Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4550
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-4550
06 Aug 2026
 | 06 Aug 2026
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS).

A Statistical-Physical Prior-Guided Framework for Multi-Class Landslide Susceptibility Mapping

Haixia Feng, Qingwu Hu, Yizhou Lan, Daoyuan Zheng, Yuxiang Xu, Jiayuan Li, Shunli Wang, and Pengcheng Zhao

Abstract. Regional landslide susceptibility mapping generally treats landslide/non-landslide discrimination as a binary learning task and subsequently divides predicted probabilities into several qualitative classes. This two-stage strategy does not directly represent the susceptibility gradient and may therefore reduce the spatial concentration of historical landslides within the very high susceptibility zone. This study proposes a statistical-physical prior-guided framework for direct five-class landslide susceptibility mapping along the Ancient Qin-Shu Roads in the Qinling-Daba Mountains. A landslide inventory containing 1,407 records and 14 conditioning factors was compiled. First, certainty factor (CF) analysis was used to generate a initial susceptibility map. The Shallow Landsliding Stability model (SHALSTAB) was then introduced to provide a physically meaningful stability mask with which the zonation was corrected and samples of very high, high, moderate, low, and very low susceptibility were constructed. Logistic regression (LR), support vector machine (SVM), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), random forest (RF), Feature Tokenizer Transformer (FT-Transformer), and Tabular Prior-Data Fitted Network (TabPFN) were compared under binary and multi-class settings. The results show that RF performed well in both tasks, attaining an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 91.08 % for binary classification and 92.53 % for multi-class classification. In the binary result, the landslide-prone zone occupied 19.3 % of the study area and contained 87.3 % of the historical landslides, yielding a Hit Optimization Index (HOI) of 1.68. In the corresponding multi-class result, the very high susceptibility zone occupied only 13.5 % of the study area while containing 91.8 % of the historical landslides, with an HOI of 1.78. These findings indicate that multi-class learning provides greater historical-landslide coverage and spatial concentration. Compared with labels derived from CF alone, the SHALSTAB-constrained scheme increased accuracy from 65.05 % to 68.60 %, AUC from 91.30 % to 92.53 %, and HOI from 1.72 to 1.78, demonstrating that physical constraints can improve susceptibility zonation. Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) showed that elevation, land use and land cover (LULC), and distance to roads were the three principal controls on identification of very high susceptibility zones.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
Share
Haixia Feng, Qingwu Hu, Yizhou Lan, Daoyuan Zheng, Yuxiang Xu, Jiayuan Li, Shunli Wang, and Pengcheng Zhao

Status: open (until 17 Sep 2026)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Haixia Feng, Qingwu Hu, Yizhou Lan, Daoyuan Zheng, Yuxiang Xu, Jiayuan Li, Shunli Wang, and Pengcheng Zhao
Haixia Feng, Qingwu Hu, Yizhou Lan, Daoyuan Zheng, Yuxiang Xu, Jiayuan Li, Shunli Wang, and Pengcheng Zhao
Metrics will be available soon.
Latest update: 06 Aug 2026
Download
Short summary
To help protect communities and historic routes, we mapped where landslides are most likely along the Ancient Qin-Shu Roads. We combined 1,407 recorded landslides with data on terrain, land cover, roads, rainfall, and ground stability, then compared six methods. The best method captured 91.8 percent of past landslides in just 13.5 percent of the area. Mapping five levels directly created clearer priority zones than a two-group approach, supporting more focused monitoring and prevention.
Share