## 4 Results
### Deep Displacement Data  
Despite some brief data gaps, the time-series of cumulative displacement acquired by automatic inclinometer probes were sufficiently continuous over the observation period (Figure 12). The data coverage was from 93% to 95% for FON2, FON3, and FON4 probes; a lower data coverage (86%) was obtained for the probe installed inside the FON1 tube. The breaks in data continuity were mainly caused by either electrical malfunctions or power supply interruptions. The trends in daily averaged cumulative displacements appeared to be slightly noisy, likely because of the wide range of errors commonly affecting data acquisition of automatic inclinometer probes [52; 53]. It is known that the performance of automatic equipment is influenced by disturbances in the electrical signal, deriving from noise sources along with systematic and random errors affecting both the probe itself and the acquisition system, which can produce measurement spikes [52; 53]. Moreover, as observed in the collected data-series (Figure 12), these disturbances also include decreases in cumulative displacements, which in turn result in negative values of daily velocity. However, these values were approximately less than or equal to the accuracy of the installed probes and thus they were assumed negligible for the purposes of the analysis. Deep displacement data allowed us to outline noticeable features of the landslide mobility. The probes installed within the verticals located in the central part of the active landslide sector (i.e., FON2 and FON3) achieved the largest total cumulative displacements throughout the monitoring period (Figure 12). Smaller displacements were measured from the probe placed inside the tube located at the landslide foot (i.e., FON4). Conversely, the time-series of displacement acquired by the FON1 probe did not show significant move  
Figure 12: Average cumulative daily displacements acquired by automatic inclinometer probes installed at the main failure depths, (**a**) along with daily and cumulative rainfall data recorded over the observation period (**b**). The main kinematics stages identified are also indicated: SM: slow-motion stage, IM: inactive-motion stage, RM: rapid-motion stage (see text for further details). ments at the landslide head. During periodical measurements with removable probes, no significant deformations were detected above and below the levels monitored continuously, testifying that they represent the most important failure surfaces within the landslide body (Figure 13a). Cumulative displacement data acquired by automatic inclinometers were quite consistent with those obtained from mobile probe, although the low temporal resolution of the latter did not allow for reliable comparisons in terms of motion trends (Figure 13b). The largest discrepancies were noticed for displacements measured inside the FON1 tube. However, it should be noted that the FON1 automatic probe did suffer from technical problems, which may have affected its functioning. For these reasons, data acquired along this vertical were not considered in the following analyses. The displacement trends obtained at the other three surveyed failure zones appeared to be consistent and comparable, suggesting similar kinematics behaviour. Based on the time-series of average cumulative daily displacement, three main types of kinematics stages were distinguished, which were defined as slow (SM), rapid (RM) and inactive (IM) motions (Figure 12). The SM and IM stages included periods showing relatively uniform or constant trends in the time-series of displacement. At first glance, these motion patterns appear to follow seasonal cycles and thus are likely influenced by the hydrological regime. Overall, the SM stage was observed during wet periods, typically comprising the autumn and winter months, whereas the IM stage was observed during intervals characterized by very low rainfall levels, namely approximately from early spring to late summer (Figure 12).