Engineering Geology 288 (2021) 106144

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Geology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enggeo

Reliability analysis of an existing slope at a specific site considering rainfall

triggering mechanism and its past performance records
Xin Liu , Yu Wang *
Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, City University of Hong Kong, Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon, Hong Kong, PR China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Accurate estimation of landslide probability or slope failure probability when there is a rainstorm event is crucial
Slope reliability for assessment and mitigation of rainfall-induced landslide risk. Slope reliability methods provide a rigorous way
Rainfall of estimating landslide probability based on slope failure mechanism and probability theory. However, it is well
Uncertainties
recognized in literature that the landslide probability estimated from existing slope reliability analysis methods
Bayesian updating
Digital twin
are often much larger than the observed landslide frequency. To improve accuracy of the slope failure proba­
bility, this study proposes a slope reliability analysis method for an existing slope at a specific site, which
considers both rainfall triggering mechanism and the slope’s performance records during previous rainfall
events. It was found that the fact that the slope survived from previous rainfall events could be utilized to
effectively reduce uncertainties in soil parameters and might reduce the estimated landslide probability by one to
two orders of magnitudes. In addition, the proposed method provides a real-time slope failure probability for a
given rainfall event, and the estimated slope failure probability varies as the considered rainfall event evolves
with time.

1. Introduction
Rainfall-induced landslides are major geohazards in tropical and
subtropical zones (e.g., Tang et al., 2019; Gong et al., 2021). With the
rapid development of digital technologies, digital twin of slopes is
emerging as a promising tool for life-cycle risk management of landslide
hazards (e.g., Zhang et al., 2019; Cheverda et al., 2020). A digital twin of
a slope is a virtual slope model that can be continuously improved by
slope performance records and monitoring data obtained from its
physical counterpart in reality (e.g., Grieves, 2015). It is valuable for
evaluating actual slope performance and providing key information for
decision-making and mitigation of landslide risk, such as landslide early
warning (e.g., Baum and Godt, 2010; Chen and Zhang, 2014; Segoni
et al., 2015; Chae et al., 2017; Kong et al., 2020).
An important task for a digital twin of slope is estimation of slope
failure probability (Pf) when there is a rainstorm scenario. Slope reli­
ability analysis methods provide a rigorous way of estimating Pf for
existing slopes based on slope failure mechanism and probability theory
(e.g., Li and Lumb, 1987; Baecher and Christian, 2003). Various factors
and uncertainties can be properly incorporated in slope reliability
analysis in a quantitative manner. However, rainfall triggering
mechanism was often ignored in the previous reliability studies of slope
stability. Therefore, the estimated Pf often does not reflect magnitudes of
different rainfall events. Even when rainfall infiltration is considered,
slope reliability analysis often produces an overestimated slope failure
probability. Christian and Baecher (2011) summarized ten unresolved
problems in geotechnical reliability analysis that hinders its wide ap­
plications. The top challenge in the list is “why are failures less frequent
than our reliability studies predict?” The actual landslide probability is
often relatively small. For example, the Geotechnical Engineering Office
(GEO) in Hong Kong reported that the annual failure rate in 2016 is
0.07% and 0.527% for engineered and non-engineered slopes, respec­
tively (Wai et al., 2018). It was found that the estimated Pf from previous
reliability analysis are “at least an order of magnitude larger than the
observed frequency”. One possible reason for such a difference might be
attributed to huge uncertainties in soil parameters often observed from
site investigation data, even when there are many measured data
available (e.g., Tofani et al., 2017). To address this issue, existing in­
formation can be utilized to improve uncertainty quantification and
prediction of Pf by slope reliability updating (e.g., Zhang et al., 2011;
Papaioannou and Straub, 2012; Zhang et al., 2014; Schweckendiek
et al., 2014; Li et al., 2015; Jiang et al., 2020). For example, Zhang et al.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: xliu268-c@my.cityu.edu.hk (X. Liu), yuwang@cityu.edu.hk (Y. Wang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2021.106144
Received 18 December 2020; Received in revised form 14 March 2021; Accepted 17 April 2021
Available online 21 April 2021
0013-7952/© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
X. Liu and Y. Wang Engineering Geology 288 (2021) 106144

(2011) demonstrated that an existing slope in natural conditions can be
deemed as a full-scale experiment under various triggering events, and
its performance that it failed or survived from a past triggering event can
be used as valuable information for updating Pf and improving its ac­
curacy. Such performance records are also readily available in
geotechnical practice. However, such performance records have rarely
been utilized in estimating failure probabilities of rainfall-induced
landslides, especially the survival records from multiple past rainfall
events with different rainfall intensities, durations, and patterns.
Furthermore, combinations of weak soil strength parameters may be
generated when random variables or random fields are used to represent
soil parameters in slope reliability analysis, and they result in slope
failure before imposing any triggering factor, especially when the vari­
ability of soil strength parameters is large. This inevitably leads to
overestimation of slope failure probability. The estimation of slope
failure probability can be enhanced by utilizing the fact that an existing
slope at a specific site is stable before imposing any triggering factor and
after previous rainfall events.
This study aims to propose a slope reliability analysis method for
estimating time-variant Pf of a slope existing at a specific site under a
specific target rainfall scenario, such as a time-variant rainfall event. To
improve estimation of Pf, the proposed method explicitly considers the
fact that an existing slope at a specific site is stable before imposing any
triggering factor, and it incorporates survival records from multiple past
rainfall events for improving quantification of uncertainties in soils and
prediction of Pf. The proposed method will be introduced in the next
section, followed by its implementation procedure in Section 3. Then, it
is illustrated using an infinite slope example under rainfall infiltration
considering its past performance records in Section 4. Section 5 sum­
marizes major conclusions drawn from this study.
2. The proposed method
The survival records contain at least two pieces of valuable infor­
mation: (1) A slope existing at a specific site is stable before a future
rainfall event occurs; and (2) the slope stays stable after multiple,
possibly many, previous rainfall events with different rainfall intensities,
durations, and patterns (e.g., hourly rainfall pattern). Although a few
studies have considered pervious performance records (e.g., Zhang
et al., 2014), only one artificial rainfall event was considered. In addi­
tion, many reliability studies of slope stability ignore the first piece of
information as triggering mechanisms are seldom considered in deter­
ministic slope stability analysis. The proposed method incorporates both
pieces of valuable information abovementioned for updating un­
certainties in a slope existing at a specific site and performing slope
reliability analysis to produce a real-time slope failure probability under
a target rainfall scenario.
Fig. 1 schematically illustrates a framework of the proposed method.
It starts with deterministic modeling and preliminary uncertainty
modeling for an existing slope, which are similar to those modules in
existing slope reliability analysis methods (e.g., Liu et al., 2019). Then,
the fact that the slope is stable before imposing any rainfall event is
utilized to obtain posterior distributions of uncertain parameters, which
is referred to as initial site-specific uncertainty updating in this study.
When there are available past rainfall records from which the slope has
survived, details of the past rainfall events (e.g., rainfall intensity,
duration and pattern) are used for subsequent site-specific uncertainty
updating. Based on the updated site-specific uncertainties, a scenario-
based slope reliability analysis is performed to assess the slope failure
probability induced by a target rainfall scenario. The scenario-based
reliability analysis results offer key information required for landslide
risk assessment and mitigation. The following subsections will respec­
tively introduce the modules of deterministic modeling, preliminary
uncertainty modeling, site-specific uncertainty updating, and scenario-
based slope reliability analysis.

This study focuses on rainfall-induced landslides, a topic frequently

encountered in the field of engineering geology. For a slope existing at a
specific site, it is stable before occurrence of any triggering factor. Such
an existing stable slope has experienced and survived from full-scale
experiments under multiple previous rainfall events (e.g., Zhang et al.,
2011, 2014). Such survival records provide valuable information for
updating uncertainties of site-specific variables (e.g., Schweckendiek
and Kanning, 2009; Zhang et al., 2011; Schweckendiek et al., 2014;
Chowdhury et al., 2015). The survival records are free and readily
accessible since rainfall data have been widely recorded in many
regions.
2.1. Deterministic modeling
A slope stability analysis model is developed for an existing slope in
the deterministic modeling module. The slope geometry information can
be obtained from site investigation and digital elevation maps. The latter
is especially useful for many inaccessible slopes in mountainous areas.
This study adopts a commonly used two-stage approach for slope sta­
bility analysis under rainfall infiltration (e.g., Zhang et al., 2016). In the
first stage, transient seepage analysis is performed to obtain pore water
pressure profiles under rainfall infiltration. The seepage analysis can be
solved analytically or numerically using commercial or free software.

Deterministic modeling of Available records of past

Preliminary uncertainty modeling
an existing slope rainfall events

Initial site-specific uncertainty

updating considering that the slope
stays stable initially before
imposing any rainfall event

Subsequent site-specific uncertainty

updating considering slope survival
records from past rainfall events

Scenario-based slope reliability Impose a target rainfall

analysis scenario

Prediction of slope failure

probability

Fig. 1. A framework of the proposed method.

2
X. Liu and Y. Wang
For example, this study adopts a public domain software called
Hydrus1D (Šimůnek et al., 2013) to perform seepage analysis under
rainfall infiltration. In the second stage, the pore water pressure profile
is exported from the software and used for slope stability analysis to
determine whether or not slope failure occurs.
Since rainfall-induced landslides are often shallow failures (e.g.,
Tang and Zhang, 2011; Zhang et al., 2014), an infinite slope model is
adopted for slope stability analysis for illustration purpose, and it might
be only suitable for distributed basin-scale analysis. If a specific slope is
given, the actual slope configuration needs to be represented by an
advanced slope model with important elements, such as root cohesion,
evapotranspiration, hysteresis cycles of unsaturated soils, development
of fracture, and two-dimensional or three-dimensional geometry and
infiltration, etc. The proposed method is also applicable to complex
slope models. Fig. 2 shows an infinite slope under rainfall infiltration. Its
factor of safety (i.e., FS) is calculated using limit equilibrium methods
(LEM) that have been widely adopted in geotechnical engineering
practice (e.g., Duncan and Wright, 2005). Since LEM consider only static
force and/or moment equilibrium, the slope deformation and displace­
ment constraints are not considered. According to LEM (e.g., Duncan
and Wright, 2005; Lu and Godt, 2008), the factor of safety of a slip
surface at depth z is calculated as
′ ′
c + (Wcos2 β − σs )tanϕ
FSLEM = (1)
Wsinβcosβ
where c’ is the effective soil cohesion; ϕ’ is the effective soil friction
angle; β is the slope angle; W is the total weight of soil at the depth z, i.e.,
∫
W = z0(γd + θ(z)γw)dz; γd is the dry unit weight of soil; θ(z) is the
volumetric water content along the depth; σ s is the suction stress as
calculated using Lu and Likos (2006), which is given by
{
− (ua − uw ) ua − uw ≤ 0
σs = (2)
Se (ua − uw ) ua − uw > 0
where ua is the pore air pressure; uw is the pore water pressure; ua - uw is
the matric suction, and it is negative in saturated soils and positive in
unsaturated soils; Se is the effective degree of saturation in unsaturated
soils, and it can be obtained from soil water characteristic curve (SWCC).
For example, the van Genuchten model (van Genuchten, 1980) is
expressed as
θ − θr 1 librium methods) inevitably involves approximation and uncertainties,
Se = = p (3)
θs − θr {1 + [α(ua − uw ) ]n }
where θr is the residual water content; θs is the saturated water content;
α, n, and p are SWCC parameters, p = 1–1/n.
For unsaturated soils, the hydraulic conductivity varies with degree
of saturation, which can be represented by the Mualem’s model (Mua­
lem, 1976) as
Rainfall
intensity q
depth z
W a slip surface
T
N P(FS0 > 1|x )fp (x)dx
slope angle β
Fig. 2. Illustration of an infinite slope example under rainfall infiltration.
3
Engineering Geology 288 (2021) 106144
[ ( )p ]2
k = ks Se0.5 1 − 1 − Se1/p (4)
where k is the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils; ks is the
saturated hydraulic conductivity.
2.2. Preliminary uncertainty modeling
Uncertainties are unavoidable in slope engineering. In geotechnical
practice, site investigation data for a slope are often limited, and
therefore knowledge about soil parameters (e.g., cohesion, friction
angle, and unsaturated soil properties) of the slope are often limited too.
The uncertainty in soil properties has been deemed as a major uncer­
tainty (e.g., Phoon and Kulhawy, 1999a&1999b), which significantly
affects slope failure (e.g., Li et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2019). Various un­
certainties can be reasonably considered in slope reliability analysis, and
they are often treated as uncertain variables and modelled using random
variable or random field theory (e.g., Fenton and Vanmarcke, 1990). For
example, the soil cohesion is often modelled as a lognormal random
variable with a prescribed mean and standard deviation (i.e., STD). The
statistics can be determined by site investigation data, along with data
from similar sites and engineering judgement (e.g., Wang et al., 2010;
Wang and Cao, 2013). More site investigation data are preferred to
reasonably characterize soil properties and enhance the prediction of
landslide failure probability (e.g., Tofani et al., 2017). The uncertainty
modeling abovementioned is preliminary, and it will be further updated
with performance records of the slope, as described in the following
subsection.
2.3. Site-specific uncertainty updating
2.3.1. Bayesian sequential updating scheme
As introduced before, an existing slope stays stable after many pre­
vious rainfall events, and it is stable before a future rainfall occurs. Such
stable or survival records are used in this study to update probability
distributions of uncertain parameters (e.g., soil parameters) obtained
from the preliminary uncertainty modeling. In geotechnical practice, FS
of a slope has been widely used as an index of stability. A slope is deemed
stable if its actual FS is large than 1, otherwise it fails. Nonetheless, the
calculated FS (e.g., FSLEM calculated using Eq. (1) based on limit equi­
which affect accuracy of the calculated FS and need to be considered in
evaluating slope performance. For example, Zhang et al. (2009) sepa­
rated the model uncertainty of limit equilibrium methods from param­
eter uncertainty based on a series of slope centrifuge test data. The
actual FS of a given slope considering an explicit model uncertainty may
be defined as
FS = FSLEM + ε (5)
where FSLEM is the calculated FS using Eq. (1) based on limit equilibrium
methods; ε is the model uncertainty or difference between the actual and
calculated FS, which may follow a normal distribution as reported in the
previous studies (e.g., Zhang et al., 2009; Zhang et al., 2011).
The fact that a slope existing at a specific site is stable before
imposing any rainfall is firstly used to update probability distributions of
uncertain parameters (e.g., soil parameters including cohesion, friction
angle, and saturated hydraulic conductivity) under a Bayesian updating
framework (e.g., Cao et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2016). Let fp(x) and f0(x)
respectively denote the prior and posterior probability density function
(PDF) of an uncertain parameter x, then f0(x) is given by
P(FS0 > 1|x )fp (x)
f0 (x) = f (x|FS0 > 1 ) = ∫ (6)
where f0(x) is the posterior PDF of x given that the slope is initially stable
before imposing any rainfall; fp(x) is the prior PDF of x obtained from
X. Liu and Y. Wang
preliminary uncertainty modeling based on site investigation data; x
denotes the concerned uncertain parameter, such as soil cohesion and
friction angle; FS0 is the actual FS before imposing any rainfall; P(FS0 >
1|x) is the conditional probability of {FS0 > 1} given a x value, and its
estimation will be discussed later.
When there are available records of past rainfall events from which
the slope has survived, the survival records can be used to further update
probability distributions of uncertain parameters (e.g., soil parameters)
(e.g., Zhang et al., 2011; Papaioannou and Straub, 2012; Zhang et al.,
2014). Let fm(x) denote the posterior PDF of uncertain variable x
considering survival records from m (m ≥ 1) past rainfall events and FSi
denote the FS after the i-th past rainfall events, then f1(x), f2(x), and fm(x)
can be obtained using a Bayesian sequential updating approach (e.g.,
Cao et al., 2016) as
P(FS1 > 1|x)f0 (x)
f1 (x) = f (x|FS0 > 1 ∩ FS1 > 1 ) = ∫
P(FS1 > 1|x)f0 (x)dx
P(FS2 > 1|x )f1 (x)
f2 (x) = f (x|FS0 > 1 ∩ FS1 > 1 ∩ FS2 > 1 ) = ∫
P(FS2 > 1|x )f1 (x)dx
∑
N
I(FS0 (xi ) > 1 and x − Δx < x < x + Δx|xi ∈ S )
P(FS0 > 1|x ) ≈ P(FS0 > 1|x − Δx < x < x + Δx, xi ∈ S ) = i=1
∑
N
i=1
…
P(FSm > 1|x )fm− 1 (x)
fm (x) = f (x|FS0 > 1 ∩ FS1 > 1 ∩ … ∩ FSm > 1 ) = ∫
P(FSm > 1|x )fm− 1 (x)dx
where P(FSm > 1|x) is the conditional probability of {FSm > 1} for a
given x value.
Note that not all uncertain variables can be updated sequentially
using different past rainfall events. The uncertain variables can be
divided into two categories, i.e., time-invariant variables and time-
variant variables (e.g., Schweckendiek et al., 2014). Time-invariant
variables stay almost unchanged during the period of rainfall events
and they can be updated sequentially. Soil properties, including cohe­
sion, friction angle, and saturated hydraulic conductivity, are often
considered as time-invariant variables (e.g., Zhang et al., 2011; Zhang
et al., 2013), when there are no large deformation and structure changes
of soils during the rainfall period. On the other hand, time-variant var­
iables vary with time and may be different before each rainfall event,
such as soil moisture conditions and the initial matric suction that are
affected by vegetation with roots and canopy. The proposed method is
only applicable when the contour conditions do not change. Some time-
variant properties may be modelled as random variables in the slope
model. For example, the initial matric suction can be deemed as a time-
variant variable because it is influenced by rainfall, evaporation, and
surface flow and may change significantly in a short period. When there
is a relatively long interval between two rainfall events, the initial
matric suction before two rainfall events can be modelled as two inde­
pendent variables. It can only be updated with the survival record of one
past rainfall event considered, instead of multiple past rainfall events.
Thus, the posterior PDF of a time-variant variable x is given by
P(FSm > 1|x )f0 (x)
fm (x) = f (x|FS0 > 1 ∩ FSm > 1 ) = ∫
P(FSm > 1|x )f0 (x)dx
Engineering Geology 288 (2021) 106144
where the prior distribution is f0(x), instead of fm-1(x) as in Eq. (9).
2.3.2. Solution of Bayesian updating by Monte Carlo simulation and
sample reassembling
A key issue for solving posterior distributions f0(x) and fm(x) in Eqs.
(6–10) is to estimate P(FS0 > 1|x) and P(FSm > 1|x). They can be
calculated using existing reliability methods, such as first-order reli­
ability method (FORM) (e.g., Low et al., 2011), response surface method
(RSM) (e.g., Li et al., 2011; Ji and Low, 2012; Jiang et al., 2015),
importance sampling (IS) (e.g., Ching et al., 2009), direct Monte Carlo
simulation (MCS) (e.g., Liu et al., 2020), and subset simulation (SS) (e.g.,
Au and Beck, 2001; Wang et al., 2011; Au and Wang, 2014; Li et al.,
2016). This study adopts direct MCS for estimating probabilities due to
its conceptual simplicity. To implement a direct MCS, the first step is to
generate N random samples of uncertain vector x with all uncertain
(7) variables from their prior distributions fp(x), leading to an initial sample
set S = {x1, x2, …, xN}. Then, these N random samples are used to
perform repetitively deterministic slope stability analysis (e.g., using the
(8) model described in subsection 2.2) and estimate P(FS0 > 1|x) in Eq. (6)
as
(11)
I(x − Δx < x < x + Δx|xi ∈ S )
where ∆x is a small interval of x; xi is the i-th random sample of uncertain
vector x in the sample set S; I(⋅) is an indicator function, whose value is
(9) equal to 1 when the expression in the bracket is true, otherwise it is 0.
Since the PDF in Eq. (7) is f0(x) instead of fp(x), the N random
samples in S generated from fp(x) may not be directly used to estimate P
(FS1 > 1|x) in Eq. (7). Conventionally, generation of another set of
random samples satisfying {FS0 > 1} from f0(x) using, e.g., Markov
Chain Monte Carlo simulation (MCMCS) (e.g., Au and Wang, 2014), is
needed for estimating P(FS1 > 1|x) in MCS. Therefore, extensive
computational costs are required for re-generating random samples and
determining whether each generated random sample satisfies {FS0 > 1}.
To improve the computational efficiency, a MCS sample reassembling
method (Wang, 2012) is adopted in this study to make use of existing
random samples in S, instead of repetitively generating new random
samples from the updated PDF (i.e., f0(x), f1(x), …, and fm(x)).
Note that the N0 conditional random samples satisfying {FS0 > 1}
constitute a sample set S0 = {xi | FS0(xi) > 1} that is a subset of the
original random sample set S, and the remaining N–N0 samples
constitute a remaining sample set R0 = {xi | FS0(xi) < 1}. Since S0 and R0
are mutually complementary samples subsets of S, P(FS1 > 1|x) can be
estimated using the Total Probability Theorem (e.g., Ang and Tang,
2007; Wang, 2012)
P(FS1 > 1|x ) = P(FS1 > 1|x, xi ∈ S0 )Pf0 (S0 ) + P(FS1 > 1|x, xi ∈ R0 )Pf0 (R0 )
(12)
where Pf0(R0) is the probability of R0 given the PDF f0(x) = f(x|FS0 > 1),
and it is equal to Pf0(R0) = Pf0[xi|FS(xi) < 1] = 0 as random samples in R0
satisfy {FS0 < 1} instead of {FS0 > 1}; and Pf0(S0) is the probability of S0
given f0(x), i.e., Pf0(S0) = 1 − Pf0(R0) = 1.
(10) Substituting Pf0(R0) = 0 and Pf0(S0) = 1 into Eq. (12) yields P(FS1 >
1|x) = P(FS1 > 1| x, xi ∈ S0), and it can be estimated using N0 random
4
X. Liu and Y. Wang Engineering Geology 288 (2021) 106144

samples in S0 as

N0
∑
I(FSm (xi ) > 1 and x − Δx < x < x + Δx |xi ∈ S0 )
P(FS1 > 1|x ) ≈ P(FS1 > 1|x − Δx < x < x + Δx, xi ∈ S0 ) = i=1 (13)
∑
N0
I(x − Δx < x < x + Δx|xi ∈ S0 )
i=1

Similar to S0, a sample subset Sm-1 (m ≥ 1) is defined as Sm-1 = {xi |
FS0(xi) > 1 ∩ … ∩ FSm-1(xi) > 1} with Nm-1 conditional random samples
satisfying {FS0 > 1 ∩ … ∩ FSm-1 > 1}. The remaining N – Nm-1 random
samples constitute a remaining sample subset Rm-1. Sm-1 and Rm-1 are
also mutually complementary sample subsets of S, and P(FSm > 1|x) is
given by
After P(FS0 > 1|x) and P(FSm > 1|x) are estimated from the above­
mentioned MCS sample reassembling method, Eqs. (6–10) can be used
to update probability distributions of uncertain parameters accordingly.
By using the MCS sample reassembling method, it only requires gener­
ating N random samples from fp(x), instead of repetitively generating
random samples from f0(x), f1(x), …, and fm(x), leading to a significant
saving in computational costs, especially when m is large.

P(FSm > 1|x ) = P(FSm > 1|x, xi ∈ Sm− 1 )Pfm− 1 (Sm− 1 ) + P(FSm > 1|x, xi
∈ Rm− 1 )Pfm− 1 (Rm− 1 )
(14)
where Pfm− 1(Rm− 1) is equal to zero given fm-1(x) as all random samples in
Rm-1 do not satisfy {FS0 > 1 ∩ … ∩ FSm-1 > 1}; and Pfm− 1(Sm− 1) is equal to
unity.
Substituting Pfm− 1(Rm− 1) = 0 and Pfm− 1(Sm− 1) = 1 into Eq. (14)
yields P(FSm > 1|x) = P(FSm > 1| x, xi ∈ Sm− 1). Then, P(FSm > 1|x) in Eq.
(14) and Eqs. (8–9) (i.e., for m = 2 and m, respectively) can be estimated
with Nm-1 random samples in the sample subset Sm-1 as
2.4. Scenario-based slope reliability analysis
This study develops a scenario-based slope reliability analysis
method for assessing slope failure probability given a target rainfall (e.
g., including a past 24 h-rainfall and an additional 6 h rainfall fore­
casted). The target rainfall may have unique features including duration,
intensity, and pattern (e.g., hourly rainfall pattern). Such rainfall fea­
tures may significantly affect the slope failure probability (e.g., Zhang
et al., 2014; Gao et al., 2017). However, previous statistical studies often
consider only accumulative rainfall and ignore other rainfall features. In
contrast, a scenario-based slope reliability analysis is developed in this

N∑
m− 1
I(FSm (xi ) > 1 and x − Δx < x < x + Δx |xi ∈ Sm− 1 )
P(FSm > 1|x ) ≈ P(FSm > 1|x − Δx < x < x + Δx, xi ∈ Sm− 1 ) = i=1
N∑
(15)
m− 1
I(x − Δx < x < x + Δx|xi ∈ Sm− 1 )
i=1

study to model the whole target rainfall scenario and estimate the
induced real-time slope failure probability Pf that varies with time. Let F
Note that Eqs. (13) and (15) look similar to Eq. (11), except that their = {FSt < 1} denote the slope failure event caused by a target rainfall
sample subsets are different. This suggests that although random sam­ scenario where FSt denotes the actual FS after the target rainfall is
ples in Sm-1 were initially generated from fp(x), they can also be used as imposed and the subscript t means the “target rainfall”. The slope failure
random samples generated from fm-1(x) to estimate a probability using probability Pf is defined as
direct MCS. The only difference between S and Sm-1 is the occurrence ∫
possibility (or weight) of each random sample (e.g., Wang, 2012; Li Pf = f (x)dx (17)
et al., 2015). The possibility of a random sample is equal to 1/N in S, and FSt <0

it changes to 1/Nm-1 in Sm-1 for a given fm-1(x).

where f(x) denotes the joint PDF of uncertain parameters.
For time-variant variables, because the PDF in Eq. (10) is f0(x), P
Note that f(x) is updated as described in subsection 2.3 considering
(FSm > 1|x) in Eq. (10) should be estimated with random samples in the
survival records from past rainfall events. In the first analysis, f(x) is
sample subset S0 as
equivalent to the prior PDF, fp(x), of uncertain parameters obtained from

N0
∑
I(FSm (xi ) > 1 and x − Δx < x < x + Δx |xi ∈ S0 )
P(FSm > 1|x ) ≈ P(FSm > 1|x − Δx < x < x + Δx, xi ∈ S0 ) = i=1
(16)
∑
N0
I(x − Δx < x < x + Δx|xi ∈ S0 )
i=1

5
X. Liu and Y. Wang Engineering Geology 288 (2021) 106144

Fig. 3. Flowchart of the proposed method using direct MCS and sample reassembling.

preliminary uncertainty modeling using limited site investigation data. ∫

Then, site-specific uncertainties are updated considering that the slope Pf = Pmf = fm (x)dx (20)
stays stable before imposing any rainfall, the posterior PDF f0(x) is used
FSt <0

as f(x) in the second analysis. When survival records from m (m ≥ 1) past where Pt, P0f , and Pmf denote respectively the slope failure probability
rainfall events are considered, the posterior PDF fm(x) should be used to under a target rainfall scenario when ignoring any past performance
estimate slope failure probability in the (m + 2)-th analysis. Thus, by record, considering the fact that the existing slope is stable before any
replacing f(x) in Eq. (17) with fp(x), f0(x) and fm(x), slope failure prob­ rainfall, and considering survival records from m past rainfall events.
abilities of these three cases are respectively given by The Pf in Eqs. (18–20) can be estimated using direct MCS. To improve
∫ computational efficiency, the MCS sample reassembling method
Pf = P t = fp (x)dx (18) described in subsection 2.3.2 is used to avoid the repetitive generation of
FSt <0
random samples. The N random samples generated from fp(x) are reused
∫
for the subsequent round of MCS. Estimating the probability of {FSt < 1}
Pf = P0f = f0 (x)dx (19) is similar to estimating {FSm > 1} in Eq. (16). The Nm conditional
FSt <0

6
X. Liu and Y. Wang Engineering Geology 288 (2021) 106144

random samples satisfying {FS0 > 1 ∩ … ∩ FSm > 1} constitute the
sample subset Sm. They can be used as Nm random samples generated
from fm(x) (Wang, 2012) with an equal occurrence possibility of 1/Nm.
Thus, Pm
f in Eq. (20) can be estimated with random samples in Sm as
1 ∑
Nm
Pmf = I[FSt (xi ) < 1 |xi ∈ Sm ] (21)
Nm i=1
where xi are the i-th random sample that follows the prior distribution
fp(x) and satisfies {FS0 > 1 ∩ … ∩ FSm > 1}.
Eq. (21) is also applicable to estimating P0f when m = 0. It is able to
incorporate the observed slope performance records into estimation of
slope failure probability, including facts that the slope stays stable
before imposing any rainfall event and that the slope has survived from
many past rainfall events. Using the survival records leads to a relatively
small estimate of slope failure probability. As more past rainfall events
are considered, the estimated slope failure probability may gradually
decrease and approach to the observed slope failure frequency.
3. Implementation procedure
Fig. 3 shows a flowchart for implementing the proposed method
using direct MCS. The details of each step are summarized as follows:
(1) Develop a deterministic slope stability analysis model without
rainfall for a slope existing at a specific site based on its geometry
and soil parameters.
(2) Determine uncertain parameters of the slope model and their
prior distributions from site-investigation data.
(3) A total of N random samples of uncertain parameters are gener­
ated from their prior distributions. These samples are denoted as
x1, x2, … xi, …, xN.
(4) Use xi as input of the slope model without rainfall to perform
slope stability analysis for calculating FSLEM. A random sample
for model uncertainty ε is added to the computed FSLEM to obtain
the actual FS, i.e., FS0(xi).
(5) Repeat Step (4) above for all N random samples.
(6) Perform initial site-specific uncertainty updating considering the
fact that the slope is stable before imposing any rainfall. The N0
samples satisfying {FS0(xi) > 1} are used to constitute a sample
subset S0. Eq. (6) is used to obtain the posterior distribution of an
uncertain variable.
(7) Suppose that the slope has survived from m past rainfall events.
Each past rainfall event is considered to develop a new slope
model with the observed rainfall infiltration during each past
rainfall event. Thus, a total of m slope models are developed in
this step.
(8) Use xi as input of the slope model with consideration of the j-th
past rainfall event to perform seepage analysis. Then, the
simulated pore water pressure profile is exported and used to
perform slope stability analysis for calculating FSj(xi).
(9) Repeat Step (8) above for all N random samples.
(10) Perform subsequent site-specific Bayesian updating of uncer­
tainty with consideration of survival records from the j-th past
rainfall event. The Nj samples satisfying {FS0(xi) > 1 ∩ … ∩
FSj(xi) > 1} are used to constitute a sample subset Sj. Eqs. (7–10)
are used to obtain posterior distributions of uncertain variables.
(11) Repeat Steps (8)–(10) for all m past rainfall events.
(12) A target rainfall is imposed and used to create a new slope model
with rainfall infiltration.
(13) Use xi in the sample subset Sm as input of the slope model
considering the target rainfall to calculate FSt(xi).
(14) Repeat Step (13) above for all Nm random samples in the sample
subset Sm.
(15) Pf is estimated by Eq. (21) using the MCS sample reassembling
method.
The abovementioned procedure has been coded into an in-house
MATLAB package. It can be easily performed once the input parame­
ters (e.g., slope geometry, prior distribution of soil parameters, and
rainfall records) are given. A software package with a user-friendly
graphical user interface will be released in future for facilitating its
application in geotechnical practice.
4. Illustrative example
The proposed method is illustrated by a real slope located in the east
of Tung Chung, Lantau Island in Hong Kong (Evans and Lam, 2003). The
slope contains a soil layer of completely decomposed volcanic (CDV) at
shallow depth and slightly decomposed volcanic as bedrock. Monitoring
instruments were installed at the site during 1999 to 2001 to obtain pore
water pressure and rainfall data. Since the shallow slope failure is the
typical failure mode for landslides triggered by rainfall, the slope was
modelled by an infinite slope under rainfall infiltration. The slope has an
angle of 35◦ and a vertical soil thickness of 2 m. The soil layer is initially
unsaturated with a uniform matric suction. The unit weight of dry soil
and water are taken as 16kN/m3 and 10kN/m3, respectively. Hydrus1D
(Šimůnek et al., 2013) is adopted to perform seepage analysis under
rainfall infiltration. Rainfall boundary is imposed on the top slope sur­
face without ponding water. The slope bottom is modelled as an
impermeable boundary. Controlling factors of landslides need to be
considered in the slope model, and they could be determined using
multivariate statistical techniques including the Eigenvalue Variance
and the Canonical Correlation methods. For example, Chae and Seo
(2010) found that slope angle, permeability, and elevation were three

Table 1
Statistics of uncertain parameters used in the slope example.
Uncertain Probability Mean Standard Coefficient of
parameter distribution deviation variation
(STD) (COV)

Effective cohesion c, Lognormal 5 1.5 0.30

kPa
Effective friction Lognormal 32 9.6 0.30
angle ϕ, ◦
Saturated hydraulic Lognormal 7.2 3.6 0.50
conductivity ks,
mm/h
Initial matric Lognormal 10 3.0 0.30
suction ψ , kPa
Model error ε, Normal 0.02 0.07 3.50
Fig. 4. Simulated pore water pressure profiles of the slope after a 24 h-rainfall
dimensionless
with intensity q = 7.2 mm/h from 500 random samples.

7
X. Liu and Y. Wang Engineering Geology 288 (2021) 106144

(a) Cohesion (b) Friction angle

(c) Saturated hydraulic conductivity (d) Model error

(e) Initial matric suction

Fig. 5. Site-specific uncertainty updating results considering the survival record from an antecedent 24 h-rainfall with q = 7.2 mm/h.

the most important factors in rainfall-induced landslides. The uncertain
parameters in this example include soil cohesion, friction angle, satu­
rated hydraulic conductivity, model uncertainty, and the initial matric
suction. Table 1 summarizes their statistics used in this example. The
initial matric suction and the saturated hydraulic conductivity are
modelled as random variables because they play an important role in
simulating hydraulic responses of soils under rainfall infiltration (e.g.,
Zhang et al., 2013). As the CDV resembles silt loam or loam texture, the
SWCC parameters of a typical loam reported by Cai and Ugai (2004) are
used in this study due to a lack of site investigation data. The SWCC of
the soil is modelled by a van Genuchten model (i.e., Eq. (3) with θr =
0.106, θs = 0.469, α = 1.06 m− 1, and n = 1.395). The hydraulic con­
ductivity varies with degree of saturation based on a Mualem’s model (i.
e., Eq. (4) with p = 0.283).
Direct MCS was adopted to generate 5000 samples of uncertain pa­
rameters for estimating the slope failure probability caused by a target
rainfall scenario. Each random sample was used as input to perform
seepage analysis of the slope under the rainfall using Hydrus1D. Then,
the simulated pore water profiles were exported and used for slope
stability analysis. Eq. (1) was used to calculate FS at various depths and
the minimum FS was used as the FSLEM of the slope. For considering the
LEM modeling uncertainty, a random number was simulated for

8
X. Liu and Y. Wang
Fig. 6. Results of slope reliability analysis considering the survival record from
one past rainfall event (the target rainfall duration = 24 h).
representing ε in Eq. (5) and calculating the final FS. The slope fails if the
final FS is less than 1; otherwise, it is deemed as stable.
Fig. 4 shows the simulated typical pore water pressure profiles from
500 random samples, when the prescribed rainfall duration is 24 h and
the rainfall intensity q = 7.2 mm/h. The top of the slope becomes
saturated after 24-h rainfall and it has a zero-pore water pressure
because no ponding water is allowed on the slope surface. Rainfall
infiltration reduces the negative-pore water pressure (or matric suction)
from the slope surface to a deep depth, which compromises the slope
stability, particularly at shallow depth. In most samples, the matric
suction at a deep depth stays unaffected. In comparison, positive pore
water pressure develops in some samples with high hydraulic conduc­
tivity in soil and the soil becomes fully saturated. The result shows the
importance of the initial matric suction and the hydraulic conductivity
in seepage analysis under rainfall infiltration.
4.1. Scenario-based slope reliability analysis considering the stable slope
and the survival record from one past rainfall event
Fig. 5 illustrates site-specific uncertainty updating results after
Fig. 7. Time-variant slope failure probability considering the survival record
from one past rainfall event (the target rainfall intensity = 10.8 mm/h).
9
Engineering Geology 288 (2021) 106144
consideration of the stable slope before a target rainfall and a survival
record from an antecedent 24 h-rainfall with q = 7.2 mm/h. Fig. 5(a)
shows prior and posterior PDF of cohesion. In preliminary uncertainty
modeling, the cohesion follows a prescribed lognormal distribution with
a mean of 5 kPa and a STD of 1.5 kPa (i.e., coefficient of variation (COV)
= 1.5/5 = 0.3). Its posterior PDF f0 is obtained by incorporating the fact
that the slope stays stable before imposing any rainfall. f0 is narrower
and has a higher peak than the prior PDF fp. The mean value of cohesion
decreases to 4.73 kPa and the STD of cohesion decreases to 0.99 kPa,
corresponding to a COV of 0.209 (i.e., 0.99/4.73 = 0.209). Then, the
posterior PDF f1 is obtained by considering the survival record from the
past rainfall. f1 becomes even narrower and higher than fp and f0. The
mean value of cohesion decreases to 4.67 kPa and the STD of cohesion
decreases to 0.81 kPa, corresponding to a COV of 0.173. It is obvious
that incorporating the survival record significantly reduces the uncer­
tainty of cohesion. In addition, posterior PDFs after Bayesian updating
have relatively thin tails on both sides, indicating a reduction in the
possibility of relatively small or large cohesion values. Similar trends are
also observed in other uncertain parameters, as shown in Figs. 5 (b-e).
After uncertainty updating with the survival record from the past rain­
fall, the COV of friction angle, saturated hydraulic conductivity, initial
matric suction and model error decreases from 0.3, 0.5, 0.3 and 3.5 to
0.157, 0.250, 0.163 and 1.826, respectively. Note that uncertainties of
soil parameters are likely to be overestimated when the prior distribu­
tions are obtained from limited site investigation data due to significant
statistical uncertainty. On the other hand, incorporating the survival
record from a past rainfall into site-specific uncertainty updating
effectively reduces uncertainties in soil parameters.
To explore the effect of past performance on estimating Pf, Fig. 6
shows the estimated Pf induced by a 24 h-rainfall when the performance
during the past rainfall event is ignored or considered. Fig. 6 shows that
the estimated Pf increases with the rainfall intensity and that the esti­
mated Pf considering the fact that the slope is stable before rainfall is
smaller than that when ignoring any past performance record, especially
when the rainfall intensity is less than 7.2 mm/h (i.e., rainfall intensity
of the past rainfall). When the survival record from a 12 h-rainfall with q
= 7.2 mm/h is considered, the estimated Pf is smaller than that when
ignoring any past performance and considering the stable slope before
rainfall. The estimated Pf decreases significantly if duration of the past
rainfall that the slope has survived from increases from 12 h to 24 h and
36 h. For example, the Pf caused by a rainfall with q = 18 mm/h is at the
order of magnitude of 10− 1 when ignoring any past performance, and it
decreases to the order of magnitude of 10− 2 and 10− 3 when the survival
record from a 24 h-rainfall and a 36 h-rainfall is considered. The results
indicate that slope reliability analysis with consideration of the slope
being stable before imposing any rainfall and the survival record of a
past rainfall event tends to produce a smaller Pf than that when ignoring
any past performance. The reduction of Pf is significant when the slope
has survived from an intense past rainfall event. The slope failure
probability becomes more dependent on future heavy rainstorms than
light rainfalls after the incorporation of past slope survival records.
Fig. 7 shows a time-variant Pf estimated under a target rainfall with a
constant rainfall intensity of 10.8 mm/h. It is shown that Pf increases
with duration of the target rainfall. Similar to Fig. 6, the estimated Pf
decreases significantly when considering the fact that the slope is stable
before rainfall and the survival record from one past rainfall event. The
results shown in Figs. 6&7 indicate that the Pf estimated from the pro­
posed method is able to reflect magnitudes of different rainfall scenarios.
When compared with previous studies in literature that ignored past
performance of the existing slope, incorporating the survival record
from a past rainfall may effectively decrease the estimated Pf.
4.2. Scenario-based slope reliability analysis considering survival records
from multiple real rainfall events
This subsection explores effects of survival records from multiple
X. Liu and Y. Wang Engineering Geology 288 (2021) 106144

(a) The first rainfall event

(b) The second rainfall event

(c) The third rainfall event

Fig. 8. Three real rainfall events occurred in Hong Kong (Evans and Lam, 2003).

rainfall events on updating site-specific uncertainty and estimating Pf.
Fig. 8 shows three real rainfall records during June and July of 2001
from a rain gauge at the slope site (Evans and Lam, 2003). Their dura­
tions and hourly rainfall patterns are quite different, though their cu­
mulative rainfalls are equal to about 300 mm. The whole hourly rainfall
pattern of each rainfall event was modelled using Hydrus1D for seepage
analysis. Then, the simulated pore water pressure profiles were exported
and used for slope stability analysis.
It was reported that the slope has survived from these three rainfall
events (Evans and Lam, 2003). The survival records from them can be
used to update site-specific uncertainties using the proposed method.
The uncertain parameters of this example include effective cohesion c’,
effective friction angle ϕ’, saturated hydraulic conductivity ks, model
uncertainty ε and the initial matric suction ψ before each rainfall, and
their prior distributions are shown in Table 1. In this example, c’, ϕ’, ks,
and ε are deemed as time-invariant variables which can be updated
sequentially. Because the initial matric suction before each past rainfall
event is uncertain, the initial matric suction is deemed as a time-variant
variable. The initial matric suctions before three past rainfall events and
the target rainfall event are modelled as independent random variables
following the same prior distribution shown in Table 1, and they are
represented by ψ 1, ψ 2, ψ 3, and ψ 4. A total of 5000 random samples of
these uncertain variables were generated from their prior distributions.
According to the implementation procedure in Section 3, the proposed
method was adopted to update probability distributions of uncertain
parameters with survival records from three past rainfall events.
Fig. 9 shows prior and posterior distributions of uncertain parame­
ters used in this example. In Fig. 9, the prior distribution is denoted as fp,
while the posterior distributions updated after various previous perfor­
mance records are represented by f0, f1, f2, and f3, respectively. It is
shown in Fig. 9(a) that the posterior PDF of cohesion becomes narrow
and has a high peak after site-specific uncertainty updating. Both the
mean and STD of cohesion decreases as more past rainfall events are
considered. The STD of cohesion decreases significantly from 1.5 kPa to

10
X. Liu and Y. Wang Engineering Geology 288 (2021) 106144

(a) Cohesion (b) Friction angle

(c) Saturated hydraulic conductivity (d) Model error

(e) Initial matric suction

Fig. 9. Results of site-specific uncertainty updating with consideration of three past rainfall events.

only 0.63 kPa when survival records from three past rainfall events are
considered, equivalent to a reduction of COV from 0.3 to 0.136. Similar
trends are also observed in Figs. 9(b-d) for other time-invariant vari­
ables: friction angle, saturated hydraulic conductivity and model error.
Their posterior PDFs also become narrow and have high peak after site-
specific uncertainty updating with survival records from past rainfall
events. In Fig. 9(b), the posterior distribution of friction angle has an
increased mean value and a decreased STD, showing a reduction of COV
from 0.3 to 0.123. Fig. 9(c) shows that the COV of saturated hydraulic
conductivity decreases from 0.5 to only 0.209 due to the reduction in
both mean and STD after uncertainty updating. Fig. 9(d) shows that the
posterior distribution of model uncertainty has an increased mean value
and a decreased STD, showing a reduction of COV from 3.5 to 0.968. It is
also shown in Figs. 9(a-d) that posterior PDFs after updating often have
high peak and thin tails on both sides. Therefore, the posterior PDFs look
more similar to truncated normal or lognormal distributions. The trun­
cation of the probability tails helps to narrow distributions of uncertain
parameters and reduce their uncertainties. These results show that
incorporating survival records from past rainfall events can bring a
significant reduction in variability of uncertain parameters after site-
specific uncertainty updating. Survival records from multiple different
past rainfall events have a more significant effect on sequential

11
X. Liu and Y. Wang
Fig. 10. A target rainfall event.
Fig. 11. Slope reliability updating results considering multiple past rain­
fall events.
Fig. 12. Time-variant slope failure probability during the target rainfall.
uncertainty updating of time-invariant variables than that from a single
past rainfall event. Since real rainfall events often have different, and
even unique, patterns, survival records of many previous rainfall events
can be utilized for site-specific uncertainty updating using the proposed
method.
12
Engineering Geology 288 (2021) 106144
Fig. 9(e) shows posterior distributions of the initial matric suction
before each rainfall, which are obtained from uncertainty updating with
the survival record from only one past rainfall event. Its STD decreases to
1.58 kPa–1.78 kPa after updating, showing a reduction of COV from 0.3
to less than 0.2. The reduction of variability of initial matric suction is
less significant than time-invariant variables. This may be attributed to
the fact that the initial matric suction is time-variant and can only be
updated once with the survival record from only one past rainfall event,
instead of multiple rainfall events.
It is also of significance to explore the effect of survival records from
multiple rainfall events on estimating Pf. Fig. 10 shows a target rainfall
event lasting for two days with an accumulative rainfall of 247 mm. The
proposed method was used to estimate Pf caused by the rainfall
considering survival records from the past three rainfall events shown in
Fig. 8. Fig. 11 illustrates the relationship between the estimated Pf and
the number of considered past rainfall events in estimating Pf. Pf is
estimated as large as 0.185 when ignoring any past performance. If the
fact that the slope stays stable before imposing any rainfall is considered,
Pf is estimated as 0.074. Then, it decreases to 0.032 and 0.012 when
survival records of one (i.e., Fig. 8(a)) or two (i.e., Figs. 8(a) and (b))
past rainfall events are considered. If survival records of all three rainfall
events are considered, Pf decreases to 0.012, which is only 1/15 of the Pf
estimated when ignoring any past performance. The Pf gradually be­
comes stable and will not continue to decrease unless there is a new
record that the slope survived from a heavier rainfall than previous
rainfall events. Thus, the Pf is more dependent on future heavy rain­
storms than light rainfalls that the slope has experienced before. Since
the slope stability is analyzed with the same slope stability model by
limit equilibrium methods, its capability of detecting slope instability
remains the same. The results indicate that survival records from
different past rainfall events provide extremely valuable information for
effectively improving the estimate of Pf and tackling the problem of Pf
overestimation.
Furthermore, Fig. 12 illustrates the real-time Pf during the target
rainfall (see Fig. 10) when ignoring any past performance and consid­
ering survival records from past rainfall events (see Fig. 8). It is shown
that Pf increases with the elapsed time during the target rainfall, espe­
cially after 24 h when the rainfall becomes relatively intense. It seems
that the increase of Pf is not significant during the target rainfall, espe­
cially when ignoring any past performance. This may be attributed to
the fact that the rainfall was poured with an intensity as large as 120
mm/h in a very short period (i.e., 0:00–6:00 of the second day in
Fig. 10). In addition, the estimated Pf with consideration of survival
records from past rainfall events is much smaller than that when
ignoring any past performance. The Geotechnical Engineering Office
(GEO) in Hong Kong reported that the annual failure rate of non-
engineered slopes in Hong Kong in 2001 was 72/21550 = 0.33%
X. Liu and Y. Wang
based on an observed landslide number of 72 and the registered slope
number of 21,550 in Hong Kong (Lam et al., 2004). The slope failure
probability considering past slope performance records ranged from
0.001 to 0.012, which is consistent with the actual annual slope failure
rate. In contrast, the slope failure probability without considering past
slope performance records was estimated as large as 0.185, two orders of
magnitude larger than the slope failure rate observed in practice. This
shows that incorporating slope survival records from past rainfall events
is able to enhance the estimation of slope failure probability and avoid
the problem of overestimating Pf.
5. Conclusions
This study proposed a scenario-based reliability analysis method for
an existing slope considering rainfall triggering mechanism and its
survival records from past rainfall events. The survival records were
used to reduce site-specific uncertainties in soil parameters and other
variables and improve accuracy of the estimated Pf. Effects of one and
multiple past rainfall events on site-specific uncertainty updating and Pf
estimation were explored using an infinite slope example under rainfall
infiltration. A few key conclusions can be summarized as:
(1) For a given slope, its Pf is dependent on a target rainfall scenario
that may have different characteristics (e.g., duration, intensity,
and hourly rainfall pattern). Different rainfall characteristics (e.
g., hourly rainfall pattern) might lead to different Pf. The illus­
trative example showed that, after Bayesian updating using the
past performance records, the estimate of Pf for an existing slope
may be reduced by one to two orders of magnitudes, making the
obtained Pf consistent with the observed slope failure frequency.
The challenge of overestimating Pf from traditional slope reli­
ability analysis is tackled using past performance records of the
existing slope. The propose method can be used to estimate real-
time slope failure probability Pf that varies as the considered
rainfall evolves with time and provide key information for
decision-making and mitigation of landslide risk.
(2) Incorporating the fact that the slope stays stable before imposing
any rainfall and the slope’s survival record from past rainfall
events leads to a significant reduction in variability of uncertain
parameters. The effect of Bayesian updating of uncertainties is
more significant for time-invariant variables (e.g., soil properties)
when using survival records from multiple past rainfall events
than that when using a single past rainfall event.
Declaration of Competing Interest
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.
Acknowledgements
The work described in this paper was supported by a grant from the
Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Re­
gion, China (Project No. T22-603/15N) and a Strategic Research Grant
from City University of Hong Kong (Project No. 7005551). The financial
supports are gratefully acknowledged.
References
Ang, A.H.S., Tang, W.H., 2007. Probability Concepts in Engineering: Emphasis on
Applications to Civil and Environmental Engineering, 2nd Ed. John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.
Au, S.K., Beck, J.L., 2001. Estimation of small failure probabilities in high dimensions by
subset simulation. Probabil. Eng. Mech. 16, 263–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0266-8920(01)00019-4.
13
Engineering Geology 288 (2021) 106144
Au, S.K., Wang, Y., 2014. Engineering Risk Assessment with Subset Simulation. John
Wiley & Sons Singapore Pte. Ltd., Singapore, Singapore.
Baecher, G.B., Christian, J.T., 2003. Reliability and Statistics in Geotechnical
Engineering. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., England, Chichester.
Baum, R.L., Godt, J.W., 2010. Early warning of rainfall-induced shallow landslides and
debris flows in the USA. Landslides 7 (3), 259–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10346-009-0177-0.
Cai, F., Ugai, K., 2004. Numerical analysis of rainfall effects on slope stability. Int. J.
Geomech. 4, 69–78. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1532-3641(2004)4:2(69).
Cao, Z.J., Wang, Y., Li, D.Q., 2016. Site-specific characterization of soil properties using
multiple measurements from different test procedures at different locations – a
Bayesian sequential updating approach. Eng. Geol. 211, 150–161. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enggeo.2016.06.021.
Chae, B.G., Seo, Y.S., 2010. Suggestion of an evaluation chart for landslide susceptibility
using a quantification analysis based on canonical correlation. Korean Soc. Econ.
Environ. Geol. 43, 381–391.
Chae, B.G., Park, H.J., Catani, F., Simoni, A., Berti, M., 2017. Landslide prediction,
monitoring and early warning: a concise review of state-of-the-art. Geosci. J. 21 (6),
1033–1070. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12303-017-0034-4.
Chen, H.X., Zhang, L.M., 2014. A physically-based distributed cell model for predicting
regional rainfall-induced shallow slope failures. Eng. Geol. 176, 79–92. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2014.04.011.
Cheverda, V., Reshetova, G., Lisitsa, V., Protasov, M., 2020. Digital twin of multiscale
geological media: Faults, fracture corridors, caves. Seismic simulation and imaging.
In: 4th EAGE Workshop on High Performance Computing for Upstream in the Middle
East: HPC through the 4th Industrial Revolution. European Association of
Geoscientists and Engineers, EAGE, pp. 1–5. https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-
4609.201903294.
Ching, J., Phoon, K.K., Hu, Y.G., 2009. Efficient evaluation of reliability for slopes with
circular slip surfaces using importance sampling. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. 135 (6),
768–777. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000035.
Chowdhury, R., Zhang, S., Flentje, P., 2015. Reliability updating and geotechnical back-
analysis. Adv. Geotech. Eng. https://doi.org/10.1680/AIGEV2.32644.0012 (The
Skempton Conference).
Christian, J.T., Baecher, G.B., 2011. Unresolved problems in geotechnical risk and
reliability. GeoRisk 2011, 50–63. https://doi.org/10.1061/41183(418)3.
Duncan, J.M., Wright, S.G., 2005. Soil Strength and Slope Stability. John Wiley & Sons
Inc.
Evans, N.C., Lam, J.S., 2003. Tung Chung East Natural Terrain Study Area Ground
Movement and Groundwater Monitoring Equipment and Preliminary Results (GEO
Report No. 142). Geotechnical Engineering Office (GEO), Hong Kong, China.
Fenton, G.A., Vanmarcke, E.H., 1990. Simulation of random fields via local average
subdivision. J. Eng. Mech. 116 (8), 1733–1749. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
0733-9399(1990)116:8(1733).
Gao, L., Zhang, L.M., Chen, H.X., 2017. Likely scenarios of natural terrain shallow slope
failures on Hong Kong Island under extreme storms. Nat. Hazards Rev. 18 (1),
B4015001 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000207.
van Genuchten, M.T., 1980. A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic
conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44 (5), 892. https://doi.org/
10.2136/sssaj1980.03615995004400050002x.
Gong, W., Juang, C.H., Wasowski, J., 2021. Geohazards and human settlements: Lessons
learned from multiple relocation events in Badong, China – Engineering geologist’s
perspective. Eng. Geol. 285, 106051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enggeo.2021.106051.
Grieves, M., 2015. Digital Twin: Manufacturing Excellence through Virtual Factory
Replication.
Ji, J., Low, B.K., 2012. Stratified response surfaces for system probabilistic evaluation of
slopes. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. 138 (11), 1398–1406. https://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000711.
Jiang, S.H., Li, D.Q., Cao, Z., Zhou, C.B., Phoon, K.K., 2015. Efficient system reliability
analysis of slope stability in spatially variable soils using Monte Carlo simulation.
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. 141 (2), 04014096 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
GT.1943-5606.0001227.
Jiang, S.H., Huang, J., Qi, X.H., Zhou, C.B., 2020. Efficient probabilistic back analysis of
spatially varying soil parameters for slope reliability assessment. Eng. Geol. 271,
105597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2020.105597.
Kong, V.W.W., Kwan, J.S.H., Pun, W.K., 2020. Hong Kong’s landslip warning system—40
years of progress. Landslides 17 (6), 1453–1463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-
020-01379-6.
Lam, T.T.M., Sun, H.W., Ho, K.K.S., 2004. Review of Landslides in 2001. GEO Report No.
155. Geotechnical Engineering Office, Hong Kong, China.
Li, D.Q., Chen, Y., Lu, W., Zhou, C., 2011. Stochastic response surface method for
reliability analysis of rock slopes involving correlated non-normal variables.
Comput. Geotech. 38 (1), 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2010.10.006.
Li, D.Q., Zhang, F.P., Cao, Z.J., Zhou, W., Phoon, K.K., Zhou, C.B., 2015. Efficient
reliability updating of slope stability by reweighting failure samples generated by
Monte Carlo simulation. Comput. Geotech. 69, 588–600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compgeo.2015.06.017.
Li, D.Q., Xiao, T., Cao, Z.J., Zhou, C.B., Zhang, L.M., 2016. Enhancement of random finite
element method in reliability analysis and risk assessment of soil slopes using Subset
simulation. Landslides 1–11.
Li, K.S., Lumb, P., 1987. Probabilistic design of slopes. Can. Geotech. J. 24 (4), 520–535.
https://doi.org/10.1139/t87-068.
Liu, X., Wang, Y., Li, D.Q., 2019. Investigation of slope failure mode evolution during
large deformation in spatially variable soils by random limit equilibrium and
X. Liu and Y. Wang
material point methods. Comput. Geotech. 111, 301–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.compgeo.2019.03.022.
Liu, X., Li, D.Q., Cao, Z.J., Wang, Y., 2020. Adaptive Monte Carlo simulation method for
system reliability analysis of slope stability based on limit equilibrium methods. Eng.
Geol. 264, 105384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2019.105384.
Low, B.K., Zhang, J., Tang, W.H., 2011. Efficient system reliability analysis illustrated for
a retaining wall and a soil slope. Comput. Geotech. 38 (2), 196–204.
Lu, N., Godt, J., 2008. Infinite slope stability under steady unsaturated seepage
conditions. Water Resour. Res. 44 (11), W11404 https://doi.org/10.1029/
2008WR006976.
Lu, N., Likos, W.J., 2006. Suction stress characteristic curve for unsaturated soil.
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. 132 (2), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-
0241(2006)132:2(131).
Mualem, Y., 1976. A new model for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated
porous media. Water Resour. Res. 12 (3), 513–522. https://doi.org/10.1029/
WR012i003p00513.
Papaioannou, I., Straub, D., 2012. Reliability updating in geotechnical engineering
including spatial variability of soil. Comput. Geotech. 42, 44–51. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.compgeo.2011.12.004.
Phoon, K.K., Kulhawy, F.H., 1999a. Characterization of geotechnical variability. Can.
Geotech. J. 36 (4), 612–624. https://doi.org/10.1139/t99-038.
Phoon, K.K., Kulhawy, F.H., 1999b. Evaluation of geotechnical property variability. Can.
Geotech. J. 36 (4), 625–639.
Schweckendiek, T., Kanning, W., 2009. Updating piping probabilities with survived
loads. In: 7th International Probabilistic Workshop, Delft, The Netherlands,
pp. 1–13.
Schweckendiek, T., Vrouwenvelder, A.C.W.M., Calle, E.O.F., 2014. Updating piping
reliability with field performance observations. Struct. Saf. 47, 13–23.
Segoni, S., Battistini, A., Rossi, G., Rosi, A., Lagomarsino, D., Catani, F., Moretti, S.,
Casagli, N., 2015. Technical note: an operational landslide early warning system at
regional scale based on space–time-variable rainfall thresholds. Nat. Hazards Earth
Syst. Sci. 15 (4), 853–861. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-15-853-2015.
Šimůnek, J., Šejna, M., Saito, H., Sakai, M., van Genuchten, M.T., 2013. The Hydrus-1D
Software Package for Simulating the Movement of Water, Heat, and Multiple Solutes
in Variably Saturated Media, Version 4.17, HYDRUS Software Series 3. Department
of Environmental Sciences, University of California Riverside, Riverside, California,
USA, p. 342.
Tang, H., Wasowski, J., Juang, C.H., 2019. Geohazards in the three Gorges Reservoir
Area, China – Lessons learned from decades of research. Eng. Geol. 261, 105267.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2019.105267.
Tang, W.H., Zhang, L.M., 2011. Development of a risk-based landslide warning system.
GeoRisk 224 GSP, 25–49. https://doi.org/10.1061/41183(418)2.
14
Engineering Geology 288 (2021) 106144
Tofani, V., Bicocchi, G., Rossi, G., Segoni, S., D’Ambrosio, M., Casagli, N., Catani, F.,
2017. Soil characterization for shallow landslides modeling: a case study in the
Northern Apennines (Central Italy). Landslides 14, 755–770. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10346-017-0809-8.
Wai, R.C.T., Lee, R.W.H., Law, R.H.C., 2018. Review of Landslides in 2016 (GEO Report
no. 341. Hong Kong, China).
Wang, Y., 2012. Uncertain parameter sensitivity in Monte Carlo simulation by sample
reassembling. Comput. Geotech. 46, 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compgeo.2012.05.014.
Wang, Y., Cao, Z., 2013. Probabilistic characterization of Young’s modulus of soil using
equivalent samples. Eng. Geol. 159, 106–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enggeo.2013.03.017.
Wang, Y., Au, S.K., Cao, Z., 2010. Bayesian approach for probabilistic characterization of
sand friction angles. Eng. Geol. 114 (3–4), 354–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enggeo.2010.05.013.
Wang, Y., Cao, Z., Au, S.K., 2011. Practical reliability analysis of slope stability by
advanced Monte Carlo simulations in a spreadsheet. Can. Geotech. J. 48 (1),
162–172. https://doi.org/10.1139/T10-044.
Wang, Y., Cao, Z., Li, D., 2016. Bayesian perspective on geotechnical variability and site
characterization. Eng. Geol. 203, 117–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enggeo.2015.08.017.
Zhang, H., Wang, R., Wang, C., 2019. Monitoring and Warning for Digital Twin-driven
Mountain Geological disaster. In: Proceedings of 2019 IEEE International Conference
on Mechatronics and Automation, ICMA 2019. Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers Inc, pp. 502–507. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMA.2019.8816292.
Zhang, J., Zhang, L.M., Tang, W.H., 2009. Bayesian framework for characterizing
geotechnical model uncertainty. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. 135 (7), 932–940. https://
doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000018.
Zhang, J., Zhang, L.M., Tang, W.H., 2011. Slope reliability analysis considering site-
specific performance information. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. 137 (3), 227–238.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000422.
Zhang, J., Huang, H.W., Zhang, L.M., Zhu, H.H., Shi, B., 2014. Probabilistic prediction of
rainfall-induced slope failure using a mechanics-based model. Eng. Geol. 168,
129–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENGGEO.2013.11.005.
Zhang, L.L., Li, J., Li, X., Zhang, J., Zhu, H., 2016. Rainfall-Induced Soil Slope Failure:
Stability Analysis and Probabilistic Assessment. CRC Press, Boca Raton, USA.
Zhang, L.L., Zuo, Z.B., Ye, G.L., Jeng, D.S., Wang, J.H., 2013. Probabilistic parameter
estimation and predictive uncertainty based on field measurements for unsaturated
soil slope. Comput. Geotech. 48, 72–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
COMPGEO.2012.09.011.