ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluation of landslide susceptibility of mountain highway based on RF and SVM models.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Principled XAI analysis of the deep learning-based landslide susceptibility prediction model.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Assessing future landslide susceptibility and risk escalations under changing LULC and climate conditions in the Western Ghats of Karnataka in India.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Texture-based image analysis and explainable machine learning for polished asphalt identification in pavement condition monitoring.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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Geological complexities along mountain highways frequently trigger landslides, posing significant threats to transportation safety and infrastructure. This study evaluates landslide susceptibility along the Lizha-Jiezi section of China's G345 national highway using Random Forest (RF) and Support Vector Machine (SVM) models. Eleven conditioning factors including altitude, slope, aspect, plan curvature, profile curvature, lithology, distance to fault, rainfall, distance to river, normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), and distance to road were analyzed using remote sensing and field surveys. A landslide inventory of 67 events was divided into training (70%) and validation (30%) datasets, with non-landslide samples selected at least 100 m away from landslide locations to minimize spatial overlap. Factor contribution analysis identified distance to road as the most significant predictor, highlighting anthropogenic impacts on slope destabilization. Model validation via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves demonstrated RF's superior performance (AUC = 0.887) over SVM (AUC = 0.735). The RF-derived susceptibility map classified five risk levels, revealing high-risk zones concentrated within 200 m of roads, consistent with field observations. Results emphasize the necessity of integrating anthropogenic factors into landslide risk management for mountainous infrastructure. This study provides actionable insights for mitigation strategies and land-use planning, offering a scalable framework adaptable to similar regions.
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.