Publicidad

CL#21-0488.pdf

25 de Mar de 2023
Publicidad

Más contenido relacionado

Similar a CL#21-0488.pdf(20)

Publicidad

CL#21-0488.pdf

  1. Landslide identification using synthetic aperture radar change detection on the Google Earth Engine Alexander L. Handwerger Joint Institute for Regional Earth System Science and Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA Co-authors Shannan Jones, Mong-Han Huang and Hannah Kerner (U of Maryland) Pukar Amatya and Dalia Kirschbaum (NASA Goddard) © 2021. All rights reserved
  2. Motivation The Asahi Shimbun/Getty Images • Landslides are a major natural hazard and are often the dominant process that erode mountainous landscapes • Rapid response to landslide events (and other natural hazards) is necessary to assess damages and save lives • Efforts are impeded by a lack of detailed information on the condition or location of damaged areas • Construct inventories to improve understanding of where landslides occur, to quantify erosion, and to look for areas subject to secondary hazards • It is necessary to continue to develop easy-to-use tools with freely available data that can be used to map the landslide extent and level of damage following catastrophic events
  3. Outline Image from PlanetLabs • Introduction • Landslide mapping • Data and Methods • Synthetic Aperture Radar • Landslide identification in Google Earth Engine • Results (Case study: 2018 Hiroshima, Japan) • Landslide Detection with SAR • Rapid Response with SAR • Summary • Examples • 2018 earthquake-triggered landslides Hokkaido, Japan • 2018 post-fire debris flows, Montecito, CA, USA • 2020 Hurricane Eta landslides, Guatemala and Honduras
  4. Introduction
  5. Landslide Identification Field Surveys https://www.usgs.gov/news/usgs-geologists-join-efforts-montecito-assess-debris-flow-aftermath 2018 Montecito Debris Flows
  6. Landslide Identification 1 km Image from Sentinel-2 Satellite-based Optical Imagery 2018 earthquake-triggered landslides Hokkaido, Japan • Pixel sizes from centimeters to hundreds of meters • Collected every few days to weeks • Multiple spectral bands (visible and near-infrared)
  7. Landslide Identification Satellite-based Optical Imagery 1 km 2018 Hokkaido, Japan Image from Sentinel-2 • Require solar illumination • Issues caused by clouds, shadows, night time Limitations • Pixel sizes from centimeters to hundreds of meters • Collected every few days to weeks • Multiple spectral bands (visible and near-infrared) Image from Sentinel-2 2018 earthquake-triggered landslides Hokkaido, Japan
  8. Landslide Identification • Normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) • NDVI change detection methods have been used for identifying landslides (e.g., Huang et al., 2020; Mondini et al., 2011; Scheip and Wegmann, 2020) Satellite-based Optical Imagery Scheip and Wegmann, 2020 1 km 2019 rainfall-induced landslides, West Pokot County, Kenya Vegetation change (%rdNDVI) gain loss • Require solar illumination • Issues caused by clouds, shadows, night time Limitations
  9. Landslide Identification • 1D viewing geometry • Topography • Vegetation Limitations • Pixel sizes meters to tens of meters • Collected every few days to weeks • Operates day or night and can ”see” through clouds • Amplitude and Phase data Satellite-based Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Images from Sentinel 1 and 2 2018 earthquake-triggered landslides Hokkaido, Japan
  10. Landslide Identification • Damage mapping from interferometric coherence (phase data) • Measure the change in radar scattering characteristics 2018 earthquake-triggered landslides Hokkaido, Japan Jung and Yun, 2020 Satellite-based Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR)
  11. Landslide Identification • Damage mapping from amplitude change • Measure the change backscatter brightness Satellite-based Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Jung and Yun, 2020 2018 earthquake-triggered landslides Hokkaido, Japan We will use a variation of this approach today
  12. Methods
  13. • Backscattering coefficient is strength of reflected echo, often expressed in decibels (dB) • Backscatter depends on properties of ground • E.g., soil moisture, surface roughness, vegeation • Can use SAR backscatter to detect a variety of natural disasters such as floods, forest fires, earthquakes, landslides (Burrows et al., in review; DeVries et al., 2020; Jung and Yun, 2020; Mondini et al., 2019; Rignot and Van Zyl, 1993; Tay et al., 2020; Yun et al., 2015) Source: ESA Earth Online Methods Slide from S. Jones SAR Backscatter
  14. • Smooth surfaces: scatters energy away and appears dark (e.g., open water) • Rough surfaces: scatters energy away and towards satellite • Volume scattering: scatters multiple times • Double Bounce: scatters back toward satellite, common in urban area Methods Slide from E. Podest SAR for Flood Mapping Using Google Earth Engine SAR Backscatter Image from Ulaby et al., 1981
  15. • Longer radar wavelengths can better penetrate through vegetation and even into the shallow ground surface Methods Slide from E. Podest SAR for Flood Mapping Using Google Earth Engine SAR Backscatter
  16. Methods Slide from E. Podest SAR for Flood Mapping Using Google Earth Engine SAR Backscatter
  17. Speckle • Each cell contains several scattering centers whose returns create positive or negative interference • "salt and pepper" appearance • Corrected with smoothing filters and multi-looking Methods SAR Backscatter Issues Source: ESA Geometric Issues • Shadowing • Foreshortening (slope facing toward radar) • Layover (mountains look as if they have fallen over toward the sensor) • Somewhat corrected when projecting to ground range using DEM Kīlauea Caldera, Hawaii Image courtesy G. Funning
  18. Methods SAR Backscatter Slide from UNAVCO short course InSAR theory and interferogram processing
  19. Methods SAR Backscatter Slide from UNAVCO short course InSAR theory and interferogram processing
  20. • User must define an event • Highlights the areas where the ground surface has changed • Landslides change the backscatter intensity of the land cover by: • Geometrical changes • Surface property changes (e.g., vegetation, wetness) • Changes can be positive or negative • 𝐼𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 < 0 when post-event backscatter intensity increases • To reduce noise and improve data quality we construct pre- and post-event stacks by taking the median of all available pre- and post-event SAR imagery Methods SAR Backscatter Intensity Change Log-ratio 𝐼𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 = 10 ∗ log10 𝐼𝑝𝑟𝑒 𝐼𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝐼𝑝𝑟𝑒 = pre-event backscatter Intensity 𝐼𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑡 = post-event backscatter Intensity
  21. Methods SAR Backscatter Intensity Change Pre-event Post-Event Backscatter Change / = 2018 rainfall-triggered landslides Hiroshima, Japan Images from S. Jones Log-ratio 𝐼𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 = 10 ∗ log10 𝐼𝑝𝑟𝑒 𝐼𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝐼𝑝𝑟𝑒 = pre-event backscatter Intensity 𝐼𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑡 = post-event backscatter Intensity
  22. Methods • We compare our SAR-based detection to an external landslide inventory using ROC curves • Each pixel is classified as a landslide if its value exceeds a threshold • For each threshold we calculate the false positive rate and true positive rate • Best performance is determined by maximizing the AUC • AUC = 1 is perfect classifier, AUC = 0.5 is random selection Receiver Operating Characteristic curves (ROC) Martin Thoma - Own work - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rec eiver_operating_characteristic
  23. • C-band wavelength (5.6 cm) • 10 m pixel for GRD • Data collected along ascending and descending geometry • Minimum revisit time 6 days for single satellite pass Data Collection Copernicus Sentinel-1 A/B Satellites
  24. Methods • Cloud-based geospatial processing platform • Available to scientists, researchers, and developers for analysis of the Earth's surface • Contains a catalogue of satellite imagery and geospatial datasets (including Sentinel-1 SAR, Landsat and Sentinel-2 optical) • Uses Java script and Python code editor • Sign up for a free account https://earthengine.google.com/ • Not required to download large datasets or install specialized software! Google Earth Engine Image from GEE
  25. Methods • Precipitation • GPM, ERA5, TRMM, PRISM Google Earth Engine NASA GES DISC at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Image from Google Earth Engine
  26. Methods • Optical and Radar Imagery • Sentinel, Landsat, MODIS, National Agriculture Imagery Program (US) Google Earth Engine European Union/ESA/Copernicus Image from Google Earth Engine
  27. Methods • Terrain • NASADEM (30 m), SRTM (30 m), USGS NED (10 m), ALOS DSM Global 30 m Google Earth Engine NASA / USGS / JPL-Caltech Image from Google Earth Engine
  28. Methods • Lithology and Land Cover Google Earth Engine Conservation Science Partners Image from Google Earth Engine
  29. Methods Code Editor Script manager Geometry tools Layer manager
  30. Methods Our approach requires two simple inputs: 1) Location (Area of Interest) 2) Event timing Additional parameters: • Slope and curvature thresholds • Smoothing filters https://github.com/MongHanHuang/GEE_SAR_landslide_detection
  31. Methods • Provides Sentinel-1 Ground Range Detected (GRD) products • Orthorectified • Pre-processed to remove thermal noise • Have undergone radiometric calibration • New data uploaded within 2 days • The main advantage of using GEE is that it utilizes open-access data, does not require specialized software, analyses performed on the cloud!
  32. Methods
  33. Results
  34. • Event of Interest (EOI) June 28, 2018 – July 8, 2018 • Record breaking rainfall event • ~8000 triggered landslides • 108 fatalities • Landslide inventory provided by the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan (GSI) and Association of Japanese Geographers (AJG) Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Case Studies (Adriano et al., 2020; Hirota et al., 2019; Miura, 2019) Slide courtesy of S. Jones The sites of landslides in Kure, Hiroshima prefecture, southwestern Japan. Photo by Kyodo News via Associated Press.
  35. Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Case Studies • ~277 km2 AOI • ~3800 landslides mapped in our AOI Next we examine data to determine the best approaches for landslide detection and for rapid response Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint
  36. Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Results Iratio All available pre-event and post-event SAR data Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint
  37. Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Iratio Results All available pre-event and post-event SAR data Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint
  38. Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Iratio Results All available pre-event and post-event SAR data Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint False positives
  39. ROC Curves • Combining flight paths improves AUC score • Addition of the DEM mask slope and curvature thresholds improves AUC even further Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Results Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint Increased AUC
  40. Results Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint ROC Curves • We explore how the total number of images used in the pre- and post-event stacks impacts landslide detection
  41. Results Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint ROC Curves • We explore how the total number of images used in the pre- and post-event stacks impacts landslide detection
  42. Results Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint ROC Curves • We explore how the total number of images used in the pre- and post-event stacks impacts landslide detection
  43. Results Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint ROC Curves • We explore how the total number of images used in the pre- and post-event stacks impacts landslide detection
  44. Results Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint ROC Curves • We explore how the total number of images used in the pre- and post-event stacks impacts landslide detection
  45. Results Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint ROC Curves • We explore how the total number of images used in the pre- and post-event stacks impacts landslide detection • The AUC score continues to improve with increasing number of SAR images (or time) • Best approach is to use all available images before and after event! Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan
  46. Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Results Iratio 1 day after event (2 SAR images) All available images Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint All available pre-event and limited post-event SAR data
  47. Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Results Iratio All available images Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint All available pre-event and limited post-event SAR data 1 week after event (4 SAR images)
  48. Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Results Iratio All available images Landslide Heat Map Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint All available pre-event and limited post-event SAR data 1 day after event (2 SAR images)
  49. Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan Results 1 week after event (4 SAR images) Iratio All available images Landslide Heat Map Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint All available pre-event and limited post-event SAR data
  50. Results Handwerger et al., 2020, preprint
  51. Summary • Developed a new methodology to identify landslides (and other ground surface changes) using open-access data • Does not require specialized SAR processing software • All data is stored and processed in GEE • Best approach combined all available SAR images, ascending and descending data with DEM mask • Landslide density “heat maps” help reduce noise and highlight landslides for rapid response • Future SAR missions, like the L-band NASA-ISRO NiSAR mission, which is currently expected to launch in January 2022, will also provide publicly available data
  52. Examples
  53. 2018 earthquake-triggered landslides, Hokkaido, Japan Case Studies
  54. 2018 earthquake-triggered landslides, Hokkaido, Japan Case Studies 1 week after event (3 post-event images)
  55. 2018 earthquake-triggered landslides, Hokkaido, Japan Case Studies 2 week after event (4 post-event images)
  56. 2018 earthquake-triggered landslides, Hokkaido, Japan Case Studies ~2 years after event (212 post-event images)
  57. 2018 earthquake-triggered landslides, Hokkaido, Japan Case Studies
  58. Case Studies Debris flows Burned area 2018 Post-fire debris flows, Montecito, CA
  59. Case Studies Debris flows Burned area ~2 weeks after event 2018 Post-fire debris flows, Montecito, CA
  60. Case Studies Debris flows Burned area 2018 Post-fire debris flows, Montecito, CA 1 year after event
  61. Case Studies 2020 Hurricane Eta, Queja landslide Guatemala
  62. Case Studies 2020 Hurricane Eta, Queja landslide, Guatemala ~ 1 week after event
  63. Case Studies 2020 Hurricane Eta, Queja landslide, Guatemala ~ 2 months after event
  64. Case Studies 2020 Hurricane Eta, Honduras
  65. Case Studies 2020 Hurricane Eta, Honduras ~ 2 weeks after event Many landslides hard to detect!
  66. Case Studies 2020 Hurricane Eta, Honduras Many landslides hard to detect! ~ 2 months after event
  67. Case Studies 2020 Hurricane Eta, Honduras Many landslides hard to detect! ~ 2 months after event
Publicidad