提出融合模型提升洪水滑坡多灾种风险预测精度与空间适应性。
FL-MHSM: Spatially-adaptive Fusion and Ensemble Learning for Flood-Landslide Multi-Hazard Susceptibility Mapping at Regional Scale

- 采用分层分区与软门控专家混合模型,实现区域级灾害风险联合建模。
- 在印度喀拉拉邦和尼泊尔,模型对洪水和滑坡的预测AUC最高达0.914,召回率超0.90。
- 可识别不同区域主导致灾因子,支持因地制宜的风险评估决策。
现有灾种风险制图研究多依赖空间均匀模型,独立处理灾害类型,难以刻画灾种间关联与不确定性。本文提出一种深度学习流程FL-MHSM,结合两级空间划分、概率早期融合(EF)、树基晚期融合(LF)及软门控专家混合模型(MoE),以MoE为最终预测模型。该方法通过区域划分保持空间异质性,利用重叠网格实现数据并行的大范围预测。在印度喀拉拉邦,EF相较LF提升洪水召回率至0.840,降低布里尔评分至0.086;MoE对洪水预测表现最优,达到AUC-ROC 0.905,召回率0.930,F1-score 0.722。在尼泊尔,EF将洪水召回率提升至0.858,布里尔评分降至0.049;MoE在滑坡预测中超越EF与LF,AUC-ROC达0.914,召回率0.901,F1-score 0.559。GeoDetector分析显示,喀拉拉邦各区域主导因子差异大,受地形、土地覆盖与排水因素组合影响;而尼泊尔则以地形与冰川相关因子为主导。结果表明,EF与LF具有互补性,其空间自适应集成通过MoE获得鲁棒性能,同时支持对复杂地貌下多灾种风险的可解释分析。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Existing multi-hazard susceptibility mapping (MHSM) studies often rely on spatially uniform models, treat hazards independently, and provide limited representation of cross-hazard dependence and uncertainty. To address these limitations, this study proposes a deep learning (DL) workflow for joint flood-landslide multi-hazard susceptibility mapping (FL-MHSM) that combines two-level spatial partitioning, probabilistic Early Fusion (EF), a tree-based Late Fusion (LF) baseline, and a soft-gating Mixture of Experts (MoE) model, with MoE serving as final predictive model. The proposed design preserves spatial heterogeneity through zonal partitions and enables data-parallel large-area prediction using overlapping lattice grids. In Kerala, EF remained competitive with LF, improving flood recall from 0.816 to 0.840 and reducing Brier score from 0.092 to 0.086, while MoE provided strongest performance for flood susceptibility, achieving an AUC-ROC of 0.905, recall of 0.930, and F1-score of 0.722. In Nepal, EF similarly improved flood recall from 0.820 to 0.858 and reduced Brier score from 0.057 to 0.049 relative to LF, while MoE outperformed both EF and LF for landslide susceptibility, achieving an AUC-ROC of 0.914, recall of 0.901, and F1-score of 0.559. GeoDetector analysis of MoE outputs further showed that dominant factors varied more across zones in Kerala, where susceptibility was shaped by different combinations of topographic, land-cover, and drainage-related controls, while Nepal showed a more consistent influence of topographic and glacier-related factors across zones. These findings show that EF and LF provide complementary predictive behavior, and that their spatially adaptive integration through MoE yields robust overall predictive performance for FL-MHSM while supporting interpretable characterization of multi-hazard susceptibility in spatially heterogeneous landscapes.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。