| 1 |
What is the primary objective of landslide susceptibility mapping as described in the article?
|
To mitigate the economic and environmental damage by predicting areas at risk. |
|
The primary objective of landslide susceptibility mapping is to identify areas that are prone to landslides.
By pinpointing these areas, the goal is to:
Mitigate risks: Implement preventive measures to reduce the impact of potential landslides.
Land-use planning: Guide development away from high-risk zones.
Emergency response: Prepare for and respond effectively to landslide disasters.
Infrastructure planning: Design and build infrastructure to withstand landslide hazards.
Essentially, landslide susceptibility mapping provides a crucial tool for managing and reducing the risks associated with landslides.
|
|
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 2 |
Which machine learning algorithm was noted for having the highest success rate according to the article?
|
Logistic Regression |
|
A Challenge in Identifying the Best Algorithm
Unfortunately, without specific details about the article you're referencing, it's impossible to pinpoint a particular machine learning algorithm with the highest success rate for landslide prediction.
The effectiveness of a machine learning algorithm often depends on various factors, including:
Data quality and quantity: The availability and quality of data significantly influence algorithm performance.
Problem complexity: The complexity of landslide prediction varies based on geographical location, geological conditions, and other factors.
Algorithm parameters: Fine-tuning algorithm parameters can greatly impact results.
Evaluation metrics: The chosen evaluation metrics can affect the perceived performance of different algorithms.
Common Algorithms Used in Landslide Prediction
While I cannot specify the "best" algorithm from the article, here are some commonly used machine learning algorithms in landslide prediction:
Random Forest: Known for its accuracy and ability to handle large datasets.
Support Vector Machines (SVM): Effective for classification tasks and handling complex datasets.
Artificial Neural Networks (ANN): Capable of learning complex patterns and relationships.
Decision Trees: Easy to interpret and understand, but might not be as accurate as other methods.
Gradient Boosting Machines (GBM): Often achieve high performance by combining multiple weak models.
If you can provide more details about the study, such as the specific region, data used, or the evaluation metrics employed, I can offer a more informed response. |
|
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 3 |
If the area of Chattogram district is 75% susceptible to landslides, and the highly susceptible zone covers approximately 12% of the district, what is the area (in percentage) that is not highly susceptible?
|
63% |
|
|
Let's break down the problem
Total area of Chattogram district = 100%
Area susceptible to landslides = 75%
Area highly susceptible to landslides = 12%
Calculating the area not highly susceptible
To find the area that is not highly susceptible, we need to subtract the highly susceptible area from the total susceptible area.
Area not highly susceptible = Area susceptible - Area highly susceptible
Area not highly susceptible = 75% - 12% = 63% |
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 4 |
Considering that the total number of analyzed landslides is 255, and 80% were used for training the models, how many landslide instances were used for testing?
|
51 |
|
|
Calculating the number of landslides used for testing
Understanding the problem:
Total landslides = 255
Percentage used for training = 80%
Calculations:
Landslides used for training = 255 * 80% = 204
To find the number of landslides used for testing, we subtract the number of landslides used for training from the total number of landslides.
Landslides used for testing = Total landslides - Landslides used for training
Landslides used for testing = 255 - 204 = 51 |
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 5 |
If the total area of Chattogram district is 7,000 km² and the very high susceptible zone covers 9% of the district, what is the area of the very high susceptible zone in km²?
|
630 km² |
|
|
alculating the Area of the Very High Susceptible Zone
Understanding the problem:
Total area of Chattogram district = 7,000 km²
Percentage of very high susceptible zone = 9%
Solution:
To find the area of the very high susceptible zone, we need to calculate 9% of 7,000 km².
Area of very high susceptible zone = 7,000 km² * 9%
Area of very high susceptible zone = 7,000 km² * 0.09 = 630 km² |
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 6 |
Assuming the false positive rate (FPR) for the logistic regression model is 0.05 and the true positive rate (TPR) is 0.95, calculate the specificity of the model.
|
0.95 |
|
|
Calculating Specificity
Understanding the terms:
False Positive Rate (FPR): The proportion of negatives that are incorrectly classified as positives.
True Positive Rate (TPR): The proportion of positives that are correctly classified as positives.
Specificity: The proportion of negatives that are correctly classified as negatives.
Calculation:
Specificity = 1 - False Positive Rate (FPR)
Given:
FPR = 0.05
Therefore,
Specificity = 1 - 0.05 = 0.95 |
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 7 |
Given that the area under the ROC curve (AUC) for the logistic regression model is 0.963, and the prediction rate is measured as the area under this curve, rate the model's prediction accuracy.
|
Excellent |
|
0.5: Random guessing (no skill)
0.7 - 0.8: Good model
0.8 - 0.9: Very good model
0.9 - 1.0: Excellent model |
|
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 8 |
If the training dataset consists of 204 locations, calculate the percentage of this training dataset from the total landslide occurrences (255 locations).
|
80% |
|
The training data represents 80.00% of total landslide occurrences. |
|
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 9 |
If the model predicts a 25% error rate for new observations, what is the accuracy percentage for predictions made by this model?
|
75% |
|
|
Accuracy = 1 - Error Rate
Given that the error rate is 25%, or 0.25 as a decimal:
Accuracy = 1 - 0.25 = 0.75
Therefore, the accuracy percentage for predictions made by this model is 75%. |
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 10 |
Calculate the success rate if a model correctly predicted 181 out of 204 training data points.
|
88.73% |
|
|
Success rate = (Correct predictions / Total predictions) * 100%
In this case:
Correct predictions = 181
Total predictions = 204
So,
Success rate = (181 / 204) * 100% ≈ 88.73%
Therefore, the success rate of the model is approximately 88.73%. |
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 11 |
What is the primary focus of multimodal transportation systems according to the article?
|
Focusing solely on increasing transportation capacity. |
|
Primary Focus of Multimodal Transportation Systems
The primary focus of multimodal transportation systems is to optimize the movement of goods and people by efficiently combining different modes of transport.
This typically involves:
Cost reduction: By selecting the most cost-effective combination of modes for specific routes.
Time efficiency: Minimizing transit times through seamless transfers between modes.
Reliability: Improving the consistency and predictability of transportation services.
Sustainability: Reducing environmental impact by promoting the use of low-carbon modes.
Accessibility: Expanding transportation options to reach underserved areas. |
|
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 12 |
According to the study, what is the main advantage of using the FAHP-DEA method in risk analysis for multimodal transportation systems?
|
It allows for precise risk prioritization and optimization of routes. |
|
Main Advantage of FAHP-DEA in Risk Analysis for Multimodal Transportation
The primary advantage of using the FAHP-DEA method in risk analysis for multimodal transportation systems is its ability to handle complex and uncertain decision-making environments.
This combined approach offers several benefits:
Combines qualitative and quantitative analysis: FAHP addresses subjective judgments while DEA provides objective efficiency evaluation.
Handles multiple criteria: FAHP can incorporate various risk factors and their relative importance.
Evaluates efficiency: DEA assesses the performance of different transportation modes or routes in terms of risk management.
Improves decision-making: By integrating both methods, it provides a comprehensive and robust framework for risk assessment and mitigation.
Essentially, FAHP-DEA helps to make more informed decisions in complex multimodal transportation systems by considering both qualitative and quantitative factors and evaluating the overall efficiency of risk management strategies. |
|
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 13 |
If the risk analysis model has five criteria and assigns importance weights such that the total sums up to 1, and the weights for operational risk and security risk are 0.157 and 0.073 respectively, what is the combined weight of the remaining three criteria?
|
0.770 |
|
|
Calculating the Combined Weight of Remaining Criteria
Understanding the problem:
Total weight of all criteria = 1
Weight of operational risk = 0.157
Weight of security risk = 0.073
We need to find the combined weight of the remaining three criteria.
Solution:
Calculate the total weight of the two given criteria:
Total weight of operational and security risk = 0.157 + 0.073 = 0.23
Subtract the total weight of the two given criteria from the total weight to find the weight of the remaining three criteria:
Weight of remaining three criteria = 1 - 0.23 = 0.77 |
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 14 |
If the probability of an accident occurring on a route is 0.2 and the consequence severity is rated at 0.5, what is the risk level for that route segment using the model
𝑅
=
𝑃
×
𝐶
R=P×C?
|
0.1 |
|
|
Calculating Risk Level
Understanding the problem:
Probability of accident (P) = 0.2
Consequence severity (C) = 0.5
Risk level (R) = P * C
Solution:
R = 0.2 * 0.5 = 0.1 |
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 15 |
Calculate the aggregate risk score if the weights of the criteria are 0.321, 0.388, 0.157, 0.073, and 0.061, and the local risk scores for a route are 0.5, 0.6, 0.4, 0.3, and 0.2 respectively.
|
0.438 |
|
|
|
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 16 |
If the probability assessment for a risk is ranked 3 on a scale of 5 and the severity assessment is also ranked 3, with the transport segment accounting for 20% of the total route distance, calculate the risk assessment using the formula
𝑅
=
𝑃
×
𝐶
×
𝐷
R=P×C×D.
|
0.20 |
|
|
Calculating Risk Assessment
Understanding the Problem
Probability (P) = 3/5 = 0.6
Severity (C) = 3/5 = 0.6
Distance factor (D) = 20% = 0.2
Risk (R) = P * C * D
Calculation
R = 0.6 * 0.6 * 0.2 = 0.072 |
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 17 |
Given that the weight for environmental risk is 0.061 and the local risk score for a route is 0.4, calculate the contribution of environmental risk to the overall risk score.
|
0.0244 |
|
|
To calculate the contribution of environmental risk to the overall risk score, we multiply the weight of the environmental risk by its local risk score.
Contribution of environmental risk = Weight of environmental risk * Local risk score
Contribution of environmental risk = 0.061 * 0.4 = 0.0244 |
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 18 |
Calculate the new overall risk score if the weight of infrastructure risk is increased from 0.388 to 0.400 while keeping other parameters constant, given that its local risk score is 0.2.
|
0.080 |
|
|
|
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 19 |
If a mode of transportation has a risk weight of 0.073 and its risk score is reassessed from 0.4 to 0.35, what is the change in its contribution to the overall risk score?
|
0.00365 |
|
|
Calculating the Change in Contribution
Understanding the Problem
Weight of the transportation mode = 0.073
Initial risk score = 0.4
New risk score = 0.35
Solution
Calculate the initial contribution:
Initial contribution = Weight * Initial risk score = 0.073 * 0.4 = 0.0292
Calculate the new contribution:
New contribution = Weight * New risk score = 0.073 * 0.35 = 0.02555
Calculate the change in contribution:
Change in contribution = Initial contribution - New contribution = 0.0292 - 0.02555 = 0.00365
Therefore, the change in the contribution of the transportation mode to the overall risk score is -0.00365. |
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|
| 20 |
If the local weights of freight-damage risk, infrastructure risk, and operational risk are 0.1, 0.2, and 0.15 respectively, what is their total contribution to the risk score if their respective weights are 0.321, 0.388, and 0.157?
|
0.15788 |
|
|
|
7 |
-.50
-.25
+.25
เต็ม
0
-35%
+30%
+35%
|