Back to Search
Start Over
Comparisons of Diverse Machine Learning Approaches for Wildfire Susceptibility Mapping.
- Source :
- Symmetry (20738994); Apr2020, Vol. 12 Issue 4, p604, 1p
- Publication Year :
- 2020
-
Abstract
- Climate change has increased the probability of the occurrence of catastrophes like wildfires, floods, and storms across the globe in recent years. Weather conditions continue to grow more extreme, and wildfires are occurring quite frequently and are spreading with greater intensity. Wildfires ravage forest areas, as recently seen in the Amazon, the United States, and more recently in Australia. The availability of remotely sensed data has vastly improved, and enables us to precisely locate wildfires for monitoring purposes. Wildfire inventory data was created by integrating the polygons collected through field surveys using global positioning systems (GPS) and the data collected from the moderate resolution imaging spectrometer (MODIS) thermal anomalies product between 2012 and 2017 for the study area. The inventory data, along with sixteen conditioning factors selected for the study area, was used to appraise the potential of various machine learning (ML) methods for wildfire susceptibility mapping in Amol County. The ML methods chosen for this study are artificial neural network (ANN), dmine regression (DR), DM neural, least angle regression (LARS), multi-layer perceptron (MLP), random forest (RF), radial basis function (RBF), self-organizing maps (SOM), support vector machine (SVM), and decision tree (DT), along with the statistical approach of logistic regression (LR), which is very apt for wildfire susceptibility studies. The wildfire inventory data was categorized as three-fold, with 66% being used for training the models and 33% being used for accuracy assessment within three-fold cross-validation (CV). Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) was used to assess the accuracy of the ML approaches. RF had the highest accuracy of 88%, followed by SVM with an accuracy of almost 79%, and LR had the lowest accuracy of 65%. This shows that RF is better suited for wildfire susceptibility assessments in our case study area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 20738994
- Volume :
- 12
- Issue :
- 4
- Database :
- Complementary Index
- Journal :
- Symmetry (20738994)
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 143334773
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12040604