Topographic uncertainty quantification for flow-like landslide models via stochastic simulations

TL;DR

This study evaluates how topographic uncertainties in digital elevation models influence flow-like landslide simulations, comparing stochastic simulation methods to understand their impact on hazard assessment accuracy.

Contribution

It introduces and compares unconditional and conditional stochastic simulation approaches to quantify DEM uncertainty effects on landslide run-out models.

Findings

DEM uncertainty significantly impacts landslide run-out predictions.

Unconditional stochastic simulation performs comparably to conditional methods without systematic DEM bias.

Unconditional methods may overestimate hazard areas when DEM errors are variable.

Abstract

Topography representing digital elevation models (DEMs) are essential inputs for computational models capable of simulating the run-out of flow-like landslides. Yet, DEMs are often subject to error, a fact that is mostly overlooked in landslide modeling. We address this research gap and investigate the impact of topographic uncertainty on landslide-run-out models. In particular, we will describe two different approaches to account for DEM uncertainty, namely unconditional and conditional stochastic simulation methods. We investigate and discuss their feasibility, as well as whether DEM uncertainty represented by stochastic simulations critically affects landslide run-out simulations. Based upon a historic flow-like landslide event in Hong Kong, we present a series of computational scenarios to compare both methods using our modular Python-based workflow. Our results show that DEM uncertainty can significantly affect simulation-based landslide run-out analyses, depending on how well the underlying flow path is captured by the DEM, as well as further topographic characteristics and the DEM error's variability. We further find that in the absence of systematic bias in the DEM, a performant root mean square error based unconditional stochastic simulation yields similar results than a computationally intensive conditional stochastic simulation that takes actual DEM error values at reference locations into account. In all other cases the unconditional stochastic simulation overestimates the variability of the DEM error, which leads to an increase of the potential hazard area as well as extreme values of dynamic flow properties.