FL-MHSM: Spatially-adaptive Fusion and Ensemble Learning for Flood-Landslide Multi-Hazard Susceptibility Mapping at Regional Scale

arXiv cs.LG / 4/20/2026

📰 NewsSignals & Early TrendsIdeas & Deep AnalysisModels & Research

Key Points

  • The study introduces FL-MHSM, a deep learning workflow for joint flood–landslide multi-hazard susceptibility mapping that addresses limitations of uniform modeling and hazard-independent treatment.
  • Its architecture combines two-level spatial partitioning, probabilistic Early Fusion (EF), a tree-based Late Fusion (LF) baseline, and a soft-gating Mixture of Experts (MoE) as the final predictor.
  • Spatial heterogeneity is handled through zonal partitions, and large-area data-parallel prediction is enabled using overlapping lattice grids.
  • Results show EF improved flood-related metrics over LF in both Kerala and Nepal, while MoE delivered the strongest performance in different tasks (flood in Kerala, landslide in Nepal), indicating complementary strengths of EF and LF.
  • GeoDetector-based analysis suggests that dominant driving factors vary more by zone in Kerala but remain more consistent (topographic and glacier-related) in Nepal, supporting the value of spatially adaptive fusion and interpretable outputs.

Abstract

Existing multi-hazard susceptibility mapping (MHSM) studies often rely on spatially uniform models, treat hazards independently, and provide limited representation of cross-hazard dependence and uncertainty. To address these limitations, this study proposes a deep learning (DL) workflow for joint flood-landslide multi-hazard susceptibility mapping (FL-MHSM) that combines two-level spatial partitioning, probabilistic Early Fusion (EF), a tree-based Late Fusion (LF) baseline, and a soft-gating Mixture of Experts (MoE) model, with MoE serving as final predictive model. The proposed design preserves spatial heterogeneity through zonal partitions and enables data-parallel large-area prediction using overlapping lattice grids. In Kerala, EF remained competitive with LF, improving flood recall from 0.816 to 0.840 and reducing Brier score from 0.092 to 0.086, while MoE provided strongest performance for flood susceptibility, achieving an AUC-ROC of 0.905, recall of 0.930, and F1-score of 0.722. In Nepal, EF similarly improved flood recall from 0.820 to 0.858 and reduced Brier score from 0.057 to 0.049 relative to LF, while MoE outperformed both EF and LF for landslide susceptibility, achieving an AUC-ROC of 0.914, recall of 0.901, and F1-score of 0.559. GeoDetector analysis of MoE outputs further showed that dominant factors varied more across zones in Kerala, where susceptibility was shaped by different combinations of topographic, land-cover, and drainage-related controls, while Nepal showed a more consistent influence of topographic and glacier-related factors across zones. These findings show that EF and LF provide complementary predictive behavior, and that their spatially adaptive integration through MoE yields robust overall predictive performance for FL-MHSM while supporting interpretable characterization of multi-hazard susceptibility in spatially heterogeneous landscapes.