cs.LGAug 12, 2026

Which Site, and When: A Free-Satellite-Data Test of Himalayan Glacial Lake Bursts, Landslides, and Ice Floods

Authors: Matthew Kahn, Milan Arjel, Nirmala Adhikari, Mingmar Sherpa, James Pope

Organizations: Applied Economics and Management, Cornell University, New York, United States of America · Department of Electronics and Computer Engineering, Purwanchal Campus, Institute of Engineering, Tribhuvan University, Dharan, Nepal · Department of Physics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Alabama, United States of America · Department of Biomedical and Biological Sciences, Cornell University, New York, United States of America · School of Engineering Mathematics and Technology, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom

Abstract

Two free satellite signals carry real information about glacial-lake outburst risk in the Nepal Himalaya: radar interferometry sees a moraine dam slowly sagging, and satellite weather marks the weeks when a primed lake is under stress. A companion feasibility study found that deformation indicates which lake is destabilizing and weather indicates when it is at risk, but proposed no predictive model. To address this gap, we propose and evaluate models that predict which site is susceptible and when a trigger arrives. We test three related hazards on free data alone: large moraine- and ice-dammed bursts, rainfall-triggered landslides, and smaller floods from ponds on and around a glacier. Each hazard gets two questions, never blended. Using 589 dated outbursts from HMAGLOFDB and several thousand catalogued landslides, we match each event against similar but unfailed sites, and hold every model to a strong simple baseline under spatial cross-validation that withholds whole map tiles, so no model succeeds by recognising a trained-on neighbourhood. Antecedent weather times the trigger at ROC 0.73 for big bursts, 0.83 for landslides, and 0.82 for small floods. Terrain ranks susceptibility only in part: scored naively it appears near 0.9, largely because catalogued failures cluster in wetter ranges; matched against comparable nearby sites the honest figures are 0.76, 0.71, and 0.54 (no better than chance). The burst signal holds within single regions, reaching 0.89 in Nepal alone. Five deep-learning models do not decisively beat a simple gradient-boosted baseline. Three score marginally higher on landslides, a hint too small to confirm. For the lake hazards the baseline wins outright, reproduced by a three-rule decision tree on ruggedness and monsoon rainfall. We close with a ranked Nepal watchlist, a prioritisation aid, not a prediction, and note where free data reaches its limits.

Explore similar work

CardsList
Apr 17, 2026cs.LG

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

Existing multi-hazard susceptibility mapping (MHSM) studies often rely on spatially uniform models, treat hazards independently, and provide limited representation of cross-hazard dependence and uncertainty. To address these limitations, this study proposes a deep learning (DL) workflow for joint flood-landslide multi-hazard susceptibility mapping (FL-MHSM) that combines two-level spatial partitioning, probabilistic Early Fusion (EF), a tree-based Late Fusion (LF) baseline, and a soft-gating Mixture of Experts (MoE) model, with MoE serving as final predictive model. The proposed design preserves spatial heterogeneity through zonal partitions and enables data-parallel large-area prediction using overlapping lattice grids. In Kerala, EF remained competitive with LF, improving flood recall from 0.816 to 0.840 and reducing Brier score from 0.092 to 0.086, while MoE provided strongest performance for flood susceptibility, achieving an AUC-ROC of 0.905, recall of 0.930, and F1-score of 0.722. In Nepal, EF similarly improved flood recall from 0.820 to 0.858 and reduced Brier score from 0.057 to 0.049 relative to LF, while MoE outperformed both EF and LF for landslide susceptibility, achieving an AUC-ROC of 0.914, recall of 0.901, and F1-score of 0.559. GeoDetector analysis of MoE outputs further showed that dominant factors varied more across zones in Kerala, where susceptibility was shaped by different combinations of topographic, land-cover, and drainage-related controls, while Nepal showed a more consistent influence of topographic and glacier-related factors across zones. These findings show that EF and LF provide complementary predictive behavior, and that their spatially adaptive integration through MoE yields robust overall predictive performance for FL-MHSM while supporting interpretable characterization of multi-hazard susceptibility in spatially heterogeneous landscapes.
Aswathi Mundayatt, Jaya Sreevalsan-Nair
LandslidesSpatio-Temporal FusionHeterogeneityEnsemble
AskPDF
Aug 31, 2026cs.LG

Supraglacial Lake Fate Is Knowable Long Before the Season Ends

A supraglacial lake on the Greenland Ice Sheet ends its melt season in one of four ways: it drains rapidly through a hydrofracture, drains slowly across the surface, refreezes in place, or is buried by late-season snowfall. Which one occurs decides whether the meltwater reaches the ice bed. Satellite classifiers recover the outcome accurately but only after the season closes, and how much of a season each outcome actually requires has never been measured. We measure it directly: holding the representation and the classifier fixed, we truncate the input at 1414 cutoffs from 1 May to 31 December, retrain at each, and record the earliest cutoff at which each outcome's per-class F1F_1 reaches a fixed target. The outcomes resolve in a consistent order, two of them months early: rapid drainage by 15 July and slow drainage by 1 August, 9292 and 7575 days ahead of the earliest date a full-season pipeline can be computed at all, with buried and refreeze following at 4444 and 3030 days. Five further learners, from a majority-class floor and 5454 summary statistics to a trigger-based early classifier, leave the ordering intact: every learner that produces a per-class trajectory reproduces it despite end-of-season accuracies differing by up to 1818 percentage points, and it survives leave-one-basin-out evaluation, though not the substitution of machine labels for expert ones in an unseen season. Every feature we compute at day tt reads only days up to tt, at a cost of at most 1.31.3 percentage points. A monitoring system should therefore not have one release date: rapid drainage can be flagged on 15 July, three months before a full-season pipeline can be computed at all.
Emam Hossain, Md Osman Gani
Sea Surface TemperatureSeason
AskPDF
Jul 5, 2026cs.LG

GlacierCastAI: Predicting Glacier Retreat from Multi-Modal Satellite Imagery and Climate Signals

ERA5 seasonal climate variables contain predictive information about future glacier retreat beyond what satellite imagery alone provides, yet existing deep learning methods focus on mapping current boundaries rather than forecasting future ones. This paper presents GlacierCastAI, which reframes glacier boundary prediction as a multi-modal spatiotemporal forecasting problem, fusing multi-temporal Landsat imagery with ERA5 reanalysis climate variables and Copernicus DEM terrain features to forecast glacier boundaries across five glaciers spanning four climate regimes. The architecture couples a ResNet50 spatial encoder with a ConvLSTM temporal model and a cross-attention climate fusion module. Because forecasting is inherently more uncertain than mapping current boundaries, the reported IoU values (0.320-0.337) are not directly comparable to state-of-the-art mapping models. Comparisons are against traditional baselines and experimental conditions. Through a pre-registered ablation study, adding ERA5 climate signals improves image-only IoU from 0.326 to 0.337 (+3.4%), suggesting that atmospheric forcing carries predictive information beyond imagery alone. All deep learning models substantially outperform persistence and linear trend baselines (IoU 0.160 and 0.169 respectively), with improvements of 89-99% relative IoU. A lightweight climate-only MLP baseline (661K parameters) achieves an IoU of 0.320 (98% of image-only performance) using 85x fewer parameters, suggesting that ERA5 variables encode substantial predictive signal independently of satellite imagery. SHAP attribution analysis suggests that spring solar radiation (MAM) is the dominant climate driver, consistent with the known role of spring insolation in setting melt season trajectories.
Arunkumar Ramachandran
Sea Surface TemperatureClimateSatellite ImagerySolar IrradianceProgressive Attention Fusion
AskPDF