An AI-Based Method for Estimating the Potential Runout Distance of Post-Seismic Debris Flows
Chenchen Qiu, Lijun Su, Congchao Bian, Bo Zhao, Xueyu Geng
An AI-Based Method for Estimating the Potential Runout Distance of Post-Seismic Debris Flows
The widely distributed sediments following an earthquake presents a continuous threat to local residential areas and infrastructure. These materials become more easily mobilized due to reduced rainfall thresholds. Before establishing an effective management plan for debris flow hazards, it is crucial to determine the potential reach of these sediments. In this study, a deep learning-based method—Dual Attention Network (DAN)—was developed to predict the runout distance of potential debris flows after the 2022 Luding Earthquake, taking into account the topography and precipitation conditions. Given that the availability of reliable precipitation data remains a challenge, attributable to the scarcity of rain gauge stations and the relatively coarse resolution of satellite-based observations, our approach involved three key steps. First, we employed the DAN model to refine the Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) data, enhancing its spatial and temporal resolution. This refinement was achieved by leveraging the correlation between precipitation and regional environment factors (REVs) at a seasonal scale. Second, the downscaled GPM underwent calibration using observations from rain gauge stations. Third, mean absolute error (MAE), mean square error (MSE), and root mean square error (RMSE) were employed to evaluate the performance of both the downscaling and calibration processes. Then the calibrated precipitation, catchment area, channel length, average channel gradient, and sediment volume were selected to develop a prediction model based on debris flows following the Wenchuan Earthquake. This model was applied to estimate the runout distance of potential debris flows after the Luding Earthquake. The results show that: (1) The calibrated GPM achieves an average MAE of 1.56 mm, surpassing the MAEs of original GPM (4.25 mm) and downscaled GPM (3.83 mm); (2) The developed prediction model reduces the prediction error by 40 m in comparison to an empirical equation; (3) The potential runout distance of debris flows after the Luding Earthquake reaches 0.77 km when intraday rainfall is 100 mm, while the minimum distance value is only 0.06 km. Overall, the developed model offers a scientific support for decision makers in taking reasonable measurements for loss reduction caused by post-seismic debris flows.
Deep learning / GPM downscaling / Post-seismic debris flows / Runout distance prediction / 2022 Luding earthquake
[] |
Bergen, K.J., P.A. Johnson, M.V. de Hoop, and G.C. Beroza. 2019. Machine learning for data-driven discovery in solid Earth geoscience. Science 363(6433): Article eaau0323.
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
Chen, W., and Y. Li. 2020. GIS-based evaluation of landslide susceptibility using hybrid computational intelligence models. Catena 195: Article 104777.
|
[] |
Chen, F.R., Y.Q. Gao, Y.G. Wang, and X. Li. 2020. A downscaling-merging method for high-resolution daily precipitation estimation. Journal of Hydrology 581: Article 124414.
|
[] |
Crozier, M.J., and R.J. Eyles. 1980. Assessing the probability of rapid mass movement. In Proceedings of the 3rd Australia-New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics, ed. Technical groups, 2–47. Wellington, NZ: Institution of Professional Engineers New Zealand
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
Hodson, T.O., T.M. Over, and S.S. Foks. 2021. Mean squared error, deconstructed. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems 13(12): Article e2021MS002681.
|
[] |
Horton, A.J., T.C. Hales, C.J. Ouyang, and X.M. Fan. 2019. Identifying post-earthquake debris flow hazard using mass flow. Engineering Geology 258: Article 105134.
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
Lee, M. 2023. Mathematical analysis and performance evaluation of the GELU activation function in deep learning. Journal of Mathematics 2023: Article 4229924.
|
[] |
|
[] |
Ma, Z.J., and G. Mei. 2021. Deep learning for geological hazards analysis: Data, models, applications, and opportunities. Earth-Science Reviews 223: Article 103858.
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
Qiu, C.C., L.J. Su, Q. Zou, and X.Y. Geng. 2022. A hybrid machine-learning model to map glacier-related debris flow susceptibility along Gyirong Zangbo watershed under the changing climate. Science of the Total Environment 818: Article 151752.
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
Tanyaş, H., D. Kirschbaum, T. Görüm, C.J. van Westen, C.X. Tang, and L. Lombardo. 2021. A closer look at factors governing landslide recovery time in post-seismic periods. Geomorphology 391: Article 107912.
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
Wang, H., F. Zang, C.Y. Zhao, and C.L. Liu. 2022. A GWR downscaling method to reconstruct high-resolution precipitation dataset based on GSMaP-Gauge data: A case study in the Qilian Mountains, Northwest China. Science of the Total Environment 810: Article 152066.
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
|
[] |
Zhou, W., J.Y. Fang, C. Tang, and G.Y. Yang. 2019. Empirical relationships for the estimation of debris flow runout distances on depositional fans in the Wenchuan Earthquake zone. Journal of Hydrology 577: Article 123932.
|
/
〈 | 〉 |