Evaluating Robustness of Landslide Susceptibility Mapping Models Using <scp>ZOO</scp> Attack and Machine Learning

ABSTRACT Landslide Susceptibility Mapping (LSM) research has traditionally emphasized predictive accuracy, often overlooking model robustness—a critical yet underexplored dimension given the substantial uncertainties in LSM workflows (e.g., inventory quality, sampling strategies, factor selection). To address the lack of standardized robustness evaluation frameworks, this study applies two complementary approaches: (1) an attack‐based empirical evaluation using the Zeroth‐Order Optimization (ZOO) adversarial attack to generate adaptive perturbations, and (2) a formal robustness verification utilizing two established metrics—verified error and average bound. This work represents the first application of adversarial machine learning techniques for robustness evaluation in geohazard susceptibility modeling. We apply the proposed framework to compare two widely used models—Random Forest (RF) and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost)—yielding two key insights. First, predictive accuracy and robustness are distinct properties: although RF achieved higher baseline accuracy (AUC: 0.9372 vs. 0.9000), XGBoost demonstrated markedly greater resilience to ZOO‐generated perturbations (AUC reduction: 0.97% vs. 8.31% for RF), challenging the assumption that higher accuracy implies greater robustness. Second, the consistency between the attack‐based empirical evaluation and the formal verification metrics confirms XGBoost's superior robustness, thereby validating the reliability of the applied framework. These findings underscore the necessity of incorporating robustness testing as a core component of LSM model evaluation to enhance reliability and reduce uncertainty in diverse application scenarios. The integrated framework, combining adversarial testing with formal verification metrics, offers a scientifically rigorous, efficient, and objective toolset for future LSM research, model benchmarking, and operational deployment.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Transactions in GIS
Published
2026-03-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/tgis.70247
Primary Topic
Landslides and related hazards
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating Robustness of Landslide Susceptibility Mapping Models Using ZOO Attack and Machine Learning

Sheng Gong, Boyi Li, Ruixue Wang, Fan Sun et al.
Transactions in GIS
Landslides and related hazards
article

Evaluating Robustness of Landslide Susceptibility Mapping Models Using ZOO Attack and Machine Learning

Sheng Gong, Boyi Li, Ruixue Wang, Fan Sun, Qihui Xiong, Hao Yu, Haijia Wen, Mingyong Liao
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Landslide Susceptibility Mapping (LSM) research has traditionally emphasized predictive accuracy, often overlooking model robustness—a critical yet underexplored dimension given the substantial uncertainties in LSM workflows (e.g., inventory quality, sampling strategies, factor selection). To address the lack of standardized robustness evaluation frameworks, this study applies two complementary approaches: (1) an attack‐based empirical evaluation using the Zeroth‐Order Optimization (ZOO) adversarial attack to generate adaptive perturbations, and (2) a formal robustness verification utilizing two established metrics—verified error and average bound. This work represents the first application of adversarial machine learning techniques for robustness evaluation in geohazard susceptibility modeling. We apply the proposed framework to compare two widely used models—Random Forest (RF) and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost)—yielding two key insights. First, predictive accuracy and robustness are distinct properties: although RF achieved higher baseline accuracy (AUC: 0.9372 vs. 0.9000), XGBoost demonstrated markedly greater resilience to ZOO‐generated perturbations (AUC reduction: 0.97% vs. 8.31% for RF), challenging the assumption that higher accuracy implies greater robustness. Second, the consistency between the attack‐based empirical evaluation and the formal verification metrics confirms XGBoost's superior robustness, thereby validating the reliability of the applied framework. These findings underscore the necessity of incorporating robustness testing as a core component of LSM model evaluation to enhance reliability and reduce uncertainty in diverse application scenarios. The integrated framework, combining adversarial testing with formal verification metrics, offers a scientifically rigorous, efficient, and objective toolset for future LSM research, model benchmarking, and operational deployment.

Transactions in GISVol. 30(2)
Chongqing University (CN), Chongqing Bureau of Geology and Minerals Exploration (CN), Ministry of Education (BD)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Landslides and related hazards
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.