Articles | Volume 21, issue 10
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-2993-2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-2993-2021
Research article
 | 
07 Oct 2021
Research article |  | 07 Oct 2021

Integrating empirical models and satellite radar can improve landslide detection for emergency response

Katy Burrows, David Milledge, Richard J. Walters, and Dino Bellugi

Related authors

Detection of landslide timing, reactivation and precursory motion during the 2018, Lombok, Indonesia earthquake sequence with Sentinel-1
Katy Burrows, David G. Milledge, and Maria Francesca Ferrario
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3264,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3264, 2024
Short summary
Using Sentinel-1 radar amplitude time series to constrain the timings of individual landslides: a step towards understanding the controls on monsoon-triggered landsliding
Katy Burrows, Odin Marc, and Dominique Remy
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 2637–2653, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2637-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2637-2022, 2022
Short summary
A systematic exploration of satellite radar coherence methods for rapid landslide detection
Katy Burrows, Richard J. Walters, David Milledge, and Alexander L. Densmore
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 3197–3214, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-3197-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-3197-2020, 2020
Short summary

Related subject area

Landslides and Debris Flows Hazards
An integrated method for assessing vulnerability of buildings caused by debris flows in mountainous areas
Chenchen Qiu and Xueyu Geng
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 709–726, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-709-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-709-2025, 2025
Short summary
Identifying unrecognised risks to life from debris flows
Mark Bloomberg, Tim Davies, Elena Moltchanova, Tom Robinson, and David Palmer
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 647–656, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-647-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-647-2025, 2025
Short summary
Predicting the thickness of shallow landslides in Switzerland using machine learning
Christoph Schaller, Luuk Dorren, Massimiliano Schwarz, Christine Moos, Arie C. Seijmonsbergen, and E. Emiel van Loon
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 467–491, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-467-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-467-2025, 2025
Short summary
Unraveling landslide failure mechanisms with seismic signal analysis for enhanced pre-survey understanding
Jui-Ming Chang, Che-Ming Yang, Wei-An Chao, Chin-Shang Ku, Ming-Wan Huang, Tung-Chou Hsieh, and Chi-Yao Hung
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 451–466, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-451-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-451-2025, 2025
Short summary
Comparison of conditioning factor classification criteria in large-scale statistically based landslide susceptibility models
Marko Sinčić, Sanja Bernat Gazibara, Mauro Rossi, and Snježana Mihalić Arbanas
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 183–206, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-183-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-183-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Aimaiti, Y., Liu, W., Yamazaki, F., and Maruyama, Y.: Earthquake-Induced Landslide Mapping for the 2018 Hokkaido Eastern Iburi Earthquake Using PALSAR-2 Data, Remote Sens., 11, 2351, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11202351, 2019. a, b, c, d, e, f
Allstadt, K. E., Jibson, R. W., Thompson, E. M., Massey, C. I., Wald, D. J., Godt, J. W., and Rengers, F. K.: Improving Near-Real-Time Coseismic Landslide Models: Lessons Learned from the 2016 Kaikōura, New Zealand, Earthquake Improving Near-Real-Time Coseismic Landslide Models, B. Seismol. Soc. Am., 108, 1649–1664, 2018. a
Au, T. C.: Random forests, decision trees, and categorical predictors: the “Absent levels” problem, J. Mach. Learn. Res., 19, 1737–1766, 2018. a, b
Breiman, L.: Random forests, Mach. Learn., 45, 5–32, 2001. a, b, c
Burrows, K., Walters, R. J., Milledge, D., Spaans, K., and Densmore, A. L.: A New Method for Large-Scale Landslide Classification from Satellite Radar, Remote Sens., 11, 237, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11030237, 2019. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h
Download
Short summary
When cloud cover obscures optical satellite imagery, there are two options remaining for generating information on earthquake-triggered landslide locations: (1) models which predict landslide locations based on, e.g., slope and ground shaking data and (2) satellite radar data, which penetrates cloud cover and is sensitive to landslides. Here we show that the two approaches can be combined to give a more consistent and more accurate model of landslide locations after an earthquake.
Share
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint