Wenping Li

Wenping Li


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

20Years (2007-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
2 October 2015 in Journal of Earth System Science
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Qiqing WangQiqing Wang
Qiqing Wang
WLWenping Li
Wenping Li
WCWei Chen
Wei Chen
HBHanying Bai
Hanying Bai

21 December 2015 in Environmental Earth Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
WCWei Chen
Wei Chen
WLWenping Li
Wenping Li
HCHuichan Chai
Huichan Chai
EHEnke Hou
Enke Hou
XLXiaoqin Li
Xiaoqin Li
XDXiao Ding
Xiao Ding

27 March 2014 in Arabian Journal of Geosciences
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Wei ChenWei Chen
Wei Chen
WLWenping Li
Wenping Li
EHEnke Hou
Enke Hou
ZZZhou Zhao
Zhou Zhao
NDNiandong Deng
Niandong Deng
DWDanzhi Wang
Danzhi Wang

1 January 2019 in Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
QWQiqing Wang
Qiqing Wang
YGYinghai Guo
Yinghai Guo
WLWenping Li
Wenping Li
JHJianghui He
Jianghui He
ZWZhiyong Wu
Zhiyong Wu
Landslide susceptibility mapping is essential in delineating landslide prone areas in mountainous regions. The primary purpose of this study is to evaluate landslide susceptibility mapping using three methods, information value (IV), weights-of-evidence (WofE), and certainty factor (CF) in southeastern Gansu province, China. Firstly, the landslide in the study area was located mainly using aerial-photo interpretation and field surveys. A total of 529 landslides were randomly divided using a ratio of 70/30 for training and validation of these methods. Eight landslide conditioning factors including slope angle, altitude, NDVI, distance to faults, distance to roads, distance to rivers, rainfall, and lithology, were considered. Landslide susceptibility maps were produced for each of the three methods. Susceptibility maps were verified and compared using the area under the curve (AUC) method. The success rate curve demonstrated that the AUC for the IV, WofE, and CF methods was 88.02, 87.56, and 89.04%, respectively, and the prediction rate curve showed that the AUC was 86.24, 86.34, and 87.44%, respectively. Furthermore, results showed that CF method had the highest accuracy in comparison with other methods. Generally, the three methods showed reasonable accuracy in landslide susceptibility mapping. Results of this study can serve as guidelines to managers and policy makers regarding the prevention and mitigation of landslide hazards.

25 January 2016 in Arabian Journal of Geosciences
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
YWYanli Wu
Yanli Wu
WLWenping Li
Wenping Li
Qiqing WangQiqing Wang
Qiqing Wang
QLQiangqiang Liu
Qiangqiang Liu
DYDongdong Yang
Dongdong Yang
SYShishun Yan
Shishun Yan

1 February 2018 in Journal of Cleaner Production
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ZYZhi Yang
Zhi Yang
WLWenping Li
Wenping Li
YPYabing Pei
Yabing Pei
WQWei Qiao
Wei Qiao
YWYanli Wu
Yanli Wu