## 5 Results
### Information Content Calculation
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline
**Factor Indicator** & **Status Indicator** & **Information Quantity** \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Topographic Slope} & 0–10\({}^{\circ}\) & \(-\)0.4030 \\  & 10–25\({}^{\circ}\) & 0.2383 \\  & 25–40\({}^{\circ}\) & \(-\)0.0958 \\  & \(>\)40\({}^{\circ}\) & 0.4657 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Topographic Aspect} & Horizontal (\(-\)1) & \(-\)1.2071 \\  & North (337.5\({}^{\circ}\)–22.5\({}^{\circ}\)) & \(-\)0.5177 \\  & Northeast (22.5\({}^{\circ}\)–67.5\({}^{\circ}\)) & \(-\)0.3595 \\  & East (67.5\({}^{\circ}\)–112.5\({}^{\circ}\)) & \(-\)0.1046 \\  & Southeast (112.5\({}^{\circ}\)–157.5\({}^{\circ}\)) & 0.3230 \\  & South (157.5\({}^{\circ}\)–202.5\({}^{\circ}\)) & 0.3546 \\  & Southwest (202.5\({}^{\circ}\)–247.5\({}^{\circ}\)) & 0.2904 \\  & West (247.5\({}^{\circ}\)–292.5\({}^{\circ}\)) & \(-\)0.1036 \\  & Northwest (292.5\({}^{\circ}\)–337.5\({}^{\circ}\)) & \(-\)0.1003 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Slope Morphology} & Concave Slope & 0.4197 \\  & Zigzag Slope, Straight Slope\({}^{\circ}\) & \(-\)0.7646 \\  & Convex Slope & \(-\)0.1037 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Topographic Relief} & 0–10 m & \(-\)1.4132 \\  & 10–20 m & 0.3037 \\  & 20–30 m & 0.3521 \\  & \(>\)30 m & \(-\)0.7748 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Engineering Geological Rock Group} & Sandy soils, claye soils, and other sedimentary soil bodies & 0.4648 \\  & Layered relatively soft metamorphic rock groups & \(-\)0.0725 \\  & Layered relatively soft red bed rock groups & \(-\)0.5125 \\  & Blocky, relatively hard to hard intrusive rock groups & 0.0269 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Vegetation Cover} & \(<\)0.1 & 0.6956 \\  & 0.1–0.3 & 2.4445 \\  & 0.3–0.5 & \(-\)0.0047 \\  & \(>\)0.5 & \(-\)2.9056 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Cover Layer Thickness} & \(<\)1 m & 0.1161 \\  & 1–3 m & \(-\)0.2501 \\  & 3–6 m & 0.6221 \\  & 6–9 m & 0.5256 \\  & 9–12 m & 0.2853 \\  & \(>\)12 m & 0.3925 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Land Use Type} & Agricultural Land & \(-\)0.8750 \\  & Construction Land & 2.4287 \\  & Forests Land & \(-\)0.4141 \\  & Water Bodies & \(-\)1.5377 \\  & Grassland & 0.1356 \\  & Barren Land & 2.3691 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Slope Structure} & Transverse Slope & \(-\)0.5750 \\  & Oblique Slope & \(-\)0.1173 \\  & Blocky Rock Slope & \(-\)0.0202 \\  & Downhill Slope & 0.8197 \\  & Uphill Slope & \(-\)0.1511 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Slope Height} & \(<\)3 m & \(-\)2.2672 \\  & 3–6 m & 1.2183 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 6–12 m & 2.2297 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 12–25 m & 2.4369 \\ \cline{1-1}  & \(>\)25 m & 2.46917 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Geological disaster-susceptibility evaluation factor information. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) is commonly used as an objective and quantitative metric to evaluate model prediction performance. The AUC value ranges from 0 to 1, with values closer to 1 indicating higher predictive accuracy. In this study, the accuracy of the susceptibility evaluation results was tested using the ROC curve. The information values of the susceptibility index map were statistically analyzed, and the ROC curve was generated using Python 3 programming, with the map area ratio plotted on the x-axis and the landslide area ratio on the y-axis (Figure 6). The resulting AUC value of 0.8739 demonstrates that the susceptibility results derived from the information value model are of high accuracy, thus providing data quality assurance for subsequent hazard and risk assessments of geological disasters in Huangshi Town.