Mapping Pyroclastic Flow Inundation Using Radar and Optical Satellite Images and Lahar Modeling

Table 4

Comparison of the common region between the pyroclastic flow (PF) simulation and Landsat supervised classification hazard zone in Figure 7.

Pyroclastic flow volume (m^3)	Orientation (direction)	Common region between Landsat and PF simulation (pixels)	Pyroclastic flow inundation area from PF simulation (pixels)	Proportion of common region (%)
Region A 20,000	E	Underestimated	Underestimated	Underestimated
	SE
	SSE
	S
	Total	—	—	—
Region B 27,000	E	252	284	88.73
	SE	110	134	82.09
	SSE	90	136	66.18
	S	130	138	94.20
	Total	582	692	84.10
Region C 30,000	E	256	292	87.67
	SE	110	140	78.57
	SSE	60	142	42.25
	S	136	144	94.44
	Total	562	718	78.27
Region E 40,000	E	272	356	76.40
	SE	110	170	64.71
	SSE	60	174	34.48
	S	144	180	80.00
	Total	586	880	66.59
Region F 50,000	E	272	402	67.66
	SE	110	204	53.92
	SSE	60	198	30.30
	S	144	204	70.59
	Total	586	1008	58.13
Region G 60,000	E	272	474	57.38
	SE	110	230	47.83
	SSE	60	238	25.21
	S	144	226	63.72
	Total	586	1168	50.17
Region H 70,000	E	272	500	54.40
	SE	110	262	41.98
	SSE	60	252	23.81
	S	144	258	55.81
	Total	586	1272	46.07