Examining LightGBM and CatBoost models for wadi flash flood susceptibility prediction

References

• Abdel-Fattah M, Kantoush SA, Saber M, Sumi T. 2018. Rainfall-runoff modeling for extreme flash floods in wadi Samail, Oman. J Jsce, Ser B1. 74(5):I_691–I_696.
   Google Scholar
• Abdel-Fattah M, Kantoush S, Sumi T. 2015. Integrated management of flash flood in wadi system of egypt: disaster prevention and water harvesting. 京都大学防災研究所年報. B= Disaster Prevention Research Institute Annuals. B, 58(B):485–496.
   Google Scholar
• Abdelkader MM, Al-Amoud AI, El Alfy M, El-Feky A, Saber M. 2021. Assessment of flash flood hazard based on morphometric aspects and rainfall-runoff modeling in Wadi Nisah, Central Saudi Arabia. Remote Sens Appl: Soc Environ. 23:100562.
   Google Scholar
• Abdrabo KI, Kantoush SA, Saber M, Sumi T, Habiba OM, Elleithy D, Elboshy B. 2020. Integrated methodology for urban flood risk mapping at the microscale in ungauged regions: a case study of Hurghada, Egypt. Remote Sensing. 12(21):3548.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdulwahab Aboualnaga. 2014. The Zafarana-Hurghada road was closed due to the floods. Mobtda [Internet]. https://www.mobtada.com/details/186604.
   Google Scholar
• Abushandi EH, Merkel BJ. 2011. Application of IHACRES rainfall-runoff model to the Wadi Dhuliel arid catchment, Jordan. J Water Climate Change. 2(1):56–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Achour Y, Pourghasemi HR. 2020. How do machine learning techniques help in increasing accuracy of landslide susceptibility maps? Geosci Front. 11(3):871–883.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adnan MSG, Dewan A, Zannat KE, Abdullah AYM. 2019. The use of watershed geomorphic data in flash flood susceptibility zoning: a case study of the Karnaphuli and Sangu river basins of Bangladesh. Nat Hazards. 99(1):425–448.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmed A, Hewa G, Alrajhi A. 2021. Flood susceptibility mapping using a geomorphometric approach in South Australian basins. Nat Hazards. 106(1):629–653.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ali SA, Parvin F, Pham QB, Vojtek M, Vojteková J, Costache R, Linh NTT, Nguyen HQ, Ahmad A, Ghorbani MA. 2020. GIS-based comparative assessment of flood susceptibility mapping using hybrid multi-criteria decision-making approach, naïve Bayes tree, bivariate statistics and logistic regression: a case of Topľa basin, Slovakia. Ecol Indic. 117:106620.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alipour A, Ahmadalipour A, Abbaszadeh P, Moradkhani H. 2020. Leveraging machine learning for predicting flash flood damage in the Southeast US. Environ Res Lett. 15(2):024011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Apollonio C, Balacco G, Novelli A, Tarantino E, Piccinni AF. 2016. Land use change impact on flooding areas: the case study of Cervaro Basin (Italy). Sustainability. 8(10):996.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arabameri A, Saha S, Mukherjee K, Blaschke T, Chen W, Ngo PTT, Band SS. 2020. Modeling spatial flood using novel ensemble artificial intelligence approaches in Northern Iran. Remote Sensing. 12(20):3423.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arora A, Arabameri A, Pandey M, Siddiqui MA, Shukla UK, Bui DT, Mishra VN, Bhardwaj A. 2021. Optimization of state-of-the-art fuzzy-metaheuristic ANFIS-based machine learning models for flood susceptibility prediction mapping in the Middle Ganga Plain, India. Sci Total Environ. 750:141565.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arora A, Pandey M, Siddiqui MA, Hong H, Mishra VN. 2019. Spatial flood susceptibility prediction in Middle Ganga Plain: comparison of frequency ratio and Shannon’s entropy models. Geocarto International. :1–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aryal SK, Mein RG, O'Loughlin EM. 2003. The concept of effective length in hillslopes: assessing the influence of climate and topography on the contributing areas of catchments. Hydrol Process. 17(1):131–151.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bachmair S, Svensson C, Prosdocimi I, Hannaford J, Stahl K. 2017. Developing drought impact functions for drought risk management. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci. 17(11):1947–1960.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Band SS, Janizadeh S, Chandra Pal S, Saha A, Chakrabortty R, Melesse AM, Mosavi A. 2020. Flash flood susceptibility modeling using new approaches of hybrid and ensemble tree-based machine learning algorithms. Remote Sensing. 12(21):3568.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bellu A, Fernandes LFS, Cortes RM, Pacheco FA. 2016. A framework model for the dimensioning and allocation of a detention basin system: the case of a flood-prone mountainous watershed. J Hydrol. 533:567–580.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beven KJ, Kirkby MJ. 1979. A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology/Un modèle à base physique de zone d’appel variable de l’hydrologie du bassin versant. Hydrol Sci J. 24(1):43–69.
   Google Scholar
• Bisht S, Chaudhry S, Sharma S, Soni S. 2018. Assessment of flash flood vulnerability zonation through Geospatial technique in high altitude Himalayan watershed, Himachal Pradesh India. Remote Sens Appl: Soc Environ. 12:35–47.
   Google Scholar
• Breiman L. 2001. Random forests. Mach Learn. 45(1):5–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bui DT, Hoang N-D, Pham T-D, Ngo P-TT, Hoa PV, Minh NQ, Tran X-T, Samui P. 2019. A new intelligence approach based on GIS-based multivariate adaptive regression splines and metaheuristic optimization for predicting flash flood susceptible areas at high-frequency tropical typhoon area. J Hydrol. 575:314–326.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bui DT, Pradhan B, Lofman O, Revhaug I, Dick OB. 2012. Spatial prediction of landslide hazards in Hoa Binh province (Vietnam): a comparative assessment of the efficacy of evidential belief functions and fuzzy logic models. Catena. 96:28–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bui DT, Panahi M, Shahabi H, Singh VP, Shirzadi A, Chapi K, Khosravi K, Chen W, Panahi S, Li S, et al. 2018. Novel hybrid evolutionary algorithms for spatial prediction of floods. Sci Rep. 8(1):15364–14.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cao C, Xu P, Wang Y, Chen J, Zheng L, Niu C. 2016. Flash flood hazard susceptibility mapping using frequency ratio and statistical index methods in coalmine subsidence areas. Sustainability. 8(9):948.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardenas MB, Wilson J, Zlotnik VA. 2004. Impact of heterogeneity, bed forms, and stream curvature on subchannel hyporheic exchange. Water Resour Res. 40(8):1–14, W08307. https://doi.org/10.1029/2004WR003008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chapi K, Singh VP, Shirzadi A, Shahabi H, Bui DT, Pham BT, Khosravi K. 2017. A novel hybrid artificial intelligence approach for flood susceptibility assessment. Environ Model Softw. 95:229–245.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen T, Guestrin C. 2016. Xgboost: a scalable tree boosting system. KDD '16: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, August 2016; p. 785–794. https://doi.org/10.1145/2939672.2939785
   Google Scholar
• Chen T-HK, Qiu C, Schmitt M, Zhu XX, Sabel CE, Prishchepov AV. 2020. Mapping horizontal and vertical urban densification in Denmark with Landsat time-series from 1985 to 2018: a semantic segmentation solution. Remote Sens Environ. 251:112096.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen C, Zhang Q, Ma Q, Yu B. 2019. LightGBM-PPI: predicting protein-protein interactions through LightGBM with multi-information fusion. Chemomet Intell Lab Syst. 191:54–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen W, Zhang S, Li R, Shahabi H. 2018. Performance evaluation of the GIS-based data mining techniques of best-first decision tree, random forest, and naïve Bayes tree for landslide susceptibility modeling. Sci Total Environ. 644:1006–1018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choubin B, Moradi E, Golshan M, Adamowski J, Sajedi-Hosseini F, Mosavi A. 2019. An ensemble prediction of flood susceptibility using multivariate discriminant analysis, classification and regression trees, and support vector machines. Sci Total Environ. 651:2087–2096.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chourushi S, Lodha P, Prakash I. 2019. A critical review of hydrological modeling practices for flood management. Pramana Res J. 9:352–362.
   Google Scholar
• Climate Hurguada. 2021. Tutiempo Network, SL. [accessed 2021 Mar 3]. https://en.tutiempo.net/climate/ws-624630.html. Tutiempo Network, S.L.
   Google Scholar
• Costache R, Hong H, Pham QB. 2020. Comparative assessment of the flash-flood potential within small mountain catchments using bivariate statistics and their novel hybrid integration with machine learning models. Sci Total Environ. 711:134514.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costache R, Popa MC, T, Bui D, Diaconu DC, Ciubotaru N, Minea G, Pham QB. 2020. Spatial predicting of flood potential areas using novel hybridizations of fuzzy decision-making, bivariate statistics, and machine learning. J Hydrol. 585:124808.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Courtesy Abdelhameed. 2016. In pictures: Heavy rains hit Egypt’s Red Sea governorate. Al Arabiya News. https://english.alarabiya.net/News/middle-east/2016/10/27/In-pictures-Heavy-rains-hit-Egypt-s-Red-Sea-governorate.
   Google Scholar
• Darabi H, Choubin B, Rahmati O, Haghighi AT, Pradhan B, Kløve B. 2019. Urban flood risk mapping using the GARP and QUEST models: a comparative study of machine learning techniques. J Hydrol. 569:142–154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devkota KC, Regmi AD, Pourghasemi HR, Yoshida K, Pradhan B, Ryu IC, Dhital MR, Althuwaynee OF. 2013. Landslide susceptibility mapping using certainty factor, index of entropy and logistic regression models in GIS and their comparison at Mugling–Narayanghat road section in Nepal Himalaya. Nat Hazards. 65(1):135–165.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dodangeh E, Choubin B, Eigdir AN, Nabipour N, Panahi M, Shamshirband S, Mosavi A. 2020. Integrated machine learning methods with resampling algorithms for flood susceptibility prediction. Sci Total Environ. 705:135983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135983.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dorogush AV, Ershov V, Gulin A. 2018. CatBoost: gradient boosting with categorical features support. Cornell University. 1–7. arXiv preprint arXiv:181011363.
   Google Scholar
• Dou J, Yunus AP, Bui DT, Merghadi A, Sahana M, Zhu Z, Chen C-W, Khosravi K, Yang Y, Pham BT. 2019. Assessment of advanced random forest and decision tree algorithms for modeling rainfall-induced landslide susceptibility in the Izu-Oshima Volcanic Island, Japan. Sci Total Environ. 662:332–346.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center. 2021. USGS EROS Archive - Vegetation Monitoring - EROS Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (eMODIS). USGS [Internet]. https://www.usgs.gov/centers/eros/science/usgs-eros-archive-vegetation-monitoring-eros-moderate-resolution-imaging?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science.
   Google Scholar
• El-Haddad BA, Youssef AM, Pourghasemi HR, Pradhan B, El-Shater A-H, El-Khashab MH. 2020. Flood susceptibility prediction using four machine learning techniques and comparison of their performance at Wadi Qena Basin, Egypt. Nat Hazards. 105(1):83–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-04296-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elsadek WM, Ibrahim MG, Mahmod WE, Kanae S. 2019. Developing an overall assessment map for flood hazard on large area watershed using multi-method approach: case study of Wadi Qena watershed. Nat Hazards. 95(3):739–767.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esfandiari M, Jabari S, McGrath H, Coleman D. 2020. Flood mapping using random forest and identifying the essential conditioning factors; a case study in fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada. Ann Photogrammet, Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci. 5(3):1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Fan J, Ma X, Wu L, Zhang F, Yu X, Zeng W. 2019. Light Gradient Boosting Machine: an efficient soft computing model for estimating daily reference evapotranspiration with local and external meteorological data. Agric Water Manag. 225:105758.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farhan Y, Anaba O. 2016. Flash flood risk estimation of Wadi Yutum (Southern Jordan) watershed using GIS based morphometric analysis and remote sensing techniques. OJMH. 06(02):79–100.
   Google Scholar
• Fawcett R, Stone R. 2010. A comparison of two seasonal rainfall forecasting systems for Australia. Aust Meteorol Oceanogr J. 60(1):15–24.
   Google Scholar
• Fenicia F, Savenije HH, Matgen P, Pfister L. 2008. Understanding catchment behavior through stepwise model concept improvement. Water Resour Res. 44(1):1–13, W01402. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006WR005563.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedman JH. 2002. Stochastic gradient boosting. Comput Stat Data Anal. 38(4):367–378.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ge X, Sun J, Lu B, Chen Q, Xun W, Jin Y. 2019. Classification of oolong tea varieties based on hyperspectral imaging technology and BOSS‐LightGBM model. J Food Process Eng. 42(8):e13289.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geospatial Information Authority of Japan 2021. Global Map Global version. Geospatial Information Authority of Japan. https://www.gsi.go.jp/kankyochiri/gm_global_e.html.
   Google Scholar
• Glenn EP, Morino K, Nagler PL, Murray RS, Pearlstein S, Hultine KR. 2012. Roles of saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) and capillary rise in salinizing a non-flooding terrace on a flow-regulated desert river. J Arid Environ. 79:56–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gong R, Fonseca E, Bogdanov D, Slizovskaia O, Gomez E, Serra X. 2017. Acoustic scene classification by fusing LightGBM and VGG-net multichannel predictions. Detection and Classification of Acoustic Scenes and Events 2017, Munich, Germany; p. 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• González-Arqueros ML, Mendoza ME, Bocco G, Castillo BS. 2018. Flood susceptibility in rural settlements in remote zones: the case of a mountainous basin in the Sierra-Costa region of Michoacán, Mexico. J Environ Manage. 223:685–693.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hancock JT, Khoshgoftaar TM. 2020. CatBoost for big data: an interdisciplinary review. J Big Data. 7(1):94–45.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hirabayashi Y, Mahendran R, Koirala S, Konoshima L, Yamazaki D, Watanabe S, Kim H, Kanae S. 2013. Global flood risk under climate change. Nature Clim Change. 3(9):816–821.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hölting B, Coldewey WG. 2019. Surface water infiltration. In: Hydrogeology. Springer Textbooks in Earth Sciences, Geography and Environment. Berlin (Heidelberg): Springer; p. 33–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-56375-5_5
   Google Scholar
• Hong H, Tsangaratos P, Ilia I, Liu J, Zhu A-X, Chen W. 2018. Application of fuzzy weight of evidence and data mining techniques in construction of flood susceptibility map of Poyang County, China. Sci Total Environ. 625:575–588.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang G, Wu L, Ma X, Zhang W, Fan J, Yu X, Zeng W, Zhou H. 2019. Evaluation of CatBoost method for prediction of reference evapotranspiration in humid regions. J Hydrol. 574:1029–1041.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janizadeh S, Avand M, Jaafari A, Phong TV, Bayat M, Ahmadisharaf E, Prakash I, Pham BT, Lee S. 2019. prediction success of machine learning methods for flash flood susceptibility mapping in the Tafresh Watershed, Iran. Sustainability. 11(19):5426. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195426.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jhaveri S, Khedkar I, Kantharia Y, Jaswal S. 2019. Success prediction using random forest, catboost, xgboost and adaboost for kickstarter campaigns. 2019 3rd International Conference on Computing Methodologies and Communication (ICCMC): IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP19K25-ART; p. 1170–1173.
   Google Scholar
• Jihad Alansary 2014. Hurghada road collapse due to floods. Misr News. https://masralarabia.net/%D8%A7%D8%AE%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%B1/230487-%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%AF%D9%8A%D9%88-%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%87%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A8%D8%B7%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%82-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%BA%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%82%D8%A9-%D8%A8%D8%B3%D8%A8%D8%A8-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%8A%D9%88%D9%84.
   Google Scholar
• Ju Y, Sun G, Chen Q, Zhang M, Zhu H, Rehman MU. 2019. A model combining convolutional neural network and LightGBM algorithm for ultra-short-term wind power forecasting. IEEE Access. 7:28309–28318.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kazakis N, Kougias I, Patsialis T. 2015. Assessment of flood hazard areas at a regional scale using an index-based approach and Analytical Hierarchy Process: Application in Rhodope–Evros region, Greece. Sci Total Environ. 538:555–563.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ke G, Meng Q, Finley T, Wang T, Chen W, Ma W, Ye Q, Liu T-Y. 2017. Lightgbm: a highly efficient gradient boosting decision tree. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 30:3146–3154.
   Google Scholar
• Khosravi K, Nohani E, Maroufinia E, Pourghasemi HR. 2016. A GIS-based flood susceptibility assessment and its mapping in Iran: a comparison between frequency ratio and weights-of-evidence bivariate statistical models with multi-criteria decision-making technique. Nat Hazards. 83(2):947–987.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khosravi K, Shahabi H, Pham BT, Adamowski J, Shirzadi A, Pradhan B, Dou J, Ly H-B, Gróf G, Ho HL, et al. 2019. A comparative assessment of flood susceptibility modeling using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Analysis and Machine Learning Methods. J Hydrol. 573:311–323.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kia MB, Pirasteh S, Pradhan B, Mahmud AR, Sulaiman WNA, Moradi A. 2012. An artificial neural network model for flood simulation using GIS: Johor River Basin, Malaysia. Environ Earth Sci. 67(1):251–264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kobayashi T, Tateishi R, Alsaaideh B, Sharma RC, Wakaizumi T, Miyamoto D, Bai X, Long BD, Gegentana G, Maitiniyazi A. 2017. Production of global land cover data - GLCNMO2013. J Geogr Geology. 9(3):1–15. https://doi.org/10.5539/jgg.v9n3p1
   Google Scholar
• Kopecký M, Čížková Š. 2010. Using topographic wetness index in vegetation ecology: does the algorithm matter? Appl Veg Sci. 13(4):450–459.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar R, Singh R, Gautam H, Pandey MK. 2018. Flood hazard assessment of August 20, 2016 floods in Satna district, Madhya Pradesh, India. Remote Sens Appl: Soc Environ. 11:104–118.
   Google Scholar
• Kusiak A, Zheng H, Song Z. 2009. Models for monitoring wind farm power. Renew Energy. 34(3):583–590.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee S, Kim J-C, Jung H-S, Lee MJ, Lee S. 2017. Spatial prediction of flood susceptibility using random-forest and boosted-tree models in Seoul metropolitan city, Korea. Geomat Nat Hazards Risk. 8(2):1185–1203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehner B, Döll P, Alcamo J, Henrichs T, Kaspar F. 2006. Estimating the impact of global change on flood and drought risks in Europe: a continental, integrated analysis. Clim Change. 75(3):273–299.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li X, Yan D, Wang K, Weng B, Qin T, Liu S. 2019. Flood risk assessment of global watersheds based on multiple machine learning models. Water. 11(8):1654.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu W, Deng K, Zhang X, Cheng Y, Zheng Z, Jiang F, Peng J. 2020. A semi-supervised tri-catboost method for driving style recognition. Symmetry. 12(3):336.
   Google Scholar
• Ma X, Sha J, Wang D, Yu Y, Yang Q, Niu X. 2018. Study on a prediction of P2P network loan default based on the machine learning LightGBM and XGboost algorithms according to different high dimensional data cleaning. Electron Commer Res Appl. 31:24–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malekipirbazari M, Aksakalli V. 2015. Risk assessment in social lending via random forests. Expert Syst Appl. 42(10):4621–4631.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martín-Vide JP, Llasat M. 2018. The 1962 flash flood in the Rubí stream (Barcelona, Spain). J Hydrol. 566:441–454.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masood M, Takeuchi K. 2012. Assessment of flood hazard, vulnerability and risk of mid-eastern Dhaka using DEM and 1D hydrodynamic model. Nat Hazards. 61(2):757–770.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meraj G, Khan T, Romshoo SA, Farooq M, Rohitashw K, Sheikh BA. 2018. An integrated geoinformatics and hydrological modelling-based approach for effective flood management in the Jhelum Basin, NW Himalaya. Multidiscipl Digital Publ Instit Proc. 7(1):8.
   Google Scholar
• Miao H, Zhang J, Gu B, Gao A, Hong J, Zhang Y, Gu W. 2019. Prognosis for residual islet β‐cell secretion function in young patients with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes. J Diabetes. 11(10):818–825.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mosavi A, Ozturk P, Chau K. 2018. Flood prediction using machine learning models: Literature review. Water. 10(11):1536.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Negm AM, editor. 2020. Flash floods in Egypt. Cham: Springer International Publishing [accessed 2020 Oct 21]. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29635-3
   Google Scholar
• Nguyen P, Ombadi M, Gorooh VA, Shearer EJ, Sadeghi M, Sorooshian S, Hsu K, Bolvin D, Ralph MF. 2020. PERSIANN dynamic infrared–rain rate (PDIR-Now): a near-real-time, quasi-global satellite precipitation dataset. J Hydrometeorol. 21(12):2893–2906.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen V-N, Tien Bui D, Ngo P-TT, Nguyen Q-P, Nguyen VC, Long NQ, Revhaug I. 2018. An integration of least squares support vector machines and firefly optimization algorithm for flood susceptible modeling using GIS. In: Tien Bui D, Ngoc Do A, Bui H-B, Hoang N-D, editors. Advances and applications in geospatial technology and earth resources. Cham: Springer International Publishing [accessed 2020 Dec 11]; p. 52–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68240-2_4
   Google Scholar
• Öztürk F, Akdeniz F. 2000. Ill-conditioning and multicollinearity. Linear Algebra Appl. 321(1-3):295–305.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pachauri RK, Allen MR, Barros VR, Broome J, Cramer W, Christ R, Church JA, Clarke L, Dahe Q, Dasgupta P. 2014. Climate change 2014: synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC.
   Google Scholar
• Pal M. 2005. Random forest classifier for remote sensing classification. Int J Remote Sens. 26(1):217–222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park S-J, Lee D-K. 2020. Prediction of coastal flooding risk under climate change impacts in South Korea using machine learning algorithms. Environ Res Lett. 15(9):094052.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Predick KI, Turner MG. 2008. Landscape configuration and flood frequency influence invasive shrubs in floodplain forests of the Wisconsin River (USA). J Ecol. 96(1):91–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prokhorenkova L, Gusev G, Vorobev A, Dorogush AV, Gulin A. 2019. CatBoost: unbiased boosting with categorical features. Cornell University arXiv preprint arXiv:170609516:1–23.
   Google Scholar
• Qin C-Z, Zhu A-X, Pei T, Li B-L, Scholten T, Behrens T, Zhou C-H. 2011. An approach to computing topographic wetness index based on maximum downslope gradient. Precision Agric. 12(1):32–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinlan JR. 1986. Induction of decision trees. Mach Learn. 1(1):81–106.
   Google Scholar
• Rahman M, Ningsheng C, Islam MM, Dewan A, Iqbal J, Washakh RMA, Shufeng T. 2019. Flood susceptibility assessment in Bangladesh using machine learning and multi-criteria decision analysis. Earth Syst Environ. 3(3):585–601.
   Google Scholar
• Rahmati O, Pourghasemi HR, Zeinivand H. 2016. Flood susceptibility mapping using frequency ratio and weights-of-evidence models in the Golastan Province, Iran. Geocarto Int. 31(1):42–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raju KP, Kumar S, Mohan K, Pandey MK. 2008. Urban cadastral mapping using very high resolution remote sensing data. J Indian Soc Remote Sens. 36(3):283–288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rätsch G, Onoda T, Müller K-R. 2001. Soft margins for AdaBoost. Mach Learn. 42(3):287–320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saber M, Abdrabo KI, Habiba OM, Kantosh SA, Sumi T. 2020. Impacts of triple factors on flash flood vulnerability in Egypt: urban growth, extreme climate, and mismanagement. Geosciences. 10(1):24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Safarov RZ, Shomanova ZK, Nossenko YG, Berdenov ZG, Bexeitova ZB, Shomanov AS, Mansurova M. 2020. Solving of classification problem in spatial analysis applying the technology of gradient boosting catboost. Folia Geographica. 62(1):112–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samanta S, Pal DK, Palsamanta B. 2018. Flood susceptibility analysis through remote sensing, GIS and frequency ratio model. Appl Water Sci. 8(2):1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoppa L, Disse M, Bachmair S. 2020. Evaluating the performance of random forest for large-scale flood discharge simulation. J Hydrol. 590:125531.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shafizadeh-Moghadam H, Valavi R, Shahabi H, Chapi K, Shirzadi A. 2018. Novel forecasting approaches using combination of machine learning and statistical models for flood susceptibility mapping. J Environ Manage. 217:1–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shahabi H, Shirzadi A, Ronoud S, Asadi S, Pham BT, Mansouripour F, Geertsema M, Clague JJ, Bui DT. 2021. Flash flood susceptibility mapping using a novel deep learning model based on deep belief network, back propagation and genetic algorithm. Geosci Front. 12(3):101100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shirzadi A, Asadi S, Shahabi H, Ronoud S, Clague JJ, Khosravi K, Pham BT, Ahmad BB, Bui DT. 2020. A novel ensemble learning based on Bayesian Belief Network coupled with an extreme learning machine for flash flood susceptibility mapping. Eng Appl Artif Intell. 96:103971.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siahkamari S, Haghizadeh A, Zeinivand H, Tahmasebipour N, Rahmati O. 2018. Spatial prediction of flood-susceptible areas using frequency ratio and maximum entropy models. Geocarto Int. 33(9):927–941.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soliman M. 2015. Rain fell in Hurghada … and the emergency was raised in anticipation of its turning into floods. Al masry Elyoum. https://www.almasryalyoum.com/news/details/830677.
   Google Scholar
• Souissi D, Zouhri L, Hammami S, Msaddek MH, Zghibi A, Dlala M. 2020. GIS-based MCDM–AHP modeling for flood susceptibility mapping of arid areas, southeastern Tunisia. Geocarto Int. 35(9):991–1017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun Z, Li X, Fu W, Li Y, Tang D. 2013. Long-term effects of land use/land cover change on surface runoff in urban areas of Beijing, China. J Appl Remote Sens. 8(1):084596.
   Google Scholar
• Sun X, Liu M, Sima Z. 2020. A novel cryptocurrency price trend forecasting model based on LightGBM. Financ Res Lett. 32:101084.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Talukdar S, Ghose B, Salam R, Mahato S, Pham QB, Linh NTT, Costache R, Avand M. 2020. Flood susceptibility modeling in Teesta River basin, Bangladesh using novel ensembles of bagging algorithms. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess. 34(12):2277–2300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang X, Li J, Liu M, Liu W, Hong H. 2020. Flood susceptibility assessment based on a novel random Naïve Bayes method: a comparison between different factor discretization methods. Catena. 190:104536.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tehrany M, Jones S. 2017. Evaluating the variations in the flood susceptibility maps accuracies due to the alterations in the type and extent of the flood inventory. In Kuala Lumpur: The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, vol. 42; p. 4.
   Google Scholar
• Tehrany MS, Jones S, Shabani F. 2019. Identifying the essential flood conditioning factors for flood prone area mapping using machine learning techniques. CATENA. 175:174–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tehrany MS, Pradhan B, Jebur MN. 2013. Spatial prediction of flood susceptible areas using rule based decision tree (DT) and a novel ensemble bivariate and multivariate statistical models in GIS. J Hydrol. 504:69–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tehrany MS, Pradhan B, Jebur MN. 2014. Flood susceptibility mapping using a novel ensemble weights-of-evidence and support vector machine models in GIS. J Hydrol. 512:332–343.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tien Bui D, Pradhan B, Nampak H, Bui Q-T, Tran Q-A, Nguyen Q-P. 2016. Hybrid artificial intelligence approach based on neural fuzzy inference model and metaheuristic optimization for flood susceptibilitgy modeling in a high-frequency tropical cyclone area using GIS. J Hydrol. 540:317–330.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torabi Haghighi A, Menberu MW, Darabi H, Akanegbu J, Kløve B. 2018. Use of remote sensing to analyse peatland changes after drainage for peat extraction. Land Degrad Develop. 29(10):3479–3488.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Townshend J, Justice C, Li W, Gurney C, McManus J. 1991. Global land cover classification by remote sensing: present capabilities and future possibilities. Remote Sens Environ. 35(2-3):243–255.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unduche F, Tolossa H, Senbeta D, Zhu E. 2018. Evaluation of four hydrological models for operational flood forecasting in a Canadian Prairie watershed. Hydrol Sci J. 63(8):1133–1149.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unisdr C. 2015. The human cost of natural disasters: a global perspective. https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/PAND_report.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Vinet F. 2008. Geographical analysis of damage due to flash floods in southern France: the cases of 12–13 November 1999 and 8–9 September 2002. Appl Geogr. 28(4):323–336.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vojtek M, Vojteková J. 2019. Flood susceptibility mapping on a national scale in Slovakia using the analytical hierarchy process. Water. 11(2):364.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Y, Hong H, Chen W, Li S, Panahi M, Khosravi K, Shirzadi A, Shahabi H, Panahi S, Costache R. 2019. Flood susceptibility mapping in Dingnan County (China) using adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system with biogeography based optimization and imperialistic competitive algorithm. J Environ Manage. 247:712–729.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang D, Zhang Y, Zhao Y. 2017. LightGBM: an effective miRNA classification method in breast cancer patients. ICCBB 2017: Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics October 2017; p. 7–11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3155077.3155079.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson JP, Gallant JC. 2000. Terrain analysis: principles and applications. John Wiley & Sons; p. 520.
   Google Scholar
• Yamazaki D, Ikeshima D, Tawatari R, Yamaguchi T, O'Loughlin F, Neal JC, Sampson CC, Kanae S, Bates PD. 2017. A high‐accuracy map of global terrain elevations. Geophys Res Lett. 44(11):5844–5853.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yariyan P, Janizadeh S, Van Phong T, Nguyen HD, Costache R, Van Le H, Pham BT, Pradhan B, Tiefenbacher JP. 2020. Improvement of best first decision trees using bagging and dagging ensembles for flood probability mapping. Water Resour Manage. 34(9):3037–3053.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ye B, Liu B, Tian Y, Wan L. 2020. A methodology for predicting aggregate flight departure delays in airports based on supervised learning. Sustainability. 12(7):2749.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young RA, Mutchler CK. 1969. Soil movement on irregular slopes. Water Resour Res. 5(5):1084–1089.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Youssef AM, Hegab MA. 2019. Flood-hazard assessment modeling using multicriteria analysis and GIS: a case study—Ras Gharib area, Egypt. In: Hamid RP, Candan G, editors. Spatial modeling in GIS and R for earth and environmental sciences. Elsevier; p. 229–257.
   Google Scholar
• Youssef AM, Pradhan B, Sefry SA. 2016. Flash flood susceptibility assessment in Jeddah city (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) using bivariate and multivariate statistical models. Environ Earth Sci. 75(1):12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang J, Fogelman-Soulié F. 2018. KKbox’s music recommendation challenge solution with feature engineering. In 11th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining WSDM, Los Angeles, California, USA, P. 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Zhao Z, Zheng J. 2020. CatBoost: a new approach for estimating daily reference crop evapotranspiration in arid and semi-arid regions of Northern China. J Hydrol. 588:125087.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang X, Aguilar E, Sensoy S, Melkonyan H, Tagiyeva U, Ahmed N, Kutaladze N, Rahimzadeh F, Taghipour A, Hantosh TH, et al. 2005. Trends in Middle East climate extreme indices from 1950 to 2003. J Geophys Res. 110(D22):1–12, D22104. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD006181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar