Journal Pre-proof

Earthquake hazard and risk assessment using machine learning

approaches at Palu, Indonesia

Ratiranjan Jena, Biswajeet Pradhan, Ghassan Beydoun, Abdullah

M. Alamri, Ardiansyah, Nizamuddin, Hizir Sofyan

PII: S0048-9697(20)35111-1
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141582
Reference: STOTEN 141582

To appear in: Science of the Total Environment

Received date: 6 July 2020

Revised date: 6 August 2020
Accepted date: 7 August 2020

Please cite this article as: R. Jena, B. Pradhan, G. Beydoun, et al., Earthquake hazard and
risk assessment using machine learning approaches at Palu, Indonesia, Science of the Total
Environment (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141582

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such
as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is
not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting,
typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this
version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production
process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers
that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2020 Published by Elsevier.

 Journal Pre-proof

Earthquake hazard and risk assessment using machine learning

approaches at Palu, Indonesia
Ratiranjan Jena1, Biswajeet Pradhan1,2,3*, Ghassan Beydoun1, Abdullah M. Alamri4, Ardiansyah5,
Nizamuddin5, Hizir Sofyan6
1
Center for Advanced Modeling and Geospatial Information Systems (CAMGIS), School of Information
Systems and Modelling, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, University of Technology
Sydney, NSW 2007, Australia
2
Department of Energy and Mineral Resources Engineering, Sejong University, Choongmu-gwan, 209,
Neungdong-ro Gwangin-gu, Seoul 05006, Korea
3
Center of Excellence for Climate Change Research, Department of Meteorology, Faculty of Meteorology,
Environment and Arid Land Agriculture; King Abdulaziz University, P. O. Box 80234, Jeddah 21589, Saudi
Arabia
4
Department of Geology & Geophysics, College of Science, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2455, Riyadh
11451, Saudi Arabia

of
5
Department of Informatics, Syiah Kuala University, Banda Aceh, Indonesia
6
Department of Statistics, Syiah Kuala University, Banda Aceh, Indonesia
*Correspondence to Biswajeet.Pradhan@uts.edu.au

ro
Abstract

On 28th September 2018, a very high magnitude of earthquake Mw 7.5 struck the Palu city in the
-p
Island of Sulawesi, Indonesia. The main objective of this research is to estimate the earthquake risk
re
based on probability and hazard in Palu region using cross-correlation among the derived parameters,
Silhouette clustering (SC), pure locational clustering (PLC) based on hierarchical clustering analysis
lP

(HCA), convolutional neural network (CNN) and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) techniques.
There is no specific or simple way of identifying risks as the definition of risk varies with time and
space. The main aim of this study is: i) to conduct the clustering analysis to identify the earthquake-
na

prone areas, ii) to develop a CNN model for probability estimation, and iii) to estimate and compare
the risk using two calculation equations (Risk A and B). Owing to its high prediction ability, the CNN
ur

model assessed the probability while SC and PLC were implemented to understand the spatial
clustering, Euclidean distance among clusters, spatial relationship and cross-correlation among the
Jo

estimated Mw, PGA and intensity including events depth. Finally, AHP was implemented for the
vulnerability assessment. To this end, earthquake probability assessment (EPA), susceptibility to
seismic amplification (SSA) and earthquake vulnerability assessment (EVA) results were employed to
generate risk A, while earthquake hazard assessment (EHA), SSA and EVA were used to generate
risk B. The risk maps were compared and the differences in results were obtained. This research
concludes that in the case of earthquake risk assessment (ERA), results obtained in Risk B are better
than the risk A. This study achieved 89.47% accuracy for EPA while for EVA a consistency ratio of
0.07. These results have important implications for future large-scale risk assessment, land use
planning and hazard mitigation.
Keywords: Earthquake risk; machine learning; CNN; GIS; hierarchical clustering; pure locational
clustering
 Journal Pre-proof

1. Introduction

The tectonic deformation of Sulawesi Island located in Indonesia shows active seismicity
mostly in the south-west part of the Island [1]. Although, the Island has not experienced a
mass casualty (1000+ fatalities) earthquake till date, nevertheless, small magnitude events
have occurred frequently in the last decade that caused minor economic losses and fatalities.
In history, the most severe event was the Toli-Toli earthquake of Ms 7.4 (1968) in terms of
fatalities (200 deaths) [1]. Many secondary events such as landslides and tsunami occurred
due to complicated tectonic, steep topography in both onshore and offshore associated with
the extension of faults. The most important step is to characterize the spatial sources of
earthquakes and the seismic hazard due to seismic amplification and to understand the threat

of
from earthquakes to 17 million people [2] who live in the Sulawesi Island. In 1996, Toli-Toli

ro
city hosted another large earthquake of Mw 7.9 [3], around 100 km north of the recent 7.5
Mw event. The 1996 earthquake caused 10 fatalities, over 60 injuries, and local buildings
-p
damage.
re
Horspool et al. [4], performed a probabilistic tsunami hazard assessment, including the
Sulawesi Island in Indonesia over the last 100 years. The northern part of Sulawesi has
lP

experienced earthquakes and tsunamis due to the subduction zone in the Sulawesi Sea [5].
Rahmadaningsi [5] employed a single fault method using raster calculator and obtained a
na

simulated tsunami inundation focusing on the 1996 earthquake that occurred at Toli-Toli,
North Sulawesi. According to the obtained results, the bay-shaped shorelines are associated
ur

with liquefaction that happened as a result of the strong ground shaking in Palu [6]. However,
the requirement is to adequately address and mitigate earthquake damages and liquefaction.
Jo

As a first step, there is a necessity to conduct the hazard and risk analysis in Palu. Several
seismological and geodetic analysis was conducted that designated shear characteristics for
the 2018 Palu earthquake [7-10]. Socquet et al. [9] also displayed indications of super shear
rupture using the InSAR data quite similar to the faulting characteristics of 2002 Denali
(Alaska), 2001 Kunlun (Tibet) and 1999 Izmit (Turkey) earthquakes. According to Socquet et
al. [9], the geodetic magnitude was 7.62 with the displacement by a strike-slip fault was about
5.25m along the fault plane in Palu. During earthquakes, slip initiated along the fault plane
trending from the north to southwards over 180 km. They also observed the wave velocity in
the un-consolidated alluvial sedimentary deposits within the basin, where extensive
liquefaction and severe destructions were found. Moreover, the variation of surface
displacements from the north towards southern segments was 1.9m to 4.7m for the Palu-Koro
 Journal Pre-proof

fault system, respectively [8]. Bao et al. [8] observed an average rupture velocity of 4.10 ±
0.15 km/s using the methods of teleseismic back-projection and remote sensing techniques
for the 2018 Palu earthquake. The rupture velocity was validated by further examining the
observations of the regional surface wave.
In a recent work, Cipta et al. [11] performed a probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the
Island of Sulawesi, Indonesia. The assessment portrays the effect of site amplification for
Sulawesi region. They observed the seismic activity is high along the Palu-Koro–Matano
fault system. Subsequently, areas with deformation contribute moderate-to-high magnitude
events mostly in the southwest part of the Island. Many cities including Palu sited on the soft
sedimentary basin that may be constructed due to the tectonic movement, which could

of
amplify the seismic waves. Therefore, Palu is at risk as the whole city is a part of the

ro
unconsolidated sedimentary basin, including the provincial capital Gorontalo. Syifa et al. [12]
performed a post-earthquake damage mapping in Palu using artificial intelligence techniques.
-p
Landsat-8 and Sentinel-2 data were used to classify damages based on the pre- and post-
earthquake satellite images classification and then using a decorrelation method, the damage
re
map was prepared. Ulrich et al. [13] performed the physics-based modeling that could reveal
the secrets of earthquake displacements. The model integrates wave and tsunami propagation,
lP

rupture dynamics and inundation. They analyzed a particular earthquake scenario, through
rupture propagation, and observed some characteristics such as rupture duration, fault plane
na

solution, moment magnitude, horizontal ground displacements, etc. Rusydi et al. [14]
conducted a study aiming to determine the EVA in Palu. Vulnerability estimation is one of
ur

the ways to reduce future earthquake risk. They performed the study using a weighted sum
technique and described the expected scientific causes. The data processing was performed
Jo

using a GIS application. According to their results, out of 45 districts in Palu, 12 are located
in low vulnerability zone, 11 in moderate and 22 lies in high vulnerability zone.
Over the last decade, artificial intelligence (AI) techniques have become very popular and
been implemented in several applications to solve real-life problems and geohazards,
particularly in the field of earthquake prediction and probability. For example, Panakkat and
Adeli [15] successfully applied neural networks for earthquake magnitude prediction by
employing several seismic indicators. Their study was proven as a robust model for
magnitude prediction. Asim et al. [16] conducted a machine learning-based study to predict
magnitude in the Hindukush region. In another study, Asim et al. [17] predicted earthquakes
using a hybrid machine learning technique for Hindukush and Chile and achieved good
accuracy. In a recent work, Jena et al. [18] estimated the earthquake probability in the Odisha
 Journal Pre-proof

state of India using an advanced machine learning-based recurrent neural network model.
According to their results, the model demonstrated superior to simple neural networks and
traditional models. In another recent work, Jena et al. [19] successfully developed an
integrated machine learning-based model to improve the earthquake risk assessment for
Banda Aceh city in Indonesia. Gitis and Derendyaev [20] used machine-learning techniques
to forecast seismic hazard and achieved excellent results. In other types of geohazards, Fanos
and Pradhan [21, 22] conducted a study on rockfall source identification using a novel hybrid
machine learning techniques using Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data in a GIS
environment. Besides, machine learning techniques have been successfully implemented in
many other environmental applications such as; groundwater potential mapping [23], land

of
suitability mapping [24], renewable energy [25], earthquake prediction and probability

ro
mapping [26,27].
Several risk calculation methods are available to generate a risk map. However, no research
-p
has been conducted in comparing the predominant risk calculation equations that have
pointed out in this study. Another novelty in this research exists with the implementation of
re
four techniques at a single ERA study for the first time. The existing methods have many
uncertainties in terms of data quality and data dependency modeling and that was not
lP

considered in the current study. Many techniques such as HCA, SC, CNN and AHP were
implemented to estimate the SSA, EPA, EHA and EVA. These four methods were used to
na

conduct a comprehensive ERA in Palu. Yet, no probability study has been conducted using
the integrated clustering analysis and artificial intelligence techniques in Palu that will be
ur

considered as an improvement in the current risk mapping. Besides, the study area (Palu city,
Indonesia) is a relatively seismic-prone area that has not been sufficiently investigated in a
Jo

city-scale in previous studies. Seismologists believe that the clustering of earthquakes in

geographically complicated and tectonically active locations could trigger a large event in
unclustered areas close to the clustered areas (www.higp.hawaii.edu) [38]. Thus, this research
investigated and identified two risk calculation equations and compared them by estimating
the risk for Palu city. The study aims to estimate and map the risk as a basis for land use
planning, prioritizing evacuation, and mitigation efforts in Palu.
2. Study area

Sulawesi Island is situated at the convergence zone of 3 major plates such as; the Indian-
Australian Plate, the Pacific Plate, and the Eurasian Plate [28]. Palu is a city on Sulawesi
Island in Indonesia. The city is located at 0◦53’42” S, 119◦51’34” E as the capital of the
 Journal Pre-proof

Central Sulawesi Province (Figure 1). Various geological rocks and tectonic conditions from
the surrounding areas distinguish the city. Sulawesi Island is K-shaped, which is
characterized by 14 geomorphic units [29]. Matsuoka et al. [30] described and classified the
geomorphological units such as tertiary mountains, pre-tertiary mountains, hills, volcanic foot
slopes, mountain foot slopes, volcano, and dunes. Volcanoes in Sulawesi covers
approximately 75% of the Island’s area. Several active faults could be found on the Island
that accommodates the active Palu-Koro fault in the northwest part of the city. The Makassar
Basin is divided by the Palu-Koro fault zone and the separation produced into the North and
South Makassar Basins [31]. The Palu-Koro fault is a transform fault in nature that is
responsible for the movement of some part of western Sulawesi towards the south-

of
southeasterly direction. Strictly, this affected the Island’s locality and generated two dormant

ro
spreading centers in the Makassar Strait [31]. The northward movement of Sulawesi
happened due to further spreading put up by the left-lateral Palu-Koro fault. As a result,
-p
Sulawesi moved away from Kalimantan in an axis with north-northwest–south-southeast
direction [32]. The main tectonic assemblages found in Sulawesi such as east-west arm
re
ophiolite complexes, north-south arm tertiary granites and volcanic deposits [31]. According
to Socquet et al. [33], Palu-Koro strike-slip fault covers approximately 50 km in width at
lP

Palu, where the fault slip ranges between 30-40 mm/year. Palu is unique because of its
unique geological structures such as alluvial deposits, granite fragments, beach and molasses
na

sediments, and metamorphic rocks in different parts within the valley.

[Figure 1. Near here]
ur

3. Data
Jo

The current study utilizes several data including earthquake inventory, geological data, digital
elevation model (DEM) for ERA [34]. The inventory data were collected from USGS
(https://earthquake.usgs.gov/) (1900-2019), geological and digital elevation data were
collected from the Statistics Indonesia (https://www.bps.go.id/) and USGS. Many estimated
variables used for the spatial relationship, clustering analysis and cross-correlation to
understand the spatial probability. Several layers were generated using geospatial information
systems (GIS) for the EPA, SSA and EHA. Some specific vulnerability factors were
generated from the vector data. In the current study, the focus is on understanding the spatial
and temporal probability trend along with the expected risk by estimating the EPA, SSA,
EHA and EVA using two risk estimating methods. This would provide a basis for
determining whether both the risk results can be used for future perspectives on a city-scale.
 Journal Pre-proof

The factors chosen for all the assessments were selected from the previous research database
and their significance in affecting earthquakes. Therefore, this study divides the factors based
on the requirement of different assessments and presented in Table 1.

[Table 1. Near here]

4. Methodology
The flowchart for the overall methodology is presented in Figure 2. The use of HCA, SC,
CNN and AHP techniques was assessed. Thereafter, the study involves determining the EPA,
EHA, SSA, EVA and ERA. Risk assessment processes were presented in Figure 2. The final
results of risk were determined using two risk assessment methods and compared as follows

of
[34]:

ro
Risk (A) = EPA ∗ SSA ∗ EVA (Probability ∗ Expected loss)
-p (1)
Risk (B) = EHA ∗ SSA ∗ EVA (Hazard ∗ Expected loss) (2)
re
[Figure 2. Near here]
lP

4.1. Hierarchical and pure locational clustering

Hierarchical clustering or cluster analysis (HCA) is a technique in statistics and data mining
na

that allows constructing a hierarchy of clusters [35]. In general, hierarchical clustering

strategies are classified into two major types such as agglomerative and divisive clustering
ur

techniques. In this study, Euclidian distances were used to analyze the clustering of events.
Therefore, Euclidean distances were plotted against the cluster to show the clustering
Jo

relationship through a dendrogram. Euclidean distance can be presented as follows:

‖𝑎 − 𝑏‖2 = √∑𝑖(𝑎𝑖 − 𝑏𝑖 )2 (3)
In this module, the pure locational clustering (PLC) approach was implemented for the
evaluation of clusters through the hierarchy. PLC is an approach, where the clusters were
projected based on the geographic coordinates of a set of earthquakes. In this section, the
total number of events was plotted concerning the longitudes for locational clustering.
4.2. Silhouette clustering
Let 𝑋𝑇 = {𝑋1 , … . , 𝑋𝑁 } be the data for clustering analysis and therefore, 𝐶 = (𝐶1 , … . , 𝐶𝐾 ) can
be its 𝐾clusters. Then the distance between 𝑋𝑘 and 𝑋𝑙 can be considered as 𝑑(𝑋𝑘 , 𝑋𝑙 ).
𝑗 𝑗
However, if 𝐶𝑗 = {𝑋1 , … . . , 𝑋𝑚𝑗 } be the j-th cluster then, 𝑗 = 1, . . . , 𝐾, where 𝑚𝑗 = |𝐶𝑗 |. The
 Journal Pre-proof

𝑗
expression that can provide the average distance 𝑎𝑖 between the 𝑖-th vector and the other
vectors in the cluster 𝐶𝑗 can be presented mathematically as follows [36]:
𝑗 1 𝑚
𝑎𝑖 = 𝑚 ∑𝑘=1𝑗 𝑑(𝑋𝑖𝑗 , 𝑋𝑘𝑗 ), 𝑖 = 1, … . , 𝑚𝑗 (4)
𝑗 −1 𝑘≠𝑖

The expression that can provide the minimum average distance between all the vectors in the
clusters 𝐶𝑘 , 𝑘 = 1, . . . , 𝐾, 𝑘 ≠ 𝑗 and the i-th vector in the cluster 𝐶𝑗 can be presented as
follows:
𝑗 𝑚𝑖𝑛 1 𝑚𝑛 𝑗
𝑏𝑖 = 𝑛= 1,...,𝐾 {𝑚 ∑𝑘=1 𝑑(𝑋𝑖 , 𝑋𝑘𝑛 ) } , 𝑖 = 1, … . , 𝑚𝑗 (5)
𝑛≠𝑗 𝑛

Then in the cluster 𝐶𝑗 , the Silhouette width of the 𝑖-th vector can be expressed as follows:

of
𝑗 𝑗
𝑗 𝑏𝑖 −𝑎𝑖
𝑠𝑖 = 𝑗 𝑗 . (6)
𝑚𝑎𝑥{𝑎𝑖 ,𝑏𝑖 }

ro
𝑗
From the eq (3), the expression follows −1 ≤ 𝑠𝑖 ≤ 1. Therefore, the Silhouette of the
cluster 𝐶𝑗 can be defined as:
-p
1
𝑗 𝑗 𝑚
𝑆𝑗 = 𝑚 ∑𝑖=1 𝑠𝑖 . (7)
𝑗
re
Finally, the global Silhouette index of the clusters can be expressed by [36]:
1
lP

𝑆 = 𝐾 ∑𝐾
𝑗=1 𝑆𝑗 . (8)

It can be understandable the inclusive values of 1 and 1 between both the cluster’s Silhouette
na

and the global Silhouette. Using the above described mathematical expressions Silhouette
index was estimated for four cases and plotted in Figure 7.
ur

4.3. CNN architecture and implementation

Jo

A biologically-inspired deep learning technique of a neural network is called as CNN, which

is particularly used for classification prediction and feature extraction [37-39]. Earthquake
inventory was prepared. Some random points were created. We considered earthquakes as 1
and non-earthquake as 0 in the target area for the binary classification using CNN. Each
indicator represents a channel and the main goal is the classification of each pixel within the
“thematic layer”. Before using the capabilities of CNN in the field of EPA, the input
predisposing factors for the earthquake were first stacked. Pixel values were extracted in
terms of multivalued by points that could act as a “multi-channel image” for the entire study
area. Next, the input multivalued data points were split into training (70%) and testing (30%)
based on which the model predicts the pixel values close to the earthquake and non-
earthquake points [34]. Once the prediction is confirmed with good accuracy, the pixel values
 Journal Pre-proof

for the whole area can be estimated. Pixels close to target will be converted into low to the
high probability, where values vary from 0 to 1. Details of feature classification could be
found in the article [40]. Firstly, the construction of a CNN model and training of a pure
CNN structure is needed. As shown in Figure 3, several neurons characterize the input layer
of the CNN model, where each neuron project an earthquake predisposing indicator. Let
𝑣 = {𝑣1 , 𝑣2 , 𝑣3 , … . 𝑣𝑛 } indicate the input earthquake indicators for probability mapping,
where N is the total number of indicators. Hereby, convolutional filters first process each
input layer in the operation. In CNN, convolutional manipulation could capture specific
representations among earthquake feature vectors through the kernels. Thus, convolutional
filtering output could be defined as follows:

of
𝐶𝑗 = ∑𝑁
𝑖 𝑓(𝑤𝑗 ∗ 𝑣𝑖 + 𝑏𝑗 ), 𝑗 = 1,2,3 … 𝑘 (9)

ro
𝑒 𝑥 −𝑒 −𝑥
𝑓(𝑥) = 𝑡𝑎𝑛ℎ(𝑥) = 𝑒 𝑥 +𝑒 −𝑥 (10)

where 𝑓 can be considered as a nonlinear activation function while ∗ was designated as the
-p
convolutional operator. However, convolutional kernels can be presented as; 𝑏𝑗 and 𝑤𝑗
re
indicates bias and weight, respectively. The pooling operation or in another way called sub-
sampling can reduce feature vectors size using a combining approach of a 𝑁 × 1 patch in the
lP

previous convolutional layer and converting it to a single value in the next layer. Therefore,
each sub-sampling layer follows the path of the previous convolutional layer. Max pooling is
na

the one, which is widely used in pooling operation during the whole process and the output
can be calculated as follows:
ur

𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑎𝑗 = (𝑎𝑗𝑛∗1 𝑢(𝑛, 1)) (11)
𝑁∗1
Jo

where the window function is 𝑢 (𝑛, 1) to the patch in the previous layer, and 𝑎𝑗 is considered
as the maximum in the patch. In the next step, these extracted values generated by the
convolutional and pooling process are restructured through fully connected layers. To the
end, the output layer that is connected to the fully connected layer consists of two neurons
classifying earthquakes (1) and non-earthquakes (0). By using a back-propagation algorithm,
the optimization process was conducted for all parameters. In general, to minimize the loss
the optimized parameters were calculated by a loss function, which is defined as follows:
1
𝐿𝑜𝑠𝑠 = − 𝑚 ∑𝑚
𝑖=1[𝑦
̂1 𝑙𝑜𝑔(𝑦̂𝑖 ) + (1 − 𝑦𝑖 )log(1 − 𝑦̂𝑖 )] (12)

where 𝑚 is the total number of earthquakes and the variables 𝑦𝑖 and 𝑦̂𝑖 indicate the true and
predicted label of the ith input sample, respectively. The parameters must be iteratively
 Journal Pre-proof

updated with a change of input indicators until the loss value reaches to the level of
convergence.

[Figure 3. Near here]

4.4. AHP algorithm
AHP is a multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) method that is firmly established and
developed by Satty [41]. The method deals with the estimation of rank and priority of criteria.
AHP has been implemented in several fields, including vulnerability assessment. In this
study, AHP was only applied to EVA using 7 criteria. The backbone of the AHP method can
be described as follows:

of
Firstly, the requirement was to construct a pairwise comparison for the criteria with the
satty’s intensity scale of 1 to 9 [42]. If the criteria have the same priority then the comparative

ro
value of 1 can be presented, by creating a square matrix. Particularly, if the criteria are N,
-p
then the matrix will be 𝐴𝑁𝑋𝑁 . Eventually, the relative importance 𝑎𝑖𝑗 of 𝑖 while 𝑖 concerning
to 𝑗. Normalized weight can be estimated in a comparison matrix by implementing the
re
geometric mean of rows. Therefore, 𝐺𝑀𝑗 can be mathematically expressed as follows:
lP

1/𝑁 𝐺𝑀𝑗
𝐺𝑀𝑗 = [∏𝑛𝑗=1 𝑎𝑖𝑗 ] and 𝑊𝑗 = ∑𝑁 . (13)
𝑗=1 𝐺𝑀𝑗

Matrices A3, A4, etc are calculated as:

na

𝐴3 = 𝐴1 ∗ 𝐴2 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝐴4 = 𝐴3/𝐴2, (14)

where
ur

𝐴2 = [𝑊1, 𝑊2 … , 𝑊𝐽]𝑇 . (15)

The maximum Eigenvalue can be calculated by averaging matrix A4.
Jo

The consistency index can be calculated as:

CI = (λ max − n)/(𝑛 − 1). (16)
Accurate results can be indicated by lower C.I. value that shows a smaller deviation from the
consistency level.
The consistency ratio can be determined as:
CI
CR = RI. (17)

In a pairwise comparison, the value CR ≤ 0.1 is acceptable according to (Satty, 2008).

Hereby, RI represents the random index associated with the matrix size. The RI value is
suggested as 1.41 for the matrix size of 8.
5. Results
 Journal Pre-proof

5.1. Relationship among Mw, PGA and intensity variation

Generally, a matrix plot is used to obtain the relationship between several variables.
Therefore, in this study, earthquake magnitude, PGA values were obtained for the events.
The possible intensity for each scenario was calculated and correlated to understand the
relationship. Three variables were obtained from the calculation using the inventory data of
earthquake events and applied using the Matlab tools. The result obtained from the plotting is
presented in Figure 4. The interpolation method was also implemented to join the three
variables smoothly. The total number of variables was 200. The variable values vary from -
3.19 to 8.09 (color-magnitude). Many negative values could be observed in the intensity
section, while positive values could be found in the magnitude section. Eventually, PGA

of
values vary at a level of 0.571. Consequently, this analysis shows that a small magnitude

ro
earthquake could generate a high intensity and PGA, while a high magnitude earthquake
could generate a low intensity and PGA in a specific location.
-p
[Figure 4. Near here]
re
5.2. Pure Locational Clustering (PLC) and hierarchy plotting
In this research, pure locational clustering (PLC) approach was applied using the classical
lP

clustering technique for defining and evaluating the number of clusters. PLC is an approach
implemented in the current study that is defined based on geographic coordinates of a set of
na

earthquake locations. Figures 5a and 5b presented below show the results of the classical
clustering performance using the earthquake locations. Subsequently, the elbow method was
ur

applied to figure out the optimum clusters by investigating the obtained critical points on the
plotted graph. However, in total two optimum numbers of clusters were obtained. It could be
Jo

observed that the distance generated between the clusters was less in classical clustering than
any other clustering such as the K-means algorithm. Thus, classical hierarchical clustering is
implemented as a countermeasure in the current research. The dendrogram presented in
figure 5b shows the Euclidean distance between the groups they based on and the clusters on
the least distance between the points.
[Figure 5. Near here]
5.3. Silhouette clustering
Silhouette clustering analysis is an interpretation and validation method to clarify the
consistency within the data cluster. In this study, the obtained PGA and intensity values for
all the earthquakes were applied to evaluate the consistency. The succinct representation of
data points was plotted graphically, which shows the object classification.
 Journal Pre-proof

[Figure 6. Near here]

The four cross-correlations were obtained in Figure 6 varies with the lag values of -105 to
105. Consequently, in the case of the correlation between epicentral distance and source-to-
site distance, when the lag value is zero the correlation is one and the p-value reaches zero.
The p-values vary in a range from 0.028 to 0.919 in the cross-correlation portraying a
positive correlation, where source-to-site distance leads. The second cross-correlation reveals
that the p-values vary in a range from 0.00012 to 0.974. In this case, the lag value is zero,
correlation is -0.266 and the p-value reaches 0.00009 with positive correlation where depth
leads. The third and fourth cross-correlation projects that the p-values vary in a range from
0.014 till 0.99 and 0.0003 till 0.973, respectively. Accordingly, the lag value is zero and the

of
correlations outreach to 0.073 and 0.246 while the p-value reaches 0.287 and 0.0003,

ro
respectively.
In general, Silhouette value is a value that shows the similarity of an object to its cluster as
-p
compared to other clusters. Figure 7a was plotted with Silhouette clustering, log y and 3-point
average. Silhouette clustering was included to plot all the indicators in a single graph. Log y
re
will provide the plot for negative values while a 3-point average could provide the graph in a
signal form. Figure 7a shows that the values of intensity (E) and PGA (D) vary
lP

correspondingly while the relative values for A, B and F are very similar. This graph shows
that if the signal varies smoothly, then the values are almost close to each other having a large
na

cluster which could be seen in the case of (C) as the magnitude varies from 4 to 8 with very
minor changes.
ur

Figure 7b shows the plot of the Silhouette clustering of intensity against PGA. This portrays
the data with a 3-point average and 95% confidence. However, as the Silhouette values range
Jo

from −1 to +1. Thus, the object will be considered as poorly matched to neighboring clusters
and well-matched to its own cluster, if high value observes.
[Figure 7. Near here]

5.4. Susceptibility to seismic amplification

Fewer studies have been conducted for Palu on earthquake probabilistic assessment, and SSA
is one of them [43-45]. The seismic zone map of Palu (SNI 03-1726-2002) shows that the
region falls under a high to very-high hazard zone trending northeast-southwest direction
across the central part of the city characterized by metamorphic rocks, unconsolidated
deposits and fewer granitic patches. Probabilistic estimation in Palu gives PGA of
approximately 0.5 to 0.6g for 10% exceedance in 50 years. From this study, the highest PGA
 Journal Pre-proof

obtained is 0.2g for Palu, which comes under the very strong category. However, the SSA
depends on the amplification factor of rock types. Therefore, the PGA observed in Palu used
for the hazard assessment. The susceptibility map obtained from this considered slope (35%),
curvature (32%), elevation (23%) and lithology with amplification factors (10%) as the
conditioning factors with predefined weights (Figure 8) [43]. Using the weighted overlay
technique the final map was produced and been stretched from low to high susceptible areas
(Figure 10a). The obtained map projects the high susceptible areas that could be found in the
coastal areas in the northern part of the city.
5.5. Probability and hazard mapping
During the probability mapping, training was performed for earthquake prediction

of
classification. The proposed model was not able to predict 11 earthquakes out of 83. Hence,

ro
the reason could be noise and data heterogeneity in the thematic layers. During data
processing, some irrelevant data points were removed for better accuracy. The proposed
-p
model predicted 200 km2 as the most probable area. The training was performed and Palu city
was tested using the CNN model. As the study is a probability assessment, therefore no
re
classification technique was applied for probable classes in Palu city. Nevertheless, the
probability must vary between 0 and 1. The Accuracy was estimated as 0.89, Precision
lP

(0.91), Recall (0.86) and finally, the F1-score was obtained as 0.88 (Table 3). The probability
map is presented in Figure 10b.
na

The spatial distribution of the probability of occurrence is higher in the eastern and northern
parts of the eastern limb of Palu city as presented in figure 10b. Particularly, Palu is a small
ur

city that is located close to the Palu-Koro active fault system has the capacity to strike strong
future earthquakes. Therefore, a high probability in the city located at the eastern limb in a
Jo

north-south direction. Medium probability is surrounding the high and low probability could
be found in the east-west direction. The probability increases towards the coastal areas
according to the obtained probability map.
Earthquake hazard is the event associated with space and time. However, when the intensity
and PGA level could reach a particular level that could become hazardous. The expected
intensity at a particular PGA value and the actual intensity resulted from the magnitude in
Palu were estimated. Based on these values, the hazard map was estimated and presented in
Figure 10c. With high intensity of more than 9 can be considered as a very high hazard,
whereas high, moderate, low and very low hazard can be classified with the intensity
variation of 8–9, 8–7, 7–5 and <5, respectively [44-47]. The quantile classification
 Journal Pre-proof

breakpoints were implemented to divide the hazard into five different classes using the
nearest values [48].

[Figure 8. Near here]

5.6. Vulnerability mapping
The vulnerability assessment was conducted and a map was produced using several
vulnerable factors for Palu (Figure 9). Vulnerable areas geometry and the buildings within
could help in calculating the number of vulnerable populations and areas in the city. Seven
vulnerable factors were applied in the AHP approach for pairwise comparison and weight
calculation [46,47]. A total of 21 comparisons were carried out with an achieved consistency

of
ratio (CR) of 0.07. The priority analysis evaluated the principal eigenvalue as 7.58; however,

ro
the eigenvector solution achieved six iterations. An eigenvalue must be nonzero and a
negative eigenvalue directs inappropriate evaluation. Consequently, CR value less than 0.1
-p
demonstrated that the criteria were deliberately assessed. Delta value was observed as 2.9E-8
during the MCDM processing. Priority scores for all the 8 layers were achieved. Hence,
re
building density, road density and major offices achieved the weights of 43.1%, 20.8% and
12.5% and ranked as 1, 2, and 3, respectively (Table 2). CR obtained from the process shows
lP

that pairwise comparison was accurate. The remaining criteria achieved medium to a low
rank as per the results presented in Table 2. A maximum and minimum of all the weights
na

were also obtained. Seven alternatives were chosen out of 8 against all the seven major
criteria where interesting locations were removed. The details of factors, weights and ranks
ur

were presented in Table 2.

[Figure 9. Near here]
Jo

Approximately, 20% (78.80 km2) area of Palu is estimated as high to very high vulnerability
(Figure 10d). The city center dominant to a very high and north-south limb of the city
belongs to the high vulnerability category. Factors that could account for this condition of
very high to high vulnerability are social characteristics that are high in the city center.
Moderate conditions covered both the sensitive and remote areas around the city with a huge
areal characteristic. The vulnerable map shows that 40% (157.60 km2) area comes under a
moderately vulnerable category. An estimated area of 40% (157.60 km2) covered by low to
very low vulnerability. Low areas covered the southeastern parts close to the hilly regions
and parts of western coastal regions of the city.
[Table 2. Near here]
[Figure 10. Near here]
 Journal Pre-proof

[Table 3. Near here]

5.7. Risk estimation
Finally, the earthquake risk was mapped spatially and the process was presented in Figure 11.
Several classification techniques are used for classifying the developed maps. In this study,
the quantile technique was employed to classify the risk into five classes such as very high,
high, moderate, low, and very low. Based on the obtained results 68 km2, 85 km2 (17.26%,
21.57%) and 66 km2, 81 km2 (16.75%, 20.55%) of the city was regarded as a very high-to
high-risk zone based on risk A and risk B map. Ultimately, 78 km2 (19.79%) and 85 km2
(21.57%) of the city comprised of moderate risk in both the maps (Table 4). The high to very
high-risk areas are observed in the city center and some parts in the northern limb of the city.

of
Medium to very low risk could be expected towards the eastern part of the city in the hilly

ro
areas (Figure 12).
[Figure 11. Near here]
-p
[Table 4. Near here]
[Figure 12. Near here]
re
6. Discussion
According to Figure 5, two major hierarchical clusters can be observed where many sub-
lP

clusters can be noticed. The clusters obtained from the PLC approach and HC are
comparable. Euclidean distance was applied to calculate the Silhouette values as the
na

distance metric. The clustering method is applied to figure out the centroid of the longitudes.
Afterward, the locations prone to earthquakes were observed, which depends on the
ur

proximity to the events, the clusters could be mapped. In Figure 6, the results show that Mw
and intensity have a positive correlation where intensity leads. Similarly, Mw and PGA show
Jo

a positive correlation and PGA leads. A strong correlation between epicentral distance with
source-to-site distance and Mw with PGA was observed. Similarly, the other two correlations
performed in Figure 6 are moderately correlated. The possible reason could be the calculation
of variables that were performed through several attenuation laws. Graphs (Figure 7) portray
that most of the objects have a high value that shows an appropriate clustering configuration.
Ellipse in this graph considers the objects as a single cluster. No negative values observed
therefore, no clustering configuration observed on the negative side.
Seismic amplification areas confined to the city center because of loose sedimentary and
coastal sedimentary deposits. Low to moderate susceptibility for seismic amplification could
be observed in the eastern and western hillside of the city. The locations with high SSA
include lesser earthquake events and the active tectonic faults are situated within the location
 Journal Pre-proof

that has the highest influence on earthquake activity. This location shows the highest PGA
values including the highest intensity values and susceptibility for seismic wave
amplification. The lower PGA values observed in some areas are because of lesser structural
features along with hard rocks. This city is seismically active because of the periodical
reactivation of the Palu-Koro fault zone. Therefore, the obtained results of SSA can be
validated using the local rock types and the pre-existing earthquake hazard maps for Palu.
Some researchers have conducted a ground-shaking amplification study using stratigraphic,
litho-dynamic, and topographic factors [43-45].
The leading cause of high probability could be the major active fault system, a huge number
of events in the eastern part and the high magnitude events. Seismic amplification is higher in

of
the coastal part than other areas in the city; however, loose sedimentary rocks making the city

ro
more probable towards the east and northern regions. The reasons could be reverse for the
low probability. Although, the quantile technique is not a default method in ArcGIS for
-p
classification, while the natural break is the one and most popularly used by researchers.
Moreover, for earthquake hazard classification, it could be observed that values are close to
re
each other and quantile technique classifies at its best. Intensity always depends on both
vulnerable factors and magnitude. Therefore, observed hazard zones could be useful for ERA
lP

in the future as presented in Figure 10c. Jena et al. [34] conducted a probability assessment
for Banda Aceh in Indonesia using an artificial neural network (ANN) and successfully
na

mapped the probable areas.

The reason for the indication of low vulnerability could be minimal social characteristics.
ur

Spatially, the vulnerability variation could be observed from the resulting map for the Palu
city. Approximately, 80% of the population lives in a very high, high and moderately
Jo

vulnerable zone, whereas 20% situated in the low vulnerable zone. Notably, very high to high
vulnerable locations are most influenced by high population and building density. Thus, the
produced vulnerability map could be implemented as a source map for future risk mapping in
Indonesia. Jena et al. [46] conducted successfully using MCDM and estimated structural,
social and geotechnical vulnerability. The detailed assessment of building types, quality of
materials and number of floors could be included for the Palu city that was not performed in
this study. Very high and high-risk areas of the city should be the focus of the Indonesian
Govt. for earthquake mitigation planning. Comparing the risk results obtained from A and B
provides a basis for the accurate risk assessment (Figure 11). However, the risk map A
portrays that the city center comes under very high to high-risk areas while according to B
very high, high and moderate areas of risk distributed in a normalized way. In the first case
 Journal Pre-proof

(Figure 12a), the risk was obtained as a multiplication of EPA, SSA and EVA to generate
risk, which mostly applies in industries [47-50]. In the second case (Figure 12b), the risk is
the product of EHA, SSA and EVA, which produces useful results according to the scientific
soundness of earthquake study [49]. Hazard and vulnerability results linked consistently in
the spatial assessment of risk [50]. The possible reasons for the observed high-risk could be a
dense population, low elevation, active faults, high density of earthquake epicenter, and high
magnitude events [51]. Having capacity in proper mitigation planning and coping, some areas
within the city could be reduced from high-risk to low status [52]. Hence, from the above
study, it could be observed that the proposed methods work efficiently and provide accurate
results.

of
7. Conclusion

ro
According to the risk results, very high and high-risk areas could be observed in 68, 85 km2
and 16.75, 20.55 km2 area in the city based on risk maps A and B, respectively. The results
-p
obtained from both risk maps are quite helpful for future study, however, the result in risk ‘B’
re
is better than ‘A’ in terms of scientific soundness. A detailed risk assessment could be
conducted using complete inventory, seismic indicators, active tectonics and geospatial data.
lP

Necessary criteria were reasonably chosen based on previous research and experience in the
field. In this study, AHP and weighted overlay techniques were applied for vulnerability
na

assessment, while CNN was applied for probability assessment.

Several limitations include the requirement of large data points for probability mapping.
ur

Challenges associated with data collection on a city-scale; nevertheless, some countries

Jo

banned the free flow of data. In this study, secondary data have been used, which is still
challenging to obtain. Some publicly available free datasets were collected from USGS and
DIVA-GIS. Particularly, the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) DEM and
earthquake catalog were used for thematic layer preparation. Light Detection and Ranging
(LiDAR)-derived DEM could be used in an earthquake study to fulfill high-quality data
requirements. Besides, this research is limited to some specific factors, where soil
characteristics, liquefaction factors, fault characteristics, and precursors were not included
because of data unavailability. Strictly, criteria were chosen based on historical events, local
geotechnical conditions and active tectonics. The aforementioned factors could be applied for
prediction and probability mapping in the future. In addition, some randomly chosen factors
based on the literature were also been selected but may not always be effective.
 Journal Pre-proof

Further works must be conducted focusing on the aforementioned limitations. The

transferability of methods for any other disaster or location is acceptable with minimal data
modification. Despite the drawbacks in this research, the method is effective for ERA and
useful for disaster risk reduction. The proposed approach of using HCA, SC, CNN and
MCDM techniques proved to be convenient for ERA for other disaster-prone locations as it
uses site-specific data.

Funding: This research is funded by the Centre for Advanced Modelling and Geospatial
Information Systems, Faculty of Engineering and IT, the University of Technology Sydney.
This research is also supported by Researchers Supporting Project number RSP-2020/14,

of
King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

ro
Acknowledgments: The authors are thankful to the University of Technology Sydney for
providing UTS president’s scholarship, international research scholarship and UTS TOP-UP
-p
scholarship to the first author.
re
References
1. Pelinovsky, E.; Yuliadi, D.; Prasetya, G.; Hidayat, R., The 1996 Sulawesi tsunami.
lP

Natural Hazards 1997, 16, (1), 29-38.

2. BPS. Population Census of Indonesia. Badan Pusat-Statistik (Indonesian Central Agency
na

for Statistics), Jakata, 2010, http://sp2010.bps.go.id. (Accessed 20 Jan 2020).

3. Gomez, J.; Madariaga, R.; Walpersdorf, A.; Chalard, E., The 1996 earthquakes in
ur

Sulawesi, Indonesia. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 2000, 90, (3), 739-
751.
Jo

4. Horspool, N.; Pranantyo, I.; Griffin, J.; Latief, H.; Natawidjaja, D.; Kongko, W.; Cipta,
A.; Bustaman, B.; Anugrah, S.; Thio, H., A probabilistic tsunami hazard assessment for
Indonesia. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 2014, 14, (11), 3105.
5. Rahmadaningsi, W.; Assegaf, A.; Setyonegoro, W. In Study of characteristic of tsunami
base on the coastal morphology in north Donggala, Central Sulawesi, Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, 2018; IOP Publishing: 2018; p 012020.
6. Muntohar, A. S., Research on Earthquake Induced Liquefaction in Padang City and
Yogyakarta Area. Jurnal Geoteknik 2014, 9, (1), 1-9.
7. Okuwaki, R.; Yagi, Y.; Shimizu, K.rokuwaki/2018-paluindonesia: v2.0., 2018,
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1469007, (Accessed on 25 Jan 2020).
 Journal Pre-proof

8. Bao, H.; Ampuero, J.-P.; Meng, L.; Fielding, E. J.; Liang, C.; Milliner, C. W.; Feng, T.;
Huang, H., Early and persistent supershear rupture of the 2018 magnitude 7.5 Palu
earthquake. Nature Geoscience 2019, 12, (3), 200-205.
9. Socquet, A.; Hollingsworth, J.; Pathier, E.; Bouchon, M., Evidence of supershear during
the 2018 magnitude 7.5 Palu earthquake from space geodesy. Nature Geoscience 2019,
12, (3), 192-199.
10. Fang, R.; Shi, C.; Song, W.; Wang, G.; Liu, J., Determination of earthquake magnitude
using GPS displacement waveforms from real-time precise point positioning.
Geophysical Journal International 2014, 196, (1), 461-472.
11. Cipta, A.; Robiana, R.; Griffin, J.; Horspool, N.; Hidayati, S.; Cummins, P. R., A
probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for Sulawesi, Indonesia. Geological Society,

of
London, Special Publications 2017, 441, (1), 133-152.

ro
12. Syifa, M.; Kadavi, P. R.; Lee, C.-W., An artificial intelligence application for post-
earthquake damage mapping in Palu, Central Sulawesi, Indonesia. Sensors 2019, 19, (3),
-p
542.
13. Ulrich, T.; Vater, S.; Madden, E. H.; Behrens, J.; van Dinther, Y.; Van Zelst, I.; Fielding,
re
E. J.; Liang, C.; Gabriel, A.-A., Coupled, physics-based modeling reveals earthquake
displacements are critical to the 2018 Palu, Sulawesi Tsunami. Pure and Applied
lP

Geophysics 2019, 176, (10), 4069-4109.

14. Rusydi, M.; Efendi, R. In Earthquake hazard analysis use Vs30 data in Palu, Journal of
na

Physics: Conference Series, 2018; IOP Publishing: 2018; p 012054.

15. Panakkat, A.; Adeli, H., Neural network models for earthquake magnitude prediction
using multiple seismicity indicators. International journal of neural systems 2007, 17,
ur

(01), 13-33.
Jo

16. Asim, K. M.; Idris, A.; Iqbal, T.; Martínez-Álvarez, F., Earthquake prediction model
using support vector regressor and hybrid neural networks. PloS one 2018, 13, (7),
e0199004.

17. Asim, K.; Martínez-Álvarez, F.; Basit, A.; Iqbal, T., Earthquake magnitude prediction in
Hindukush region using machine learning techniques. Natural Hazards 2017, 85, (1),
471-486.

18. Jena, R.; Pradhan, B.; Alamri, A.M. Susceptibility to seismic smplification and
earthquake probability estimation using recurrent neural network (RNN) model in
Odisha, India. Applied Sciences 2020, 10, 5355
 Journal Pre-proof

19. Jena, R.; Pradhan, B., Integrated ANN-cross-validation and AHP-TOPSIS model to
improve earthquake risk assessment. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction
2020, 101723.
20. Gitis, V. G.; Derendyaev, A. B., Machine learning methods for seismic hazards forecast.
Geosciences 2019, 9, (7), 308.
21. Fanos, A.M.; Pradhan, B. A novel hybrid machine learning-based model for rockfall
source identification in presence of other landslide types using LiDAR and GIS. Earth
Systems and Environment 2019, 3, 491-506.
22. Fanos, A.M.; Pradhan, B. Laser scanning systems and techniques in rockfall source
identification and risk assessment: A Critical Review. Earth Systems and
Environment 2018, 2, 163-182.

of
23. Sajedi-Hosseini, F.; Malekian, A.; Choubin, B.; Rahmati, O.; Cipullo, S.; Coulon, F.;

ro
Pradhan, B., A novel machine learning-based approach for the risk assessment of nitrate
groundwater contamination. Science of The Total Environment 2018, 644, 954-962.
-p
24. Heumann, B. W.; Walsh, S. J.; McDaniel, P. M., Assessing the application of a
geographic presence-only model for land suitability mapping. Ecological informatics
re
2011, 6, (5), 257-269.
25. Salcedo-Sanz, S.; Cornejo-Bueno, L.; Prieto, L.; Paredes, D.; García-Herrera, R., Feature
lP

selection in machine learning prediction systems for renewable energy applications.

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2018, 90, 728-741.
na

26. Rouet‐ Leduc, B.; Hulbert, C.; Lubbers, N.; Barros, K.; Humphreys, C. J.; Johnson, P.
A., Machine learning predicts laboratory earthquakes. Geophysical Research Letters
2017, 44, (18), 9276-9282.
ur

27. Jena, R.; Pradhan, B.; Beydoun, G.; Sofyan, H.; Affan, M., Integrated model for
Jo

earthquake risk assessment using neural network and analytic hierarchy process: Aceh
province, Indonesia.Geoscience Frontiers 2020, 11, (2), 613-634.
28. Rusydi, M.; Efendi, R. 'Earthquake hazard analysis use Vs30 data in Palu', Journal of
Physics: Conference Series, vol. 979, IOP Publishing 2018, p. 012054.
29. Cipta, A.; Robiana, R.; Griffin, J.; Horspool, N.; Hidayati, S.; Cummins, P. R., A
probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for Sulawesi, Indonesia. Geological Society,
London, Special Publications 2017, 441, (1), 133-152.
30. Matsuoka, M.; Wakamatsu, K.; Fujimoto, K.; Midorikawa, S., Average shear-wave
velocity mapping using Japan engineering geomorphologic classification map. Structural
Engineering/Earthquake Engineering 2006, 23, (1), 57-68.
31. Katili, J. A., Past and present geotectonic position of Sulawesi, Indonesia. Tectonophysics
1978, 45, (4), 289-322.
 Journal Pre-proof

32. Tjia, H.; Zakaria, T., Palu-Koro strike-slip fault zone, Central Sulawesi, Indonesia. Sains
Malaysiana 1974, 3, (1), 65-86.
33. Socquet, A.; Simons, W.; Vigny, C.; McCaffrey, R.; Subarya, C.; Sarsito, D.; Ambrosius,
B.; Spakman, W., Microblock rotations and fault coupling in SE Asia triple junction
(Sulawesi, Indonesia) from GPS and earthquake slip vector data. Journal of Geophysical
Research: Solid Earth 2006, 111, (B8).
34. Jena, R.; Pradhan, B.; Al-Amri, A.; Lee, C.W.; Park, H.-J. Earthquake probability
assessment for the Indian subcontinent using deep learning. Sensors 2020, 20, 4369.
35. Trugman, D. T.; Shearer, P. M., GrowClust: A hierarchical clustering algorithm for
relative earthquake relocation, with application to the Spanish Springs and Sheldon,
Nevada, earthquake sequences. Seismological Research Letters 2017, 88, (2A), 379-391.

of
36. Petrovic, S. In A comparison between the silhouette index and the davies-bouldin index in

ro
labelling ids clusters, Proceedings of the 11th Nordic Workshop of Secure IT Systems,
2006; 2006; pp 53-64. -p
37. Fang, Z.; Wang, Y.; Peng, L.; Hong, H., Integration of convolutional neural network and
conventional machine learning classifiers for landslide susceptibility mapping.Computers
re
& Geosciences 2020, 104470.

38. Layek, A. K.; Chatterjee, A.; Chatterjee, D.; Biswas, S., Detection and Classification of
lP

Earthquake Images from Online Social Media. In Computational Intelligence in Pattern

Recognition 2020; pp 345-355.
na

39. Girshick, R.; Donahue, J.; Darrell, T.; Malik, J., Region-based convolutional networks
for accurate object detection and segmentation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis
ur

and Machine Intelligence 2015, 38, (1), 142-158.

Jo

40. Wang, J., A deep learning approach for atrial fibrillation signals classification based on
convolutional and modified Elman neural network. Future Generation Computer Systems
2020,102, 670-679.

41. Satty, T., Multicriteria decision making-the analytic hierarchy process. Planning, priority
setting, resource allocation. Pittsburgh, PA, USA, RWS 1990.

42. Saaty, T. L., Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal
of Services Sciences 2008, 1, (1), 83-98.

43. Dhar, S.; Rai, A.; Nayak, P., Estimation of seismic hazard in Odisha by remote sensing
and GIS techniques. Natural Hazards 2017, 86, (2), 695-709.

44. Aucelli, P. P. C.; Di Paola, G.; Valente, E.; Amato, V.; Bracone, V.; Cesarano, M.; Di
Capua, G.; Scorpio, V.; Capalbo, A.; Pappone, G., First assessment of the local seismic
 Journal Pre-proof

amplification susceptibility of the Isernia Province (Molise Region, Southern Italy) by

the integration of geological and geomorphological studies related to the first level
seismic microzonation project. Environmental Earth Sciences 2018, 77, (4), 118.

45. Monahan, P.; Levson, V.; Hayes, B.; Dorey, K.; Mykula, Y.; Brenner, R.; Clarke, J.;
Galambos, B.; Candy, C.; Krumbiegel, C., Mapping the Susceptibility to Amplification
of Seismic Ground Motions in the Montney Play Area, Northeast British Columbia.
2018.

46. Jena, R.; Pradhan, B.; Beydoun, G., Earthquake vulnerability assessment in Northern
Sumatra province by using a multi-criteria decision-making model. International Journal
of Disaster Risk Reduction 2020, 46, 101518.

of
47. Bayrak, Y.; Öztürk, S.; Çınar, H.; Kalafat, D.; Tsapanos, T. M.; Koravos, G. C.;

ro
Leventakis, G.-A., Estimating earthquake hazard parameters from instrumental data for
different regions in and around Turkey. Engineering Geology 2009, 105, (3-4), 200-210.
-p
48. Erden, T.; Karaman, H., Analysis of earthquake parameters to generate hazard maps by
re
integrating AHP and GIS for Küçükçekmece region. Natural Hazards and Earth System
Sciences 2012, 12, (2), 475-483.
lP

49. Jena, R.; Pradhan, B.; Beydoun, G.; Al-Amri, A.; Sofyan, H., Seismic hazard and risk
assessment: a review of state-of-the-art traditional and GIS models. Arabian Journal of
na

Geosciences 2020, 13, (2), 50.

50. Risky calculations, http://www.syque.com/quality_tools/tools/TOOLS11.htm, (Assessed

ur

on 7 february, 2020).

51. Main, I., Is the reliable prediction of individual earthquakes a realistic scientific goal.
Jo

Nature 1999, 397, (1).

52. Jena, R.; Pradhan, B. A Model for Visual Assessment of Fault Plane Solutions and
Active Tectonics Analysis Using the Global Centroid Moment Tensor Catalog. Earth
Systems and Environment 2019, 4, 197–211.

53. Joyner, W. B.; Boore, D. M., Peak horizontal acceleration and velocity from strong-
motion records including records from the 1979 Imperial Valley, California, earthquake.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 1981, 71, (6), 2011-2038.
 Journal Pre-proof

Table 1. Input parameters for ERA

Assessment Input parameters Methods Resolution and
scale
EPA Slope HCA, SC, CNN 30 m and 1:30,000
Elevation
Magnitude density
Depth density
Epicentre density
Proximity to fault
Geology

SSA Amplification factor Weighted overlay

Slope using predefined
Curvature weights

of
EHA PGA Probabilistic seismic
Intensity variation hazard assessment

ro
using Joyner and
Boore [53]
attenuation
-p
equations.
EVA Building density AHP based MCDM
re
Road density technique
Proximity to road (in
m)
lP

Stream density
Proximity to stream
(in m)
na

Major official places

Major visiting places
ERA EPA, SSA, EVA and Risk A=
ur

EHA EPA*SSA*EVA
Risk (B)=
EHA*SSA*EVA
Jo

Table 2. Priority and rank of criteria for vulnerability assessment

Category Priority Rank (+) (-)
1 Building density 43.1% 1 20.7% 20.7% Number of
2 Road density 20.8% 2 8.0% 8.0% comparisons = 21
Consistency Ratio
3 Proximity to road (m) 9.7% 4 4.5% 4.5%
CR = 7.3%
4 Stream density 4.5% 6 2.0% 2.0% Principal eigenvalue
5 Proximity to stream (m) 2.8% 7 1.4% 1.4% = 7.586
6 Major official places 12.5% 3 6.7% 6.7% Eigenvector
7 Major visiting places 6.7% 5 1.4% 1.4% solution: 6 iterations,
delta = 2.9E-8
 Journal Pre-proof

Table 3. Confusion matrix with accuracy, precision, recall and f1 score values
Predicted
Positive Negative
Positive 72 11
Actual Negative 7 81

Accuracy assessment
Accuracy 0.89
Precision 0.91
Recall 0.86
F1 score 0.88

of
Table 4. Risk areas in Palu
Risk A (km2) Risk B (km2)

ro
Category Area (%) Area (%)
Very high 68 17.26 66 16.75
High 85 21.57 81 20.55
Moderate 78
-p
19.79 85 21.57
Low 77 19.54 80 20.30
re
Very low 86 21.82 82 20.81
Total 394 100 394 100
lP

Figure 1. Location of the study area (Palu, Indonesia)

na

Figure 2. Methodological flowchart for ERA adopted in this study

Figure 3. Architecture of CNN for EPA
ur

Figure 4. Matrix plot among Mw (0-1), PGA (1-2) and intensity (2-3) variation
Figure 5. a) Presenting the locational clustering, b) hierarchical clustering presenting
Euclidean distance against clusters using a dendrogram
Jo

Figure 6. Cross-correlation shows (red signal portray p-values while the blue signal is the
correlation spectrum) a) epicentral distance vs source-to-site distance, b) PGA vs depth, c)
Mw vs intensity, and d) Mw vs PGA
Figure 7. Silhouette clustering analysis: a) relative change of values for five indicators (A)
epicentral distance, (B) source to site distance, (C) magnitude (Mw), (D) PGA, (E) intensity,
(F) depth of earthquake focus, b) PGA vs Intensity
Figure 8. Indicators for EPA, SSA, EHA for Palu
Figure 9. Factors influencing EVA
Figure 10. Results of a) EPA, b) SSA, c) EHA, d) EVA
Figure 11. Risk assessment using two calculation methods
Figure 12. Presents a) risk map A, and b) risk map B
 Journal Pre-proof

Declaration of competing interests

☒ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal
relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

☐The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be
considered as potential competing interests:

of
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo
 Journal Pre-proof

Credit Author Statement

“Conceptualization: R.J. and B.P.; Methodology: R.J.; Software: B.P.; Validation: R.J. and
B.P.; Formal analysis: R.J.; Investigation: R.J. and B.P.; Resources: B.P.; Input data supply:
A., N., H.S.; Writing—original draft preparation: R.J. and B.P.; Writing—review and editing:
B.P.; Visualization: B.P.; Supervision: B.P. and G.B.; Project administration: B.P.; Funding
acquisition: B.P. and A.A.”

of
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo
 Journal Pre-proof

Graphical abstract

Highlights

 Performed clustering analysis to identify earthquake potential zone at Palu, Indonesia.

 Implemented four techniques for earthquake risk assessment for the first time.
 Developed a CNN model for earthquake probability estimation.
 Estimated the risk based on two calculation methods.

of
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo