Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42557262›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Distinguishing compound and cumulative hazards using machine learning and fuzzy logic in multi-hazard susceptibility mapping.

Jamshid Einali, Khalil Gholamnia, Golzar Einali, Hossein Tahmasebi Moghaddam, Bahareh Akbari Monfared, Mahdi Cheraghi, Omid Ghorbanzadeh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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

7 authors.

Jamshid EinaliDepartment of Geography, Faculty of Human Sciences, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran. einalia@znu.ac.ir.
Khalil GholamniaDepartment of Applied Geoinformatics and Cartography, Charles University, Albertov 6, Prague 2, 128 43, Czech Republic. gholamnk@natur.cuni.cz.
Golzar EinaliDepartment of Remote Sensing and Geographic Information System, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran.
Hossein Tahmasebi MoghaddamDepartment of Geography, Faculty of Human Sciences, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran.
Bahareh Akbari MonfaredFaculty of Geography, University of Tehran, Tehran, 1417935840, Iran.
Mahdi CheraghiDepartment of Geography, Faculty of Human Sciences, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran.
Omid GhorbanzadehDepartment of Geoinformatics-Z_GIS, University of Salzburg, 5020, Salzburg, Austria. omid.ghorbanzadeh@plus.ac.at.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study presents an integrated multi-hazard susceptibility assessment for a mountainous region in northern Iran, focusing on four major hazards: flood, avalanche, rockfall, and landslide. Three machine learning models Artificial Neural Network (ANN), Random Forest (RF), and Support Vector Machine (SVM) were applied to model single-hazard susceptibility using 21 topographic, climatic, geological, land-cover, and proximity-related variables at 30 m spatial resolution. Model performance was evaluated using ROC-AUC, accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score based on field-validated hazard inventories. The results demonstrate that RF achieved the highest predictive performance for flood (90.96%) and rockfall (91.63%), while SVM showed competitive performance for avalanche (85.70%) and landslide (86.20%) susceptibility, reflecting differences in dominant hazard processes and model sensitivity to nonlinear and threshold-based relationships. To extend beyond single-hazard assessment, a Fuzzy Logic-based integration framework was implemented using AND, OR, and GAMMA operators to explicitly represent alternative hazard interaction mechanisms. The AND operator identified spatially constrained but high-confidence compound hazard hotspots, whereas the GAMMA operator captured broader zones of cumulative susceptibility driven by shared environmental controls. Comparative analysis indicates that fuzzy integration improves overall multi-hazard prediction, with the AND operator achieving the highest predictive reliability (ROC-AUC = 92.20%, F1-score = 93.83%), while GAMMA provides a more generalized but spatially comprehensive susceptibility pattern. The proposed framework highlights the importance of combining model selection with integration logic and provides a robust basis for regional-scale hazard assessment and spatial planning in complex mountainous environments.

Indexed as

Fuzzy logicMachine learningMountain environmentsMulti-hazard susceptibilitySpatial modeling

Identifiers

PMID42557262
PMCPMC13443201

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.