Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41390695›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Comparative assessment of landslide susceptibility in Fugu town using machine learning models at multiple grid resolutions.

Shuhang Ni, Yang Xie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Shuhang NiXi'an University of Science and Technology College of Geology and Environment, Xi'an, 710048, China. 920422462@qq.com.
Yang XieXi'an University of Science and Technology College of Geology and Environment, Xi'an, 710048, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Landslides pose serious threats to life and infrastructure in the loess hilly regions of northern China, where the complex interaction between topography, lithology, and human activities makes susceptibility prediction challenging. Although numerous studies have explored the effects of spatial resolution and machine learning models on landslide susceptibility assessment, their conclusions remain inconsistent, and few have quantitatively examined the interaction between these two factors. To address this gap, this study conducted a multi-scale comparative analysis of landslide susceptibility in Fugu Town, Shaanxi Province (area: 328.73 km2) using Random Forest (RF) and XGBoost (XGB) models under 15 m, 30 m, and 60 m grid resolutions. The objectives were to determine the optimal model-resolution combination and to evaluate the influence of spatial scale on model performance. Results indicate that grid resolution significantly affects prediction accuracy and spatial patterns of susceptibility zones. The XGBoost model at 15 m resolution achieved the best performance (AUC = 0.980), with high- and very-high-susceptibility zones mainly distributed in the canyon-hill terrains of the northern and central-western regions. These findings provide methodological insights for selecting appropriate model-resolution combinations and practical references for landslide risk management in the loess areas of northern Shaanxi.

Indexed as

Landslide susceptibilityMulti-scale grid resolutionRandom forest modelXGBoost model

Identifiers

PMID41390695
PMCPMC12789451

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.