This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Negative-sample construction is an important step in machine learning-based landslide susceptibility assessment. Traditional negatives selected from flat or clearly stable terrain may introduce easy-negative bias and inflate apparent model performance. In this study, positive-unlabeled (PU) bagging and hard-negative mining were used to construct a mixed negative set combining easy negatives with harder negatives from plausible hillslope environments. To evaluate the effects of negative-sample construction, a dual-branch deep learning model comprising a hydrological sequence branch and a static environmental branch was used to assess landslide susceptibility in Kentucky, USA. The model integrated antecedent precipitation and terrestrial water-storage anomaly sequences with topographic, soil, vegetation, and lithological predictors. Five scenarios represented different negative-sample characteristics and levels of environmental matching: easy-negative, regular-mixed, hard-negative, slope-matched, and static-matched. Each scenario was applied to models trained with traditional and reconstructed negatives to compare their performance under different negative-sample conditions. The reconstructed strategy achieved higher AUC values in the hard-negative and slope-matched scenarios (0.823 and 0.752, respectively) than the traditional strategy (0.786 and 0.659, respectively) and retained higher recall at a false-positive rate (FPR) of 0.10. Conventional machine learning models showed the same pattern, indicating that the improvement was not architecture-specific. These findings support more representative negative-sample construction and more reliable regional model evaluation, providing a stronger basis for risk-informed land-use planning and landslide mitigation.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Duan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: