Research article

Landslide Susceptibility Mapping Using GIS-based Vector Grid File (VGF) Validating with InSAR Techniques: Three Gorges, Yangtze River (China)

  • A landslide susceptibility assessment for the Three Gorges (TG) region (China) was performed in a Geographical Information System (GIS) environment and Persistent Scatterer (PS) InSAR derived displacements were used for validation purposes. Badong County of TG was chosen as case study field. Landslide parameters were derived from two datasets. The Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) Global Digital Elevation Map (GDEM) was used to calculate slope geometry parameters (slope, aspect, drainage, and lineament), while geology and vegetation cover were obtained from Landsat and ASTER data. The majority of historical landslides occurred in the sandstone-shale-claystone intercalations. It appears that slope gradients are more critical than other parameters such as aspect and drainage. The susceptibility assessment was based on a summation of assigned susceptibility scores (points) for each 30×30 m unit in a database of a Vector Grid File (VGF) composed of ‘vector pixels’. A landslide susceptibility map (LSM) was generated using VGF and classified with low, moderate and high landslide susceptibility zones. The comparison between the LSM and PS InSAR derived displacements suggests that landslides only account for parts of the observed surface movements.

    Citation: Cem Kıncal, Zhenhong Li, Jane Drummond, Peng Liu, Trevor Hoey, Jan-Peter Muller. Landslide Susceptibility Mapping Using GIS-based Vector Grid File (VGF) Validating with InSAR Techniques: Three Gorges, Yangtze River (China)[J]. AIMS Geosciences, 2017, 3(1): 116-141. doi: 10.3934/geosci.2017.1.116

    Related Papers:

    [1] Shufen Zhao, Xiaoqian Li, Jianzhong Zhang . S-asymptotically ω-periodic solutions in distribution for a class of stochastic fractional functional differential equations. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(2): 599-614. doi: 10.3934/era.2023029
    [2] Seda IGRET ARAZ, Mehmet Akif CETIN, Abdon ATANGANA . Existence, uniqueness and numerical solution of stochastic fractional differential equations with integer and non-integer orders. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(2): 733-761. doi: 10.3934/era.2024035
    [3] Changling Xu, Huilai Li . Two-grid methods of finite element approximation for parabolic integro-differential optimal control problems. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(8): 4818-4842. doi: 10.3934/era.2023247
    [4] Jingyun Lv, Xiaoyan Lu . Convergence of finite element solution of stochastic Burgers equation. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(3): 1663-1691. doi: 10.3934/era.2024076
    [5] Meng Gao, Xiaohui Ai . A stochastic Gilpin-Ayala nonautonomous competition model driven by mean-reverting OU process with finite Markov chain and Lévy jumps. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(3): 1873-1900. doi: 10.3934/era.2024086
    [6] Martin Bohner, Alexander Domoshnitsky, Oleg Kupervasser, Alex Sitkin . Floquet theory for first-order delay equations and an application to height stabilization of a drone's flight. Electronic Research Archive, 2025, 33(5): 2840-2861. doi: 10.3934/era.2025125
    [7] Jing Yang, Shaojuan Ma, Dongmei Wei . Dynamical analysis of SIR model with Gamma distribution delay driven by Lévy noise and switching. Electronic Research Archive, 2025, 33(5): 3158-3176. doi: 10.3934/era.2025138
    [8] Kai Gao . Global boundedness of classical solutions to a Keller-Segel-Navier-Stokes system involving saturated sensitivity and indirect signal production in two dimensions. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(3): 1710-1736. doi: 10.3934/era.2023089
    [9] Dongxing Fu, Xiaowei Xu, Zhibing Zhao . Generalized tilting modules and Frobenius extensions. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(9): 3337-3350. doi: 10.3934/era.2022169
    [10] Zihan Zheng, Juan Wang, Liming Cai . Global boundedness in a Keller-Segel system with nonlinear indirect signal consumption mechanism. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(8): 4796-4808. doi: 10.3934/era.2024219
  • A landslide susceptibility assessment for the Three Gorges (TG) region (China) was performed in a Geographical Information System (GIS) environment and Persistent Scatterer (PS) InSAR derived displacements were used for validation purposes. Badong County of TG was chosen as case study field. Landslide parameters were derived from two datasets. The Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) Global Digital Elevation Map (GDEM) was used to calculate slope geometry parameters (slope, aspect, drainage, and lineament), while geology and vegetation cover were obtained from Landsat and ASTER data. The majority of historical landslides occurred in the sandstone-shale-claystone intercalations. It appears that slope gradients are more critical than other parameters such as aspect and drainage. The susceptibility assessment was based on a summation of assigned susceptibility scores (points) for each 30×30 m unit in a database of a Vector Grid File (VGF) composed of ‘vector pixels’. A landslide susceptibility map (LSM) was generated using VGF and classified with low, moderate and high landslide susceptibility zones. The comparison between the LSM and PS InSAR derived displacements suggests that landslides only account for parts of the observed surface movements.


    Taxis-diffusion and aggregation equations are widely studied in the context of biological populations (see [10,15,16,21] for instance). They describe cell communities which react to external stimuli and form aggregates of organisms (pattern formation), such as bacterial colonies, slime mold or cancer cells. The Patlak-Keller-Segel model [18] is the most famous system and we are interested in the following generalization

    {utx[uxφ(u)vx]=0,x(0,1),t>0,uxφ(u)vx=0,for x=0 or 1,u(x,0)=u0(x)0,x[0,1]. (1)

    Here, u(x,t)0 represents the density of a given quantity (e.g. cells or bacteria population) and the initial data u0(x) is a given nonnegative smooth function. As for the function v, which models a molecular concentration, we choose either the case of the Fokker-Planck (FP in short) equation, where v(x) is known

    v:=v(x)0,vxL(0,1), (2)

    or the case of the generalized Keller-Segel (GKS in short) equation, where

    v(x,t)=K(x,y)u(y,t)dy,K(x,y) a smooth, symmetric kernel. (3)

    Depending on the modeling choice for φ(u), solutions to 1 can blow up in finite time depending upon a critical mass (see [6,22]) or reach stationary profiles in the form of peaks or plateaus [24] (pattern formation by Turing instability). The high nonlinearities due to the advection term make problem 1 mainly untractable through analytical methods. Thus, it is important to provide reliable numerical methods avoiding non-physical oscillations and numerical instabilities even when dealing with non-smooth solutions. The main properties that one wishes to preserve in a numerical method are

    (P1) positivity property, since we are dealing with densities or concentrations,

    u(x,t)0, (4)

    (P2) mass conservation, because no-flux boundary conditions are imposed,

    10u(x,t)=10u0(x)dx, (5)

    (P3) preservation of discretized steady states of the form

    g(u)=μ+v,g(u)=1φ(u), (6)

    where μ is a parameter related to the mass of u, and

    (P4) energy dissipation

    ddtE(t)0,E(t)=10[G(u)κuv]dx, (7)

    where G(u) is a primitive of g(u) and the value of κ differs for the two cases we study here, namely

    κ=1(FP case),κ=12(GKS case). (8)

    The aims of our work are first to recall two points of view for the derivation of the above energy inequality, second to use them for the construction of conservative, finite volume numerical schemes preserving energy dissipation to solve equation 1, third to make numerical comparisons in the case of complex patterns in order to distinguish physical instabilities from numerical artifacts. The two different derivations of the energy dissipation use two symmetrization strategies: the gradient flow or the Scharfetter-Gummel approach. It turns out that they lead to two strategies for discretization of problem 1. We prove that the proposed schemes statisfy properties 4-7 and because we build implicit schemes, there is no limitation on the time step in the fully discrete case.

    There exist other works which propose schemes for the resolution of problems in the form 1. For instance, finite elements methods are used, see [25] and references therein. Optimal transportation schemes for Keller-Segel systems are introduced in [5]. The papers [8] and [9] propose a finite-volume method able to preserve the above properties, including energy dissipation, at the semi-discrete level or with an explicit in time discretization, using the gradient flow approach, see also [4]. The symmetrization using the Scharfetter-Gummel approach is used in [20] where properties similar to ours are proved. However, the results do not include sensitivity saturation. To the best of our knowledge, our work is the first to propose implicit in time methods, without time step limitation (CFL condition), for which we are able to prove that, under generic conditions, the energy decreases at both semi-discrete and discrete level. Moreover, we build an alternative to the gradient flow approach applying the Scharfetter-Gummel strategy [26] for the discretization of drift-diffusion equations 1 with a general saturation function φ.

    The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we present in more details our assumptions for the equation 1. We also explain some modeling choices in particular for the nonlinearity φ(u) and on the choice of the kernel K. Section 3 is devoted to the introduction of the two approaches, gradient flow or Scharfetter-Gummel, and to how we use the continuous version of energy dissipation to derive the schemes. In Section 4 and Section 5, we show how the aforementioned two approaches lead to two different numerical methods, developed from the semi-discrete (only in space discretization) level to the fully discretized scheme. In particular, using a general result recalled in Appendix A about monotone schemes, we prove that the proposed schemes are well-posed and satisfy the fundamental properties 4-7. These theoretical results are illustrated in Section 6 by numerical simulations: we compare the gradient flow and the Scharfetter-Gummel schemes with the upwind approach, typically used to solve this kind of models.

    The standard biological interpretation of 1 ([14,21,23]) provides us with some further properties of the nonlinearities which we describe now.

    Chemotactic sensitivity. The function φ(u) is called chemotactic sensitivity. It determines how the random movement of particles of density u is biased in the direction of the gradient of v. In order to include the different choices of φ, as φ(u)=u as in the Keller-Segel or drift-diffusion model, or the logistic case φ(u)=u(1u), or the generalized case φ(u)=ueu, we use the formalism

    φ(u)=uψ(u),withψ(u)0,ψ(u)0. (9)

    More precisely, we consider two cases for the smooth function ψ,

    ψ(u)>0,u>0, (10)

    or

    ψ(u)>0for0<u<M,ψ(M)=0. (11)

    In the case 11 we only consider solutions which satisfy u[0,M].

    It is convenient to introduce the notations

    g(u)=ua1φ(v)dv,G(u)=u0g(s)ds, (12)

    where a is a constant chosen so that g is well-defined (depending on φ). For instance, for the standard case φ(u)=u, a=1 and one obtains g(u)=ln(u) and G(u)=uln(u)u. For functions φ satisfying 10, a natural hypothesis which is related to blow-up is the following

    1φL1(a,+),g(u)u+, (13)

    an assumption which, as we see it later, appears naturally when it comes to the well-posedness of numerical schemes.

    Note that under assumption 10 and if ψ is bounded, solutions exist globally and are uniformly bounded [11]. Under assumption 11, if 0u0M, the solution is also globally defined and satisfies 0u(t,)M for all times [16].

    Expression of the drift v. The convolution expression for v as a function of u has been widely used in recent studies [1,2,3]. It also comes from the Keller-Segel model [15,18,23], where the equation for the cells density in 1 is complemented with a parabolic equation for the chemoattractant concentration v. Since the chemoattractant is supposed to diffuse much quicker than the cells density, we can consider a simplified form of the Keller-Segel system and couple 1 with the elliptic equation for v

    {2vx2=uv,x(0,1),vx=0,x=0 or 1.

    This equation leads to 3 using the Green function given by the positive and symmetric kernel K(x,y) defined as

    K(x,y)=λ(ex+ex)(ey+e2y),xy,λ=12(e21). (14)

    Energy dissipation is the most difficult property to preserve in a discretization and methods might require corrections [17]. Therefore, it is useful to recall how it can be derived simply for the continuous equation. We focus on two different strategies, that lead to two different discretization approaches, the gradient flow approach and the Scharfetter-Gummel approach.

    Using the notations 12, the equation for u can be rewritten as

    utx[φ(u)(g(u)v)x]=0, (15)

    so that

    (g(u)v)ut=(g(u)v)x[φ(u)(g(u)v)x]=12x[φ(u)(g(u)v)2x]φ(u)[(g(u)v)x]2.

    Consequently, we find, in the Fokker-Planck case

    ddt10[G(u)uv(x)]dx=10φ(u)[(g(u)v)x]2dx0,

    and in the generalized Keller-Segel case

    ddt10[G(u)12uv(x,t)]dx=10φ(u)[(g(u)v)x]2dx0,

    because, thanks to the symmetry assumption on K and by using the definition 3 of v, we have

    1010K(x,y)u(y,t)u(x,t)t=1010K(x,y)u(y,t)tu(x,t)=12ddt1010K(x,y)u(y,t)u(x,t).

    Inspired from the case of electric forces in semi-conductors, the equation for u can be rewritten as

    utx[evg(u)φ(u)eg(u)vx]=0, (16)

    so that

    (g(u)v)ut=(g(u)v)x[evg(u)φ(u)eg(u)vx]=x[(g(u)v)evg(u)φ(u)eg(u)vx]evg(u)φ(u)eg(u)vx(g(u)v)x.

    It is immediate to see that the last term has the negative sign while the time derivative term is exactly the same as in the gradient flow approach.

    At the continuous level, these two calculations are very close to each other. However, they lead to the construction of different discretizations. The gradient flow point of view is used for numerical schemes by [10], the Scharfetter-Gummel approach is used in [20].

    We give here our notations for the semi-discretization. We consider a (small) space discretization Δx=1I, IN. The mesh is centered at xi=iΔx for i=1,,I, with endpoints xi+1/2=(i+1/2)Δx for i=1,,I. Therefore, our computational domain is always shifted and takes the form (Δx2,(I+12)Δx). Finally, the mesh is formed by the intervals

    Ii=(xi12,xi+12),i=1,,I.

    The semi-discrete approximation of u(x,t) at a given time t, interpreted in the finite volume sense ([7,13,19]), is denoted by

    ui(t)1ΔxIiu(x,t)dx,i=1,,I.

    As for the discretization of v for i=1,,I, vi(t) stands for v(xi) in the FP case, while it is defined by Ij=1Kijuj(t) in the GKS case, where

    Kij:=K(xi,xj),i=1,,I,j=1,I.

    Integration on the interval Ii yields fluxes Fi+12(t) which will approximate the quantity (uxφ(u)vx) at xi+12 for i=0,,I through the interval interfaces. The boundary conditions require F12(t)=FI+12(t)=0, and the whole problem will be to properly define Fi+12(t) for i=1,,I1. This will be chosen depending on the strategy, either through a gradient flow or a Scharfetter-Gummel approach, as well as the equation considered (FP or GKS).

    The mass conservative form of 1 leads to a finite volume semi-discrete scheme

    {dui(t)dt+1Δx[Fi+1/2(t)Fi1/2(t)]=0,i=1,,I,t>0,F1/2(t)=FI+1/2(t)=0. (17)

    We use the definition 8 for κ and set for i=1,,I

    Ei(t)=G(ui(t))κui(t)vi(t).

    The semi-discrete energy is then

    Esd(t):=ΔxIi=1Ei(t).

    Using the form 15 of equation 1, we define the semi-discrete flux as

    Fi+1/2(t)=φi+1/2Δx[g(ui+1)vi+1(g(ui)vi)],i=1,,I1. (18)

    The precise expression of φi+1/2 is not relevant for our present purpose which is to preserve the energy dissipation property. However, for stability considerations it is useful to upwind, an issue which we shall tackle when we consider the full discretization.

    Then, the semi-discrete energy form is obtained after multiplication by (g(ui)vi) and yields

    ddtΔxIi=1Ei(t)=Ii=1(g(ui)vi)[Fi+1/2Fi1/2]=I1i=1Fi+1/2[(g(ui+1)vi+1)(g(ui)vi)].

    Therefore, we find the semi-discrete form of energy dissipation

    dEsddt=ΔxI1i=1φi+1/2[(g(ui+1)vi+1)(g(ui)vi)Δx]20.

    We choose to discretize the form 16, defining the semi-discrete flux as

    Fi+1/2(t)=(evg(u)φ(u))i+1/2Δx[eg(ui+1)vi+1eg(ui)vi],i=1,,I1, (19)

    where, again, the specific form of the interpolant (evg(u)φ(u))i+1/2 is not relevant here.

    As above, the semi-discrete energy form follows upon multiplication by g(ui)vi and reads

    ddtΔxIi=1Ei(t)=Ii=1(g(ui)vi)[Fi+1/2Fi1/2]=I1i=1Fi+1/2[(g(ui+1)vi+1)(g(ui)vi)].

    Summing up, the semi-discrete form of energy dissipation here writes

    dEsddt=ΔxI1i=1{(evg(u)φ(u))i+1/2eg(ui+1)vi+1eg(ui)viΔx(g(ui+1)vi+1)(g(ui)vi)Δx}0.

    Steady states make the energy derivative vanish which imposes both in the gradient flow and the Scharfetter-Gummel approaches that (g(ui+1)vi+1)=(g(ui)vi). In other words they are given, up to a constant μ, as the discrete version of 6,

    g(ui)=vi+μ,i=1,,I. (20)

    We recall from [24] that in the GKS case, there are several steady states and the constant ones can be unstable.

    For the time discretization, we consider (small) time steps Δt>0, and set tn=nΔt for nN. The discrete approximation of u(x,t) is now

    uni1ΔxIiu(x,tn)dx,i=1,,I,nN.

    Integration on the interval Ii yields fluxes Fni+12 which will approximate the quantity (uxφ(u)vx) at xi+12 for i=1,,I1 through the interval interfaces, and at time tn for nN. The boundary conditions require Fn12=FnI+12=0 for all nN.

    To achieve the time discretization, and restricting our analysis to the Euler scheme, we write the time discretization dui(t)dt as un+1iuniΔt. Therefore, the full discretization of 17 reads for nN as

    {un+1iuni+ΔtΔx[Fn+1i+1/2Fn+1i1/2]=0,i=1,,I,Fn+11/2=Fn+1I+1/2=0. (21)

    The issue here is to decide which terms (in u and v) should be discretized with implicit or explicit schemes based on fully discrete energy dissipation. We claim that, apart from the interpolant, we need to make the terms in ui implicit and, for the GKS case, the terms in vi explicit, a fact on which we now elaborate.

    We define the energy at the discrete level through

    Eni=G(uni)κunivni,i=1,,I,nN,

    and

    En:=ΔxIi=1Eni,nN.

    The computation made in the semi-discrete case, dEi(t)dt=dui(t)dt(g(ui(t))vi(t)), extends to the fully discrete setting and leads to the following constraint on the energy

    Ii=1(En+1iEni)Ii=1(un+1iuni)(g(uαni)vβni).

    Here, uαni:=αuni+(1α)un+1i and vβni:=βvni+(1β)vn+1i. The convexity of G() motivates the choice of an implicit discretization for u, i.e. α=0, because for i=1,,I, there holds

    G(un+1i)G(uni)g(un+1i)(un+1iuni).

    Regarding the term in uv, only the case of GKS needs to be fixed and we thus require

    Ii=1[un+1ivn+1iunivni]2Ii=1vβni(un+1iuni).

    It is natural to try and balance the terms by choosing a semi-explicit discretization with β=12, which yields

    Ii=12vβni(un+1iuni)(un+1ivn+1iunivni)=Ii=1(un+1ivniunivn+1i)=i,jKij(un+1iunjuniun+1j),

    with the last term vanishing due to the symmetry of K.

    However, implicit and explicit time discretizations for v can also be considered at the expense of adding hypotheses on the kernel K. Indeed, for a given 0β1, we find

    Ii=12vβni(un+1iuni)(un+1ivn+1iunivni)=(12β)i,jKij(un+1iuni)(un+1junj).

    As a consequence, an explicit (resp. implicit) scheme is suitable for the time discretization of v provided that K is a non-negative (resp. non-positive) symmetric kernel. Since K is a non-negative symmetric kernel for the Generalized Keller-Segel equation 3, for simplicity we choose an explicit discretization for v.

    Finally, we note that the interpolant does not play any role for energy discretization and we can use the simplest explicit or implicit discretization (both in u and v), so as to make the analysis of the scheme as simple as possible.

    We consider the full discretization of 18 and define the fully discrete flux in 21 as

    Fn+1i+1/2=φ(u)n+1i+1/2Δx[(g(un+1i+1)vni+1)(g(un+1i)vni)],i=1,,I1. (22)

    At this level, we need to define the form of the interpolant φ(u)n+1i+1/2. From the theorem in Appendix A, we use an upwind technique in order to ensure well-posedness and monotonicity properties of the scheme. Thus, for i=1,,I1, we define

    φ(u)n+1i+1/2:={un+1iψ(un+1i+1)wheng(un+1i)g(un+1i+1)+vni+1vni0,un+1i+1ψ(un+1i)wheng(un+1i)g(un+1i+1)+vni+1vni<0. (23)

    Proposition 1 (Fully discrete gradient flow scheme). We assume either 10 and 13, or 11 and give the u0i0. Then, the scheme 21-22-23 has the following properties:

    (ⅰ) the solution uni exists and is unique, for all i=1,,I, and n1;

    (ⅱ) it satisfies uni0, and uniM for the case 11, if it is initially true;

    (ⅲ) the steady states g(ui)vi=μ are preserved;

    (ⅳ) the discrete energy dissipation inequality is satisfied

    En+1EnΔtΔxI1i=1φ(u)ni+1/2[(g(un+1i+1)vni+1)(g(un+1i)vni)]2.

    Notice that this theorem does not state a uniform bound in the case 10 and 13.

    Proof. (ⅰ) We prove that the scheme satisfies the hypotheses of the theorem in Appendix A. We set

    Ai+1/2(un+1i,un+1i+1)=ΔtΔxFn+1i+1/2.

    Then, the simplest case is when φ satisfies 11, since clearly un+1i0 and un+1iM are respectively a sub- and supersolution. When φ satisfies 10 and 13, un+1i0 is again a subsolution, while for the supersolution we choose ˉUn+1i=g1(C+vni). Such a choice indeed makes the flux terms vanish:

    Fn+1i+1/2=φ(u)n+1i+1/2Δx[(g(ˉUn+1i+1)vni+1)(g(ˉUn+1i)vni)]=φ(u)n+1i+1/2Δx[CC]=0.

    Thus ˉUn+1i is a supersolution as soon as g1(C+vni)uni, which holds when C is taken to be large enough because we recall that assumption 13 ensures that g(u) tends to + as u tends to +.

    Moreover, the scheme is monotone since

    1Ai+12(un+1i,un+1i+1)=Δt(Δx)2un+1i+1ψ(un+1i)[g(un+1i+1)vni+1(g(un+1i)vni)]+Δt(Δx)2ψ(un+1i+1)[g(un+1i+1)vni+1(g(un+1i)vni)]Δt(Δx)2φ(u)n+1i+12[g(un+1i)]0,

    where

    [x]+={xforx0,0forx<0and[x]={0forx0,xforx<0,

    so that [x]+0,[x]0 for all x.

    (ⅱ) Positivity of discrete solutions and the upper bound in the logistic case follow from the subsolution and supersolution built in step (ⅰ).

    (ⅲ) Preservation of steady states at the discrete level follows immediately from the form we have chosen for the fully discrete fluxes.

    (ⅳ) For the energy inequality, we remark that the contribution regarding time discretization is treated in the introduction of the present section. The space term is exactly treated as in the corresponding subsection of Section 4.

    In 21, the fully discrete Scharfetter-Gummel flux reads

    Fn+1i+1/2=(evng(un)φ(un+1))i+1/2[eg(un+1i+1)vni+1eg(un+1i)vni],i=1,,I1.

    As for the gradient flow approach, we need the upwind technique to get a scheme which satisfies the hypotheses in Appendix A. So, we set for i=1,,I1

    (evng(un)φ(un+1))i+1/2:={un+1i+1ψ(un+1i)evni+1g(uni+1),ife(g(un+1i+1)vni+1)e(g(un+1i)vni)0,un+1iψ(un+1i+1)evnig(uni),ife(g(un+1i+1)vni+1)e(g(un+1i)vni)<0.

    Proposition 2 (Fully discrete Scharfetter-Gummel scheme). We assume either 10 and 13, or 11 and give the u0i0. Then, the scheme 21-22-23 has the following properties:

    (ⅰ) the solution uni exists and is unique, for all i=1,,I, and n1;

    (ⅱ) it satisfies uni0, and uniM for the case 11, if it is initially true;

    (ⅲ) the steady states g(ui)vi=μ are preserved;

    (ⅳ) the discrete energy dissipation inequality is satisfied

    En+1EnΔtΔxI1i=1{(evng(un)φ(un))i+1/2[eg(un+1i+1)vni+1eg(un+1i)vni][(g(un+1i+1)vni+1)(g(un+1i)vni)]}0.

    Proof. We argue exactly as for the gradient flow approach.

    The upwind scheme is driven by simplicity and, in 21, the fluxes are defined by

    Fn+1i+1/2=1Δx[un+1i+1un+1iφ(u)ni+1/2(vni+1vni)],i=1,,I1,

    with

    φ(u)n+1i+1/2:={un+1iψ(un+1i+1)whenvni+1vni0,un+1i+1ψ(un+1i)whenvni+1vni<0, (24)

    as in 23, but this time depending on the sign of vni+1vni.

    Proposition 3 (Fully discrete upwind scheme). We assume either 10 and 13, or 11 and give the u0i0. Then, the scheme 21-22-23 has the following properties:

    (i) the solution uni exists and is unique, for all i=1,,I, and n1;

    (ii) it satisfies uni0, and uniM for the case 11, if it is initially true.

    Proof. As for the gradient flow approach, the above choice makes the scheme monotone, because

    ΔtΔx1Fi+12(un+1i,un+1i+1)=ΔtΔx2(1un+1i+1ψ(un+1i)[vni+1vni]ψ(un+1i+1)[vni+1vni]+)0.

    Thus, arguing as for the gradient flow approach and relying on the results in Appendix A, existence and uniqueness of the discrete solution as well as preservation of the initial bounds follow immediately.

    Thus, choice 24 enables to prove that the scheme is well-defined, satisfies uni0 and preserves the bound uniM for the case 11, but the energy dissipation inequality is lost. Also the steady states, in this case, are defined by the nonlinear relation ui+1ui=φ(u)i+1/2(vi+1vi) which are usually not in the form 20.

    We first present the numerical implementation of the Fokker-Planck equation with φ(u)=u. We here compare the Scharfetter-Gummel and upwind approaches (the gradient flow gives the same solution as the Scharfetter-Gummel and is thus not presented here). Both these schemes have error convergence of order 1 in space, as it can be easily checked.

    We consider a first case with χ/D=24, with I=100 and an initial density u0=1. We take the velocity field as

    v=x(1x)|x0.5|.

    In Figure 1, we compare the approximate stationary solutions obtained with the upwind scheme (blue, dashed line) and the Scharfetter-Gummel scheme (red line) with the exact stationary solution (black line), which in this case has the form u(x)=Ceχv(x)/D, with C=(10eχv(x)/Ddx)1 so that the mass of the stationary solution is normalized. In this first case, the two schemes have no significant differences; this is a major difference with the Keller-Segel equation, as we show it in the next subsection.

    Figure 1. 

    Left: Comparison of solutions of the Scharfetter-Gummel (red line) and upwind (blue, dashed line) schemes at time t=100 with the exact stationary solution (black line) for the linear Fokker-Planck equation with φ(u)=u. We used I=100 and Δt=0.01. Right: normalized L variation for the two schemes

    .

    We turn to the equation 1 coupled with 3 for two nonlinear forms of the chemotactic sensitivity function: the logistic form φ(u)=u(1u) and the exponential form φ(u)=ueu. The goal is to compare the discrete solutions obtained with the three numerical approaches presented above when patterns arise, namely when Turing instabilities drive the formation of spatially inhomogeneous solutions (we refer to [21] for an introduction to this topic). To this end, we slightly modify the original equation 1 to

    {utx[Duxχφ(u)vx]=0,x(0,1),t>0,Duxχφ(u)vx=0,for x=0 or 1,u(x,0)=u0(x)0,x[0,1], (25)

    in order to emphasize the coefficients driving the instabilities: D>0, the constant diffusion coefficient and χ>0, the chemosensitivity. The concentration of the chemoattractant v remains driven by (3).

    We first consider the logistic case with χ/D=40. We take as initial condition a random spatial perturbation of the constant steady state u0=0.5 and solve the equation with 100 equidistant points in [0,1].

    Figure 2 shows the evolution in time of the density uni obtained with the Scharfetter-Gummel (red line) and the gradient flow schemes (black, dashed line). After a rather short time, the initial spatial perturbation evolves, as expected, in spatially inhomogeneous patterns: a series of "steps" arise in the regions where the concentration of the chemoattractant is greater. After some time, a structure with a smaller number of steps forms when the two central plateaus merge. It is worth noticing that, even if the transitions from one structure to another happen very quickly, the time period during which these structures remain unchanged grows with the number of transitions that occurred. In [24], these intermediate patterns are called metastable, and this peculiar phenomenon is explained in details.

    Figure 2. 

    Evolution in time of solutions to (25) in the logistic case φ(u)=u(1u) with χ/D=40. We solved the equation with the Scharfetter-Gummel (red line) and the gradient flow scheme (black dashed line) with I=100 and Δt=1. There is no major difference between the solutions given by the two schemes

    .

    As for the schemes, Figure 2 shows that the Scharfetter-Gummel and the gradient flow approaches give the same solution; no difference can be spotted. This is not true for the upwind approach. In Figure 3, we compare the solutions to the Scharfetter-Gummel (red line) and the upwind (blue, dashed line) schemes. The upwind solution transitions faster from one metastable structure to the following than the Scharfetter-Gummel one. In fact, as proved above, the latter preserves discrete stationary profiles which, using the no-flux boundary conditions, solve the equation

    ux=χDφ(u)vx. (26)
    Figure 3. 

    Evolution in time of solutions to 25 in the logistic case φ(u)=u(1u) with χ/D=40. We solved the equation with the Scharfetter-Gummel (red line) and the upwind scheme (blue, dashed line) with I=100 and Δt=1

    .

    From 26, it is clear that, in the logistic case, the expected stationary solutions are 0-1 plateaus (or "steps") connected by a sigmoid curve which is increasing or decreasing when v is. We refer again to [24] and also to [12] for a detailed study of the stationary solutions and their properties for the logistic Keller-Segel system. In Figures 4a and 4b, we compare two stationary solutions to the Scharfetter-Gummel and upwind schemes, at time t=50 and t=9000 respectively. The Scharfetter-Gummel scheme approximates the 0-1 plateaus of metastable solutions better than the upwind scheme, whose solutions have smoother edges. We hypothesize that, since the Scharfetter-Gummel scheme preserves the metastable profiles better, it will also better preserve the time during which the solution will remain very close to a metastable state, up until the next transition. Consequently, this would mean that the upwind scheme accelerates the real dynamics.

    Figure 4. 

    Stationary profiles and dynamics. (A), (B) Comparison of the stationary profiles of solutions to the Scharfetter-Gummel (red line) and the upwind (blue, dashed line) schemes at t=50 and t=9000. (C) Normalized L variation for the three schemes

    .

    Moreover, in Figure 4c we compare the L dynamics of the three schemes, computing the quantity ||unun1||/||un1|| for each n. The peaks shown by this figure correspond to the transitions from one profile to another. Observe that, for both solutions of the Scharfetter-Gummel and the gradient flow scheme, the two peaks are further away in time than the ones from the upwind scheme: this confirms that the upwind solution is in advance when it comes to transitioning. Nevertheless, from t6000, the relative errors of the upwind solution are consistently greater that the ones from the two other approaches, thus confirming that only the Scharfetter-Gummel and the gradient flow schemes better preserve the exact discrete stationary profiles as well as the metastable ones. Also notice that none of the schemes produce overshoot, due to our upwinding of the term in ψ(u).

    Next, we consider an exponentially decreasing form of the chemotactic sensitivity function with χ/D=24. Again, we take as initial condition a random spatial perturbation of the constant steady state u0=0.7 and solve the equation on 100 equidistant points. The evolution in time of discrete solutions obtained with the three numerical approaches are compared in Figures 5 and 7. In this model, no initial upper bound for the solution is imposed, so that the cells aggregate "naturally" where the chemoattractant has the greatest concentration, resulting in profiles without the plateaus observed in the logistic model. However, solutions face the same kind of transitions observed before, evolving from one stationary profile to another. As before, the Scharfetter-Gummel and the gradient flow approaches give the same solutions (Figure 5), while the solution of the upwind scheme evolves faster. In Figures Figures 6a and 6b, we compare stationary profiles obtained with the different approaches while in Figure 6c we compare dynamics of the solutions. This last figure shows that, as for the logistic model, smaller errors can be expected for the Scharfetter-Gummel and gradient flow approaches when steady states are reached.

    Figure 5. 

    Evolution in time of solutions to 25 in the exponential case φ(u)=ueu with χ/D=24. We solved the equation with the Scharfetter-Gummel (red line) and the gradient flow schemes (black, dashed line) with I=100 and Δt=1. As for the logistic model, the two schemes give the same solution

    .
    Figure 6. 

    Stationary profiles and dynamics. (A), (B)Comparison of the stationary profiles obtained with the Scharfetter-Gummel (red line) and the upwind scheme (blue, dashed line) at t=50 (left) and t=200. (C) Normalized L variation for the three schemes

    .
    Figure 7. 

    Evolution in time of solutions to 25 in the exponential case φ(u)=ueu with χ/D=24. We compare the solutions of the Scharfetter-Gummel (red line) and the upwind schemes (blue, dashed line) obtained with I=100 and Δt=1 for different times

    .

    In the context of the Generalized Keller-Segel system, we have presented constructions of numerical schemes which extend previous works [10,20], built on two different views of energy dissipation. Our construction unifies these two views, the gradient flow and Scharfetter-Gummel symmetrizations. Our schemes preserve desirable continuous properties: positivity, mass conservation, exact energy dissipation, discrete steady states. Being correctly tuned between implicit and explicit discretization, they can handle large time steps without CFL condition.

    The present work is motivated by experiments of breast cancer cells put in a 3D structure mimicking the conditions they meet in vivo, namely in the extracellular matrix. After a few days, images of 2D sections show that cells have organized as spheroids, a phenomenon believed to be driven by chemotaxis. The spheroids can then be interpreted as Turing patterns for Keller-Segel type models and it is crucial to use appropriate schemes for them to be distinguishable from actual steady states or numerical artifacts. Comparing 2D simulations of such models with these experimental images will be the subject of future work.

    In fact, it is important to remark that the schemes we presented here in 1D could be easily extended to rectangular domains, without loss of properties 4-7. However, it remains a perspective to treat more general geometries in a multi-dimensional setting with our approach.

    The authors acknowledge partial funding from the "ANR blanche" project Kibord [ANR-13-BS01-0004] funded by the French Ministry of Research.

    B.P. has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant agreement No 740623).

    We recall sufficient conditions for which an implicit Euler discretization in time can be solved, independently of the step-size. This is the case for a monotone scheme. The proof relies on the existence of sub- and supersolutions, and thus also yields the preservation of positivity and other pertinent bounds as we have used in Section 5.

    We consider the problem of finding a unique solution (un+1i) to the nonlinear equation arising in Section 5 which reads

    un+1iuniΔt+1Δx[F(uni,uni+1,vni,vni+1,un+1i,un+1i+1)Fn+1i+12Fn+1i12]=0,i=1,,I. (27)

    We write a general proof for a scheme of the form

    ui+Ai+12(ui,ui+1)Ai12(ui1,ui)=fi,i=1,,I, (28)

    where we consider the problem of finding a solution (ui) (which stands for un+1i).

    Here we assume that the fi are given (it stands for uni) and that the Ai+12 are Lipschitz continuous and, a.e.,

    1Ai+12(,)0,2Ai+12(,)0,i=1,,I, (29)

    and there are a supersolution (ˉUi)i=1,I and a subsolution (U_i)i=1,I such that for all i=1,,I,

    ˉUi+Ai+12(ˉUi,ˉUi+1)Ai12(ˉUi1,ˉUi)fi, (30)
    U_i+Ai+12(U_i,U_i+1)Ai12(U_i1,U_i)fi. (31)

    We build a solution of 28 using an evolution equation

    dui(t)dt+ui(t)+Ai+12(ui(t),ui+1(t))Ai12(ui1(t),ui(t))=fi,i=1,,I. (32)

    Theorem A.1. Assume 29 and the existence of a subsolution and of a supersolution. Then,

    (ⅰ) For a supersolution (resp. subsolution) initial data, the dynamics 32 satisfies dˉui(t)dt0 (resp. du_i(t)dt0) for all times t0, and thus ˉui(t) is a supersolution (resp. subsolution) for all times.

    (ⅱ) A subsolution is smaller than a supersolution.

    (ⅲ) ˉui(t) and u_i(t) converge to the same solution of 28.

    Proof. (ⅰ) We prove the statement with the supersolution. We set

    zi(t)=dˉui(t)dt,zi(0)0,i=1,,I.

    Since the Ai+12 are Lipschitz continuous, from equation 32 we deduce that the quantities dˉui(t)dt are also Lipschitz continuous. From Rademacher's Theorem, the zi are differentiable a.e. and their a.e. derivatives are also their distributional derivatives.

    Differentiating equation 32, we obtain for i=1,I, and for a.e. t>0

    dzi(t)dt+zi(t)+[1Ai+122Ai12]zi(t)=2Ai+12zi+1(t)+1Ai12zi1(t).

    The solution cannot change sign and thus for i=1,,I, zi(t)0 for all times.

    (ⅱ) Consider u_,ˉu sub (super) solutions. Set w=u_ˉu and we want to prove that w0.

    We write for i=1,,I

    wi+[Ai+12(u_i,u_i+1)Ai+12(ˉui,u_i+1)]+[Ai+12(ˉui,u_i+1)Ai+12(ˉui,ˉui+1)][Ai12(u_i1,u_i)Ai12(ˉui1,u_i)][Ai12(ˉui1,u_i)Ai12(ˉui1,ˉui)]0.

    For i=1,,I, we multiply by sgn+(wi):=1wi>0 and add the relations to conclude that

    Ii=1(wi)++I1i=1Ji+12+I1i=1Ki+12=0,

    with

    Ji+12=[Ai+12(u_i,u_i+1)Ai+12(ˉui,u_i+1)][sgn+(wi)sgn+(wi+1)],Ki+12=[Ai+12(ˉui,u_i+1)Ai+12(ˉui,ˉui+1)][sgn+(wi)sgn+(wi+1)].

    For each of the these terms, we show that Ji+120, Ki+120, as follows. Only the case when the + signs in the right brackets are different has to be considered. Assume for instance that

    u_iˉui,andu_i+1ˉui+1.

    Then, we have by assumption 29,

    [Ai+12(u_i,u_i+1)Ai+12(ˉui,u_i+1)]0Ji+120,[Ai+12(ˉui,u_i+1)Ai+12(ˉui,ˉui+1)]0Ki+120.

    Therefore Ii=1(wi)+0 and this implies wi0 for all i. From (ⅰ) and (ⅱ) we infer that the subsolution increases and is bounded from above by the supersolution, so that it exists for all times. Similarly, the supersolution exists for all times and thus, so does the solution ui(t) to 32, so that we can speak of its convergence.

    (ⅲ) This is clear since the limits are solutions.

    [1] Wahono B.F.D. (2010) Applications of Statistical and Heuristic Methods for Landslide Susceptibility Assessments : A case study in Wadas Lintang Sub District Wonosobo Regency, Central Java Province, Indonesia, Graduate School, Faculty of Geography, Gadjah Mada University and International Institute for Geo-information Science and Earth Observation. p. 106.
    [2] Guzzetti F, Reichenbach P, Cardinali M, et al. (2005) Probabilistic landslide hazard assessment at the basin scale. Geomorphol 72: 272-299. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2005.06.002
    [3] Chacon J, Irigaray C, Fernandez T, et al. (2006) Engineering geology maps: landslides and geographical information systems. Bull Eng Geol Environ 65: 341-411. doi: 10.1007/s10064-006-0064-z
    [4] Radbruch DH (1970) Map of relative amounts of landslides in California, in US Geological Survey Open-File Report. p. 70-1485, 85-585.
    [5] Dobrovolny E (1971) Landslide susceptibility in and near anchorage as interpreted from topographic and geologic maps, in The Great Alaska Earthquake of 1964. Natl Acad Sci 735-745.
    [6] Nilsen TH and Wright RH (1979) Relative slope stability and landuse planning in the San Francisco Bay region, California. Prof Pap 103.
    [7] Brabb EE, Pampeyan EH, Bonilla MG (1972) Landslide Susceptibility in San Mateo County. California: U.S. Geological Survey. Misc Field Stud Map MF-360, Scale 1:62,500.
    [8] Carrara A, Cardinali M, Detti R, et al. (1991) GIS Techniques and Statistical-Models in Evaluating Landslide Hazard. Earth Surf Processes Landforms 16: 427-445. doi: 10.1002/esp.3290160505
    [9] Carrara A and Guzzetti F (1995) Geographical information systems in assessing natural hazards. Springer Neth 4: 45–59.
    [10] Chung CJF and Fabbri AG (1999) Probabilistic prediction models for landslide hazard mapping. Photogramm Eng Remote 65: 1389-1399.
    [11] Guzzetti F, Carrara A, Cardinali M, et al. (1999) Landslide hazard evaluation: a review of current techniques and their application in a multi-scale study, Central Italy. Geomorphol 31: 181-216. doi: 10.1016/S0169-555X(99)00078-1
    [12] Brabb EE (1993). Priorities for landslide during the international decade of hazard reduction. in Landslides : seventh international conference and field workshop. Rotterdam: Balkema.
    [13] Agostoni S, Laffi R, Mazzocola, et al. (1998). Landslide inventory data base for an Alpine area, Lombardia, Italy. in 8th IAEG Congress. Vancouver: A.A.Balkema.
    [14] Chau KT, Lo KH, (2004) Hazard assessment of debris flows for Leung King Estate of Hong Kong by incorporating GIS with numerical simulations. NatHazards Earth Syst Sci 4: 103-116. doi: 10.5194/nhess-4-103-2004
    [15] Giardino M, Giordan D, Ambrogio S (2004) GIS technologies for data collection, management and visualization of large slope instabilities: two applications in the Western Italian Alps. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 4: 197-211. doi: 10.5194/nhess-4-197-2004
    [16] Lee S, Chwae U, Min KD (2002) Landslide susceptibility mapping by correlation between topography and geological structure: the Janghung area, Korea. Geomorphol 46: 149-162. doi: 10.1016/S0169-555X(02)00057-0
    [17] Lee S, Choi J, Min K (2002) Landslide susceptibility analysis and verification using the Bayesian probability model. Environ Geol 43: 120-131. doi: 10.1007/s00254-002-0616-x
    [18] Süzen ML and Doyuran V (2004) A comparison of the GIS based landslide susceptibility assessment methods: multivariate versus bivariate. Environ Geol 45: 665-679. doi: 10.1007/s00254-003-0917-8
    [19] Ermini L, Catani F, Casagli N (2005) Artificial Neural Networks applied to landslide susceptibility assessment. Geomorphol 66: 327-343. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2004.09.025
    [20] Van Westen CJ, Van Ash TWJ, Soetoers R (2005) Landslide and risk zonation-why is it still so difficult? Bull Eng Geol Env 65: 167-184.
    [21] Magliulo P, Di Lisio A, Russo F, et al. (2008) Geomorphology and landslide susceptibility assessment using GIS and bivariate statistics: a case study in southern Italy. Nat Hazards 47: 411-435. doi: 10.1007/s11069-008-9230-x
    [22] Kawabata D and Bandibas J (2009) Landslide susceptibility mapping using geological data, a DEM from ASTER images and an Artificial Neural Network (ANN). Geomorphol 113: 97-109. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.06.006
    [23] Mejianavarro M, Wohl EE, Oaks SD (1994) Geological Hazards, Vulnerability, and Risk Assessment Using GIS - Model for Glenwood-Springs, Colorado. Geomorphol 10: 331-354. doi: 10.1016/0169-555X(94)90024-8
    [24] Temesgen B, Mohammed MU, Korme T (2001) Natural hazard assessment using GIS and remote sensing methods, with particular reference to the landslides in the Wondogenet area, Ethiopia. Phys Chem Earth Part C-Solar-TerrestialPlanet Sci 26: 665-675.
    [25] Zhu AX, Wang RX, Qiao JP, et al. (2004) Mapping landslide susceptibility in the Three Gorges area, China using GIS, expert knowledge and fuzzy logic. IAHS Publ 289: 385-391.
    [26] Kıncal C, Akgün A, Koca MY (2009) Landslide susceptibility assessment in the Izmir (West Anatolia,Turkey) city center and its near vicinity by the logistic regression method. Environ Earth Sci 59: 745–756. doi: 10.1007/s12665-009-0070-0
    [27] Bai S-B, Wang J, Lü G-N, et al. (2010) GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping of the Zhongxian segment in the Three Gorges area, China. Geomorphol 115, 23-31.
    [28] Yilmaz C, Topal T, Süzen ML (2012) GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping using bivariate statistical analysis in Devrek (Zonguldak-Turkey) 65: 2161-2178.
    [29] Van Westen CJ (1993) Application of geographic information systems to landslide hazard zonation. University Delft Inter Instit.
    [30] Süzen ML and Doyuran V (2004) Data driven bivariate landslide susceptibility assessment using geographical information systems: a method and application to Asarsuyu cathment, Turkey. Eng Geol 71: 303-321. doi: 10.1016/S0013-7952(03)00143-1
    [31] Chen W, Li X, Wang Y, et al. (2013) Landslide susceptibility mapping using LIDAR and DMC data: a case study in the Three Gorges area, China. Environ Earth Sci 70:673-685. doi: 10.1007/s12665-012-2151-8
    [32] Wu X, Niu R, Ren F, et al. (2013) Landslide susceptibility mapping using rough sets and back-propagation neural networks in the Three Gorges, China. Environ Earth Sci 70: 1307-1318. doi: 10.1007/s12665-013-2217-2
    [33] Kavzaoglu T, Sahin EK, Colkesen I (2014) Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis, support vector machines, and logistic regression. Landslides 11:425-439. doi: 10.1007/s10346-013-0391-7
    [34] Tehrany MS, Pradhan B, Jebur MN, (2014) Flood susceptibility ampping using a novel ensemble weights-of-evidence and support vector machine models in GIS. J Hydrol 512: 332-343. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.03.008
    [35] Wu X, Ren F, Niu R (2014) Landslide susceptibility assessment using object mapping units, decision tree, and support vector machine models in the Three Gorges of China. Environ Earth Sci 71: 4725-4738. doi: 10.1007/s12665-013-2863-4
    [36] Du W, Wu Y, Liu J, et al. (2016) Landslide Susceptibility Mapping Using Support Vector Machine Model. Electron J Geotech Eng 21: 7069-7084.
    [37] Li J and Yi C (2005) The Magnificent Three Gorges Project.
    [38] Fuggle R and Smith WT (2000) Experience with dams in water and energy resource development in the People's Republic of China, Cape Town (South Africa), Secretariat of the World Commission on Dams.
    [39] Liu JG, Mason PJ, Clerici N, et al. (2004) Landslide hazard assessment in the Three Gorges area of the Yangtze river using ASTER imagery: Zigui-Badong. Geomorphol 61: 171-187. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2003.12.004
    [40] Boyle CE (2007) Water-borne Illness in China. China Environmental Health Project, Research Brief. Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
    [41] Chinese Three Gorges Project Corporation (CTGPC), (2002) Flooding on the Yangtze in 1998. April 20, 2002. Retrieved on February 8, 2008. (Chinese).
    [42] Ministry of Environmental Protection The People's Republic of China (MOEPTPRCa), (2010) Three Gorges Bulletin in 2009 Chapter 2 Economic and Social Development 2010-02-23. Available from: http://english.mep.gov.cn/standards_reports/threegorgesbulletin/.
    [43] Ministry of Environmental Protection The People's Republic of China (MOEPTPRCb), (2010) Three Gorges Bulletin in 2009 Chapter 3, State of the Natural Ecological Environment 2010-02-23. Available from: http://english.mep.gov.cn/standards_reports/threegorgesbulletin/.
    [44] Wu S, Wang H, Han J, et al. (2009) The Application of Fractal Dimensions of Landslide Boundary Trace for Evaluation of Slope Instability, in Landslide Disaster Mitigation in Three Gorges Reservoir, China, T.L. Fawu Wang, Editor. Springer-Verlag: Berlin. 465-474.
    [45] Xue G, Xu F, Wu Y, et al. (2009) Bank Slope Stability Evaluation for the Purpose of Three Gorges Reservoir Dam Construction. Springer Berl Heidelb 41-86.
    [46] Wu SR, Shi L, Wang R, et al. (2001) Zonation of the landslide hazards in the for reservoir region of the Three Gorges Project on the Yangtze River. Eng Geol 59: 51-58. doi: 10.1016/S0013-7952(00)00061-2
    [47] Wu S, Hu D, Chen Q, et al. (1997) Assessment of the crustal stability in the Qingjiang river basin of the western Hubei Province and its peripheral area, China. in Thirtieth International Geological Congress. Beijing, China: VSP International Science Publishers.
    [48] Fourniadis IG and Liu JG (2007) Landslides in the Wushan-Zigui region of the Three Gorges, China. Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol 40: 115-122. doi: 10.1144/1470-9236/06-035
    [49] METI/ERSDAC (2010) Earth Remote Sensing Data Analysis Center. 24 August 2010 16 June 2010]; METI/ERSDAC]. Available from: http://www.ersdac.or.jp/GDEM/E/4.html.
    [50] Stefanov WL, Ramsey MS, Christensen PR (2001) Monitoring urban land cover change: An expert system approach to land cover classification of semiarid to arid urban centers. Remote Sens Environ 77: 173-185. doi: 10.1016/S0034-4257(01)00204-8
    [51] Zhu GB and Blumberg DG (2002) Classification using ASTER data and SVM algorithms; The case study of Beer Sheva, Israel. Remote Sens Environ 80: 233-240. doi: 10.1016/S0034-4257(01)00305-4
    [52] Stefanov WL and Netzband M (2005) Assessment of ASTER land cover and MODIS NDVI data at multiple scales for ecological characterization of an and urban center. Remote Sens Environ 99: 31-43. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2005.04.024
    [53] U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S.G.S., (2010) USGS/EROS Find Data/Products and Data Available/ETM. 1 April 2010 [cited 2010 10 May 2010]; Available from: http://eros.usgs.gov/#/Find_Data/Products_and_Data_Available/ETM.
    [54] Irons JR (2010) The Landsat Program. National Aeronautics and Space Administration . 1 September 2010 [cited 2010 15 July 2010]; Available from: http://landsat.gsfc.nasa.gov/about/landsat7.html.
    [55] Li P, Shi C, Li Z, et al. (2013) Evaluation of ASTER GDEM using GPS benchmarks and SRTM in China. Int J Remote Sens 34: 1744-1771. doi: 10.1080/01431161.2012.726752
    [56] Liu P, Li Z, Hoey T, et al. (2011) Using advanced InSAR time series techniques to monitor landslide movements in Badong of the Three Gorges region, China. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinform 21: 253-264.
    [57] Dai FC, Lee CF, Li J, et al. (2001) Assessment of landslide susceptibility on the natural terrain of Lantau Island, Hong Kong. Environ Geol 40: 381-391. doi: 10.1007/s002540000163
    [58] Van Westen CJ, Rengers N, Soeters R (2003) Use of geomorphological information in indirect landslide susceptibility assessment. Nat Hazards 30: 399-419. doi: 10.1023/B:NHAZ.0000007097.42735.9e
    [59] Ercanoglu M and Gokceoglu C (2004) Use of fuzzy relations to produce landslide susceptibility map of a landslide prone area (West Black Sea Region, Turkey). Eng Geol75: 229-250.
    [60] Ayenew T and Barbieri G (2005) Inventory of landslides and susceptibility mapping in the Dessie area, northern Ethiopia. Eng Geol 77: 1-15. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2004.07.002
    [61] Ayalew L and Yamagishi H (2005) The application of GIS-based logistic regression for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Kakuda-Yahiko Mountains, Central Japan. Geomorphol 65: 15-31. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2004.06.010
    [62] Duman TY, Can T, Gökçeoğlu C, et al. (2006) Application of logistic regression for landslide susceptibility zoning of Cekmece Area, Istanbul, Turkey. Environ Geol 51: 241-256. doi: 10.1007/s00254-006-0322-1
    [63] Fourniadis IG, Liu JG, Mason PJ (2007) Regional assessment of landslide impact in the Three Gorges area, China, using ASTER data: Wushan-Zigui. Landslides 4: 267-278. doi: 10.1007/s10346-007-0080-5
    [64] Wang F and Li T (Eds.) (2009) Landslide Disaster Mitigation in Three Gorges Reservoir, China. Mountain Res Dev 30: 184-185.
    [65] E.R.S.D.A. (2010) About ASTER G-DEM. Available from: http://www.ersdac.or.jp/GDEM/E/1.html.
    [66] Kıncal C (2005) Engineering Geological Evaluation of Geological Units in and Around Izmir City Center with the Help of Geographical Information Systems and Remote Sensing Techniques, in The Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences. Dokuz Eylul University Izmir. p. 342.
    [67] Jimenez MJ, Fernandez MG, Zonno G, et al. (2000) Mapping soil effects in Barcelona, Spain, through an integrated GIS environment. Soil DynEarthq Eng 19: 289-301. doi: 10.1016/S0267-7261(00)00007-5
    [68] Kıncal C, Koca MY, van Loon AJ (2009) Large-scale land-suitability mapping in the GIS environment for the construction site of the University Olympic Village in Izmir (Turkey). Geol 15: 189-198.
    [69] Heywood DI, Cornelius S, Carver S (2006) An introduction to geographical information systems. 3rd ed., Harlow, England ; New York: Pearson Prentice Hall. xxxiii, 426 p.
    [70] Collins MG, Steiner FR, Rushman MJ (2001) Land-use suitability analysis in the United States: Historical development and promising technological achievements. Environ Manage 28: 611-621. doi: 10.1007/s002670010247
    [71] Sarkar S and Kanungo DP (2004) An integrated approach for landslide susceptibility mapping using remote sensing and GIS. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 70: 617-625. doi: 10.14358/PERS.70.5.617
    [72] Pandy A, Dabral PP, Chowdary VM, et al. (2008) Landslide Hazard Zonation using Remote Sensing and GIS: a case study of Dikrong river basin, Arunachal Pradesh, India. Environ Geol 54: 1517-1529. doi: 10.1007/s00254-007-0933-1
    [73] Massonnet D and Feigl KL (1998) Radar interferometry and its application to changes in the earth's surface. Rev Geophys 36: 441-500. doi: 10.1029/97RG03139
    [74] Hanssen RF (2001) Radar interferometry : data interpretation and error analysis. Remote sensing and digital image processing. Dordrecht ; Boston: Kluwer Academic. xviii, 308
    [75] Ferretti A, Prati C, Rocca F (2000) Nonlinear subsidence rate estimation using permanent scatterers in differential SAR interferometry. Ieee Trans Geosci Remote Sens 38: 2202-2212. doi: 10.1109/36.868878
    [76] Ferretti A, Prati C, Rocca F, (2001) Permanent scatterers in SAR interferometry. Ieee Trans Geosci Remote Sens 39: 8-20. doi: 10.1109/36.898661
    [77] Colesanti C, Ferretti A, Novali F, et al. (2003) SAR monitoring of progressive and seasonal ground deformation using the permanent scatterers technique. Ieee Trans GeosciRemote Sens 41: 1685-1701. doi: 10.1109/TGRS.2003.813278
    [78] Kampes B (2005) Displacement Parameter Estimation using Permanent Scatterer Interferometry. Delft Univ Technol p. 168.
    [79] Hooper A, Zebker H, Segall P, et al. (2004) A new method for measuring deformation on volcanoes and other natural terrains using InSAR persistent scatterers. Geophys Res Lett 31: 5.
    [80] Hooper A, Segall P, Zebker H (2007) Persistent scatterer interferometric synthetic aperture radar for crustal deformation analysis, with application to Volcan Alcedo, Galapagos. J Geophys Res-Solid Earth 112: B07407.
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Sameer Kumar, Alka Chadha, Rajni Rohila, Approximation of mild solution of the delay fractional integro-differential equations on the Banach spaces, 2024, 0971-3611, 10.1007/s41478-024-00820-6
    2. Mamadou Moustapha Mbaye, Amadou Diop, Gaston Mandata N’Guérékata, A Study on Square-Mean S-Asymptotically Bloch Type Periodic Solutions for Some Stochastic Evolution Systems with Piecewise Constant Argument, 2025, 13, 2227-7390, 1495, 10.3390/math13091495
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2017 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(7483) PDF downloads(1477) Cited by(5)

Figures and Tables

Figures(13)  /  Tables(5)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog