Probability distributions of landslide volumes

We examine 19 datasets with measurements of landslide volume, <I>V<sub>L</sub></I>, for sub-aerial, submarine, and extraterrestrial mass movements. Individual datasets include from 17 to 1019 landslides of different types, including rock fall,...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: M. T. Brunetti, F. Guzzetti, M. Rossi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Copernicus Publications 2009-03-01
Series:Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics
Online Access:http://www.nonlin-processes-geophys.net/16/179/2009/npg-16-179-2009.pdf
_version_ 1818143791777841152
author M. T. Brunetti
F. Guzzetti
M. Rossi
author_facet M. T. Brunetti
F. Guzzetti
M. Rossi
author_sort M. T. Brunetti
collection DOAJ
description We examine 19 datasets with measurements of landslide volume, <I>V<sub>L</sub></I>, for sub-aerial, submarine, and extraterrestrial mass movements. Individual datasets include from 17 to 1019 landslides of different types, including rock fall, rock slide, rock avalanche, soil slide, slide, and debris flow, with individual landslide volumes ranging over 10<sup>−4</sup> m<sup>3</sup>≤<I>V<sub>L</sub></I>≤10<sup>13</sup> m<sup>3</sup>. We determine the probability density of landslide volumes, <I>p(V<sub>L</sub></I>), using kernel density estimation. Each landslide dataset exhibits heavy tailed (self-similar) behaviour for their frequency-size distributions, <I>p(V<sub>L</sub></I>) as a function of <I>V<sub>L</sub></I>, for failures exceeding different threshold volumes, <I>V<sub>L</sub></I>*, for each dataset. These non-cumulative heavy-tailed distributions for each dataset are negative power-laws, with exponents 1.0≤β≤1.9, and averaging β≈1.3. The scaling behaviour of <I>V<sub>L</sub></I> for the ensemble of the 19 datasets is over 17 orders of magnitude, and is independent of lithological characteristics, morphological settings, triggering mechanisms, length of period and extent of the area covered by the datasets, presence or lack of water in the failed materials, and magnitude of gravitational fields. We argue that the statistics of landslide volume is conditioned primarily on the geometrical properties of the slope or rock mass where failures occur. Differences in the values of the scaling exponents reflect the primary landslide types, with rock falls exhibiting a smaller scaling exponent (1.1≤β≤1.4) than slides and soil slides (1.5≤β≤1.9). We argue that the difference is a consequence of the disparity in the mechanics of rock falls and slides.
first_indexed 2024-12-11T11:37:17Z
format Article
id doaj.art-97af82c94cdd4e8495dc387709bec466
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1023-5809
1607-7946
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-11T11:37:17Z
publishDate 2009-03-01
publisher Copernicus Publications
record_format Article
series Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics
spelling doaj.art-97af82c94cdd4e8495dc387709bec4662022-12-22T01:08:42ZengCopernicus PublicationsNonlinear Processes in Geophysics1023-58091607-79462009-03-01162179188Probability distributions of landslide volumesM. T. BrunettiF. GuzzettiM. RossiWe examine 19 datasets with measurements of landslide volume, <I>V<sub>L</sub></I>, for sub-aerial, submarine, and extraterrestrial mass movements. Individual datasets include from 17 to 1019 landslides of different types, including rock fall, rock slide, rock avalanche, soil slide, slide, and debris flow, with individual landslide volumes ranging over 10<sup>−4</sup> m<sup>3</sup>≤<I>V<sub>L</sub></I>≤10<sup>13</sup> m<sup>3</sup>. We determine the probability density of landslide volumes, <I>p(V<sub>L</sub></I>), using kernel density estimation. Each landslide dataset exhibits heavy tailed (self-similar) behaviour for their frequency-size distributions, <I>p(V<sub>L</sub></I>) as a function of <I>V<sub>L</sub></I>, for failures exceeding different threshold volumes, <I>V<sub>L</sub></I>*, for each dataset. These non-cumulative heavy-tailed distributions for each dataset are negative power-laws, with exponents 1.0≤β≤1.9, and averaging β≈1.3. The scaling behaviour of <I>V<sub>L</sub></I> for the ensemble of the 19 datasets is over 17 orders of magnitude, and is independent of lithological characteristics, morphological settings, triggering mechanisms, length of period and extent of the area covered by the datasets, presence or lack of water in the failed materials, and magnitude of gravitational fields. We argue that the statistics of landslide volume is conditioned primarily on the geometrical properties of the slope or rock mass where failures occur. Differences in the values of the scaling exponents reflect the primary landslide types, with rock falls exhibiting a smaller scaling exponent (1.1≤β≤1.4) than slides and soil slides (1.5≤β≤1.9). We argue that the difference is a consequence of the disparity in the mechanics of rock falls and slides.http://www.nonlin-processes-geophys.net/16/179/2009/npg-16-179-2009.pdf
spellingShingle M. T. Brunetti
F. Guzzetti
M. Rossi
Probability distributions of landslide volumes
Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics
title Probability distributions of landslide volumes
title_full Probability distributions of landslide volumes
title_fullStr Probability distributions of landslide volumes
title_full_unstemmed Probability distributions of landslide volumes
title_short Probability distributions of landslide volumes
title_sort probability distributions of landslide volumes
url http://www.nonlin-processes-geophys.net/16/179/2009/npg-16-179-2009.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT mtbrunetti probabilitydistributionsoflandslidevolumes
AT fguzzetti probabilitydistributionsoflandslidevolumes
AT mrossi probabilitydistributionsoflandslidevolumes