Zhilu Chang

Dr. Zhilu Chang

Department of Geosciences, University of Padua, 35122 Padua, Italy
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

7Years (2020-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
4 February 2020 in Remote Sensing
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ZCZhilu Chang
Zhilu Chang
ZDZhen Du
Zhen Du
FZFan Zhang
Fan Zhang
Faming HuangFaming Huang
Faming Huang
JCJiawu Chen
Jiawu Chen
Zizheng GuoZizheng Guo
Zizheng Guo
Landslide susceptibility prediction (LSP) has been widely and effectively implemented by machine learning (ML) models based on remote sensing (RS) images and Geographic Information System (GIS). However, comparisons of the applications of ML models for LSP from the perspectives of supervised machine learning (SML) and unsupervised machine learning (USML) have not been explored. Hence, this study aims to compare the LSP performance of these SML and USML models, thus further to explore the advantages and disadvantages of these ML models and to realize a more accurate and reliable LSP result. Two representative SML models (support vector machine (SVM) and CHi-squared Automatic Interaction Detection (CHAID)) and two representative USML models (K-means and Kohonen models) are respectively used to scientifically predict the landslide susceptibility indexes, and then these prediction results are discussed. Ningdu County with 446 recorded landslides obtained through field investigations is introduced as case study. A total of 12 conditioning factors are obtained through procession of Landsat TM 8 images and high-resolution aerial images, topographical and hydrological spatial analysis of Digital Elevation Modeling in GIS software, and government reports. The area value under the curve of receiver operating features (AUC) is applied for evaluating the prediction accuracy of SML models, and the frequency ratio (FR) accuracy is then introduced to compare the remarkable prediction performance differences between SML and USML models. Overall, the receiver operation curve (ROC) results show that the AUC of the SVM is 0.892 and is slightly greater than the AUC of the CHAID model (0.872). The FR accuracy results show that the SVM model has the highest accuracy for LSP (77.80%), followed by the CHAID model (74.50%), the Kohonen model (72.8%) and the K-means model (69.7%), which indicates that the SML models can reach considerably better prediction capability than the USML models. It can be concluded that selecting recorded landslides as prior knowledge to train and test the LSP models is the key reason for the higher prediction accuracy of the SML models, while the lack of a priori knowledge and target guidance is an important reason for the low LSP accuracy of the USML models. Nevertheless, the USML models can also be used to implement LSP due to their advantages of efficient modeling processes, dimensionality reduction and strong scalability.

3 September 2021 in Landslides
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
FHFaming Huang
Faming Huang
STSiyu Tao
Siyu Tao
ZCZhilu Chang
Zhilu Chang
JHJinsong Huang
Jinsong Huang
XFXuanmei Fan
Xuanmei Fan
WLWenbin Li
Wenbin Li

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Faming HuangFaming Huang
Faming Huang
JCJiawu Chen
Jiawu Chen
ZDZhen Du
Zhen Du
CYChi Yao
Chi Yao
Jinsong HuangJinsong Huang
Jinsong Huang
SLShu Li
Shu Li
Soil erosion (SE) provides slide mass sources for landslide formation, and reflects long-term rainfall erosion destruction of landslides. Therefore, it is possible to obtain more reliable landslide susceptibility prediction results by introducing SE as a geology and hydrology-related predisposing factor. The Ningdu County of China is taken as a research area. Firstly, 446 landslides are obtained through government disaster survey reports. Secondly, the SE amount in Ningdu County is calculated and nine other conventional predisposing factors are obtained under both 30 m and 60 m grid resolutions to determine the effects of SE on landslide susceptibility prediction. Thirdly, four types of machine-learning predictors with 30 m and 60 m grid resolutions—C5.0 decision tree (C5.0 DT), logistic regression (LR), multilayer perceptron (MLP) and support vector machine (SVM)—are applied to construct the landslide susceptibility prediction models considering the SE factor as SE-C5.0 DT, SE-LR, SE-MLP and SE-SVM models; C5.0 DT, LR, MLP and SVM models with no SE are also used for comparisons. Finally, the area under receiver operating feature curve is used to verify the prediction accuracy of these models, and the relative importance of all the 10 predisposing factors is ranked. The results indicate that: (1) SE factor plays the most important role in landslide susceptibility prediction among all 10 predisposing factors under both 30 m and 60 m resolutions; (2) the SE-based models have more accurate landslide susceptibility prediction than the single models with no SE factor; (3) all the models with 30 m resolutions have higher landslide susceptibility prediction accuracy than those with 60 m resolutions; and (4) the C5.0 DT and SVM models show higher landslide susceptibility prediction performance than the MLP and LR models.

6 May 2025 in Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
FHFaming Huang
Faming Huang
YYYang Yang
Yang Yang
BJBingchen Jiang
Bingchen Jiang
ZCZhilu Chang
Zhilu Chang
CZChuangbing Zhou
Chuangbing Zhou
CYChangshi Yu
Changshi Yu