| Literature DB >> 33918922 |
Muhammad Aamir1, Tariq Ali1, Muhammad Irfan2, Ahmad Shaf1, Muhammad Zeeshan Azam3, Adam Glowacz4, Frantisek Brumercik5, Witold Glowacz4, Samar Alqhtani6, Saifur Rahman2.
Abstract
Natural disasters not only disturb the human ecological system but also destroy the properties and critical infrastructures of human societies and even lead to permanent change in the ecosystem. Disaster can be caused by naturally occurring events such as earthquakes, cyclones, floods, and wildfires. Many deep learning techniques have been applied by various researchers to detect and classify natural disasters to overcome losses in ecosystems, but detection of natural disasters still faces issues due to the complex and imbalanced structures of images. To tackle this problem, we propose a multilayered deep convolutional neural network. The proposed model works in two blocks: Block-I convolutional neural network (B-I CNN), for detection and occurrence of disasters, and Block-II convolutional neural network (B-II CNN), for classification of natural disaster intensity types with different filters and parameters. The model is tested on 4428 natural images and performance is calculated and expressed as different statistical values: sensitivity (SE), 97.54%; specificity (SP), 98.22%; accuracy rate (AR), 99.92%; precision (PRE), 97.79%; and F1-score (F1), 97.97%. The overall accuracy for the whole model is 99.92%, which is competitive and comparable with state-of-the-art algorithms.Entities:
Keywords: convolutional neural network; deep learning; natural disasters intensity and classification
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33918922 PMCID: PMC8069408 DOI: 10.3390/s21082648
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Comparison of state-of-the-art techniques.
| Reference | Methodology Name | Outcomes | Weakness |
|---|---|---|---|
| [ | Signal processing, image processing and statistical technique | More accurate prediction of natural disasters | Limited statistical parameters for prediction |
| [ | Particle swarm optimization | Predict magnitude of earthquake | Work only for prediction on seismic dataset |
| [ | Neural network | Predict magnitude of earthquake | Limited parameters used for prediction |
| [ | Text mining, regular log mining technique | Detect earthquake with speed and accuracy on seismological data | Depends on public feedback to detect earthquake |
| [ | Decision tree | Utilize some parameters to access the model for flood damage area detection | Parametric limitation for the detection of flood damaging regions |
| [ | Artificial neural network, genetic algorithm and wavelet transfer technique | Sum-up good results as compared to the already existing techniques in the southeast Asia | Work for monsoon floods in June and September for specific regions in India for time series data |
| [ | Support vector machine, naïve Bayes | Classify the natural disasters on various parameters | Limited for only early stages of natural disasters |
| [ | Machine learning technique | Predict the land slidding with the accuracy rate of 75 to 95 | More guidlines for model selection for predition large scale landslide |
| [ | Neural network and back propagation | Prediction occur on past dataset | Dyanamic prediction is very much crucial for this system |
| [ | Clustering for multivariable time series | Proposed a dynamic clustering approch for time series analysis and self-optimize organizing mapping technique | Dynamic time series data required for clustering process |
| [ | Data mining technique | A real time desktop-based GUI system is designed to predict local storm | Use parallel computing process that takes various amounts of time to predict storm |
| [ | Text mining technique | Develop a public platform to inform early tsunami prediction and information | Public feedback is compulsory for prediction process |
| [ | Random forest, long short-term model | Evaluate the flood severity in terms of sensitivity, specificity and accuracy as 71.4%, 85.9%, 81.13%, respectively | Particle swarm optimization and other deep learning techniques can be used as a future work |
| [ | A learning-based wildfire model | Proposed method can predict the short term spread of wildfire | Real time rate of wildfire spread is required for initial stage |
| [ | Machine learning technique | The gradient boosting tree and CLIPER model used for cyclone prediction | Model is still weak to produce velocity sensitivities |
| [ | Machine learning technique with numerical weather prediction | The prediction method is used for China that shows significant improvement as compared to the traditional methods | Still lack symmetric parameters for numerical computations |
| [ | Artificial neural network | A fully connected neural network for segmentation which is used for multivariable pattern recognition at different levels | It works on multivariable parameters rather than the pixel by pixel parameters |
Figure 1Proposed architecture of multilayered deep convolutional neural network.
Block-I Convolutional Neural Network (B-I CNN).
| Block-I Convolutional Neural Network (B-I CNN) with Learning Rate = 0.001 and Epochs = 40 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Layer Name and Batches | Parameters | |
| Image Input Layer | Height: 100, Width: 120, Channel: 3 | |
|
| Convolution Layer | Filter size: 3 × 3, No. of filters = 8, stride = 1 |
|
| Convolution Layer | Filter size: 3 × 3, No. of filters = 16, stride = 1 |
|
| Convolution Layer | Filter size: 3 × 3, No. of filters = 32, stride = 1 |
| Fully Connected Layer | 4 Classes | |
Figure 2Architecture of proposed multilayered deep convolutional neural network.
Block-II convolutional neural network (B-II CNN).
| Block-II Convolutional Neural Network (B-II CNN) with Learning Rate = 0.001 and Epochs = 30 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Layer Name and Batches | Parameters | |
| Image Input Layer | Height: 100, Width: 120, Channel: 3 | |
|
| Convolution Layer | Filter size: 3 × 3, No. of filters = 8, stride = 1 |
|
| Convolution Layer | Filter size: 3 × 3, No. of filters = 16, stride = 1 |
|
| Convolution Layer | Filter size: 3 × 3, No. of filters = 32, stride = 1 |
| Fully Connected Layer | 4 Classes | |
Figure 3Different classes of natural disasters from dataset.
Grouping of natural disasters dataset.
| Disaster Type | Total | Training | Test | Validation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cyclone | 928 | 500 | 300 | 128 |
| Earthquake | 1350 | 600 | 300 | 450 |
| Flood | 1073 | 600 | 300 | 173 |
| Wildfire | 1077 | 600 | 300 | 177 |
| Total | 4428 | 2300 | 1200 | 928 |
Figure 44-Class matrix of natural disasters classification by using the proposed method on the testing dataset.
Figure 5Confusion matrix of 4-class of natural disaster classification by using the proposed method on the training dataset.
Figure 6Graphical representation of training and validation accuracy and loss on various iterations.
Statistical value calculations of proposed model for the whole dataset.
| Sr. | Disaster Type | SE (%) | SP (%) | AR (%) | PRE (%) | F1 (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cyclone | 97.15 | 98.08 | 100.00 | 97.32 | 97.36 |
| 2 | Earthquake | 95.18 | 97.11 | 99.70 | 96.34 | 98.88 |
| 3 | Flood | 99.17 | 99.13 | 100.00 | 99.05 | 99.23 |
| 4 | Wildfire | 98.67 | 98.56 | 100.00 | 98.45 | 96.44 |
| Average | 97.54 | 98.22 | 99.92 | 97.79 | 97.97 | |
State-of-the-art comparison of the proposed multilayered deep convolutional neural network.
| Cited | Technique Used | Accuracy-Rate (%) | Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| [ | CNN | 84.00 | 2015 |
| [ | Feed-Forward neural network | 92.00 | 2016 |
| [ | Support Vector Machine | 87.00 | 2016 |
| [ | CNN | 90.00 | 2016 |
| [ | Glaucoma-Deep (CNN, DBN d, Softmax) | 99.0 | 2017 |
| [ | RestNet-50 | 96.02 | 2018 |
| [ | WSDD-Net | 99.20 | 2019 |
| [ | OCT Probability map using CNN | 95.7 | 2019 |
| [ | Attention Guided Convolutional Neural Network | 95.3 | 2019 |
| [ | ML-DCNN | 99.39 | 2020 |
| [ | ML-DCNNet | 99.14 | 2020 |
| Proposed Multilayered Deep Convolutional Neural Network | 99.92 | 2021 | |