2021
DOI: 10.1007/s11069-021-04606-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Landslide susceptibility mapping through continuous fuzzification and geometric average multi-criteria decision-making approaches

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Or weights may be calculated on the basis of cases study (In [30], statistical procedure consisted in calculating a landslide frequency per class area expressed in percentage, i.e., number of landslide pixels.km −2 × 100). Logistic function may be used to weight factors is a suitable example of weights calculations based on landslides distribution data [31].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Or weights may be calculated on the basis of cases study (In [30], statistical procedure consisted in calculating a landslide frequency per class area expressed in percentage, i.e., number of landslide pixels.km −2 × 100). Logistic function may be used to weight factors is a suitable example of weights calculations based on landslides distribution data [31].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, the progressive failure law of rock slope under variable rainfall intensity is analysed based on the data of water content and pore water pressure. Ghiasi et al (2021) proposed a method of continuous fuzzification and geometric average multi‐criteria decision‐making approaches and applied it to identify the landslide areas of Oshvand watershed dataset in Hamadan province, Iran, which is more reliable than the existing methods of classified values of landslide conditioning factors. By analysing the landslide disaster of dumps for coal mining enterprises, the negative influence and hazard factors of landslide are explained directly (Jiang et al, 2022; Wang et al, 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Qualitative methods are based on the relevant aspects of geohazard investigation and determine the main impact factors of geohazard and delineate the areas susceptible to geohazards [ 9 ]. These qualitative methods include the Delphi method [ 10 ], analytic hierarchy process [ 11 ], weighted average method [ 12 ], and weighted linear combination [ 13 ]. Although the qualitative method is simple and easy to implement and takes into account the regional geological background and relevant historical information, it mainly relies upon expert experience, which can be highly subjective and have shortcomings [ 14 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%