ArticleScientific reports2025
Interpretable flash flood susceptibility mapping in Yarlung Tsangpo River Basin using H2O Auto-ML.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Distribution-informed machine learning for flash flood susceptibility: integrating weibull extreme value theory with interpretable models.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Machine learning model optimization for flood susceptibility zonation over the Kosi megafan, Himalayan foreland basin, India.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Flash flood susceptibility mapping is essential for identifying areas prone to flooding events and aiding decision-makers in formulating effective prevention measures. This study aims to evaluate the flash flood susceptibility in the Yarlung Tsangpo River Basin (YTRB) using multiple machine learning (ML) models facilitated by the H2O automated ML platform. The best-performing model was used to generate a flash flood susceptibility map, and its interpretability was analyzed using the Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) tree interpretation method. The results revealed that the top four models, including both single and ensemble models, demonstrated high accuracy in the tests. The flash flood susceptibility map generated by the best-performing eXtreme Randomized Trees (XRT) model showed that 8.92%, 12.95%, 15.42%, 31.34%, and 31.37% of the study area exhibited very high, high, moderate, low, and very low flash flood susceptibility, respectively, with approximately 74.9% of the historical flash floods occurring in areas classified as moderate to very high susceptibility. The SHAP plot identified topographic factors as the primary drivers of flash floods, with the importance analysis ranking the most influential factors in such descending order as DEM, topographic wetness index, topographic position index, normalized difference vegetation index, and average multi-year precipitation. This study demonstrates the benefits of interpretable machine learning, which can provide guidance for flash flood mitigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.