2015 International Conference on Science in Information Technology (ICSITech) 2015
DOI: 10.1109/icsitech.2015.7407828
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparison between natural and Head/tail breaks in LSI (Landslide Susceptibility Index) classification for landslide susceptibility mapping: A case study in Ponorogo, East Java, Indonesia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
3

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
4
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, the raw risk values were classified into five grades using the natural breaks method (Basofi et al., 2015). Figure 9 and Figures S6 and S7 in Supporting Information S1 display the proportions of grids with drought risk at five levels for each region in the subperiods under the four scenarios.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, the raw risk values were classified into five grades using the natural breaks method (Basofi et al., 2015). Figure 9 and Figures S6 and S7 in Supporting Information S1 display the proportions of grids with drought risk at five levels for each region in the subperiods under the four scenarios.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A similar case is the distribution of susceptibility values, to which it seems to adapt satisfactorily. However, in a study of susceptibility comparing NB with HT, Basofi et al (2015) found that the low susceptibility values includes too many data with the HT classification, and is less significant than NB. The present study therefore attempts to provide a better adaptation of the HT method for the five classes described above.…”
Section: Head/tail Breaks (Ht)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sumber pengetahuan tentang faktor-faktor penyebab longsor dapat bersifat subjektif atau dapat dilihat dari pendekatan objektif [12]. Penggunaan metode AHP untuk menilai kerentanan longsor berdasarkan beberapa faktor juga di kembangkan untuk penilaian area longsor di Ponorogo [13], Bantul [14], dan Pangandaran [15]. AHP telah berhasil menghasilkan nilai rangking dari setiap area berdasarkan faktor-faktor penyebab longsor.…”
Section: Gambar 1 Tren Kejadian Bencana DI Kabupaten Pacitan 2010-2020unclassified
“…Namun untuk memberikan informasi tingkat kerentanan, beberapa penelitian menggunakan klasifikasi pembobotan [9][12][14] [15] yang mempunyai kelemahan dalam menentukan batasbatas yang tepat. Metode klasifikasi natural break merupakan pendekatan untuk membagi nilai rangking hasil perhitungan AHP berdasarkan nilai varian, hal ini juga digunakan untuk mengelompokkan tingkat kerentanan longsor dengan lebih baik [13].…”
Section: Gambar 1 Tren Kejadian Bencana DI Kabupaten Pacitan 2010-2020unclassified
See 1 more Smart Citation