mathematics

Article
Landslide Displacement Prediction Based on Time-Frequency
Analysis and LMD-BiLSTM Model
Zian Lin 1,2 , Yuanfa Ji 2,3 , Weibin Liang 2,3 and Xiyan Sun 2,3, *

1 School of Computer Science and Information Security, Guilin University of Electronic Technology,
Guilin 541004, China; [email protected]
2 Guangxi Key Laboratory of Precision Navigation Technology and Application, Guilin University of Electronic
Technology, Guilin 541004, China; [email protected] (Y.J.); [email protected] (W.L.)
3 Information and Communication School, Guilin University of Electronic Technology, Guilin 541004, China
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: In landslide displacement prediction, random factors that would affect the performance of
prediction are usually ignored by using a time series analysis method. In order to solve this problem,
in this paper, a landslide displacement prediction model, the local mean decomposition-bidirectional
long short-term memory (LMD-BiLSTM), is proposed based on the time-frequency analysis method.
The model uses the local mean decomposition (LMD) algorithm to decompose landslide displacement
and obtains several subsequences of landslide displacement with different frequencies. This paper
analyzes the internal relationship between the landslide displacement and rainfall, reservoir water
level, and landslide state. The maximum information coefficient (MIC) algorithm is used to calculate
the intrinsic correlation between each subsequence of landslide displacement and rainfall, reservoir
water level, and landslide state. Subsequences of influential factors with high correlation are selected
as input variables of the bidirectional long short-term memory (BiLSTM) model to predict each
subsequence. Finally, the predicted results of each of the subsequences are added to obtain the
final predicted displacement. The proposed LMD-BiLSTM model effectiveness is verified based on
Citation: Lin, Z.; Ji, Y.; Liang, W.; Sun, the Baishuihe landslide. The prediction results and evaluation indexes show that the model can
X. Landslide Displacement Prediction accurately predict landslide displacement.
Based on Time-Frequency Analysis
and LMD-BiLSTM Model.
Keywords: landslide displacement prediction; local mean decomposition; bidirectional long short-
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203. https://
term memory; maximal information coefficient
doi.org/10.3390/math10132203

Academic Editors: Xiang Li, MSC: 68T07

Shuo Zhang and Wei Zhang

Received: 24 May 2022

Accepted: 22 June 2022
1. Introduction
Published: 24 June 2022
Landslide geological disasters are a serious type of geological disaster that occur
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
worldwide, inducing serious threats and losses to the development of human society.
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
In recent years, under the influence of extreme global climate change, seismic activities,
published maps and institutional affil-
coupled with the rapid development of human engineering activities, have become more
iations.
intense interferences to the natural environment, directly leading to geological disasters
with greater intensity and higher frequency [1,2]. This increases the difficulty of developing
landslide disaster reduction strategies [3]. Combined with land use change, population
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
growth, uncontrolled urbanization, and so on in vulnerable areas, the landslide risk level
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. continues to rise [4]. The Three Gorges Reservoir Area is one of the areas with a high
This article is an open access article incidence of landslide disasters in China [5,6]. Every year, landslides cause very large
distributed under the terms and losses to local lives and property, so it is necessary to prevent and control such landslide
conditions of the Creative Commons disasters [7].
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// Landslide displacement refers to the distance that the soil or rock mass on the slope
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ slides along the slope as a whole or separately under the influence of gravity under the
4.0/). influence of river erosion, groundwater activity, rain immersion, earthquakes, and artificial

Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10132203 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/mathematics

Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 2 of 19

slope cutting [8]. The generation of landslide displacement is influenced by both the in-
ternal geological conditions (geological structure, landform, lithology, etc.) and external
influencing factors (rainfall, reservoir water level, etc.) of a given landslide location [9–11].
Landslide displacement prediction is a frontier problem in the international landslide
research field [12]. Landslide displacement prediction is an important part of landslide
disaster loss reduction [13]. It can be used to summarize the historical displacement of
landslides and environmental conditions and also to analyze the potential relationship
between geological and meteorological environmental changes and disasters. The com-
bination of an accurate landslide displacement prediction model and landslide warning
model can effectively improve people’s ability to determine landslides in daily life, help
decision-makers make more accurate decisions [14], and take active disaster reduction
actions in advance [15] to achieve adaptive risk avoidance [16] and protect people’s lives
and health, and to achieve the purpose of improving people’s livelihood [14]. In the Three
Gorges Reservoir area, affected by rainfall and reservoir water level, landslide displacement
usually shows the characteristic of a “step shape” that represents accelerated activity in
the rainy season and remains almost steady in the dry season [17]. Therefore, defining
methods for predicting the increase in landslide displacement has become the focus of
scholars. However, landslides are very complex systems, and their deformation is affected
by their own engineering geological conditions and externally induced factors [14]. The
displacement curve is often highly nonlinear, which makes it difficult to accurately predict
the landslide displacement [8].
At present, landslide displacement prediction models are mainly divided into physics-
based and data-based models [18]. Although both models can predict landslide displace-
ment, physics-based models are complex, time-consuming, expensive [19], difficult to
establish [5], and have strict application conditions [11], which can only be used in limited
cases [20]. However, the data-based model has a simple process, accurate prediction, and
low cost [19], and it is good at dealing with nonlinear relations [21]. Therefore, physics-
based models are not as popular as data-based models [10]. Thus, most of the landslide
displacement prediction models in recent years are based on data models. The key factors
for the occurrence of landslides can be roughly divided into two categories: the slope,
lithology, and soil type are internal factors affecting landslides, while the rainfall, reservoir
water level, and snowfall are external factors affecting landslides [22].
Based on the principle of time series analysis, many studies have decomposed land-
slide displacement into trend displacement and periodic displacement [5,8,10,14,15,23],
which has well separated the nonlinear characteristics of landslide displacement. There
have also been studies on the decomposition of landslide displacement data into several
subsequences of different frequencies based on the time-frequency analysis method. Guo
et al. [24] combined the variational modal decomposition (VMD) method with the WA-
GWA-BP model, and Liu et al. [6] combined the VMD method with the periodic neural
network (PNN) model to predict landslide displacement. The empirical mode decom-
position (EMD) method was combined with the LSTM model, and a linear interpolation
technique was used to increase the size of the training dataset to accurately predict land-
slide displacement [25]. According to the wavelet transform, multiscale analysis can be
carried out on landslide displacement data through the operation functions of stretching
and shifting [26–28]. To solve the problems of modal aliasing in EMD, the Ensemble Empir-
ical Mode Decomposition (EEMD) algorithm was used to decompose the landslide data
series, further improving the prediction ability of the model [29–31]. Taking into consid-
eration the fact that EMD and EEMD have randomness and uncontrollability built in the
decomposition times of landslide displacement, Xing et al. [32] used VMD to decompose
landslide displacement.
Taking into consideration the lag fluctuation of the groundwater level, the SVC-PSO-
SVR model was proposed to predict landslide displacement by Han et al. [33]. Deng
et al. [34] used acoustic emission sound generation and rainfall as data inputs, and the
equivalent reservoir water level function model was combined with Lasso-ELM to improve
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 3 of 19

the accuracy of landslide displacement prediction. Based on the traditional gray prediction
model, L et al. improved and proposed a new gray prediction model [13]. SVR and
the Hausdorff derivative operator were used to determine model parameters with the
improved SALP group algorithm, further improving the prediction performance of the
traditional gray model [35]. Based on the optimal weight allocation method, Li et al. [36]
assigned different weights to the verhulst model and GM(1,1) model, and combined the
advantages of the two models to form a new prediction model. Considering the importance
of past experience, Hu et al. [37] used the verhulst inverse function to describe the motion
characteristics of landslides, and constructed a displacement prediction model combined
with a random forest algorithm. To predict the displacement more accurately, two new
concepts, the trend sequence and sensitivity state, were proposed, and a new model was
obtained by integrating the trend sequence and sensitivity state [38]. The cost function
and the penalty mechanism were proposed in order to force the underestimated landslide
displacement to be transferred to a higher estimate, and the ability of the model to avoid
landslide risk is taken into full consideration while predicting landslide displacement [16].
Researchers considered that it is normal that the landslide displacement will fluctuate
within the normal range in the future, and the prediction interval method was adopted
instead of point prediction; this method can obtain clear data, and the resulting model
was presented as an interval [15,29,39,40]. Interval prediction can not only predict the
future variation trend of data but also obtain the variation range of landslide displacement,
providing an important basis for decision-making regarding landslide disaster prevention
and mitigation [21]. In recent years, with the development of technology, the local mean
decomposition (LMD) algorithm has been increasingly applied, and an increasing number
of studies have begun to use the LMD algorithm to address nonlinear problems in various
fields [41–45]. Inspired by previous studies, this paper presents a new theory that intends
to apply the LMD algorithm to process typical nonlinear landslide displacement data
on the basis of previous research results and time-frequency analysis methods and to
propose a new local mean decomposition-bidirectional long short-term memory (LMD-
BiLSTM) model.
The LMD-BiLSTM model can decompose nonlinear and nonstationary data series well,
it can solve the problem of ignoring random displacement in time series analysis, and the
LMD algorithm is used to decompose the original displacement data and influencing factors
into several sub-time-series data of different frequencies. Due to the complex relationship
between influencing displacement factors and landslide displacement, the correlation
between them cannot be well quantified. Therefore, to improve the accuracy of prediction,
the maximum information coefficient (MIC) algorithm is introduced in this paper.
MIC correlation calculations are carried out between the subsequence of influencing
displacement factors and each of the subsequences of landslide displacement, and the data
with high correlation are selected as the input variable of each subsequence prediction,
which improves the validity and reliability of the input data. Considering that the rainfall
and reservoir water level of landslides have a similar change trend in each time period, the
bidirectional long short-term memory (BiLSTM) model is used to predict each sub-series
and the final predicted displacement of the landslide is obtained by adding the predicted
results. The case of a Baishuihe landslide in the Three Gorges region of China is taken to
verify the prediction performance and advantages of the model.
The main contributions of this study are as follows.
1. In order to solve the problem where the time series analysis method ignores the
random factors, which would affect the accuracy of prediction, based on the time-
frequency analysis method, the LMD algorithm is used for the first time to decompose
landslide displacement data and factors affecting displacement into multiple instan-
taneous frequency subsequences with physical significance. The disadvantages of
EMD or EEMD mode aliasing and endpoint effects are solved, and the integrity of the
signal is better preserved.
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 4 of 19

2. The internal relationship between landslide displacement, rainfall, and reservoir water
level are analyzed after obtaining the landslide displacement and the subsequences of
the influencing displacement factors through the LMD algorithm. The MIC method is
used to calculate the correlation between each subsequence of landslide displacement
and each of the subsequences of the influencing displacement factors. The MIC
method can improve the reliability and validity of data, it discards less correlated
data, and it selects more correlated data as the input variables of each subsequence.
3. Considering that the rainfall and reservoir water level of the Baishuihe landslide have
the same change trend in each time period, the BiLSTM model is used to predict each
subsequence of landslide displacement. Finally, the displacement obtained by adding
the subsequence data is the predicted displacement of the landslide.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Local Mean Decomposition
The LMD algorithm was first proposed by Jonathan S. Smith [46], and its advantages
over EMD in EEG signal processing were discussed. In recent years, the LMD algorithm, a
decomposition method for nonlinear nonstationary signals, has been applied to tool chatter
areas [41], solar radiation prediction [42], underwater acoustic signal processing [43], daily
natural gas load forecasting [44], time series compressor stall processes [45], and many
other fields.
The core idea of the LMD algorithm is to adaptively decompose a complex nonstation-
ary multicomponent signal into the sum of several product functions (PF) with the physical
significance of instantaneous frequency, for which each PF component is directly calculated
by an envelope signal and a pure frequency modulation (FM) signal. The envelope signal
is the instantaneous amplitude of the PF component, and the instantaneous frequency of
the PF component can be directly calculated from the pure frequency modulation signal.
Furthermore, by combining the instantaneous amplitude and instantaneous frequency of
all PF components, the complete time-frequency distribution of the original signal can
be obtained. The LMD algorithm can decompose complex nonlinear landslide displace-
ment data into several PFs with physical significance, and its decomposition steps are as
follows [43,46]:
n + n i +1
mi = i (1)
2
| n i − n i +1 |
αi = (2)
2
where mi is the i-th average value of two consecutive extreme values ni ; ni+1 αi is the local
magnitude of each halfwave oscillation; i = 1, 2, . . . , m − 1 (where m is the number of
extrema). The mean mi of all continuous extreme values must form a straight line. The
moving average method is used to smooth the mean mi and αi , and the local mean function
m11 (t) and the envelope estimation function α11 (t) are obtained. Then, m11 (t) is separated
from the original signal X (t) to obtain the residual signal h11 (t):

h11 = X (t) − m11 (t) (3)

Then, h11 (t) is divided by α11 (t) to conduct amplitude modulation and yield:

h11 (t)
s11 (t) = (4)
α11

where s11 (t) is a pure frequency modulation signal, and the process is repeated q times
until a pure FM signal s1q (t) whose envelope function meets α1(q+1) (t) = 1 is obtained. The
corresponding envelope α1 (t) is shown in the formula:
n
α1 (t) = α11 (t)α12 (t) · · · α1n (t) = ∏ α1q (t) (5)
q −1
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 5 of 19

where q is the number of iterations and the first component PF1 (t) is:

PF1 (t) = s1q (t) × α1 (t) (6)

The PF1 (t) is subtracted from the original signal X (t) to obtain the new signal. The
above steps are repeated to obtain PF2 (t). These steps are repeated until the last signal
becomes a constant or contains no more oscillations, and then the residual signal uk (t) can
be obtained. Therefore, the original signal X (t) can be decomposed into the sum of the PF
component and uk (t), as shown in the formula below:

k
X (t) = ∑ PFp (t) + uk (t) (7)
p −1

2.2. Maximal Information Coefficient

Reshef et al. [47] proposed the MIC concept that can be used to measure the nonlinear
correlation between two variables based on mutual information theory in information
theory. The main idea is as follows: if there is some correlation between the two variables,
then after some sort of meshing on the scatter plot of the two variables, the mutual infor-
mation of these two variables can be calculated according to the approximate probability
density distribution of the variables in the grid. After regularization, this value can be
used to measure the correlation between the two variables. When the MIC is 0, it indicates
that the pairs of variables are completely independent; when the MIC is 1, it indicates
that there is some functional relationship between the pairs of variables. The larger the
MIC is, the stronger the correlation between variables is. For a set of ordered pair datasets
D = {( xi , yi ), i = 1, 2, . . . , n}, if the X-axis is divided into X cells and the Y-axis into Y cells,
the result is an x × y grid G. The points in the dataset D land on G based on the proportion
of approximate D|G, representing its probability distribution. Therefore, the maximum
mutual information can be defined as follows:

I ∗ ( D, x, y) = max I ( D | G ) (8)

where the maximum value in the above formula is the maximum value of mutual informa-
tion on G of all possible networks in which D divides the X-axis into X grids and the Y-axis
into Y grids. I ( D | G ) indicates mutual information in the case of probability distribution
D|G. The elements of the x-th row and y-th column of the eigenmatrix M(D) on the ordered
pair dataset D are shown in the formula:

I ∗ ( D, x, y)
M ( D ) x,y = (9)
log(min{ x, y})

Then, the ordered pair dataset D divided by data scale n and the number of grids is
less than or equal to B(n). Then, the MIC of dataset D is defined as follows:

MIC ( D ) = max M ( D ) x,y (10)
xy< B(n)

According to the actual application [47–49], B(n) = n0.6 is recommended, so this paper
also chooses this value.

2.3. Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory Model

Landslide displacement is affected by external factors such as rainfall and reservoir
level, and the collected data series have certain fluctuations and periodicities. To analyze
and predict the time series data of landslide displacement, this paper uses an improved
recurrent neural network (RNN) model to predict landslide displacement. A long short-
term memory network (LSTM) was proposed by Hochreiter et al. [50]; it is a special RNN
 2.3. Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory Model
Landslide displacement is affected by external factors such as rainfall and reservoir
level, and the collected data series have certain fluctuations and periodicities. To analyze
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 and predict the time series data of landslide displacement, this paper uses an improved 6 of 19
recurrent neural network (RNN) model to predict landslide displacement. A long short-
term memory network (LSTM) was proposed by Hochreiter et al. [50]; it is a special RNN
that,
that,because
becauseofofthe theadded
addedgate
gatemechanism
mechanismthat thatisisadded,
added,can cansolve
solvethe theRNNRNNgradient
gradient
explosion and gradient disappearance problems to a certain
explosion and gradient disappearance problems to a certain extent. extent.
OnOnthe
thebasis
basisofofa atraditional RNN,
traditional RNN, the LSTM
the LSTM model
model introduces
introduces𝑐 cttotostore
storelong-term
long-term
memory.
memory.The Themodel
modelcancanbebemade
madetotoselectively
selectivelyupdate
updatethe thememory
memoryunit
unitsosothatthatthe
thecurrent
current
node
nodelearns
learnsthe
thecharacteristics
characteristicsofofthe
theinput
inputdata
datafrom
fromaalong longtime
timeago.
ago.ThereThereare arethree
three
control
controlgates
gatesinineach
eachLSTM
LSTMunit,
unit,namely
namelythe theinput gate i𝑖t , forget
input gate gate f𝑓t , ,and
forget gate andoutput
outputgategateot .
𝑜 The
. The structure
structure ofof
thethe LSTM
LSTM model
model is is shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 1. 1.

Figure 1. The LSTM model structure.

Figure 1. The LSTM model structure.
Assuming the input sequence x = { x1 , x2 , . . . xt }, xt = { xt1 , xt2 , . . . xtk } represents the
Assuming the input sequence 𝑥 = {𝑥 , 𝑥 , … 𝑥 }, 𝑥 = {𝑥 , 𝑥 , … 𝑥 } represents the
real vector data of the k-dimension under time step t, the LSTM model is used to construct
real vector data of the k-dimension under time step t, the LSTM model is used to construct
landslide displacement data, and the updating formula of each internal unit is as follows.
landslide
Thedisplacement
forget gate fdata, and the updating formula of each internal unit is as follows.
t is used to forget the information of the state ct−1 of the upper
The forget gate 𝑓
memory unit, and its formula isto forget the information of the state 𝑐
is used of the upper
memory unit, and its formula is
 
f t𝑓==σ𝜎(𝑊
W f x𝑥t +
+U𝑈 f ℎht−1 +
+ 𝑏b f) (11)
(11)

where𝑊
where W f isisthe
theweight
weightmatrix
matrixof ofthetheforget gate, 𝑏b f is
forgetgate, is the
the bias
bias of of the
the forget
forget gate, and σ𝜎is
gate, and
isthe
thesigmoid
sigmoidfunction.
function.
The
Thecalculation
calculationof ofthe
the candidate
candidate state of of memory
memoryunit unitcet𝑐̃is is shown
shown in in
thethe formula,
formula, and
and
the the input
input gategate 𝑖 determines
it determines the reserved
the reserved information
information of theof the candidate
candidate state instate in the
the current
current
unit. unit.
cet = tanh(Wc xt + Uc ht−1 + bc ) (12)
𝑐̃ = 𝑡𝑎𝑛ℎ(𝑊 𝑥 + 𝑈 ℎ + 𝑏 ) (12)
it = σ(Wi xt + Ui ht−1 + bi ) (13)
= 𝜎(𝑊matrices
where Wi and Wc represent the 𝑖weight 𝑥 + 𝑈 ℎof the
+ 𝑏input
) gate it and candidate (13) state
ct , respectively; b and bc represent the corresponding bias quantities of it and ct . it and f t
where 𝑊 and 𝑊 i represent the weight matrices of the input gate 𝑖 and candidate state
e e
combine with the previous memory state ct−1 and the current candidate state cet to update
𝑐̃ , respectively; 𝑏 and 𝑏 represent the corresponding bias quantities of 𝑖 and 𝑐̃ . 𝑖
the current memory unit state ct .

ct = f t  ct−1 + it  cet (14)

where  indicates multiplication. The input gate ot is mainly used to control the output of
the memory unit state value.

ot = σ (Wo xt + Uo ht−1 + bo ) (15)

Mathematics 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 20
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 7 of 19

and 𝑓 combine with the previous memory state 𝑐 and the current candidate state 𝑐̃
to update the current memory unit state 𝑐 .
The weight and bias of each unit in the above types are dynamic and can be updated
through data training to predict landslide displacement in time series. In traditional LSTM
𝑐 = 𝑓 ⊙ 𝑐 + 𝑖 ⊙ 𝑐̃ (14)
models, the information is one-way, and the model can use past information but not
future ⊙
where information. To adapt to the
indicates multiplication. Thevariation
input gate 𝑜 is mainlyof
characteristics landslide
used displacement,
to control the output
precipitation, and reservoir
of the memory unit state value.water level, the BiLSTM model was selected to construct the
prediction model.
The BiLSTM model is formed 𝑜 =by𝜎(𝑊 𝑥 + 𝑈 ℎ +of𝑏positive
the combination ) and reverse LSTM [51],(15)
and its structure is shown in Figure 2. Forward LSTM can obtain the past data information
The weight and bias of each unit in the above types are dynamic and can be updated
of the input sequence, and backward LSTM can obtain the future data information of the
through data training to predict landslide displacement in time series. In traditional LSTM
input sequence [52]. The forward and backward LSTM training processes of time series
models, the information is one-way, and the model can use past information but not fu-
data can further improve the global integrity of feature extraction. At time t, the output
ture information. To adapt to the variation characteristics of landslide → displacement,← pre-
value Ht ofand
cipitation, thereservoir
hidden layer
wateroflevel,
BiLSTMthe is composed
BiLSTM of forward
model h t and
was selected backwardthe
to construct h pre-
t:
diction model. → −−−−→
The BiLSTM model ishformed by the(hcombination
t = LSTM t−1 , xt , ct−1 ), of
t ∈positive
[1, T ] and reverse LSTM [51], (16)
and its structure is shown in Figure 2. Forward LSTM can obtain the past data information
of the input sequence, and← ←−−−LSTM
−
hbackward can obtain the future data information of (17)
t = LSTM ( ht+1 , xt , ct+1 ), t ∈ [ T, 1]
the
input sequence [52]. The forward and backward → ←  LSTM training processes of time series
data can further improve the global integrity
Ht = h of feature extraction. At time t, the output
t, h t (18)
→ ←
value 𝐻 of the hidden layer of BiLSTM is composed of forward ℎ and backward ℎ :

Figure 2.
Figure The BiLSTM
2. The BiLSTM model
model structure.
structure.

After obtaining Ht , the landslide displacement is obtained by a fully connected layer

→
as the prediction output of the = 𝐿𝑆𝑇𝑀⃗(ℎ , 𝑥 , 𝑐 ), 𝑡 ∈ 1, 𝑇
ℎ model. (16)

3. Results ←
⃖
ℎ = 𝐿𝑆𝑇𝑀 (ℎ ,𝑥 ,𝑐 ), 𝑡 ∈ 𝑇, 1 (17)
3.1. A Real Case
The Baishuihe landslide is located on the → south
← bank of the main trunk road of the
𝐻 =Badong
ℎ , ℎ County, 56 km away from the three (18)
Yangtze River between Zigui County and
Gorges Dam
After obtaining 𝐻 , athe
sites, with longitude 1100 3200 0900 and
landslideofdisplacement latitude by
is obtained of 31 0 0100 3400 . The specific
a fully connected layer
geographical
as location
the prediction outputof of
thethe
Baishuihe
model. landslide is shown in Figure 3.

3. Results
3.1. A Real Case
The Baishuihe landslide is located on the south bank of the main trunk road of the
Yangtze River between Zigui County and Badong County, 56 km away from the three
Gorges Dam sites, with a longitude of 110′32″09″ and latitude of 31′01″34″. The specific
geographical location of the Baishuihe landslide is shown in Figure 3.
Mathematics 2022,10,
Mathematics2022, 10,2203
x FOR PEER REVIEW 88 of
of 19
20

Figure3.3.The
Figure Thegeographical
geographicallocation
locationof
ofBaishuihe
Baishuihelandslide.
landslide.

Theoverall
The overalltopography
topographyof ofthe
thelandslide
landslideareaareaisishigh
highininthe
the south
south and and low
low in
in the
the north.
north.
The
Therelative
relativeelevation
elevationdifference
differenceofof
thetheterrain in in
terrain thethe
landslide
landslide area is approximately
area is approximately 300300
m,
the
m, frontal elevation
the frontal is approximately
elevation is approximately 70 m,70the
m,north–south
the north–south length is 600ism,
length the
600 m,east–west
the east–
width is 700 is
west width m,700andm, the average
and thickness
the average of the slide
thickness of thebody
slideisbody
approximately
is approximately30 m [6,10].
30 m
The longitudinal sliding surface of the Baishuihe landslide area is a
[6,10]. The longitudinal sliding surface of the Baishuihe landslide area is a folded line,folded line, which is
steep at the back and shallow at the front, and the middle slide surface
which is steep at the back and shallow at the front, and the middle slide surface is between is between the two
sliding
the twosurfaces. The Baishuihe
sliding surfaces. landslidelandslide
The Baishuihe area has area
two slip
has zone layers,
two slip zone the shallow
layers, theslide
shal-
zone is thezone
low slide interface
is theofinterface
gravel soil
of and
gravelcataclasite,
soil and the thickness
cataclasite, theis thickness
approximately 0.9~3.13 m,
is approximately
and the buried
0.9~3.13 m, anddepth is 12.4~20.3
the buried depth ism12.4~20.3
[19,27]. mThe deep The
[19,27]. slidedeep
zoneslideis thezonecontact
is thesurface
contact
between
surface between cataclastic rock and carbonaceous silt mudstone, with a thickness m
cataclastic rock and carbonaceous silt mudstone, with a thickness of 0.6~1.5 of
and burial
0.6~1.5 depth
m and of 18.9~34.1
burial m [31]. According
depth of 18.9~34.1 to the classification
m [31]. According of HungrofetHungr
to the classification al. [53],
et
the Baishuihe
al. [53], landslidelandslide
the Baishuihe belongs to the clay/silt
belongs to the planar
clay/siltslide.
planar Its slide.
deformation is slow. Ais
Its deformation
topographical map of the
slow. A topographical mapBaishuihe landslidelandslide
of the Baishuihe area is shown
area is inshown
Figure in 4. Figure 4.

Figure 4. The GPS monitoring location of the Baishuihe landslide area.

Figure 4. The GPS monitoring location of the Baishuihe landslide area.
Eleven global positioning system (GPS) monitoring sites have been installed in the
Eleven
Baishuihe global positioning
landslide system
area. The GPSs (GPS) monitoring
are installed sites have
by the National been installed
Cryosphere Desert in the
Data
Baishuihe
Center. Thelandslide
purposearea.
is toThe GPSs the
observe are installed
impact ofbythe
theThree
National Cryosphere
Gorges Dam onDesert Data
landslides
Center. The purpose is to observe the impact of the Three Gorges Dam on landslides in
Mathematics 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 20
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 9 of 19

this area. The ZG118 monitoring station is located in the center of the landslide area, and
itin this
can area.
well Thethe
reflect ZG118
wholemonitoring
situation ofstation is located
the Baishuihe in the center
landslide. of the
It is used landslide
by most area,
research
and it can well reflect the whole situation of the Baishuihe landslide. It is used
institutes [11,19,54], so the data from the ZG118 monitoring station are also used as rep- by most
research institutes [11,19,54], so the data from the ZG118 monitoring station are also used
resentatives of Baishuihe landslide data in this study. In this study, the displacement data
as representatives of Baishuihe landslide data in this study. In this study, the displacement
of the Baishuihe landslide area for 108 months are used, and the variations in rainfall and
data of the Baishuihe landslide area for 108 months are used, and the variations in rainfall
reservoir water level within the landslide range in the same period are monitored. The
and reservoir water level within the landslide range in the same period are monitored. The
data-collection time period was from January 2004 to December 2012, and one data point
data-collection time period was from January 2004 to December 2012, and one data point
was collected every month, as shown in Figure 5. This dataset and the topographical map
was collected every month, as shown in Figure 5. This dataset and the topographical map
are provided by the National Cryosphere Desert Data Center/National Service Center for
are provided by the National Cryosphere Desert Data Center/National Service Center for
Speciality Environmental Observation Stations.
Speciality Environmental Observation Stations.

Thevariations
Figure5.5.The
Figure variationsininthe
thedisplacement,
displacement,rainfall,
rainfall,and
andreservoir
reservoirwater
waterlevel
levelofofthe
theBaishuihe
Baishuihe
landslidearea.
landslide area.

3.2. Analysis of Influencing Factors

3.2. Analysis of Influencing Factors
Figure 5 shows that from April to August every year, the rainy season of the Baishuihe
Figure 5 shows that from April to August every year, the rainy season of the
landslide area occurs, and the amount of rainfall continues to rise. Every year, Baishuihe’s
Baishuihe landslide area occurs, and the amount of rainfall continues to rise. Every year,
landslide displacement increases most rapidly during the height of the rainy season, and
Baishuihe’s landslide displacement increases most rapidly during the height of the rainy
the largest increase in landslide displacement occurred during the rainy season in 2007.
season, and the largest increase in landslide displacement occurred during the rainy sea-
The dry season in the Baishuihe landslide area is from January to March. There is less
son in 2007. The dry season in the Baishuihe landslide area is from January to March.
rainfall in these months, and the landslide displacement hardly increases. As rainfall
There is less rainfall in these months, and the landslide displacement hardly increases. As
increases, the amount of water entering the slope increases, making the overall weight
rainfall increases, the amount of water entering the slope increases, making the overall
of the slope rise, thus increasing the speed of the landslide. After rainwater enters the
weight
slope, ofthethe slope of
interior rise,
thethus increasing
slope becomesthe wet,speed of thethe
reducing landslide. Afterand
friction force rainwater enters
increasing the
the slope, the interior of the slope becomes wet, reducing the friction force
landslide probability. Rainfall is usually used as one of the inputs to predict landslide and increasing
the landslide probability.
displacement models [55–58].Rainfall is usually used as one of the inputs to predict landslide
displacement models [55–58].
Although the largest increase in landslide displacement occurred during the rainy
season of 2007,the
Although largest
there wereincrease in landslide
three years with moredisplacement
rainfall than occurred during
that in 2007, the rainy
suggesting that
season of 2007, there were three years with more rainfall than that in 2007,
rainfall is not the only factor affecting landslide displacement. Because of the complexity suggesting thatof
rainfall is notgeological
the internal the only factor affecting
structure landslide landslides
of a landslide, displacement. Because
usually of the
contain complexity
several different
ofstates,
the internal geological structure of a landslide, landslides usually contain
and landslide stability differs between such states. When a landslide is relatively several dif-
ferent
stable,states,
it is and landslide
difficult stabilitya differs
to produce between suchwhen
large displacement states.strong
When external
a landslide is rela-
factors are
tively stable, it is
encountered. difficult
When to produce
a landslide is inaan
large displacement
unstable whendisplacement
state, a large strong external mayfactors
occur
are encountered.
even if externalWhen
factors a landslide
of generalis strength
in an unstable state, a large Therefore,
are encountered. displacement themay occur
maximum
even
rainfall is not the factor that corresponds to the maximum landslide displacement; rain-
if external factors of general strength are encountered. Therefore, the maximum this is
consistent with the actual displacement in the Baishuihe landslide area. To some extent,
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 10 of 19

the displacement before the landslide can represent the state of the landslide at that time
and the stability of the landslide [14,17,28,59]. Therefore, we take the displacement of the
landslide in the previous month as the state of the landslide as one of the inputs of the
prediction model.
Since 2003, the Three Gorges Dam has released water during the rainy season to ensure
that the dam is safe; subsequently, the reservoir level of the dam has dropped significantly.
It can be observed from Figure 5 that the rate of landslide displacement increases at the
end of the decrease in the reservoir water level every year, indicating that the decrease
in the reservoir water level has a certain lag effect on landslide displacement. When the
water level of the reservoir decreases for a certain period of time, the resistance of the
landslide surface will be reduced. When the reservoir releases more water, the impact
force of the landslide also increases with the increase in water flow, making the structure of
the landslide more easily affected such that a landslide is more likely to occur. Therefore,
the reservoir water level is also considered one of the influencing factors of landslide
displacement [60–63].
In this paper, it is speculated that landslide displacement is the result of the compre-
hensive action of rainfall, reservoir level, and landslide state. Therefore, rainfall, reservoir
water level, and landslide state are selected as the input for the prediction model in this
paper.

3.3. Decomposition Data Using the LMD Algorithm

In this experiment, we used 108 months of data for simulation verification. The
data of the first 96 months were used as a training set for the training model, and the
data from the last 12 months were used as a test set for model prediction to verify the
performance of the landslide displacement prediction model. According to the time-
frequency analysis method, the LMD algorithm was used to decompose the landslide
displacement, precipitation, reservoir water level, and landslide state from high frequency
to low frequency into six subsequences, as shown in Figure 6.
The landslide displacement, rainfall, reservoir water level, and landslide state were
decomposed by the LMD algorithm, and five PFs with different frequencies and one uk
residual component were obtained.

3.4. Calculating the Correlation between Landslide Displacement and Influencing Factors
Due to the complexity of the landslide attributes, there are many factors affecting
landslides, and different landslide states cause different landslide consequences when the
same influence conditions are met. After the landslide displacement and influencing factor
data are decomposed into subsequence data of different frequencies by the LMD algorithm,
the subsequences of landslide displacement for each frequency correspond to multiple
influencing factors of different frequencies. However, any influencing factors with too little
correlation reduce the prediction performance of the model; additionally, using too many
irrelevant factors for prediction leads to an increasing number of deviations in the results.
Therefore, the MIC algorithm is adopted in this paper to calculate the correlation degree
between each of the subsequences of the landslide displacement and the different frequency
subsequences of the various influencing factors. Table 1 shows the MIC correlation results
for each set of landslide displacement subsequence with other subsequences.
The selection of an appropriate MIC value is particularly critical for the selection of
influencing factors and the final prediction results of the model. MIC values that are too
small result in factors with low correlation participating in the training and prediction of
the prediction model. A large range of MIC values leads to fewer datasets for the model to
use. According to the results of the study [17] and several experiments, this paper selects
the influential factors with MIC > 0.3 as the input of the prediction model. The final results
show that there are 16, 13, 16, 17, 14, and 17 input variables for PF1 , PF2 , PF3 , PF4 , PF5 , and
uk in the landslide displacement subsequences, respectively.
 Mathematics 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 20
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 11 of 19

Figure6.6.Subsequence
Figure Subsequencedecomposition
decompositionofofthe
thelandslide
landslidedisplacement,
displacement,precipitation,
precipitation,reservoir
reservoirwater
water
level,
level,and
andlandslide
landslidestate.
state.
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 12 of 19

Table 1. MIC results for each landslide displacement subsequence with other subsequences.

Landslide Influence Factor Subsequences

Displacement Influence Factor Types
Subsequences PF1 PF2 PF3 PF4 PF5 uk
Precipitation 0.317 0.375 0.418 0.331 0.479 0.404
PF1 Reservoir water level 0.267 0.255 0.403 0.351 0.424 0.521
State of landslide 0.477 0.526 0.521 0.422 0.386 0.521
Precipitation 0.245 0.231 0.289 0.287 0.568 0.508
PF2 Reservoir water level 0.241 0.364 0.396 0.419 0.383 0.678
State of landslide 0.413 0.616 0.569 0.423 0.546 0.681
Precipitation 0.208 0.317 0.521 0.403 0.486 0.697
PF3 Reservoir water level 0.281 0.419 0.353 0.448 0.528 0.915
State of landslide 0.529 0.471 0.525 0.545 0.579 0.955
Precipitation 0.237 0.345 0.573 0.512 0.523 0.901
PF4 Reservoir water level 0.366 0.454 0.448 0.566 0.646 0.897
State of landslide 0.541 0.813 0.591 0.978 0.517 0.923
Precipitation 0.228 0.246 0.697 0.524 0.591 0.891
PF5 Reservoir water level 0.258 0.278 0.325 0.615 0.525 0.971
State of landslide 0.448 0.652 0.679 0.601 0.379 0.982
Precipitation 0.251 0.348 0.472 0.423 0.684 0.793
uk Reservoir water level 0.636 0.442 0.433 0.565 0.888 0.879
State of landslide 0.402 0.909 0.704 0.861 0.602 0.972

3.5. Prediction Using the BiLSTM Model

After the MIC algorithm calculation, the input variables of each subsequence of
landslide displacement are obtained. The forecasting process of the BiLSTM model is
introduced with PF1 as an example. PF1 has 16 input variables, which are combined into
two 16-dimensional vectors. A vector of the model’s training set contains data for the
first 96 months, and the other vector contains data for the next 12 months as a test set for
the model. Training sets are used to train the BiLSTM model, and the model adjusts the
parameters adaptively in the training process. After the training, the test set is input into
the trained BiLSTM model to obtain the prediction results. The process of PF1 prediction
is similar to those of the other five subsequences, and the prediction results obtained are
shown in Figure 7.
After the six components of landslide displacement are predicted, they are summed to
obtain the final prediction result, as shown in Figure 8.
Mathematics 2022,Mathematics
10, 2203 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 20 13 of 19

Mathematics 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 20

The 7.
Figure 7.Figure components of the
The components landslide
of the displacement
landslide displacement prediction
prediction results.results.

After the six components of landslide displacement are predicted, they are summed
to obtain the final prediction result, as shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8.
Figure Final prediction
8. Final prediction results
results of
of landslide
landslide displacement.
displacement.

4. Discussion
4. Discussion
Landslide displacement prediction is a typical regression problem, so to describe the
Landslide
prediction displacement
performance of theprediction
LMD-BiLSTMis a typical
model regression problem,
more accurately, this so to describe
study the
selects four
prediction performance of the LMD-BiLSTM model more accurately, this study selects
four performance indicators to evaluate the prediction effects of various models. The
mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), mean absolute error (MAE), root-mean-square
error (RMSE), and determination coefficient R-squared (R2) are calculated. Each evalua-
tion index is defined as follows:
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 14 of 19

performance indicators to evaluate the prediction effects of various models. The mean
absolute percentage error (MAPE), mean absolute error (MAE), root-mean-square error
(RMSE), and determination coefficient R-squared (R2 ) are calculated. Each evaluation index
is defined as follows:
1 n
MAE = ∑ |ŷi − yi | (19)
n i =1
s
1 n
n i∑
RMSE = (ŷi − yi )2 (20)
=1

100% n  ŷi − yi 
 

n i∑
MAPE =  y  (21)
=1 i
n
2
∑ (ŷi − yi )
i =1
R2 = 1 − n (22)
2
∑ ( yi − yi )
i =1

where n indicates the number of landslide data points, ŷ = {ŷ1 , ŷ2 , . . . , ŷn } is the predicted
value of the model, y = {y1 , y2 , . . . yn } is the actual value of the Baishuihe landslide,
and y = {y1 , y2 , . . . yn } is the average value of the actual Baishuihe landslide. The three
evaluation indexes MAE, RMSE, and MAPE all indicate that the smaller the value is, the
better the performance and accuracy of the model. R2 also evaluates the model according
to the numerical value, and the higher the evaluation value is, the better the performance
and accuracy of the model.
To further verify the effectiveness and predictive performance of the LMD-BiLSTM
model, this study uses the LMD-BiLSTM without MIC and the LMD-LSTM model to
simulate 108 data points of the Baishuihe landslide simultaneously. Four models are used
to simultaneously predict five PF components and uk components, and the prediction
results are shown in Figure 9.
After obtaining five PF components and uk components, the final prediction result
is obtained by adding the subsequence prediction results of these models. To make a
better comparison, the BiLSTM model is added to compare the final landslide displacement
prediction results. The comparison of the final landslide displacement prediction results is
shown in Figure 10.
We can see from Figures 9 and 10 that the BiLSTM model can also be used to predict
landslide displacement without the processing of the LMD algorithm and MIC method, but
it can only roughly predict the overall trend, and the predicted fluctuations are large. The
prediction result of the LMD-BiLSTM model is similar to the curve of the LMD-BiLSTM
without the MIC model, but it can be observed that the prediction deviation of some points
is too large, which is the result of selecting too many input factors with low correlation
without the MIC algorithm. The prediction results of the LMD-LSTM model are not as
accurate as those of the LMD-BiLSTM model either on the whole or at a certain point, due
to the lack of information about the future during model training and prediction. The
experimental results also verify this idea.
To intuitively compare the performance of these prediction models, this paper uses
MAE, MAPE, RMSE, and R2 to evaluate the models. The results are shown in Table 2.
 Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 Mathematics 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of
15 of 20
19

Mathematics 2022, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 20

Figure 9. Comparison of the subsequence prediction results for landslide displacement based on four
Figure 9. Comparison of the subsequence prediction results for landslide displacement based on
models. four models.

After obtaining five 𝑃𝐹 components and 𝑢 components, the final prediction result
is obtained by adding the subsequence prediction results of these models. To make a bet-
ter comparison, the BiLSTM model is added to compare the final landslide displacement
prediction results. The comparison of the final landslide displacement prediction results
is shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10. Final prediction results for the landslide displacement of four models.
Figure 10. Final prediction results for the landslide displacement of four models.

We can see from Figures 9 and 10 that the BiLSTM model can also be used to predict
landslide displacement without the processing of the LMD algorithm and MIC method,
but it can only roughly predict the overall trend, and the predicted fluctuations are large.
The prediction result of the LMD-BiLSTM model is similar to the curve of the LMD-
BiLSTM without the MIC model, but it can be observed that the prediction deviation of
some points is too large, which is the result of selecting too many input factors with low
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 16 of 19

Table 2. Comparison of four models for landslide displacement prediction.

Models MAE MAPE RMSE R2

LMD-BiLSTM 7.276 0.322 8.511 0.976
LMD-BiLSTM
17.061 0.749 21.156 0.853
without MIC
LMD-LSTM 15.147 0.670 18.215 0.891
BiLSTM 24.501 1.074 29.524 0.713

In addition to using the model prediction performance evaluation index to evaluate

the prediction results of these models, this paper also uses the minimum error, maximum
error, relative error, and mean absolute error to intuitively judge the prediction performance
of the model, and the results are shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Accuracy of the predicted landslide displacement based on the four models.

Mean Absolute
Models Minimum Error Maximum Error Relative Error
Error
LMD-BiLSTM 0.518 16.544 3.784 7.109
LMD-BiLSTM
1.386 39.061 9.016 17.062
without MIC
LMD-LSTM 1.680 30.583 7.983 15.168
BiLSTM 1.987 49.078 12.861 24.489

Tables 2 and 3 show that the model processed by the LMD algorithm and MIC algo-
rithm is superior to the pure neural network BiLSTM model in terms of the comprehensive
prediction level at all time points, the stability of the whole prediction, and the fluctuation
change at a single time point. This superiority is because the hybrid model exploits the
advantages of the LMD algorithm, which is good at analyzing the characteristics of data
signals and reasonably reflecting the time and frequency distribution of data in various
spaces and scales, which are advantages of the use of the MIC algorithm, which can calcu-
late the degree of nonlinear association between two variables and also use the advantages
of the BiLSTM model, which is good at processing time series data. Therefore, the hybrid
model has the advantages of these algorithms and models. Because LMD-BiLSTM without
the MIC model does not have the MIC algorithm to calculate the correlation of influencing
factors, its prediction performance is between the LMD-BiLSTM model and BiLSTM model.
Although the BiLSTM model takes the information sharing each cycle into account in the
prediction, its prediction performance degrades because it does not remove redundant
influencing factors, with the final prediction result being inferior to LMD-LSTM.

5. Conclusions
Landslide displacement prediction has been studied for a long time but is still a chal-
lenging research topic. In order to solve the disadvantage of ignoring random displacement
in most time analysis methods, this paper proposes an LMD-BiLSTM model based on the
time-frequency analysis method for landslide displacement prediction. The LMD algo-
rithm is used for the first time to deconstruct the nonlinear and nonstationary data series
of landslide displacement and influencing factors into multiple subseries. To improve
the prediction accuracy, the MIC algorithm is used to quantify the correlation between
the subsequences of landslide displacement and the subsequences of factors affecting
the displacement; moreover, the factors with greater correlation are selected as the input
variables of the model. According to the constantly changing characteristics of landslide
displacement, precipitation, and reservoir water level in multiple time periods, the BiLSTM
model is used to predict the subsequence components of landslide displacement, and the
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 17 of 19

final landslide predicted displacement is obtained by adding the predicted results. The real
landslide dataset of the Baishuihe landslide in the Three Gorges Reservoir area of China
is used in the experiment, and excellent results are obtained. The final results show that
the new LMD-BiLSTM model proposed in this study can predict landslide displacement
smoothly and accurately. In the future, the LMD-BiLSTM model will be improved accord-
ing to the different characteristics of each landslide and then popularized and applied to
the displacement prediction of other landslides. In addition, the LMD-BiLSTM model could
also be applied to other forecasting fields, such as rainfall prediction and power generation
prediction, to assist decision-makers in continuously improving the process of making
reasonable judgments. The decision makers can add the landslide displacement prediction
results into the landslide warning system to make their own judgment according to the
landslide displacement, and the scientific community can build on these findings and apply
these methods to other areas of prediction. The results presented in this paper may not be
applicable to the early warning of landslides, because prediction models require a certain
amount of monitoring data, which is not suitable for early warning.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, X.S., Y.J. and Z.L.; methodology, Z.L. and X.S.; formal
analysis, Y.J. and X.S.; resources, Z.L., Y.J., W.L. and X.S.; writing—original draft preparation, Z.L.,
Y.J. and X.S.; writing—review and editing, Z.L., Y.J. and X.S.; funding acquisition, X.S. and W.L. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant
No. 62161007, Grant No. 62061010, and Grant No. 61861008), Technology Major Project of Nanning
Qingxiu District (Grant No. 2018001), Department of Science and Technology of Guangxi Zhuang
Autonomous Region (Grant No. AB21196041, Grant No. AA20302022, Grant No. AA19182007,
and Grant No. AA19254029), Natural Science Foundation of Guangxi Province of China (Grant No.
2019GXNSFBA245072 and Grant No. 2018GXNSFAA294054), and Young Teachers Promotion Project
of Guangxi Universities (Grant No. 2022KY0182).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Restrictions apply to the availability of these data. Data were obtained
from the National Cryosphere Desert Data Center/National Service Center for Speciality Environ-
mental Observation Stations and are available from the http://data.casnw.net/portal/ (accessed
on 19 January 2021) with the permission of the National Cryosphere Desert Data Center/National
Service Center for Speciality Environmental Observation Stations.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Du, B.; Zhao, Z.; Hu, X.; Wu, G.; Han, L.; Sun, L.; Gao, Q. Landslide susceptibility prediction based on image semantic
segmentation. Comput. Geosci. 2021, 155, 104860. [CrossRef]
2. Depina, I.; Oguz, E.A.; Thakur, V. Novel Bayesian framework for calibration of spatially distributed physical-based landslide
prediction models. Comput. Geotech. 2020, 125, 103660. [CrossRef]
3. Shou, K.-J.; Lin, J.-F. Evaluation of the extreme rainfall predictions and their impact on landslide susceptibility in a sub-catchment
scale. Eng. Geol. 2019, 265, 105434. [CrossRef]
4. Chikalamo, E.E.; Mavrouli, O.C.; Ettema, J.; van Westen, C.J.; Muntohar, A.S.; Mustofa, A. Satellite-derived rainfall thresholds
for landslide early warning in Bogowonto Catchment, Central Java, Indonesia. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 2020, 89, 102093.
[CrossRef]
5. Liu, Z.; Guo, D.; Lacasse, S.; Li, J.; Yang, B.; Choi, J. Algorithms for intelligent prediction of landslide displacements. J. Zhejiang
Univ. Sci. A 2020, 21, 412–429. [CrossRef]
6. Liu, Q.; Lu, G.; Dong, J. Prediction of landslide displacement with step-like curve using variational mode decomposition and
periodic neural network. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 2021, 80, 3783–3799. [CrossRef]
7. Huang, F.; Ye, Z.; Jiang, S.-H.; Huang, J.; Chang, Z.; Chen, J. Uncertainty study of landslide susceptibility prediction considering
the different attribute interval numbers of environmental factors and different data-based models. CATENA 2021, 202, 105250.
[CrossRef]
8. Lin, Z.; Sun, X.; Ji, Y. Landslide Displacement Prediction Model Using Time Series Analysis Method and Modified LSTM Model.
Electronics 2022, 11, 1519. [CrossRef]
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 18 of 19

9. Tang, M.; Xu, Q.; Yang, H.; Li, S.; Iqbal, J.; Fu, X.; Huang, X.; Cheng, W. Activity law and hydraulics mechanism of landslides with
different sliding surface and permeability in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China. Eng. Geol. 2019, 260, 105212. [CrossRef]
10. Huang, F.; Huang, J.; Jiang, S.; Zhou, C. Landslide displacement prediction based on multivariate chaotic model and extreme
learning machine. Eng. Geol. 2017, 218, 173–186. [CrossRef]
11. Miao, F.; Wu, Y.; Xie, Y.; Li, Y. Prediction of landslide displacement with step-like behavior based on multialgorithm optimization
and a support vector regression model. Landslide 2017, 15, 475–488. [CrossRef]
12. Krkac, M.; Gazibara, B.S.; Arbanas, Z.; Sečanj, S.; Arbanas, S.M. A comparative study of random forests and multiple linear
regression in the prediction of landslide velocity. Landslide 2020, 17, 2515–2531. [CrossRef]
13. Wu, L.Z.; Li, S.H.; Huang, R.Q.; Xu, Q. A new grey prediction model and its application to predicting landslide displacement.
Appl. Soft Comput. 2020, 95, 106543. [CrossRef]
14. Lin, Z.; Sun, X.; Ji, Y. Landslide Displacement Prediction based on Time Series Analysis and Double-BiLSTM Model. Int. J. Environ.
Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 2077. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
15. Wang, Y.; Tang, H.; Wen, T.; Ma, J. A hybrid intelligent approach for constructing landslide displacement prediction intervals.
Appl. Soft Comput. 2019, 81, 105506. [CrossRef]
16. Xing, Y.; Yue, J.; Chen, C.; Qin, Y.; Hu, J. A hybrid prediction model of landslide displacement with risk-averse adaptation.
Comput. Geosci. 2020, 141, 104527. [CrossRef]
17. Long, J.; Li, C.; Liu, Y.; Feng, P.; Zuo, Q. A multi-feature fusion transfer learning method for displacement prediction of rainfall
reservoir-induced landslide with step-like deformation characteristics. Eng. Geol. 2022, 297, 106494. [CrossRef]
18. Zhang, J.; Tang, H.; Tannant, D.D.; Lin, C.; Xia, D.; Liu, X.; Zhang, Y.; Ma, J. Combined forecasting model with CEEMD-LCSS
reconstruction and the ABC-SVR method for landslide displacement prediction. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 293, 126205. [CrossRef]
19. Yang, B.; Yin, K.; Lacasse, S.; Liu, Z. Time series analysis and long short-term memory neural network to predict landslide
displacement. Landslides 2019, 16, 677–694. [CrossRef]
20. Ma, J.; Tang, H.; Liu, X.; Wen, T.; Zhang, J.; Tan, Q.; Fan, Z. Probabilistic forecasting of landslide displacement accounting for
epistemic uncertainty: A case study in the Three Gorges Reservoir area, China. Landslides 2018, 15, 1145–1153. [CrossRef]
21. Lian, C.; Zeng, Z.; Yao, W.; Tang, H.; Chen, C.L.P. Landslide Displacement Prediction With Uncertainty Based on Neural Networks
With Random Hidden Weights. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 2016, 27, 2683–2695. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Khan, S.; Kirschbaum, D.B.; Stanley, T. Investigating the potential of a global precipitation forecast to inform landslide prediction.
Weather. Clim. Extrem. 2021, 33, 100364. [CrossRef]
23. Zhang, Y.; Tang, J.; He, Z.; Tan, J.; Li, C. A novel displacement prediction method using gated recurrent unit model with time
series analysis in the Erdaohe landslide. Nat. Hazards 2021, 105, 783–813. [CrossRef]
24. Guo, Z.; Chen, L.; Gui, L.; Du, J.; Do, H.M. Landslide displacement prediction based on variational mode decomposition and
WA-GWO-BP model. Landslides 2019, 17, 567–583. [CrossRef]
25. Xu, S.; Niu, R. Displacement prediction of Baijiabao landslide based on empirical modedecomposition and long short-term
memory neural network in Three Gorgesarea, China. Comput. Geosci. 2018, 111, 87–96. [CrossRef]
26. Cai, Z.; Xu, W.; Meng, Y.; Chong, S.; Wang, R. Prediction of landslide displacement based on GA-LSSVM with multiple factors.
Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 2015, 75, 637–646. [CrossRef]
27. Huang, F.; Yin, K.; Zhang, G.; Gui, L.; Yang, B.; Liu, L. Landslide displacement prediction using discrete wavelet transform and
extreme learning machine based on chaos theory. Environ. Earth Sci. 2016, 75, 1376. [CrossRef]
28. Zhou, C.; Yin, K.; Ying, C.; Emanuele, I.; Bayes, A.; Filippo, C. Displacement prediction of step-likelandslide by applying a novel
kernel extreme learning machine method. Landslides 2018, 15, 2211–2225. [CrossRef]
29. Lian, C.; Zeng, Z.; Wang, X.; Yao, W.; Su, Y.; Tang, H. Landslide displacement interval prediction using lower upper bound
estimation method with pre-trained random vector functional link network initialization. Neural Netw. 2020, 130, 286–296.
[CrossRef]
30. Du, H.; Song, D.; Chen, Z.; Shu, H.; Guo, Z. Prediction model oriented for landslide displacement with step-like curve by applying
ensemble empirical mode decomposition and the PSO-ELM method. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 270, 122248. [CrossRef]
31. Lian, C.; Zeng, Z.; Yao, W.; Tang, H. Extreme learning machine for the displacement prediction of landslide under rainfall and
reservoir level. Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk Assess. 2014, 28, 1957–1972. [CrossRef]
32. Xing, Y.; Yue, J.; Chen, C.; Cong, K.; Zhu, S.; Bian, Y. Dynamic Displacement Forecasting of Dashuitian Landslide in China Using
Variational Mode Decomposition and Stack Long Short-Term Memory Network. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 2951. [CrossRef]
33. Han, H.; Shi, B.; Zhang, L. Prediction of landslide sharp increase displacement by SVM with considering hysteresis of groundwater
change. Eng. Geol. 2021, 280, 105876. [CrossRef]
34. Deng, L.; Smith, A.; Dixon, N.; Yuan, H. Machine learning prediction of landslide deformation behaviour using acoustic emission
and rainfall measurements. Eng. Geol. 2021, 293, 106315. [CrossRef]
35. Li, S.; Wu, N. A new grey prediction model and its application in landslide displacement prediction. Chaos Solitons Fractals 2021,
147, 110969. [CrossRef]
36. Li, X.; Kong, J.; Wang, Z. Landslide displacement prediction based on combining method with optimal weight. Nat. Hazards 2012,
61, 635–646. [CrossRef]
37. Hu, X.; Wu, S.; Zhang, G.; Zheng, W.; Liu, C.; He, C.; Liu, Z.; Guo, X.; Zhang, H. Landslide displacement prediction using
kinematics-based random forests method: A case study in Jinping Reservoir Area, China. Eng. Geol. 2021, 283, 105975. [CrossRef]
Mathematics 2022, 10, 2203 19 of 19

38. Liu, Y.; Xu, C.; Huang, B.; Ren, X.; Liu, C.; Hu, B.; Chen, Z. Landslide displacement prediction based on multi-source data fusion
and sensitivity states. Eng. Geol. 2020, 271, 105608. [CrossRef]
39. Lian, C.; Chen, C.L.P.; Zeng, Z.; Yao, W.; Tang, H. Prediction Intervals for Landslide Displacement Based on Switched Neural
Networks. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 2016, 65, 1483–1495. [CrossRef]
40. Lian, C.; Zhu, L.; Zeng, Z.; Su, Y.; Yao, W.; Tang, H. Constructing prediction intervals for landslide displacement using
bootstrapping random vector functional link networks selective ensemble with neural networks switched. Neurocomputing 2018,
291, 1–10. [CrossRef]
41. Gupta, P.; Singh, B. Local mean decomposition and artificial neural network approach to mitigate tool chatter and improve
material removal rate in turning operation operation. Appl. Soft Comput. 2020, 96, 106714. [CrossRef]
42. Yue, S.; Wang, Y.; Wei, L.; Zhang, Z. The joint empirical mode decomposition-local mean decomposition method and its application
to time series of compressor stall process. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2020, 105, 105969. [CrossRef]
43. Lu, T.; Yu, F.; Wang, J.; Wang, X.; Han, B. Application of adaptive complementary ensemble local mean decomposition in
underwater acoustic signal processing. Appl. Acoust. 2021, 178, 107966. [CrossRef]
44. Huynh, A.N.-L.; Deo, R.C.; Ali, M.; Abdulla, S.; Raj, N. Novel short-term solar radiation hybrid model: Long short-term memory
network integrated with robust local mean decomposition. Appl. Energy 2021, 298, 117193. [CrossRef]
45. Peng, S.; Chen, R.; Yu, B.; Xiang, M.; Lin, X.; Liu, E. Daily natural gas load forecasting based on the combination of long short term
memory, local mean decomposition, and wavelet threshold denoising algorithm. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2021, 95, 104175. [CrossRef]
46. Smith, J.S. The local mean decomposition and its application to EEG perception data. Interface 2005, 2, 443–454. [CrossRef]
47. Reshef, D.N.; Reshef, Y.A.; Finucane, H.K.; Grossman, S.R.; McVean, G.; Turnbaugh, P.J.; Lander, E.S.; Mitzenmacher, M.; Sabeti,
P.C. Detecting novel associations in large data sets. Science 2011, 334, 1518–1524. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
48. Guo, Z.; Yu, B.; Hao, M.; Wang, W.; Jiang, Y.; Zong, F. A novel hybrid method for flight departure delay prediction using Random
Forest Regression and Maximal Information Coefficient. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2021, 116, 106822. [CrossRef]
49. Huang, X.; Luo, Y.-P.; Xia, L. An efficient wavelength selection method based on the maximal information coefficient for
multivariate spectral calibration. Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 2019, 194, 103872. [CrossRef]
50. Hochreiter, S.; Schmidhuber, J. Long short-term memory. Neural Comput. 1997, 9, 1735–1780. [CrossRef]
51. Yin, J.; Deng, Z.; Ines, A.V.M.; Wu, J.; Rasu, E. Forecast of short-term daily reference evapotranspiration under limited meteorolog-
ical variables using a hybrid bi-directional long short-term memory model (Bi-LSTM). Agric. Water Manag. 2020, 242, 106386.
[CrossRef]
52. Yadav, S.; Ekbal, A.; Saha, S.; Kumar, A.; Bhattacharyya, P. Feature assisted stacked attentive shortest dependency path based
Bi-LSTM model for protein–protein interaction. Knowl. Based Syst. 2019, 166, 18–29. [CrossRef]
53. Hungr, O.; Leroueil, S.; Picarelli, L. The Varnes classification of landslide types, anupdate. Landslides 2014, 11, 167–194. [CrossRef]
54. Chen, J.; Zeng, Z.; Jiang, P.; Tang, H. Deformation prediction of landslide based on functional network. Neurocomputing 2014,
149, 151–157. [CrossRef]
55. Li, S.H.; Wu, L.; Chen, J.J.; Huang, R. Multiple data-driven approach for predicting landslide deformation. Landslide 2020,
17, 709–718. [CrossRef]
56. Wang, R.; Zhang, K.; Wang, W.; Meng, Y.; Yang, L.; Huan, H. Hydrodynamic landslide displacement prediction using combined
extreme learning machine and random search support vector regression model. Eur. J. Environ. Civ. Eng. 2020, 2020, 1–13.
[CrossRef]
57. Wen, T.; Tang, H.; Wang, Y.; Lin, C.; Xiong, C. Landslide displacement prediction using the GA-LSSVM model and time series
analysis: A case study of Three Gorges Reservoir, China. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2017, 17, 2181–2198. [CrossRef]
58. Li, X.; Li, S. Large-Scale Landslide Displacement Rate Prediction Based on Multi-Factor Support Vector Regression Machine. Appl.
Sci. 2021, 11, 1381. [CrossRef]
59. Wang, C.; Zhao, Y.; Bai, L.; Guo, W.; Meng, Q. Landslide Displacement Prediction Method Based on GA-Elman Model. Appl. Sci.
2021, 11, 11030. [CrossRef]
60. Zhou, C.; Yin, K.; Cao, Y.; Ahmed, B. Application of time series analysis and PSO–SVM model in predicting the Bazimen landslide
in the Three Gorges Reservoir, China. Eng. Geol. 2016, 204, 108–120. [CrossRef]
61. Jiang, Y.; Luo, H.; Xu, Q.; Lu, Z.; Liao, L.; Li, H.; Hao, L. A Graph Convolutional Incorporating GRU Network for Landslide
Displacement Forecasting Based on Spatiotemporal Analysis of GNSS Observations. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 1016. [CrossRef]
62. Wang, J.; Nie, G.; Gao, S.; Wu, S.; Li, H.; Ren, X. Landslide Deformation Prediction Based on a GNSS Time Series Analysis and
Recurrent Neural Network Model. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 1055. [CrossRef]
63. Wang, Y.; Tang, H.; Huang, J.; Wen, T.; Ma, J.; Zhang, J. A comparative study of different machine learning methods for reservoir
landslide displacement prediction. Eng. Geol. 2022, 298, 106544. [CrossRef]