CN113139701A - Regional energy source health degree evaluation method based on hierarchical analysis method - Google Patents

Regional energy source health degree evaluation method based on hierarchical analysis method Download PDF

Info

Publication number
CN113139701A
CN113139701A CN202110548437.9A CN202110548437A CN113139701A CN 113139701 A CN113139701 A CN 113139701A CN 202110548437 A CN202110548437 A CN 202110548437A CN 113139701 A CN113139701 A CN 113139701A
Authority
CN
China
Prior art keywords
evaluation
health degree
judgment matrix
consistency
score
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Granted
Application number
CN202110548437.9A
Other languages
Chinese (zh)
Other versions
CN113139701B (en
Inventor
余磊波
沙学松
李金苡
王显政
曹洋
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Zhongneng Integrated Smart Energy Technology Co Ltd
Original Assignee
Zhongneng Integrated Smart Energy Technology Co Ltd
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Zhongneng Integrated Smart Energy Technology Co Ltd filed Critical Zhongneng Integrated Smart Energy Technology Co Ltd
Priority to CN202110548437.9A priority Critical patent/CN113139701B/en
Publication of CN113139701A publication Critical patent/CN113139701A/en
Application granted granted Critical
Publication of CN113139701B publication Critical patent/CN113139701B/en
Active legal-status Critical Current
Anticipated expiration legal-status Critical

Links

Images

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/04—Forecasting or optimisation specially adapted for administrative or management purposes, e.g. linear programming or "cutting stock problem"
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
    • G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
    • G06Q10/063—Operations research, analysis or management
    • G06Q10/0639—Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
    • G06Q10/06393—Score-carding, benchmarking or key performance indicator [KPI] analysis
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q30/00—Commerce
    • G06Q30/02—Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
    • G06Q30/0201—Market modelling; Market analysis; Collecting market data
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q30/00—Commerce
    • G06Q30/02—Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
    • G06Q30/0201—Market modelling; Market analysis; Collecting market data
    • G06Q30/0202—Market predictions or forecasting for commercial activities
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q50/00—Information and communication technology [ICT] specially adapted for implementation of business processes of specific business sectors, e.g. utilities or tourism
    • G06Q50/06—Energy or water supply
    • Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
    • Y02—TECHNOLOGIES OR APPLICATIONS FOR MITIGATION OR ADAPTATION AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE
    • Y02P—CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION TECHNOLOGIES IN THE PRODUCTION OR PROCESSING OF GOODS
    • Y02P90/00—Enabling technologies with a potential contribution to greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions mitigation
    • Y02P90/80—Management or planning
    • Y02P90/82—Energy audits or management systems therefor

Landscapes

  • Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Strategic Management (AREA)
  • Development Economics (AREA)
  • Economics (AREA)
  • Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
  • Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
  • Accounting & Taxation (AREA)
  • Finance (AREA)
  • General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • Marketing (AREA)
  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
  • Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
  • Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
  • Quality & Reliability (AREA)
  • Operations Research (AREA)
  • Educational Administration (AREA)
  • Data Mining & Analysis (AREA)
  • Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
  • Public Health (AREA)
  • Water Supply & Treatment (AREA)
  • General Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
  • Primary Health Care (AREA)
  • Medical Treatment And Welfare Office Work (AREA)
  • Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)

Abstract

The application discloses a method for evaluating health degree of an internal energy source in a region based on a hierarchical analysis method, which relates to the hierarchical analysis method, wherein the hierarchical analysis method decomposes a complex problem into various composition factors, and the composition factors are layered according to a domination relation, so that a clear hierarchical structure is established, the relative importance of the factors in the layers is determined in a pairwise comparison mode on the same layer, the judgment scales are quantized by using relative scales, corresponding judgment matrixes are established layer by layer, and finally, the weight coefficient of each factor is determined by solving a normalized eigenvector corresponding to the maximum eigenvalue of the judgment matrix.

Description

Regional energy source health degree evaluation method based on hierarchical analysis method
Technical Field
The invention relates to the field of evaluation and analysis methods, in particular to a method for evaluating the health degree of an energy source in a region based on a hierarchical analysis method.
Background
The method is based on a hierarchical analysis method, and a reasonable health degree evaluation system is established through deep analysis of a park comprehensive energy system. And grading each subsystem of the park comprehensive energy by adopting a hierarchical analysis method to realize the health evaluation of each subsystem, further comprehensively evaluating the whole comprehensive energy system, and optimizing the intelligent energy system on the basis of the comprehensive evaluation.
The park comprehensive intelligent energy system is a system which is based on various primary and secondary energy development achievements in a certain area, further realizes the comprehensive integration of the whole energy network on the basis of realizing digitization, automation, informatization, interaction and intellectualization in various energy fields based on an information physical system and can realize the optimization decision and wide area coordination of energy.
The comprehensive intelligent energy system aims to integrate multiple energy supply types such as coal, gas, oil, wind, light, biomass and the like in a certain area, plan, schedule, cooperate and complement, optimally meet multiple energy requirements of different users such as electricity, heat, cold, steam, gas and the like according to local conditions, finally comprehensively improve the energy utilization efficiency, reduce the emission of carbon dioxide, furthest reduce the environmental burden and actively promote the realization of carbon peak reaching and carbon neutralization.
The energy management service of the comprehensive intelligent energy system needs to be realized by means of an informatization platform so as to realize the automation of energy management and promote the standardization and systematization of energy management. The energy management system mainly comprises: energy input, energy conversion, energy distribution and transmission, energy use, energy consumption condition analysis, system health degree evaluation and the like. The evaluation of the health degree of the energy system is particularly important, and the running state of the energy system can be judged quickly and effectively by analyzing the evaluation score of the health degree of the system, and an optimization target and a scheme are provided.
In the prior art, the health degree evaluation of an energy system is mostly the health degree evaluation of energy utilization equipment. The health diagnosis of the system (equipment) is realized by adopting a method for scoring the running state of the running equipment.
The invention patent CN202011431422.6 establishes a system optimization objective function by obtaining comprehensive energy system parameters, takes the minimum sum of the operating cost of energy-using equipment divided by the health degree as a system control objective, and establishes source-load balance constraint according to the total output of the energy-using equipment and energy requirements; and solving the energy consumption optimization model to obtain the optimized yield control target of each energy consumption device. The energy consumption optimization method of the invention relates to the health degree of equipment, but does not provide a reasonable and effective equipment health degree evaluation method. The health of the energy-using device is obtained by other existing techniques, or from other modules.
Aiming at the defects of the prior art, the method for evaluating the health degree of the regional internal energy based on the hierarchical analysis method establishes the health degree evaluation system of each subsystem in the park comprehensive energy system by the hierarchical analysis method, establishes the evaluation system of the park comprehensive energy system by taking the evaluation result of each subsystem as the basis, and performs overall evaluation on the whole comprehensive energy system.
Disclosure of Invention
The embodiment of the invention provides a method for evaluating the health degree of an energy source in a region based on a hierarchical analysis method. The following presents a simplified summary in order to provide a basic understanding of some aspects of the disclosed embodiments. This summary is not an extensive overview and is intended to neither identify key/critical elements nor delineate the scope of such embodiments. Its sole purpose is to present some concepts in a simplified form as a prelude to the more detailed description that is presented later.
The embodiment of the invention provides a method for evaluating the health degree of an energy source in a region based on a hierarchical analysis method, which comprises the following steps:
s1: establishing a hierarchical structure model: dividing a hierarchical structure model by analyzing various factors of energy in a certain area, namely dividing the hierarchical structure model into different levels, wherein one level is one level, each level is provided with a plurality of subsystems, and each level of subsystem is provided with one or more evaluation indexes; determining the evaluation index of each grade, completing the establishment of a hierarchical structure chart/model,
s2: constructing a judgment matrix: quantitatively describing the importance of comparison of every two evaluation indexes in the same layer according to the hierarchical structure model to obtain the relative importance of each evaluation index so as to construct a judgment matrix; the numerical value in the judgment matrix is determined according to the experience of evaluation analysts, data and research;
s3: calculating the relative weight of each evaluation index: according to the judgment matrix, carrying out normalization processing on the feature vectors to obtain the weight of each evaluation index;
s5: and scoring the health degree of the energy in the certain area: according to the hierarchical analysis method, the evaluation index and the weight of the hierarchy of the hierarchical structure model are determined, and the overall score of the health degree of the energy system in a certain area is calculated, namely the health degree score of the energy system in the certain area is completed.
In some embodiments, preferably, the S2: establishing a judgment matrix, and quantitatively describing the importance of comparison of every two evaluation indexes in the same level according to the hierarchical structure model to obtain the relative importance of each evaluation index, thereby establishing the judgment matrix, wherein the specific method comprises the following steps:
quantitatively describing the importance of comparison of two evaluation indexes in the same level, and constructing a judgment matrix A:
Figure BDA0003074380630000031
wherein the content of the first and second substances,
a: judgment matrix
i: evaluation index i
j: evaluation index j
The matrix a satisfies the following condition:
αij>0,
Figure BDA0003074380630000032
αii＝1。
in some embodiments, preferably, S3: calculating the relative weight of each evaluation index: according to the judgment matrix A, carrying out normalization processing on the feature vectors to obtain the weight of each evaluation index; the specific method comprises the following steps:
calculating a maximum eigenvalue lambda max and an eigenvector W according to the judgment matrix A,
normalizing the feature vector W to obtain the weight of each evaluation index, which is as follows:
wherein W ═ W1，w2，w3…，wn)，
And satisfies the following formula:
AW＝λmaxW。
in some embodiments, preferably, in the S3: calculating the relative weight of each evaluation index: according to the judgment matrix, carrying out normalization processing on the feature vectors to obtain the weight of each evaluation index; then, the method also comprises the following steps:
s4: and (3) checking consistency: the reliability and consistency of the judgment matrix are checked;
if the consistency is within the consistency test range, accepting;
and if the judgment matrix is not in the consistency check range, correcting the judgment matrix until the judgment matrix is in the consistency check range.
In some embodiments, it may be preferable, if,
calculating a consistency index CI:
CI＝(λmax-n)/(n-1)
wherein:
CI represents a consistency index;
λ max represents the maximum eigenvalue;
n represents the order of the judgment matrix;
CI reflects the difference in consistency of the current decision matrix:
a higher CI value indicates a poorer consistency; the closer the CI value is to 0, the closer the judgment matrix A is to complete consistency is;
n is the order number of the judgment matrix, namely the number of indexes participating in pairwise comparison, and the larger the value of n is, the larger the index CI deviating from complete consistency is due to subjective judgment; the smaller the value of n, the smaller the deviation caused by subjective factors.
In some embodiments, it is preferred to find and calculate the corresponding average random consensus indicator RI,
calculating the consistency ratio CR:
Figure BDA0003074380630000051
if CR is less than 0.1, the judgment matrix is considered to have satisfactory consistency and is accepted;
if CR is more than or equal to 0.1, the judgment matrix is corrected until the consistency check condition is met.
In some embodiments, preferably, the S5: and scoring the health degree of the energy in the certain area: according to the hierarchical analysis method, determining evaluation indexes and weights of all levels of the hierarchical structure model, and completing the scoring of the health degree of energy in a certain area after consistency check, wherein the specific method comprises the following steps:
s51: calculating the health degree scores of the subsystems of all layers;
s52: calculating the overall score of the evaluation of the health degree of the energy system in a certain area;
s53: and classifying and prompting the overall score.
In some embodiments, preferably, the S51: calculating the health degree evaluation score of each layer of subsystem; the specific calculation formula is as follows:
Figure BDA0003074380630000052
wherein:
Qsa health evaluation score representing a subsystem of a certain floor;
i represents an evaluation index i;
k represents the total number of evaluation indexes of subsystems of a certain layer;
Ps,ia score representing an evaluation index i of the subsystem s;
Ws,iand (3) normalized weight of the evaluation index i of the subsystem s.
In some embodiments, preferably, the S52: calculating the overall score of the health degree of the energy system in a certain area, wherein the specific calculation method comprises the following steps:
calculating the overall score of the energy system health degree evaluation in a certain area according to the health degree evaluation score of the subsystem of each layer and the weight occupied by the subsystem of each layer,
the calculation formula is as follows:
Figure BDA0003074380630000061
wherein:
q represents the overall score of the health degree evaluation of the energy system in a certain area;
s represents the total number of subsystems;
Qsa health evaluation score representing the subsystem s;
wsrepresenting the normalized weight of the subsystem s.
In some embodiments, preferably, the S53: classifying and prompting the overall score:
the scores are divided into 4 grades according to 100 grades:
scores below 60 points suggest "severe abnormalities";
the score is 60-80 points (80 points are not included), and a 'key attention' is prompted;
the score is 80-90 points (no 90 points) indicating "good";
the score is between 90 and 100 points, which indicates 'health'.
The technical scheme provided by the embodiment of the invention has the following beneficial effects:
the invention provides a method for evaluating the health degree of an internal energy source in a region based on a hierarchical analysis method, which is used for evaluating and analyzing the health degree of a subsystem and a comprehensive energy source system by utilizing the hierarchical analysis method aiming at a park comprehensive energy source system coexisting in various energy forms.
It is to be understood that both the foregoing general description and the following detailed description are exemplary and explanatory only and are not restrictive of the invention, as claimed.
Drawings
The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute a part of this specification, illustrate embodiments consistent with the invention and together with the description, serve to explain the principles of the invention.
FIG. 1 is a flow diagram illustrating a method for energy health assessment within a region based on a hierarchical analysis method in accordance with an exemplary embodiment;
FIG. 2 is a flow diagram illustrating optimization of a method for evaluating energy health within a region based on a hierarchical analysis method in accordance with an exemplary embodiment;
FIG. 3 is a hierarchical model diagram illustrating a method for energy health assessment within a region based on a hierarchical analysis method, according to an example embodiment.
Detailed Description
The following description and the drawings sufficiently illustrate specific embodiments of the invention to enable those skilled in the art to practice them. The examples merely typify possible variations. Individual components and functions are optional unless explicitly required, and the sequence of operations may vary. Portions and features of some embodiments may be included in or substituted for those of others. The scope of embodiments of the invention encompasses the full ambit of the claims, as well as all available equivalents of the claims. Embodiments may be referred to herein, individually or collectively, by the term "invention" merely for convenience and without intending to voluntarily limit the scope of this application to any single invention or inventive concept if more than one is in fact disclosed. Herein, relational terms such as first and second, and the like may be used solely to distinguish one entity or action from another entity or action without requiring or implying any actual such relationship or order between such entities or actions. Also, the terms "comprises," "comprising," or any other variation thereof, are intended to cover a non-exclusive inclusion, such that a process, method, or apparatus that comprises a list of elements does not include only those elements but may include other elements not expressly listed. The embodiments are described in a progressive manner, each embodiment focuses on differences from other embodiments, and the same and similar parts among the embodiments are referred to each other. For the structures, products and the like disclosed by the embodiments, the description is relatively simple because the structures, the products and the like correspond to the parts disclosed by the embodiments, and the relevant parts can be just described by referring to the method part.
The invention is further described with reference to the following figures and examples:
as shown in fig. 1, a method for evaluating health degree of energy sources in a region based on a hierarchical analysis method,
s1: establishing a hierarchical structure model: dividing a hierarchical structure model by analyzing various factors of energy in a certain area, namely dividing the hierarchical structure model into different levels, wherein one level is one level, each level is provided with a plurality of subsystems, and each level of subsystem is provided with one or more evaluation indexes; determining the evaluation index of each grade, completing the establishment of a hierarchical structure chart/model,
s2: constructing a judgment matrix: quantitatively describing the importance of comparison of every two evaluation indexes in the same layer according to the hierarchical structure model to obtain the relative importance of each evaluation index so as to construct a judgment matrix; the numerical value in the judgment matrix is determined according to the experience of evaluation analysts, data and research;
s3: calculating the relative weight of each evaluation index: according to the judgment matrix, carrying out normalization processing on the feature vectors to obtain the weight of each evaluation index;
s5: and scoring the health degree of the energy in the certain area: according to the hierarchical analysis method, the evaluation index and the weight of the hierarchy of the hierarchical structure model are determined, and the overall score of the health degree of the energy system in a certain area is calculated, namely the health degree score of the energy system in the certain area is completed.
Wherein the content of the first and second substances,
s2: establishing a judgment matrix, and quantitatively describing the importance of comparison of every two evaluation indexes in the same level according to the hierarchical structure model to obtain the relative importance of each evaluation index, thereby establishing the judgment matrix, wherein the specific method comprises the following steps:
quantitatively describing the importance of comparison of two evaluation indexes in the same level, and constructing a judgment matrix A:
Figure BDA0003074380630000081
wherein the content of the first and second substances,
a: judgment matrix
i: evaluation index i
j: evaluation index i
The matrix a satisfies the following condition:
αij>0,
Figure BDA0003074380630000091
αii＝1。
wherein the content of the first and second substances,
s3: calculating the relative weight of each evaluation index: according to the judgment matrix A, carrying out normalization processing on the feature vectors to obtain the weight of each evaluation index; the specific method comprises the following steps:
calculating a maximum eigenvalue lambda max and an eigenvector W according to the judgment matrix A,
normalizing the feature vector W to obtain the weight of each evaluation index, which is as follows:
wherein W ═ W1，w2，w3…，wn)，
And satisfies the following formula:
AW＝λmaxW。
in some embodiments, as shown in fig. 2, between the steps S3 and S5, the following steps are further included:
s4: and (3) checking consistency: the reliability and consistency of the judgment matrix are checked;
if the consistency is within the consistency test range, accepting;
and if the judgment matrix is not in the consistency check range, correcting the judgment matrix until the judgment matrix is in the consistency check range.
According to the scheme, further, a consistency index CI is calculated:
CI＝(λmax-n)/(n-1)
wherein:
CI represents a consistency index;
λ max represents the maximum eigenvalue;
n represents the order of the judgment matrix;
CI reflects the difference in consistency of the current decision matrix:
a higher CI value indicates a poorer consistency; the closer the CI value is to 0, the closer the judgment matrix A is to complete consistency is;
n is the order number of the judgment matrix, namely the number of indexes participating in pairwise comparison, and the larger the value of n is, the larger the index CI deviating from complete consistency is due to subjective judgment; the smaller the value of n, the smaller the deviation caused by subjective factors.
Searching and calculating corresponding average random consistency index RI, calculating 1000 times by 1-11 order positive and negative matrix to obtain average random consistency index,
calculating the consistency ratio CR:
Figure BDA0003074380630000101
if CR is less than 0.1, the judgment matrix is considered to have satisfactory consistency and is accepted;
if CR is more than or equal to 0.1, correcting the judgment matrix until the consistency check condition is met;
the average random consistency index is a calculated fixed value and only has a relation with the order number of the matrix, and only 1-11 order average random consistency index values are given here, so that the index value is convenient to search in practical application.
Wherein the content of the first and second substances,
s5: and scoring the health degree of the energy in the certain area: according to the hierarchical analysis method, determining evaluation indexes and weights of all levels of the hierarchical structure model, and completing the scoring of the health degree of energy in a certain area after consistency check, wherein the specific method comprises the following steps:
s51: calculating the health degree scores of the subsystems of all layers;
s52: calculating the overall score of the health degree of the energy system in a certain area;
s53: and classifying and prompting the overall score.
Wherein the content of the first and second substances,
s51: calculating the health degree evaluation score of each layer of subsystem; the specific calculation formula is as follows:
Figure BDA0003074380630000102
wherein:
Qsa health evaluation score representing a subsystem of a certain floor;
i represents an evaluation index i;
k represents the total number of evaluation indexes of subsystems of a certain layer;
Ps,ia score representing an evaluation index i of the subsystem s;
Ws,iand (3) normalized weight of the evaluation index i of the subsystem s.
Wherein the content of the first and second substances,
s52: calculating the overall score of the evaluation of the health degree of the energy system in a certain area, wherein the specific calculation method comprises the following steps:
calculating the overall score of the energy system health degree evaluation in a certain area according to the health degree evaluation score of the subsystem of each layer and the weight occupied by the subsystem of each layer,
the calculation formula is as follows:
Figure BDA0003074380630000111
wherein:
q represents the overall score of the health degree evaluation of the energy system in a certain area;
s represents the total number of subsystems;
Qsa health evaluation score representing the subsystem s;
wsrepresenting the normalized weight of the subsystem s.
Wherein the content of the first and second substances,
s53: classifying and prompting the overall score:
the scores are divided into 4 grades according to 100 grades:
scores below 60 points suggest "severe abnormalities";
the score is 60-80 points (80 points are not included), and a 'key attention' is prompted;
the score is 80-90 points (no 90 points) indicating "good";
the score is between 90 and 100 points, which indicates 'health'.
The area or a certain area mentioned in the present application, in some embodiments, may be a comprehensive energy system in some industrial parks, and generally includes a heating system, a power supply system, a cooling system, a water supply system, an air supply system, and the like, and a core problem of health degree evaluation of the comprehensive energy system is how to formulate a scientific and reasonable evaluation index system, which may affect the accuracy of a final evaluation result. According to the characteristics and operation targets of each system, a secondary evaluation index and related sublevel indexes are determined through detailed analysis and demonstration, and the establishment of a hierarchical structure model is completed as shown in table 1.
TABLE 1 comprehensive energy system health evaluation-hierarchy model
Figure BDA0003074380630000121
Under the hierarchical structure model shown in the table above, the idea of comprehensive energy system health degree evaluation is as follows: the first step is that the health degree score of each subsystem is calculated according to each evaluation index of each subsystem and the weight occupied by each evaluation index; and secondly, making an overall score of the health degree of the whole comprehensive energy system according to the health degree scores of the subsystems and the weights corresponding to the subsystems, and making a prompt for health degree evaluation.
The basic idea of the analytic hierarchy process is to decompose a complex problem into various component factors and layer the component factors according to a dominating relation, thereby establishing a clear hierarchical structure model. On the same layer, determining the relative importance of each factor in the layer by means of pairwise comparison, quantizing the judgment scale by using relative scale, establishing corresponding judgment matrixes layer by layer, and finally determining the weight coefficient of each factor by solving the normalized eigenvector corresponding to the maximum eigenvalue of the judgment matrix.
The method mainly comprises the following steps:
1. building a hierarchical model
Various factors in the complex problem are organized, organized and layered by dividing the interconnected ordered layers, and a hierarchical structure model is established. The evaluation indexes of each level are determined, and a hierarchical evaluation structure diagram is established as shown in fig. 3.
2. Constructing a decision matrix
The hierarchical structure model reflects the relationship among all factors, but the proportion of the evaluation indexes in all index layers in the target measurement is not necessarily the same. Therefore, the importance of comparing two factors in the same level needs to be quantitatively described according to experience and subjective judgment on certain objective reality, so as to obtain the relative importance of a single evaluation index, thereby constructing a judgment matrix. The magnitude of the numerical value in the judgment matrix is determined after repeated research mainly according to the experience of evaluation analysts, data and the like. Each element in the matrix reflects the importance of the element in the layer relative to each evaluation index in the previous layer.
In order to convert the comparison problem of each complex feature into a simple comparison of two factors, the present embodiment compares two factors with each other to obtain a quantitative determination matrix, determines a scale rule for comparing the two factors, and introduces a data scale index and a meaning, as shown in table 2.
TABLE 2 Scale rules for two factor comparison
Data scale aij Means of
1 The i factor is equally important as the j factor
3 i factor is slightly more important than j factor
5 The i factor is more important than the j factor
7 The i factor is more important than the j factor
9 The i factor is more important than the j factor
2，4，6，8 Is a scale value corresponding to an intermediate state between the above judgments
Reciprocal of the If the j factor is compared with the i factor, the result isUntil the judgment value is aji＝1/aij
According to the scale rule of the comparison of the two factors shown in the table above, a pair-wise discrimination judgment matrix can be constructed as follows:
Figure BDA0003074380630000141
according to the above discrimination rules, it can be seen that the matrix a satisfies the following condition:
αij>0,
Figure BDA0003074380630000142
αii＝1
3. calculating relative weight of each evaluation index
And calculating the maximum eigenvalue lambda max and the eigenvector W according to the judgment matrix A. W is the corresponding normalized feature vector, W ═ W1，w2，w3…，wn) The following formula is satisfied.
AW＝λmaxW
And carrying out normalization processing on the feature vectors to obtain the weight of each evaluation index.
4. Hierarchical consistency check
Since the comparison values in the decision matrix are determined by experts based on subjective factors, logic errors like "a is more important than B, B is more important than C, and C is more important than a" may occur, and thus a consistency check is required to evaluate the reliability of the matrix. The steps of the consistency check are as follows:
first, a consistency index CI is calculated:
CI＝(λmax-n)/(-1)
wherein:
CI represents a consistency index;
λ max represents the maximum eigenvalue;
n represents the order of the judgment matrix;
CI reflects the difference in consistency of the current decision matrix:
a higher CI value indicates a poorer consistency; a CI value closer to 0 indicates that the decision matrix is closer to perfect agreement. In the formula, n is the order of the judgment matrix, namely the number of indexes participating in pairwise comparison. The larger the value of n is, the larger the index CI deviating from complete consistency due to subjective judgment is; the smaller the value of n, the smaller the deviation caused by subjective factors.
Then, the corresponding average random consistency index RI is searched. The average random consistency index is a calculated fixed value and only has a relation with the order number of the matrix, and only 1-11 order average random consistency index values are given here, so that the index value is convenient to search in practical application. The average random consistency index obtained by calculating 1000 times by the 1-11 order positive and inverse matrix is detailed in table 3.
TABLE 3 average random consistency index
n 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
RI 0 0 0.58 0.90 1.12 1.24 1.32 1.41 1.45 1.49 1.51
Finally, the consistency ratio CR is calculated:
Figure BDA0003074380630000151
if CR is less than 0.1, the judgment matrix is considered to have satisfactory consistency and can be accepted;
if CR is more than or equal to 0.1, the judgment matrix should be properly corrected until the consistency check condition is met.
5. Calculating health degree scores of all subsystems
And after the weights of the evaluation indexes are calculated according to the analytic hierarchy process, substituting the corresponding weight coefficients into a subsystem health degree calculation formula to respectively calculate the comprehensive evaluation score of each subsystem. And comparing the health degree evaluation score of the subsystem with the alarm area score section, and making corresponding alarm prompt information.
The calculation formula is as follows:
Figure BDA0003074380630000152
wherein:
Qsrepresenting a health evaluation score of a subsystem;
k represents the total number of the subsystem evaluation indexes;
Ps，iindicating the evaluation score of the index of the subsystem i;
ws，irepresenting the normalized weight of the i index.
6. Overall score for health evaluation of park integrated energy system
And calculating the health degree scores and the weights of the subsystems according to a comprehensive energy system health degree evaluation calculation formula to obtain the overall score of the health degree evaluation of the park comprehensive energy system evaluation, and giving corresponding prompt or alarm information according to the overall score condition of the health degree evaluation.
The calculation formula is as follows:
Figure BDA0003074380630000161
wherein:
q represents the overall score of the health evaluation of the park integrated energy system;
s represents the total number of subsystems;
Qsa health evaluation score representing the subsystem s;
wsrepresenting the normalized weight of the subsystem s.
7. System health score evaluation prompt
In the invention, the overall score of the health degree evaluation of the subsystem and the comprehensive energy system is divided according to 100 grades. According to the overall score result of the health degree evaluation of the subsystems and the comprehensive energy system, the evaluation is divided into 4 grades:
scores below 60 points suggest "severe abnormalities";
the score is 60-80 points (80 points are not included), and a 'key attention' is prompted;
the score is 80-90 points (no 90 points) indicating "good";
the score is between 90 and 100 points, which indicates 'health'.
Example 1
A method for evaluating the health degree of an energy source in a region based on a hierarchical analysis method comprises the following specific implementation methods:
1. structural judgment matrix
And aiming at the hierarchical structure model of the park comprehensive energy system, calculating the health degree weight of the park comprehensive energy system by applying the basic principle and method steps of an analytic hierarchy process. The evaluation indexes of the subsystems A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5 form a judgment matrix A for the park layer, and the numerical value of the judgment matrix is determined by repeated research mainly according to data and the experience of evaluation analysts.
Figure BDA0003074380630000171
The value of each evaluation index in the matrix A reflects the analysis and judgment of the difference of the importance degree of the relative factor pairwise comparison by the evaluator.
According to the method, the judgment matrixes respectively formed by the factors of the performance index layer corresponding to the evaluation index conditions of the subsystem layer can be obtained.
Figure BDA0003074380630000172
Figure BDA0003074380630000173
Figure BDA0003074380630000174
Figure BDA0003074380630000175
Figure BDA0003074380630000176
The evaluation values of the evaluation indexes in the judgment matrix A1-A5 also reflect the analysis and judgment of the difference of the importance degree of the relative factor pairwise comparison by the evaluation personnel.
2. Computing maximum eigenvectors
Approximate solutions of the maximum eigenvectors of the decision matrix A and A1-A5 are calculated respectively:
wA＝(0.489，0.233，0.086，0.140，0.051)T
wA1＝(0.572，0.109，0.209，0.109)T
wA2＝(0.539，0.297，0.164)T
wA3＝(0.572，0.109，0.209，0.109)T
wA4＝(0.539，0.297，0.164)T
wA5＝(0.539，0.297，0.164)T
3. consistency check
And respectively carrying out consistency check on each judgment matrix, wherein the random consistency ratio CR value of each judgment matrix is as follows:
CRA＝0.017＜0.1
CRA1＝0.001＜0.1
CRA2＝0.004＜0.1
CRA3＝0.001＜0.1
CRA4＝0.004＜0.1
CRA5＝0.004＜0.1
the above results indicate that the comparison decision matrices A and A1-A5 both pass the consistency check and have acceptable consistency.
4. Calculating the evaluation score of the health degree of each subsystem
According to the formula:
Figure BDA0003074380630000181
the scores for each subsystem were calculated as follows:
Qs1＝0.572×88+0.109×90+0.209×85+0.109×92＝87.94
Qs2＝0.539×85+0.297×90+0.164×87＝86.81
Qs3＝0.572×90+0.109×86+0.209×85+0.109×84＝87.78
Qs4＝0.539×75+0.297×80+0.164×74＝76.32
Qs5＝0.539×82+0.297×80+0.164×78＝80.75
5. calculating an overall score for the evaluation of the health of the integrated energy system
Qs5＝0.489×87.94+0.233×86.81+0.086×87.78+0.140×76.32+0.051×80.75＝85.58
6. Presentation of overall score for system health assessment
The evaluation of the health degree of the comprehensive energy system is 85.58 points and is between 80 and 90 points, so that the evaluation of the health degree of the system is indicated to be 'good'.
The method comprises the steps of establishing a health degree evaluation system of each subsystem in the park comprehensive energy system by a hierarchical analysis method, establishing an evaluation system of the park comprehensive energy system by taking evaluation results of each subsystem as a basis, and carrying out overall evaluation on the whole comprehensive energy system.
It is to be understood that the present invention is not limited to the procedures and structures described above and shown in the drawings, and that various modifications and changes may be made without departing from the scope thereof. The scope of the invention is limited only by the appended claims.

Claims (10)

1. A method for evaluating the health degree of energy sources in a region based on a hierarchical analysis method is characterized in that,
s1: establishing a hierarchical structure model: dividing a hierarchical structure model by analyzing various factors of energy in a certain area, namely dividing the hierarchical structure model into different levels, wherein one level is one level, each level is provided with a plurality of subsystems, and each level of subsystem is provided with one or more evaluation indexes; determining the evaluation indexes of all levels to finish establishing a hierarchical structure chart/model;
s2: constructing a judgment matrix: quantitatively describing the importance of comparison of every two evaluation indexes in the same layer according to the hierarchical structure model to obtain the relative importance of each evaluation index so as to construct a judgment matrix; the numerical value in the judgment matrix is determined according to the experience of evaluation analysts, data and research;
s3: calculating the relative weight of each evaluation index: according to the judgment matrix, carrying out normalization processing on the feature vectors to obtain the weight of each evaluation index;
s5: and scoring the health degree of the energy in the certain area: according to the method of S1-S3, the evaluation indexes and the weights of the levels of the hierarchical structure model are determined, and the overall score of the health degree of the energy system in a certain area is calculated, namely the health degree score of the energy system in the certain area is completed.
2. The method for evaluating energy source health degree in an area based on a hierarchical analysis method according to claim 1, wherein the step S2: constructing a judgment matrix: quantitatively describing the importance of comparing every two evaluation indexes in the same level according to the hierarchical structure model to obtain the relative importance of each evaluation index so as to construct a judgment matrix, wherein the specific method comprises the following steps:
quantitatively describing the importance of comparing two evaluation indexes in the same level, and constructing a judgment matrix:
Figure FDA0003074380620000011
wherein the content of the first and second substances,
a: judgment matrix
i: evaluation index i
j: evaluation index j
The matrix a satisfies the following condition:
Figure FDA0003074380620000021
3. the method for evaluating the health degree of an energy source in an area based on a hierarchical analysis method according to claim 2, wherein the step of S3: calculating the relative weight of each evaluation index: according to the judgment matrix, carrying out normalization processing on the feature vectors to obtain the weight of each evaluation index; the specific method comprises the following steps:
calculating a maximum eigenvalue max and an eigenvector W according to the judgment matrix A,
normalizing the feature vector W to obtain the weight of each evaluation index, which is as follows:
wherein W ═ W1，w2，w3...，wn)，
And satisfies the following formula:
AW＝λmaxW。
4. the method for evaluating energy source health degree in a region based on a hierarchical analysis method according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein in the step S3: calculating the relative weight of each evaluation index: according to the judgment matrix, carrying out normalization processing on the feature vectors to obtain the weight of each evaluation index; then, the method also comprises the following steps:
s4: and (3) checking consistency: the reliability and consistency of the judgment matrix are checked;
if the consistency is within the consistency test range, accepting;
and if the judgment matrix is not in the consistency check range, correcting the judgment matrix until the judgment matrix is in the consistency check range.
5. The method for evaluating energy source health degree in an area based on a hierarchical analysis method according to claim 4,
calculating a consistency index CI:
CI ═ i (in)max-n)/(n-1)
Wherein:
CI represents a consistency index;
λ max represents the maximum eigenvalue;
n represents the order of the judgment matrix;
the CI reflects the difference that the current judgment matrix reaches the consistency;
a higher CI value indicates a poorer consistency; the closer the CI value is to 0, the closer the judgment matrix A is to complete consistency is;
n is the order number of the judgment matrix, namely the number of indexes participating in pairwise comparison, and the larger the value of n is, the larger the index CI deviating from complete consistency is due to subjective judgment; the smaller the value of n, the smaller the deviation caused by subjective factors.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein the corresponding average random consistency index RI is searched and calculated,
calculating the consistency ratio CR:
Figure FDA0003074380620000031
if CR is less than 0.1, the judgment matrix is considered to have satisfactory consistency and is accepted;
if CR is more than or equal to 0.1, the judgment matrix is corrected until the consistency check condition is met.
7. The method for evaluating energy source health degree in a region based on a hierarchical analysis method according to claim 5, wherein the step S5: and scoring the health degree of the energy in the certain area: according to the hierarchical analysis method, determining evaluation indexes and weights of all levels of the hierarchical structure model, and completing the scoring of the health degree of energy in a certain area after consistency check, wherein the specific method comprises the following steps:
s51: calculating the health degree scores of the subsystems of all layers;
s52: calculating the overall score of the evaluation of the health degree of the energy system in a certain area;
s53: and classifying and prompting the overall score.
8. The method for evaluating energy source health degree in a region based on a hierarchical analysis method according to claim 7, wherein the step S51: calculating the health degree evaluation score of each layer of subsystem; the specific calculation formula is as follows:
Figure FDA0003074380620000032
wherein:
Qsa health evaluation score representing a subsystem of a certain floor;
i represents an evaluation index i;
k represents the total number of evaluation indexes of subsystems of a certain layer;
Ps,ia score representing an evaluation index i of the subsystem s;
Ws,iand (3) normalized weight of the evaluation index i of the subsystem s.
9. The method for evaluating energy source health degree in a region based on a hierarchical analysis method according to claim 8, wherein the step S52: calculating the overall score of the health degree of the energy system in a certain area, wherein the specific calculation method comprises the following steps:
calculating the overall score of the energy system health degree evaluation in a certain area according to the health degree evaluation score of the subsystem of each layer and the weight occupied by the subsystem of each layer,
the calculation formula is as follows:
Figure FDA0003074380620000041
wherein:
q represents the overall score of the health degree evaluation of the energy system in a certain area;
s represents the total number of subsystems;
Qsa health evaluation score representing the subsystem s;
wsrepresenting the normalized weight of the subsystem s.
10. The method for evaluating energy source health degree in a region based on a hierarchical analysis method according to claim 9, wherein the step S53: classifying and prompting the overall score:
the scores are divided into 4 grades according to 100 grades:
scores below 60 points suggest "severe abnormalities";
the score is 60-80 points (80 points are not included), and a 'key attention' is prompted;
the score is 80-90 points (no 90 points) indicating "good";
the score is between 90 and 100 points, which indicates 'health'.
CN202110548437.9A 2021-05-19 2021-05-19 Regional energy health evaluation method based on analytic hierarchy process Active CN113139701B (en)

Priority Applications (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
CN202110548437.9A CN113139701B (en) 2021-05-19 2021-05-19 Regional energy health evaluation method based on analytic hierarchy process

Applications Claiming Priority (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
CN202110548437.9A CN113139701B (en) 2021-05-19 2021-05-19 Regional energy health evaluation method based on analytic hierarchy process

Publications (2)

Publication Number Publication Date
CN113139701A true CN113139701A (en) 2021-07-20
CN113139701B CN113139701B (en) 2024-01-19

Family

ID=76817371

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
CN202110548437.9A Active CN113139701B (en) 2021-05-19 2021-05-19 Regional energy health evaluation method based on analytic hierarchy process

Country Status (1)

Country Link
CN (1) CN113139701B (en)

Cited By (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN116090872A (en) * 2022-12-07 2023-05-09 湖北华中电力科技开发有限责任公司 Power distribution area health state evaluation method
CN116521517A (en) * 2023-02-09 2023-08-01 海看网络科技(山东)股份有限公司 IPTV system health degree assessment method based on service topology multi-model fusion

Citations (12)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US20070269557A1 (en) * 2006-05-19 2007-11-22 Hannaford Licensing Corp. Method and system for assessing, scoring, grouping and presenting nutritional value information of food products
CN102034214A (en) * 2010-12-20 2011-04-27 上海勘测设计研究院 Health evaluation method for eutrophic lakes
US20110139871A1 (en) * 2009-12-15 2011-06-16 Carefusion 303, Inc. Methods and systems for tracking inventory using an rfid tag tape
CN103065050A (en) * 2012-12-31 2013-04-24 河南省电力公司电力科学研究院 Health level judging method of information system during operation maintenance period
CN104778359A (en) * 2015-04-10 2015-07-15 中国科学院植物研究所 Method for evaluating health condition and human-induced restoration effect of mangrove forest and application thereof
US20150370986A1 (en) * 2014-06-20 2015-12-24 William E. Hayward Estimating impact of property on individual health - property score
CN105205590A (en) * 2015-09-01 2015-12-30 深圳供电局有限公司 Transformer health state analysis method and system
CN107483240A (en) * 2017-08-07 2017-12-15 国网安徽省电力公司淮北供电公司 Power communication network service health degree analysis method based on Internet resources incidence relation
US20180182490A1 (en) * 2016-12-22 2018-06-28 Basehealth, Inc. Scoring and Mitigating Health Risks
CN110001713A (en) * 2019-04-12 2019-07-12 卡斯柯信号有限公司 The method and device of the detection of meter shaft magnetic head health degree and early warning based on AHP
CN110070461A (en) * 2019-04-17 2019-07-30 南瑞集团有限公司 A kind of power information system health degree appraisal procedure and its assessment system
CN112200405A (en) * 2020-08-27 2021-01-08 国网浙江省电力有限公司电力科学研究院 Special transformer health condition assessment method based on entropy weight-fuzzy analytic hierarchy process

Patent Citations (12)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US20070269557A1 (en) * 2006-05-19 2007-11-22 Hannaford Licensing Corp. Method and system for assessing, scoring, grouping and presenting nutritional value information of food products
US20110139871A1 (en) * 2009-12-15 2011-06-16 Carefusion 303, Inc. Methods and systems for tracking inventory using an rfid tag tape
CN102034214A (en) * 2010-12-20 2011-04-27 上海勘测设计研究院 Health evaluation method for eutrophic lakes
CN103065050A (en) * 2012-12-31 2013-04-24 河南省电力公司电力科学研究院 Health level judging method of information system during operation maintenance period
US20150370986A1 (en) * 2014-06-20 2015-12-24 William E. Hayward Estimating impact of property on individual health - property score
CN104778359A (en) * 2015-04-10 2015-07-15 中国科学院植物研究所 Method for evaluating health condition and human-induced restoration effect of mangrove forest and application thereof
CN105205590A (en) * 2015-09-01 2015-12-30 深圳供电局有限公司 Transformer health state analysis method and system
US20180182490A1 (en) * 2016-12-22 2018-06-28 Basehealth, Inc. Scoring and Mitigating Health Risks
CN107483240A (en) * 2017-08-07 2017-12-15 国网安徽省电力公司淮北供电公司 Power communication network service health degree analysis method based on Internet resources incidence relation
CN110001713A (en) * 2019-04-12 2019-07-12 卡斯柯信号有限公司 The method and device of the detection of meter shaft magnetic head health degree and early warning based on AHP
CN110070461A (en) * 2019-04-17 2019-07-30 南瑞集团有限公司 A kind of power information system health degree appraisal procedure and its assessment system
CN112200405A (en) * 2020-08-27 2021-01-08 国网浙江省电力有限公司电力科学研究院 Special transformer health condition assessment method based on entropy weight-fuzzy analytic hierarchy process

Cited By (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN116090872A (en) * 2022-12-07 2023-05-09 湖北华中电力科技开发有限责任公司 Power distribution area health state evaluation method
CN116521517A (en) * 2023-02-09 2023-08-01 海看网络科技(山东)股份有限公司 IPTV system health degree assessment method based on service topology multi-model fusion

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
CN113139701B (en) 2024-01-19

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
WO2018053935A1 (en) Failure mode occurrence probability based operating status fuzzy evaluation and prediction method for rotating device
CN116150897A (en) Machine tool spindle performance evaluation method and system based on digital twin
CN113139701A (en) Regional energy source health degree evaluation method based on hierarchical analysis method
CN111815136A (en) Modeling method for full life cycle maturity of aviation product
CN111882198A (en) Project performance evaluation method and system
CN112215512A (en) Comprehensive evaluation index weight quantification method and system considering functional characteristics of microgrid
CN113869732A (en) Scientific and technological project industrialization evaluation method based on factor analysis method
CN109460926A (en) Platform area group of assets comprehensive performance evaluation method based on analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and Information Entropy
CN113627735A (en) Early warning method and system for safety risk of engineering construction project
CN112488565A (en) Oversea engineering project risk evaluation method based on matter element extension
CN114881490A (en) Transformer substation green construction evaluation method and system
CN114757392A (en) Power grid system comprehensive evaluation index system optimization method based on game weight method
CN110851784A (en) Early warning method for field operation of electric energy meter
CN111932081B (en) Method and system for evaluating running state of power information system
CN112950048A (en) National higher education system health evaluation based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation
CN111091301A (en) Optimization method for provincial power grid sustainable development strategy
CN107239907B (en) Method, device and system for evaluating comprehensive disaster bearing capacity of town
CN113177748B (en) Gas transmission pipeline earthquake damage evaluation method
CN109657967A (en) A kind of confirmation method and system of Transmission Expansion Planning in Electric evaluating indexesto scheme weight
CN114912744A (en) Optimization evaluation method for town sewage treatment facilities
CN114612119A (en) Supplier risk early warning system based on analytic hierarchy process and ordered weighting operator
CN113722195A (en) Local area network operation evaluation system and method based on AHP (advanced health process) hierarchy analysis method
CN114764741A (en) Method and system for predicting running wind power of wind driven generator
CN114707784A (en) Weight determination method and system based on combined weighting method
CN111144604B (en) Recommendation method and device for operation and maintenance traffic scheme of offshore wind farm

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
PB01 Publication
PB01 Publication
SE01 Entry into force of request for substantive examination
SE01 Entry into force of request for substantive examination
GR01 Patent grant
GR01 Patent grant