. The described application in fact highlighted that by keeping the same parameters values, landslides and other land cover changes triggered by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.7</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>  aftershock were also detected. Overlapping between the calculated
segments (i.e., change detections 9 and 10) to ground truth data revealed
that largest SAR amplitude changes often corresponded with landslides (Fig. 6). Further evidence was provided by the statistical distributions shown in Fig. 9, with results similar to those estimated by other landslide-related studies (Stark and Hovius, 2001; Malamud et al., 2004; Rossi et al., 2012; Schlögel et al., 2015). The segments located mostly outside the areas affected by landslides were caused instead by other land cover changes that were out of the aims of this study or by random noise effects. Segments related to these changes can be easily identified because they are composed of an average number of pixels close to 10, as detected in all the change detections, whereas segments related to landslides (i.e., change detections 9 and 10) are characterized by a higher number of pixels (Fig. 5c).</p>
      <p id="d1e1742">The occurrence and location of secondary failures (blue pixels in Fig. 6)
were not known before our analysis because they were not reported by news and local
government websites and were also missing in the maps of the Copernicus
Emergency Management Service
(<uri>https://emergency.copernicus.eu/mapping/list-of-components/EMSR270</uri>, last access: 24 January 2020) activated for the disaster response. The general lack of information related to these failures was likely due to a series of issues affecting both the field and the satellite surveys in the aftermath of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> earthquake. In fact, an effective assessment in the field was impeded by the road damage also caused by the mass movements triggered by the previous major <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>  event, whereas the use of optical satellite images was hampered by a widespread cloud cover that, as stated before, persisted during several weeks after the two main seismic shakings. The first information about the occurrence of these landslides was provided online by Petley (2018b) about 1 month later, without a clear indication of its relationship with the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.7</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>   earthquake. The detection of this second set of failures in areas poorly affected by previous slope movements triggered by the mainshock demonstrates the relevant usefulness of the proposed processing chain.</p>
      <p id="d1e1783">A suitable segmentation can hence allow us to get statistical evidence of
the occurrence of event landslides. Statistical distributions of the three
parameters shown in Fig. 5 provided distinctive signatures of widespread
land cover changes triggered by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>    mainshock and by the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.7</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> aftershock. It is worth noting, however, that the 95th percentile highlighted in the plots is also exceeded by other peaks (e.g., change detection 13 in the segment count) that cannot be considered as diagnostic of landslide occurrence since they are ephemeral and are not as steady in all three plots as those of the change detections 9 and 10. In the case of small-scale landslides occurring in localized portions of a wide area, the related statistical signals may be imperceptible if these are of the same magnitude as other previous and successive signals that are not related to landslides. In cases like this, distinctive evidence of slope failures can be achieved by starting the processing chain with a smaller subset of the LR layer (i.e., monitored area).</p>
      <p id="d1e1808">The outcomes of this study represent a concrete example of how to exploit
the relevant advantages of open-source software with a command line
interface (i.e., SNAP and GRASS GIS) to implement automatic processing
chains. Moreover, the proposed methodology can be properly adopted to
monitor areas on the order of thousands of square kilometers if powerful
hardware resources are available. In fact, the preprocessing and
segmentation steps require significant<?pagebreak page2392?> amounts of calculation power and
memory. It is well known that the Mean Shift is a time-consuming algorithm
for large datasets (Wu and Yang, 2007) and that convergence for large areas can
be reached in dozens of hours. Segmentation times are proportional to the
dimensions of the monitored area and to the selected spatial kernel size (hs).</p>
      <p id="d1e1811">A final remark concerns the occurrence of landslides in the study area.
Generally, landslides in the mountainous sectors of Papua New Guinea are
very common processes. Earthquakes with a magnitude greater than 5 are among
the dominant factors triggering widespread landslides. According to Robbins
and Petterson (2015), such earthquakes occur regularly in the country, but
records of the triggered landslides are surprisingly lacking. The lack of
systematic reporting and the remoteness of communities affected by such
events, also impeded an adequate characterization of landslide hazard and
risk (Blong, 1986). Robbins et al. (2013) stated that landslides occur
annually, and failures tend to range from few cubic meters of material to
mass movements with estimated volumes of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.8</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>,
varying from debris slides, avalanches and flows to translational and
rotational slides. In this framework, the landslide detection procedure
described in the article may result in a relevant tool for local authorities of
countries characterized by extensive remote areas repeatedly affected by
slope failures, and for the humanitarian organizations operating in response
to geohydrological disasters.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e1847">This study presents a procedure aimed at supporting the detection of landslides
inducing sharp land cover changes on vast mountainous areas. It is based on
SAR data acquired systematically by the Sentinel-1 satellites. The
computation of the LR index and segmentation of the consequent raster
layers allow for detecting areas affected by multi-temporal variations of the
radar backscattered signal. Among them, areas potentially related to
rapidly moving landslides can be identified with a robust statistical
analysis. The performance of the implemented procedure was tested in back
analysis in an area of about 3000 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in Papua New Guinea. Here, in
2018, two consecutive earthquakes (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.5</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.7</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) triggered widespread slope failures causing more than 100 fatalities and severe damage to roads and buildings. The simulation of a multi-temporal survey of about 7 months, before and after the earthquakes, revealed the ability of the implemented procedure to detect statistical evidence of significant land cover changes in correspondence with the two events. Moreover, results demonstrated that the zones characterized by significant backscattering changes resulted in a
reasonable agreement with those affected by landslides, as compared to the
ground truth data.</p>
      <p id="d1e1881">The study highlights advantages of free SAR products that may guide the
scientific community and the local authorities to develop archives of freely
accessible data suitable for implementing streamlines of information aimed
at monitoring natural and urbanized areas. As demonstrated in the case study,
the proposed procedure has the potential to be a valid support in landslide
emergency management, providing relevant information in near real time for
civil protection authorities and scientists involved in the emergency
response. Future improvements may limit the user decisions in the model
parameterization, optimizing the processing times and refining the filtering
of landslide-related changes by also considering geological and
geomorphological factors.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <?pagebreak page2393?><p id="d1e1888">Copernicus Sentinel-1 data have been downloaded from the Copernicus Open Access Hub (<uri>https://scihub.copernicus.eu</uri>, Copernicus, 2020).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e1897">GE and IM implemented the proposed procedure. ACM designed the preprocessing of SAR images. GE and IM designed the segmentation procedure. GE and IM carried out the experiments. GE wrote the first draft of the manuscript. MR and GE carried out the statistics for the landslide-like segments. IM, GE and PR analyzed the results. GE, SS, IM and PR improved the final version of the manuscript.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e1903">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="sistatement"><title>Special issue statement</title>

      <p id="d1e1909">This article is part of the special issue “Groundbreaking technologies, big data, and innovation for disaster risk modelling and reduction”. It is not associated with a conference.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e1915">The research was developed in the framework of the STRESS (Strategies, Tools
and new data for REsilient Smart Societies) project,
focusing on designing, implementing and testing of a Spatial Information
Infrastructure, enabling the provision
of new data and tools to spatial planners and risk managers in order to improve susceptibility, hazard and impact
assessments of geohydrological phenomena (<uri>http://www.idpa.cnr.it/progetti_STRESS_ufficiale.html</uri>, last access: 24 January 2020). We are grateful to Chaoying Zhao, Pierluigi Confuorto and the anonymous referee for the constructive reviews and useful suggestions.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e1923">This research has been supported by the Fondazione Cariplo (grant no. 2016-0766).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e1929">This paper was edited by Carmine Galasso and reviewed by Pierluigi Confuorto and one anonymous referee.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Alvioli, M., Mondini, A. C., Fiorucci, F., Cardinali, M., and Marchesini, I.: Topography-driven satellite imagery analysis for landslide mapping, Geomat. Nat. Haz. Risk, 9, 544–567, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2018.1458050" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/19475705.2018.1458050</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Blong, R. J.: Natural hazards in the Papua New Guinea highlands, Mt. Res. Dev., 6, 233–246, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2307/3673393" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2307/3673393</ext-link>, 1986.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bornaetxea, T., Rossi, M., Marchesini, I., and Alvioli, M.: Effective surveyed area and its role in statistical landslide susceptibility assessments, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2455–2469,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2455-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-18-2455-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Calò, F., Calcaterra, D., Iodice, A., Parise, M., and Ramondini, M.:
Assessing the activity of a large landslide in southern Italy by ground-monitoring and SAR interferometric techniques, Int. J. Remote Sens.,
33, 3512–3530, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2011.630331" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/01431161.2011.630331</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Calvello, M., Peduto, D., and Arena, L.: Combined use of statistical and DInSAR data analyses to define the state of activity of slow-moving landslides, Landslides, 14, 473–489, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-016-0722-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10346-016-0722-6</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Casagli, N., Frodella, W., Morelli, S., Tofani, V., Ciampalini, A., Intrieri, E., Raspini, F., Rossi, G., Tanteri, L., and Lu, P.: Spaceborne, UAV and ground-based remote sensing techniques for landslide mapping, monitoring and early warning, Geoenviron. Disast., 4, 1–23, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s40677-017-0073-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1186/s40677-017-0073-1</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Cigna, F., Bianchini, S., and Casagli, N.: How to assess landslide activity
and intensity with persistent scatterer interferometry (PSI): the PSI-based
matrix approach, Landslides, 10, 267–283, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-012-0335-7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10346-012-0335-7</ext-link>,
2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Colesanti, C. and Wasowski, J.: Investigating landslides with space-borne
Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) interferometry, Eng. Geol., 88, 173–199, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2006.09.013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.enggeo.2006.09.013</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Comaniciu, D. and Meer, P.: Mean shift: A robust approach toward feature
space analysis, IEEE T. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intel., 24, 603–619,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1109/34.1000236" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1109/34.1000236</ext-link>, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Copernicus: Open Access Hub, <uri>https://scihub.copernicus.eu</uri>, last access: 24 January 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dai, K., Li, Z., Tomás, R., Liu, G., Yu, B., Wang, X., Cheng, H., Chen,
J., and Stockamp, J.: Monitoring activity at the Daguangbao mega-landslide
(China) using Sentinel-1 TOPS time series interferometry, Remote Sens. Environ., 186, 501–513, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2016.09.009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.rse.2016.09.009</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>El-Darymli, K., McGuire, P., Gill, E., Power, D., and Moloney, C.: Understanding the significance of radiometric calibration for synthetic
aperture radar imagery, in: Can. Conf. Electr. Comput. Eng., May 2014,
Toronto, ON, Canada, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1109/CCECE.2014.6901104" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1109/CCECE.2014.6901104</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>ESA: Thermal Denoising of Products Generated by the S-1 IPF, available at:
<uri>https://sentinels.copernicus.eu/documents/247904/2142675/Thermal-Denoising-of-Products-Generated-by-Sentinel-1-IPF</uri>
(last access: 4 January 2020), 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>ESA: Level-1 SLC Products, available at:
<uri>https://sentinel.esa.int/web/sentinel/user-guides/sentinel-1-sar/product-types-processing-levels/level-1</uri>
(last access: 4 January 2020), 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Fiorucci, F., Cardinali, M., Carlà, R., Rossi, M., Mondini, A. C., Santurri, L., Ardizzone, F., and Guzzetti, F.: Seasonal landslides mapping
and estimation of landslide mobilization rates using aerial and satellite
images, Geomorphology, 129, 59–70, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.01.013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.01.013</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Frost, V. S., Stiles, J. A., Shanmugan, K. S., and Holtzman, J. C.: A Model
for Radar Images and Its Application to Adaptive Digital Filtering of
Multiplicative Noise, IEEE T. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intel., PAMI-4, 157–166, 1982.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Gabriel, A. K., Goldstein, R. M., and Zebker, H. A.: Mapping small elevation
changes over large areas<?pagebreak page2394?>: differential radar interferometry, J. Geophys. Res., 94, 9183–9191, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/JB094iB07p09183" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/JB094iB07p09183</ext-link>, 1989.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Guzzetti, F., Cardinali, M., Reichenbach, P., and Carrara, A.: Comparing
landslide maps: a case study in the upper Tiber River Basin, Central Italy,
Environ. Manage., 25, 247–363, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s002679910020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s002679910020</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Guzzetti, F., Mondini, A. C., Cardinali, M., Fiorucci, F., Santangelo, M., and Chang, K. T.: Landslide inventory maps: New tools for an old problem,
Earth-Sci. Rev., 112, 42–66, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2012.02.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.earscirev.2012.02.001</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>IFRC – International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies:
Emergency Plan of Action Operation Final Report – Papua New Guinea:
earthquake, available at:
<uri>https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/MDRPG008dfr_0.pdf</uri> (last access: 24 January 2020), 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Intrieri, E., Raspini, F., Fumagalli, A., Lu, P., Del Conte, S., Farina, P.,
Allievi, J., Ferretti, A., and Casagli, N.: The Maoxian landslide as seen
from space: detecting precursors of failure with Sentinel-1 data, Landslides, 15, 123–133, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-017-0915-7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10346-017-0915-7</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kersten, Valgur, M., Marcel, W., Jonas, Delucchi, L., unnic, Kinyanjui, L.
K., Schlump, martinber, Baier, G., Keller, G., and Castro, C.: sentinelsat/sentinelsat: v0.12.2 (Version v0.12.2), Zenodo,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1293758" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.1293758</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Konishi, T. and Suga, Y.: Landslide detection using COSMO-SkyMed images: A
case study of a landslide event on Kii Peninsula, Japan, Eur. J. Remote Sens., 51, 205–221, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/22797254.2017.1418185" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/22797254.2017.1418185</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, N., Wang, R., Deng, Y., Liu, Y., Li, B., Wang, C., and Balz, T.:
Unsupervised polarimetric synthetic aperture radar classification of
large-scale landslides caused by Wenchuan earthquake in hue-saturation-intensity color space, J. Appl. Remote Sens., 8,
083595, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JRS.8.083595" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1117/1.JRS.8.083595</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ma, H. R., Cheng, X., Chen, L., Zhang, H., and Xiong, H.: Automatic
identification of shallow landslides based on Worldview2 remote sensing images, J. Appl. Remote Sens., 10, 016008, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JRS.10.016008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1117/1.JRS.10.016008</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Malamud, B. D., Turcotte, D. L., Guzzetti, F., and Reichenbach, P.: Landslide
inventories and their statistical properties, Earth Surf. Proc. Land., 29, 687–711, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.1064" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/esp.1064</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Marchesini, I., Ardizzone, F., Alvioli, M., Rossi, M., and Guzzetti, F.:
Non-susceptible landslide areas in Italy and in the Mediterranean region,
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 14, 2215–2231, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-14-2215-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-14-2215-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Martha, T. R., Kerle, N., van Westen, C. J., Jetten, V., and Kumar, K. V.:
Segment optimization and data-driven thresholding for knowledge-based landslide detection by object-based image analysis, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 49, 4928–4943, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2011.2151866" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1109/TGRS.2011.2151866</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
McCue, K., Gibson, G., and Love, D.: The Mainshock of 25 February 2018 and
Aftershocks in the Central Highlands of Papua New Guinea, in: Australian
Earthquake Engineering Society 2018 Conference, 16–18 November 2018, Perth, WA, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mergili, M., Marchesini, I., Alvioli, M., Metz, M., Schneider-Muntau, B., Rossi, M., and Guzzetti, F.: A strategy for GIS-based 3-D slope stability
modelling over large areas, Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 2969–2982,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2969-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-7-2969-2014</ext-link>, 2014a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mergili, M., Marchesini, I., Rossi, M., Guzzetti, F., and Fellin, W.: Spatially distributed three-dimensional slope stability modelling in a
raster GIS, Geomorphology, 206, 178–195, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2013.10.008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.geomorph.2013.10.008</ext-link>, 2014b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Momsen, E. and Metz, M.: i.segment, available at:
<uri>https://grass.osgeo.org/grass74/manuals/i.segment.html</uri> (last access:
7 January 2020), 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mondini, A. C.: Measures of spatial autocorrelation changes in multitemporal
SAR images for event landslides detection, Remote Sens., 9, 554, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs9060554" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/rs9060554</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mondini, A. C., Chang, K. T., and Yin, H. Y.: Combining multiple change
detection indices for mapping landslides triggered by typhoons,
Geomorphology, 134, 440–451, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.07.021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.07.021</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mondini, A. C., Santangelo, M., Rocchetti, M., Rossetto, E., Manconi, A., and
Monserrat, O.: Sentinel-1 SAR amplitude imagery for rapid landslide detection, Remote Sens., 11, 1–25, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11070760" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/rs11070760</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Petley, D.: An emerging crisis? Valley blocking landslides in the Papua New
Guinea highlands, available at:
<uri>https://blogs.agu.org/landslideblog/2018/02/28/papua-new-guinea-crisis/</uri>
(last access: 24 January 2020), 2018a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Petley, D.: Papua New Guinea earthquake – continued landslide impacts,
available at:
<uri>https://blogs.agu.org/landslideblog/2018/03/14/papua-new-guinea-earthquake-3/</uri>
(last access: 24 January 2020), 2018b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Planet Team: Planet Application Program Interface: In Space for Life on
Earth, San Francisco, CA, available at: <uri>https://api.planet.com</uri> (last access: 24 January 2020), 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Plank, S.: Rapid damage assessment by means of multi-temporal SAR – A
comprehensive review and outlook to Sentinel-1, Remote Sens., 6, 4870–4906,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs6064870" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/rs6064870</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Plank, S., Twele, A., and Martinis, S.: Landslide mapping in vegetated areas
using change detection based on optical and polarimetric SAR data, Remote
Sens., 8, 307, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8040307" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/rs8040307</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Raspini, F., Bardi, F., Bianchini, S., Ciampalini, A., Del Ventisette, C.,
Farina, P., Ferrigno, F., Solari, L., and Casagli, N.: The contribution of
satellite SAR-derived displacement measurements in landslide risk management
practices, Nat. Hazards, 86, 327–351, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2691-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11069-016-2691-4</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Reichenbach, P., Rossi, M., Malamud, B. D., Mihir, M., and Guzzetti, F.: A
review of statistically-based landslide susceptibility models, Earth-Sci. Rev., 180, 60–91, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2018.03.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.earscirev.2018.03.001</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Robbins, J. C. and Petterson, M. G.: Landslide inventory development in a data sparse region: spatial and temporal characteristics of landslides in Papua New Guinea, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., 3, 4871–4917, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhessd-3-4871-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhessd-3-4871-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Robbins, J. C., Petterson, M. G., Mylne, K., and Espi, J. O.: Tumbi Landslide, Papua New Guinea: Rainfall induced?, Landslides, 10, 673–684,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-013-0422-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10346-013-0422-4</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rossi, M. and Reichenbach, P.: LAND-SE: a software for statistically based
landslide susceptibility zonation, version 1.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 9,
3533–3543, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3533-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-9-3533-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page2395?><ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Rossi, M., Ardizzone, F., Cardinali, M., Fiorucci, F., Marchesini, I., Mondini, A. C., Santangelo, M., Ghosh, S., Riguer, D. E. L., Lahousse, T.,
Chang, K. T., and Guzzetti, F.: A tool for the estimation of the distribution of landslide area in R, Geophys. Res. Abstr., 14, EGU2012-9438-1, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Salvi, S., Stramondo, S., Funning, G. J., Ferretti, A., Sarti, F, and Mouratidis, A.: The Sentinel-1 mission for the improvement of the scientific
understanding and the operational monitoring of the seismic cycle, Remote
Sens. Environ., 120, 164–174, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.09.029" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.rse.2011.09.029</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Santangelo, M., Marchesini, I., Bucci, F., Cardinali, M., Fiorucci, F., and
Guzzetti, F.: An approach to reduce mapping errors in the production of
landslide inventory maps, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 2111–2126,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-2111-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-15-2111-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Schellenberger, T., Ventura, B., Zebisch, M., and Notarnicola,
C.: Wet Snow Cover Mapping Algorithm Based on Multitemporal
COSMO-SkyMed X-Band SAR Images, IEEE J. Sel.
Top. Appl., 5, 1045–1053,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2012.2190720" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1109/JSTARS.2012.2190720</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Schlögel, R., Malet, J.-P., Reichenbach, P., Remaître, A., and Doubre, C.: Analysis of a landslide multi-date inventory in a complex mountain landscape: the Ubaye valley case study, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 2369–2389, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-2369-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-15-2369-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Shimada, M., Watanabe, M., Kawano, N., Ohki, M., Motooka, T., and Wada, Y.:
Detecting Mountainous Landslides by SAR Polarimetry: A Comparative Study
Using Pi-SAR-L2 and X-band SARs, Trans. Japan Soc. Aeronaut. Sp. Sci.
Aerosp. Technol. Japan, 12, Pn_9–Pn_15, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2322/tastj.12.pn_9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2322/tastj.12.pn_9</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Skriver, H.: Crop classification by multitemporal C- and L-band single- and
dual-polarization and fully polarimetric SAR, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 50, 2138–2149, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2011.2172994" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1109/TGRS.2011.2172994</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Stark, C. P. and Hovius, N.: The characterization of landslide size
distributions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 1091–1094, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000GL008527" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2000GL008527</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Steger, S., Brenning, A., Bell, R., Petschko, H., and Glade, T.: Exploring
discrepancies between quantitative validation results and the geomorphic
plausibility of statistical landslide susceptibility maps, Geomorphology,
262, 8–23, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2016.03.015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.geomorph.2016.03.015</ext-link>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tessari, G., Floris, M., and Pasquali, P.: Phase and amplitude analyses of SAR data for landslide detection and monitoring in non-urban areas located in the North-Eastern Italian pre-Alps, Environ. Earth Sci., 76, 1–11,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-017-6403-5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s12665-017-6403-5</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Twele, A., Cao, W., Plank, S., and Martinis, S.: Sentinel-1-based flood mapping: a fully automated processing chain, Int. J. Remote Sens., 37, 2990–3004, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2016.1192304" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1080/01431161.2016.1192304</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>USGS – United States Geological Survey: Event page of the M 7.5 Papua New
Guinea earthquake occurred on February 25, 2018, available at:
<uri>https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us2000d7q6/executive#executive</uri>
(last access: 7 January 2020), 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>van Westen, C. J., van Asch, T. W. J., and Soeters, R.: Landslide hazard and
risk zonation – why is it still so difficult?, B. Eng. Geol. Environ., 65,
167–184, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-005-0023-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10064-005-0023-0</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wilson, A. M. and Jetz, W.: Remotely Sensed High-Resolution Global Cloud
Dynamics for Predicting Ecosystem and Biodiversity Distributions, PLoS Biol., 14, e1002415, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002415" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1371/journal.pbio.1002415</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wu, K. L. and Yang, M. S.: Mean shift-based clustering, Pattern Recognit.,
40, 3035–3052, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2007.02.006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.patcog.2007.02.006</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Yamaguchi, Y.: Disaster Monitoring by Fully Polarimetric SAR Data Acquired
With ALOS-PALSAR, Proc. IEEE, 100, 2851–2860, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2012.2195469" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1109/JPROC.2012.2195469</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, C., Lu, Z., Zhang, Q., and De La Fuente, J.: Large-area landslide
detection and monitoring with ALOS/PALSAR imagery data over Northern California and Southern Oregon, USA, Remote Sens. Environ., 124, 348–359,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2012.05.025" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.rse.2012.05.025</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, C., Zhang, Q., Yin, Y., Lu, Z., Yang, C., Zhu, W., and Li, B.: Pre-, co-, and post- rockslide analysis with ALOS/PALSAR imagery: a case study of the Jiweishan rockslide, China, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 13, 2851–2861, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-13-2851-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/nhess-13-2851-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>A spaceborne SAR-based procedure  to support the detection of landslides</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>The increasing availability of free-access satellite data represents a relevant opportunity for the analysis and assessment of natural hazards. The systematic acquisition of spaceborne imagery allows for monitoring areas prone to geohydrological disasters, providing relevant information for risk evaluation and management. In cases of major landslide events, for example, spaceborne radar data can provide an effective solution for the
detection of slope failures, even in cases with persistent cloud cover. The
information about the extension and location of the landslide-affected areas may support decision-making processes during emergency responses.</p><p>In this paper, we present an automatic procedure based on Sentinel-1
Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) images, aimed at facilitating the detection of
landslides over wide areas. Specifically, the procedure evaluates changes of radar backscattered signals associated with land cover modifications that may be also caused by mass movements. After a one-time calibration of some
parameters, the processing chain is able to automatically execute the
download and preprocessing of images, the detection of SAR amplitude
changes, and the identification of areas potentially affected by landslides, which are then displayed in a georeferenced map. This map should help decision makers and emergency managers to organize field investigations. The process of automatization is implemented with specific scripts running on a GNU/Linux operating system and exploiting modules of open-source software.</p><p>We tested the processing chain, in back analysis, on an area of about 3000&thinsp;km<sup>2</sup> in central Papua New Guinea that was struck by a severe seismic sequence in February–March 2018. In the area, we simulated a periodic survey of about 7 months, from 12 November 2017 to 6 June 2018, downloading 36 Sentinel-1 images and performing 17 change detection analyses automatically. The procedure resulted in statistical and graphical evidence of widespread land cover changes that occurred just after the most severe seismic events. Most of the detected changes can be interpreted as mass movements triggered by the seismic shaking.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Alvioli, M., Mondini, A. C., Fiorucci, F., Cardinali, M., and Marchesini, I.: Topography-driven satellite imagery analysis for landslide mapping, Geomat. Nat. Haz. Risk, 9, 544–567, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2018.1458050" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2018.1458050</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Blong, R. J.: Natural hazards in the Papua New Guinea highlands, Mt. Res. Dev., 6, 233–246, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/3673393" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2307/3673393</a>, 1986.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Bornaetxea, T., Rossi, M., Marchesini, I., and Alvioli, M.: Effective surveyed area and its role in statistical landslide susceptibility assessments, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 2455–2469,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2455-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2455-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Calò, F., Calcaterra, D., Iodice, A., Parise, M., and Ramondini, M.:
Assessing the activity of a large landslide in southern Italy by ground-monitoring and SAR interferometric techniques, Int. J. Remote Sens.,
33, 3512–3530, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2011.630331" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2011.630331</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Calvello, M., Peduto, D., and Arena, L.: Combined use of statistical and DInSAR data analyses to define the state of activity of slow-moving landslides, Landslides, 14, 473–489, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-016-0722-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-016-0722-6</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Casagli, N., Frodella, W., Morelli, S., Tofani, V., Ciampalini, A., Intrieri, E., Raspini, F., Rossi, G., Tanteri, L., and Lu, P.: Spaceborne, UAV and ground-based remote sensing techniques for landslide mapping, monitoring and early warning, Geoenviron. Disast., 4, 1–23, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s40677-017-0073-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1186/s40677-017-0073-1</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Cigna, F., Bianchini, S., and Casagli, N.: How to assess landslide activity
and intensity with persistent scatterer interferometry (PSI): the PSI-based
matrix approach, Landslides, 10, 267–283, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-012-0335-7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-012-0335-7</a>,
2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Colesanti, C. and Wasowski, J.: Investigating landslides with space-borne
Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) interferometry, Eng. Geol., 88, 173–199, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2006.09.013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2006.09.013</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Comaniciu, D. and Meer, P.: Mean shift: A robust approach toward feature
space analysis, IEEE T. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intel., 24, 603–619,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1109/34.1000236" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1109/34.1000236</a>, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Copernicus: Open Access Hub, <a href="https://scihub.copernicus.eu" target="_blank"/>, last access: 24 January 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Dai, K., Li, Z., Tomás, R., Liu, G., Yu, B., Wang, X., Cheng, H., Chen,
J., and Stockamp, J.: Monitoring activity at the Daguangbao mega-landslide
(China) using Sentinel-1 TOPS time series interferometry, Remote Sens. Environ., 186, 501–513, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2016.09.009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2016.09.009</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
El-Darymli, K., McGuire, P., Gill, E., Power, D., and Moloney, C.: Understanding the significance of radiometric calibration for synthetic
aperture radar imagery, in: Can. Conf. Electr. Comput. Eng., May 2014,
Toronto, ON, Canada, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1109/CCECE.2014.6901104" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1109/CCECE.2014.6901104</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
ESA: Thermal Denoising of Products Generated by the S-1 IPF, available at:
<a href="https://sentinels.copernicus.eu/documents/247904/2142675/Thermal-Denoising-of-Products-Generated-by-Sentinel-1-IPF" target="_blank"/>
(last access: 4 January 2020), 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
ESA: Level-1 SLC Products, available at:
<a href="https://sentinel.esa.int/web/sentinel/user-guides/sentinel-1-sar/product-types-processing-levels/level-1" target="_blank"/>
(last access: 4 January 2020), 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Fiorucci, F., Cardinali, M., Carlà, R., Rossi, M., Mondini, A. C., Santurri, L., Ardizzone, F., and Guzzetti, F.: Seasonal landslides mapping
and estimation of landslide mobilization rates using aerial and satellite
images, Geomorphology, 129, 59–70, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.01.013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.01.013</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Frost, V. S., Stiles, J. A., Shanmugan, K. S., and Holtzman, J. C.: A Model
for Radar Images and Its Application to Adaptive Digital Filtering of
Multiplicative Noise, IEEE T. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intel., PAMI-4, 157–166, 1982.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Gabriel, A. K., Goldstein, R. M., and Zebker, H. A.: Mapping small elevation
changes over large areas: differential radar interferometry, J. Geophys. Res., 94, 9183–9191, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/JB094iB07p09183" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/JB094iB07p09183</a>, 1989.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Guzzetti, F., Cardinali, M., Reichenbach, P., and Carrara, A.: Comparing
landslide maps: a case study in the upper Tiber River Basin, Central Italy,
Environ. Manage., 25, 247–363, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s002679910020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s002679910020</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Guzzetti, F., Mondini, A. C., Cardinali, M., Fiorucci, F., Santangelo, M., and Chang, K. T.: Landslide inventory maps: New tools for an old problem,
Earth-Sci. Rev., 112, 42–66, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2012.02.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2012.02.001</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
IFRC – International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies:
Emergency Plan of Action Operation Final Report – Papua New Guinea:
earthquake, available at:
<a href="https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/MDRPG008dfr_0.pdf" target="_blank"/> (last access: 24 January 2020), 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Intrieri, E., Raspini, F., Fumagalli, A., Lu, P., Del Conte, S., Farina, P.,
Allievi, J., Ferretti, A., and Casagli, N.: The Maoxian landslide as seen
from space: detecting precursors of failure with Sentinel-1 data, Landslides, 15, 123–133, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-017-0915-7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-017-0915-7</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Kersten, Valgur, M., Marcel, W., Jonas, Delucchi, L., unnic, Kinyanjui, L.
K., Schlump, martinber, Baier, G., Keller, G., and Castro, C.: sentinelsat/sentinelsat: v0.12.2 (Version v0.12.2), Zenodo,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1293758" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1293758</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Konishi, T. and Suga, Y.: Landslide detection using COSMO-SkyMed images: A
case study of a landslide event on Kii Peninsula, Japan, Eur. J. Remote Sens., 51, 205–221, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/22797254.2017.1418185" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/22797254.2017.1418185</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Li, N., Wang, R., Deng, Y., Liu, Y., Li, B., Wang, C., and Balz, T.:
Unsupervised polarimetric synthetic aperture radar classification of
large-scale landslides caused by Wenchuan earthquake in hue-saturation-intensity color space, J. Appl. Remote Sens., 8,
083595, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JRS.8.083595" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JRS.8.083595</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Ma, H. R., Cheng, X., Chen, L., Zhang, H., and Xiong, H.: Automatic
identification of shallow landslides based on Worldview2 remote sensing images, J. Appl. Remote Sens., 10, 016008, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JRS.10.016008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JRS.10.016008</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Malamud, B. D., Turcotte, D. L., Guzzetti, F., and Reichenbach, P.: Landslide
inventories and their statistical properties, Earth Surf. Proc. Land., 29, 687–711, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.1064" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.1064</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Marchesini, I., Ardizzone, F., Alvioli, M., Rossi, M., and Guzzetti, F.:
Non-susceptible landslide areas in Italy and in the Mediterranean region,
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 14, 2215–2231, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-14-2215-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-14-2215-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Martha, T. R., Kerle, N., van Westen, C. J., Jetten, V., and Kumar, K. V.:
Segment optimization and data-driven thresholding for knowledge-based landslide detection by object-based image analysis, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 49, 4928–4943, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2011.2151866" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2011.2151866</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
McCue, K., Gibson, G., and Love, D.: The Mainshock of 25 February 2018 and
Aftershocks in the Central Highlands of Papua New Guinea, in: Australian
Earthquake Engineering Society 2018 Conference, 16–18 November 2018, Perth, WA, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Mergili, M., Marchesini, I., Alvioli, M., Metz, M., Schneider-Muntau, B., Rossi, M., and Guzzetti, F.: A strategy for GIS-based 3-D slope stability
modelling over large areas, Geosci. Model Dev., 7, 2969–2982,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2969-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-7-2969-2014</a>, 2014a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Mergili, M., Marchesini, I., Rossi, M., Guzzetti, F., and Fellin, W.: Spatially distributed three-dimensional slope stability modelling in a
raster GIS, Geomorphology, 206, 178–195, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2013.10.008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2013.10.008</a>, 2014b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Momsen, E. and Metz, M.: i.segment, available at:
<a href="https://grass.osgeo.org/grass74/manuals/i.segment.html" target="_blank"/> (last access:
7 January 2020), 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Mondini, A. C.: Measures of spatial autocorrelation changes in multitemporal
SAR images for event landslides detection, Remote Sens., 9, 554, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs9060554" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/rs9060554</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Mondini, A. C., Chang, K. T., and Yin, H. Y.: Combining multiple change
detection indices for mapping landslides triggered by typhoons,
Geomorphology, 134, 440–451, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.07.021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.07.021</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Mondini, A. C., Santangelo, M., Rocchetti, M., Rossetto, E., Manconi, A., and
Monserrat, O.: Sentinel-1 SAR amplitude imagery for rapid landslide detection, Remote Sens., 11, 1–25, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11070760" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11070760</a>, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Petley, D.: An emerging crisis? Valley blocking landslides in the Papua New
Guinea highlands, available at:
<a href="https://blogs.agu.org/landslideblog/2018/02/28/papua-new-guinea-crisis/" target="_blank"/>
(last access: 24 January 2020), 2018a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Petley, D.: Papua New Guinea earthquake – continued landslide impacts,
available at:
<a href="https://blogs.agu.org/landslideblog/2018/03/14/papua-new-guinea-earthquake-3/" target="_blank"/>
(last access: 24 January 2020), 2018b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Planet Team: Planet Application Program Interface: In Space for Life on
Earth, San Francisco, CA, available at: <a href="https://api.planet.com" target="_blank"/> (last access: 24 January 2020), 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Plank, S.: Rapid damage assessment by means of multi-temporal SAR – A
comprehensive review and outlook to Sentinel-1, Remote Sens., 6, 4870–4906,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs6064870" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/rs6064870</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Plank, S., Twele, A., and Martinis, S.: Landslide mapping in vegetated areas
using change detection based on optical and polarimetric SAR data, Remote
Sens., 8, 307, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8040307" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8040307</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Raspini, F., Bardi, F., Bianchini, S., Ciampalini, A., Del Ventisette, C.,
Farina, P., Ferrigno, F., Solari, L., and Casagli, N.: The contribution of
satellite SAR-derived displacement measurements in landslide risk management
practices, Nat. Hazards, 86, 327–351, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2691-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2691-4</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Reichenbach, P., Rossi, M., Malamud, B. D., Mihir, M., and Guzzetti, F.: A
review of statistically-based landslide susceptibility models, Earth-Sci. Rev., 180, 60–91, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2018.03.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2018.03.001</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Robbins, J. C. and Petterson, M. G.: Landslide inventory development in a data sparse region: spatial and temporal characteristics of landslides in Papua New Guinea, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., 3, 4871–4917, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhessd-3-4871-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhessd-3-4871-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Robbins, J. C., Petterson, M. G., Mylne, K., and Espi, J. O.: Tumbi Landslide, Papua New Guinea: Rainfall induced?, Landslides, 10, 673–684,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-013-0422-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-013-0422-4</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Rossi, M. and Reichenbach, P.: LAND-SE: a software for statistically based
landslide susceptibility zonation, version 1.0, Geosci. Model Dev., 9,
3533–3543, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3533-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-3533-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Rossi, M., Ardizzone, F., Cardinali, M., Fiorucci, F., Marchesini, I., Mondini, A. C., Santangelo, M., Ghosh, S., Riguer, D. E. L., Lahousse, T.,
Chang, K. T., and Guzzetti, F.: A tool for the estimation of the distribution of landslide area in R, Geophys. Res. Abstr., 14, EGU2012-9438-1, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Salvi, S., Stramondo, S., Funning, G. J., Ferretti, A., Sarti, F, and Mouratidis, A.: The Sentinel-1 mission for the improvement of the scientific
understanding and the operational monitoring of the seismic cycle, Remote
Sens. Environ., 120, 164–174, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.09.029" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.09.029</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Santangelo, M., Marchesini, I., Bucci, F., Cardinali, M., Fiorucci, F., and
Guzzetti, F.: An approach to reduce mapping errors in the production of
landslide inventory maps, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 2111–2126,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-2111-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-2111-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Schellenberger, T., Ventura, B., Zebisch, M., and Notarnicola,
C.: Wet Snow Cover Mapping Algorithm Based on Multitemporal
COSMO-SkyMed X-Band SAR Images, IEEE J. Sel.
Top. Appl., 5, 1045–1053,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2012.2190720" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2012.2190720</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Schlögel, R., Malet, J.-P., Reichenbach, P., Remaître, A., and Doubre, C.: Analysis of a landslide multi-date inventory in a complex mountain landscape: the Ubaye valley case study, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 2369–2389, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-2369-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-2369-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Shimada, M., Watanabe, M., Kawano, N., Ohki, M., Motooka, T., and Wada, Y.:
Detecting Mountainous Landslides by SAR Polarimetry: A Comparative Study
Using Pi-SAR-L2 and X-band SARs, Trans. Japan Soc. Aeronaut. Sp. Sci.
Aerosp. Technol. Japan, 12, Pn_9–Pn_15, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2322/tastj.12.pn_9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2322/tastj.12.pn_9</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Skriver, H.: Crop classification by multitemporal C- and L-band single- and
dual-polarization and fully polarimetric SAR, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 50, 2138–2149, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2011.2172994" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2011.2172994</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Stark, C. P. and Hovius, N.: The characterization of landslide size
distributions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 1091–1094, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000GL008527" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2000GL008527</a>, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Steger, S., Brenning, A., Bell, R., Petschko, H., and Glade, T.: Exploring
discrepancies between quantitative validation results and the geomorphic
plausibility of statistical landslide susceptibility maps, Geomorphology,
262, 8–23, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2016.03.015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2016.03.015</a>, 2016.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Tessari, G., Floris, M., and Pasquali, P.: Phase and amplitude analyses of SAR data for landslide detection and monitoring in non-urban areas located in the North-Eastern Italian pre-Alps, Environ. Earth Sci., 76, 1–11,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-017-6403-5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-017-6403-5</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Twele, A., Cao, W., Plank, S., and Martinis, S.: Sentinel-1-based flood mapping: a fully automated processing chain, Int. J. Remote Sens., 37, 2990–3004, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2016.1192304" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2016.1192304</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
USGS – United States Geological Survey: Event page of the M 7.5 Papua New
Guinea earthquake occurred on February 25, 2018, available at:
<a href="https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us2000d7q6/executive#executive" target="_blank"/>
(last access: 7 January 2020), 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
van Westen, C. J., van Asch, T. W. J., and Soeters, R.: Landslide hazard and
risk zonation – why is it still so difficult?, B. Eng. Geol. Environ., 65,
167–184, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-005-0023-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-005-0023-0</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Wilson, A. M. and Jetz, W.: Remotely Sensed High-Resolution Global Cloud
Dynamics for Predicting Ecosystem and Biodiversity Distributions, PLoS Biol., 14, e1002415, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002415" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002415</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Wu, K. L. and Yang, M. S.: Mean shift-based clustering, Pattern Recognit.,
40, 3035–3052, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2007.02.006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2007.02.006</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Yamaguchi, Y.: Disaster Monitoring by Fully Polarimetric SAR Data Acquired
With ALOS-PALSAR, Proc. IEEE, 100, 2851–2860, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2012.2195469" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2012.2195469</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, C., Lu, Z., Zhang, Q., and De La Fuente, J.: Large-area landslide
detection and monitoring with ALOS/PALSAR imagery data over Northern California and Southern Oregon, USA, Remote Sens. Environ., 124, 348–359,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2012.05.025" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2012.05.025</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Zhao, C., Zhang, Q., Yin, Y., Lu, Z., Yang, C., Zhu, W., and Li, B.: Pre-, co-, and post- rockslide analysis with ALOS/PALSAR imagery: a case study of the Jiweishan rockslide, China, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 13, 2851–2861, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-13-2851-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-13-2851-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
