the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Predicting Deep-Seated Landslide Displacements in Mountains through the Integration of Convolutional Neural Networks and Age of Exploration-Inspired Optimizer
Abstract. Deep-seated landslides, becoming increasingly frequent due to changing climate patterns, pose significant risks to human life and infrastructure. This research contributes to developing predictive early warning systems for deep-seated slope displacements, employing advanced computational models for environmental risk management. Our novel framework integrates machine learning, time series deep learning, and convolutional neural networks (CNN), enhanced by the Age of Exploration-Inspired Optimizer (AEIO) algorithm. Our approach demonstrates exceptional forecasting capabilities by utilizing eight years of comprehensive data—including displacement, groundwater levels, and meteorological information from the Lushan Mountain region in Taiwan. The AEIO-MobileNet model stands out for its precision in predicting imminent slope displacements with a mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) of 2.81 %. These advancements significantly enhance geohazard informatics by providing reliable and efficient landslide risk assessment and management tools. These safeguard road networks, construction projects, and infrastructure within vulnerable slope areas.
- Preprint
(2334 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on nhess-2024-86', Anonymous Referee #1, 09 Jul 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://nhess.copernicus.org/preprints/nhess-2024-86/nhess-2024-86-RC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Jui-Sheng Chou, 21 Aug 2024
The authors appreciate reviewer 1's valuable feedback. The summary of the changes based on the reviewer's recommendations & comments is listed below. All the revisions are TRACKED in the re-submitted WORD file along with marked RED COLOR for the ease of the reviewer's perusal. Our colleague, a native English speaker of BLUE COLOR, has corrected grammatical and writing style errors in the original version. Please see the attached file for the authors' responses and corrections.
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Jui-Sheng Chou, 21 Aug 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on nhess-2024-86', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Aug 2024
The manuscript can be an interesting contribution for the methodology of use and interpretation of data for the prediction of deep landslide movements. However, it requires a substantial review in the text, in the figures and in the production of additional figures to show the final results. The list presented below are the specific comments:
1) Sections 3.1 and 3.2 should be in the text in more synthetic form, placing much of the content in an appendix
2) In section 3.4.2 the equation of the MAPE, MAE and RSME objective function is not presented
3) Section 3.5 - Chou and Nguyen in 2024 article not present in the bibliography or not mentioned in the correct form
4) Section 3.5 - EQ. 10 and 11 - The meaning of the Maxit and Mind parameters are not indicated
5) Section 3.6.0-In Figure 9, references are indicated to the 18-19-20-21 and 22 equations. But these equations do not exist and the text
6) section 3.6.0 in Figure 9 and in the text the optimization stop criterion should be indicated.
7) Section 3.6.2. Figures 12 13 and 14 should be presented together in the same group with the same temporal axis. And an additional figure should be added to the group, with the temporal sequence of the rains
8) in Section 4, the comparative result of the deformations observations (shown in figure 14) with the comparative predictions of the best model should be graphically presented.
9) section 4.2 is too long and should be simplified and synthesizedCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2024-86-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Jui-Sheng Chou, 21 Aug 2024
The authors appreciate reviewer 2's valuable feedback. The summary of the changes based on the reviewer's recommendations & comments is listed below. All the revisions are TRACKED in the re-submitted WORD file along with marked RED COLOR for the ease of the reviewer's perusal. Our colleague, a native English speaker of BLUE COLOR, has corrected grammatical and writing style errors in the original version. Please find the attached file for the authors' responses and corrections.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Jui-Sheng Chou, 21 Aug 2024
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on nhess-2024-86', Anonymous Referee #1, 09 Jul 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://nhess.copernicus.org/preprints/nhess-2024-86/nhess-2024-86-RC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Jui-Sheng Chou, 21 Aug 2024
The authors appreciate reviewer 1's valuable feedback. The summary of the changes based on the reviewer's recommendations & comments is listed below. All the revisions are TRACKED in the re-submitted WORD file along with marked RED COLOR for the ease of the reviewer's perusal. Our colleague, a native English speaker of BLUE COLOR, has corrected grammatical and writing style errors in the original version. Please see the attached file for the authors' responses and corrections.
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Jui-Sheng Chou, 21 Aug 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on nhess-2024-86', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Aug 2024
The manuscript can be an interesting contribution for the methodology of use and interpretation of data for the prediction of deep landslide movements. However, it requires a substantial review in the text, in the figures and in the production of additional figures to show the final results. The list presented below are the specific comments:
1) Sections 3.1 and 3.2 should be in the text in more synthetic form, placing much of the content in an appendix
2) In section 3.4.2 the equation of the MAPE, MAE and RSME objective function is not presented
3) Section 3.5 - Chou and Nguyen in 2024 article not present in the bibliography or not mentioned in the correct form
4) Section 3.5 - EQ. 10 and 11 - The meaning of the Maxit and Mind parameters are not indicated
5) Section 3.6.0-In Figure 9, references are indicated to the 18-19-20-21 and 22 equations. But these equations do not exist and the text
6) section 3.6.0 in Figure 9 and in the text the optimization stop criterion should be indicated.
7) Section 3.6.2. Figures 12 13 and 14 should be presented together in the same group with the same temporal axis. And an additional figure should be added to the group, with the temporal sequence of the rains
8) in Section 4, the comparative result of the deformations observations (shown in figure 14) with the comparative predictions of the best model should be graphically presented.
9) section 4.2 is too long and should be simplified and synthesizedCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2024-86-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Jui-Sheng Chou, 21 Aug 2024
The authors appreciate reviewer 2's valuable feedback. The summary of the changes based on the reviewer's recommendations & comments is listed below. All the revisions are TRACKED in the re-submitted WORD file along with marked RED COLOR for the ease of the reviewer's perusal. Our colleague, a native English speaker of BLUE COLOR, has corrected grammatical and writing style errors in the original version. Please find the attached file for the authors' responses and corrections.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Jui-Sheng Chou, 21 Aug 2024
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
432 | 82 | 90 | 604 | 18 | 15 |
- HTML: 432
- PDF: 82
- XML: 90
- Total: 604
- BibTeX: 18
- EndNote: 15
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1