CN115587703A - Limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method - Google Patents
Limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN115587703A CN115587703A CN202211257919.XA CN202211257919A CN115587703A CN 115587703 A CN115587703 A CN 115587703A CN 202211257919 A CN202211257919 A CN 202211257919A CN 115587703 A CN115587703 A CN 115587703A
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- factor
- evaluation
- mine
- layer
- factors
- 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.)
- Pending
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
- G06Q10/06—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
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F17/00—Digital computing or data processing equipment or methods, specially adapted for specific functions
- G06F17/10—Complex mathematical operations
- G06F17/16—Matrix or vector computation, e.g. matrix-matrix or matrix-vector multiplication, matrix factorization
Landscapes
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Mathematical Physics (AREA)
- Strategic Management (AREA)
- Computational Mathematics (AREA)
- Data Mining & Analysis (AREA)
- Pure & Applied Mathematics (AREA)
- Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
- Mathematical Optimization (AREA)
- Economics (AREA)
- Mathematical Analysis (AREA)
- Educational Administration (AREA)
- Development Economics (AREA)
- Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
- Computing Systems (AREA)
- General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
- Quality & Reliability (AREA)
- Operations Research (AREA)
- Algebra (AREA)
- Marketing (AREA)
- Databases & Information Systems (AREA)
- Software Systems (AREA)
- General Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)
Abstract
The invention relates to the technical field of mine ecological regreening, in particular to a limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method. Meanwhile, an evaluation method combining an analytic hierarchy process and fuzzy mathematics is adopted, the subjectivity of an expert scoring method is avoided for evaluation results, the evaluation results of the limestone mine ecological management restoration quality are more real, the evaluation method is convenient to understand, the operation is simpler and more convenient, and the operability is strong.
Description
Technical Field
The invention relates to the technical field of mine ecological greening, in particular to a limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method.
Background
Mineral resources are an important foundation for social and economic development, limestone mining is mostly used as building materials, and long-term mining causes a plurality of mine geological environment problems such as land occupation and damage, landscape damage, geological disasters and the like, thereby generating great damage to ecological environment and land resources.
At present, the method for treating the mine geological damage environment problem by adopting the mine ecological restoration technology is an effective means and is also a key link which cannot be lost in the mine ecological restoration. However, in reality, when the mine geological environment problem is treated, applicability, harmony and correspondence of the ecological restoration technology and various conditions such as geological environment damage type in a mining area, geological conditions, difference of micro landforms, slope lithologic conditions and the like are rarely considered, so that the treatment and restoration method has unicity, one-sidedness and blindness, the scientific performance is poor, the ecological restoration effect is poor, the mine exposure condition is not improved, the possibility of geological disaster reoccurrence is low, and a large amount of fund waste is caused.
Disclosure of Invention
The invention aims to provide a limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method which is used for guiding the restoration treatment of the limestone mine geological environment problem and avoiding the technical problem of subjectivity in the evaluation result scoring by adopting an expert alone.
In order to achieve the purpose, the invention provides a limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method, which comprises the following steps:
constructing a limestone mine ecological management and restoration difficulty and easiness evaluation index model;
determining the weight of the evaluation factor by using an analytic hierarchy process;
and comprehensively judging the target to be evaluated by adopting a fuzzy mathematical method.
The limestone mine ecological management and restoration difficulty and easiness evaluation index model comprises a target layer, a criterion layer and an index factor layer, the target layer is constructed by combining the background and experience of the limestone mine ecological management and restoration field, the criterion layer forms a first-level factor influencing the target layer, and the index factor layer forms a second-level factor influencing the target layer.
The evaluation factors of the criterion layers consist of limestone mine slope conditions, mine geological disasters and terrain landscape destruction, and each criterion layer corresponds to the evaluation factor of the index factor layer.
The evaluation factors of the index factor layer comprise mine slope height, mine slope angle, mine slope type, mine dangerous rock, mine unstable slope, terrain and landform damage and land occupation and damage, wherein the evaluation factors corresponding to the limestone mine slope condition comprise the mine slope height, the mine slope angle and the mine slope type; the evaluation factors corresponding to the mine geological disaster are mine dangerous rocks and mine unstable slopes; and the evaluation factors corresponding to the landform landscape destruction are landform destruction and land occupation and damage.
The evaluation factors of the index factor layer are divided into qualitative factors and quantitative factors, wherein the quantitative factors comprise mine side slope height, mine side slope angle, mine unstable slope, terrain and landform damage and land occupation and damage, and the evaluation factors of each quantitative factor are divided into grades according to respective attributes.
The process for determining the weight of the evaluation factor by using the analytic hierarchy process comprises the following steps:
judging by adopting a 1-9 scale method, and constructing a comparison scale according to the relative importance of the evaluation factors;
establishing a comparison judgment matrix for the evaluation factors through scoring;
finding the maximum characteristic root lambda of its matrix max Calculating and sequencing importance index factors by using the characteristic vector omega;
checking whether the constructed judgment matrix conforms to consistency check;
and calculating to obtain the weight of the comprehensive evaluation factor.
The process of establishing the comparison judgment matrix is specifically to compare the criterion layer comparison matrix with the target layer and the index factor layer to obtain a comparison matrix.
Wherein, in the process of constructing the comparison judgment matrix, the comparison scale value comprises a reciprocal besides natural numbers of 1-9, and the reciprocal means that if the ratio of the importance of the elements i to j is a ij Then the ratio of the importance of elements j to i is a ij ＝1/a ij 。
The process of comprehensively judging the target to be evaluated by adopting a fuzzy mathematical method comprises the following steps:
determining a membership matrix, determining the membership of the qualitative factors by adopting a percentage statistical method, obtaining a qualitative factor comment set by adopting a scoring method for the qualitative factors, and calculating the qualitative factor comment set through a membership function; the quantitative factor adopts a semi-trapezoidal distribution function as a membership function, and the membership is determined;
determining a set of rating criteria
Wherein G is ij (i =1,2, \8230;, n; j =1,2, \8230;, m) is the evaluation criterion, n is the number of factors, and m is the evaluation criterion dimension;
and evaluating the target to be evaluated by adopting a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method.
The process of evaluating the target to be evaluated by adopting the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method comprises the following steps:
step 1: establishing a criterion layer and factor weight sets W of the criterion layer i (ii) a Let criterion layer B = { B = 1 ,B 2 ,B 3 ,…,B n H, criterion layer factor B: weight set W = { W = { W i1 ,W i2 ,W i3 ,…,W in } T Finger criteria layer refers to B i (ii) a The importance of each factor in the index factor layer to the criterion layer factor B is 0<ω ip <1 wherein
Wherein, p =1,2, \8230k; k is a criterion layer factor B; the number of each factor in the index factor layer;
and 2, step: and carrying out fuzzy comprehensive evaluation on the factors of the criterion layer, wherein a single-factor membership matrix of the comprehensive evaluation is as follows:
the comprehensive evaluation membership matrix D is as follows:
the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation set of the i-th factor is as follows:
finally, obtaining a factor comprehensive evaluation result of the criterion layer:
and step 3: carrying out fuzzy comprehensive evaluation on the factors of the target layer:
the invention provides a limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method, which comprises the steps of constructing a limestone mine ecological treatment repair difficulty evaluation index model, determining evaluation factor weight by using an analytic hierarchy process, and comprehensively evaluating a target to be evaluated by using a fuzzy mathematical method, wherein the limestone mine ecological treatment repair difficulty evaluation index model comprises a target layer, a criterion layer and an index factor layer, the comprehensive evaluation factor in the invention comprises qualitative and quantitative factors, and the factor composition is reasonable. Meanwhile, an evaluation method combining an analytic hierarchy process and fuzzy mathematics is adopted, the subjectivity of an expert scoring method is avoided for the evaluation result, the evaluation result of the ecological treatment restoration quality of the limestone mine is more real, the evaluation method is convenient to understand, the operation is simpler and more convenient, and the operability is strong.
Drawings
In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the drawings used in the embodiments or the prior art descriptions will be briefly described below, it is obvious that the drawings in the following description are only some embodiments of the present invention, and other drawings can be obtained by those skilled in the art without creative efforts.
FIG. 1 is a schematic flow chart of the limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method.
FIG. 2 is a schematic flow chart of a hierarchical analysis-fuzzy mathematics comprehensive evaluation model used in an embodiment of the present invention.
Detailed Description
Reference will now be made in detail to embodiments of the present invention, examples of which are illustrated in the accompanying drawings, wherein like reference numerals refer to the same or similar elements or elements having the same or similar functions throughout. The embodiments described below with reference to the accompanying drawings are illustrative and intended to explain the present invention and should not be construed as limiting the present invention.
Referring to fig. 1, the invention provides a limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method, which comprises the following steps:
s1: constructing a limestone mine ecological management restoration difficulty and easiness evaluation index model;
s2: determining the weight of the evaluation factor by using an analytic hierarchy process;
s3: and comprehensively judging the target to be evaluated by adopting a fuzzy mathematical method.
In the step S1, the limestone mine ecological management restoration difficulty evaluation index model is composed of a target layer (A), a criterion layer (B) and an index factor layer (C); the criterion layer (B) forms a primary factor influencing the target layer (A), and the index factor layer (C) forms a secondary factor influencing the target layer (A); constructing a target layer (A) according to relevant standard standards and by combining with relevant backgrounds and experiences in the field of ecological management and restoration of limestone mines; determining the number of evaluation factor items of the criterion layer (B) and the number of evaluation factor items of the index factor layer (C) corresponding to each criterion layer (B) by analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of the existing evaluation factors; and the evaluation factors of the index factor layer (C) include qualitative factors and quantitative factors.
The evaluation factors of the criterion layer (B) consist of limestone mine slope conditions (B1), mine geological disasters (B2) and landform landscape destruction (B3); the evaluation factors of the index factor layer (C) consist of mine side slope height (C1), mine side slope angle (C2), mine side slope type (C3), mine dangerous rock (C4), mine unstable slope (C5), landform damage (C6) and land occupation and damage (C7); wherein the evaluation factors of the index factor layer (C) corresponding to the limestone mine slope body condition (B1) are mine side slope body height (C1), mine side slope body angle (C2) and mine side slope body type (C3), the evaluation factors of the index factor layer (C) corresponding to the mine geological disaster (B2) are mine dangerous rock (C4) and mine unstable slope (C5), the evaluation factors of the index factor layer (C) corresponding to the landform landscape damage (B3) are landform damage (C6) and land occupation and damage (C7), the quantitative factors comprise mine side slope body height (C1), mine body angle (C2), mine unstable slope (C5), landform damage (C6), land occupation and damage (C7), the mine side slope body height (C1), the mine side slope body angle (C2), the mine unstable slope (C5), the land occupation and damage (C6), the land occupation and damage (C7), the mine side slope body height (C1), the mine side slope body angle (C2), the mine unstable slope land occupation and the land occupation and damage (C7) are respectively divided according to the mine side slope body height (C1) and the mine side slope degree (C10, the general factor is 10-30 m, the highest factor is more than 30m, the lowest factor of the mine slope body angle (C2) is not more than 30 degrees, the general factor is 30-50 degrees, the highest factor is 90 degrees, the lowest factor of the mine unstable slope (C5) is not more than 100m3, the general factor is 100m 3-200 m3, the highest factor is more than 200m3, the terrain damage (C6) is the value of the mine right on the aspect ratio of the actual damage area of the terrain, the lowest factor is not more than 9 percent, the general factor is 9-30 percent, the highest factor is more than 30 percent, the land occupation and damage (C7) is the ratio of the single occupation area to the total occupation area, the lowest factor is not more than 3 percent, the general factor is 3-7 m, and the highest factor is more than 7 percent. Thereby forming an accurate evaluation result according to the quantitative factor.
In step S2, the process of determining the evaluation factor weight by using the analytic hierarchy process includes the following steps:
s21: judging by adopting a 1-9 scale method, and constructing a comparison scale according to the relative importance of the evaluation factors;
s22: establishing a comparison judgment matrix for the evaluation factors through scoring;
s23: solving the maximum characteristic root and the characteristic vector of the matrix, calculating importance index factors and sequencing;
s24: checking whether the constructed judgment matrix conforms to consistency check;
s25: and calculating to obtain the weight of the comprehensive evaluation factor.
In the constructed comparison and judgment matrix, the comparison scale value comprises a reciprocal besides natural numbers of 1-9, wherein the reciprocal means that if the importance ratio of the elements i to j is a ij Then the ratio of the importance of the elements j to i is a ij ＝1/a ij (ii) a The elements of the criterion layer information and the index factor layer information are evaluated respectively, and a comparison relation of ' 8230 ' \ 8230 '; more important than ' 8230 '; exists between index factors of the same layer is established. An evaluation scale table is established as shown in table 1:
TABLE 1 evaluation ruler-Table
The established comparison judgment matrix is obtained by comparing the comparison matrix of the criterion layer (B) with the comparison matrix of the target layer (A) and the comparison matrix of the index factor layer (C); the step of calculating the comprehensive evaluation factor weight includes calculating the weight of the index factor layer (C) with respect to the criterion layer (B) and the weight with respect to the target layer (a).
In step S24, the following check formula is used to check the consistency of the judgment matrix: CR = CI/RI;
wherein, CR is a random consistency ratio; CI is a general consistency factor, and CI is obtained by the following formula: CI = (λ) max -n)/(n-1)；
In the formula, RI is an average random consistency factor; n is the order of the matrix natural number; RI values established by the analytic hierarchy process are shown in Table 2 below;
TABLE 2 RI values established by analytic hierarchy process
| 0 | 0 | 0.58 | 0.90 | 1.12 | 1.24 | 1.32 | 1.41 | 1.45 |
Further, in step S3, the step of performing comprehensive evaluation on the target to be evaluated by using a fuzzy mathematical method includes:
s31: determining a membership matrix, determining the membership of the qualitative factors by adopting a percentage statistical method, obtaining a qualitative factor comment set by adopting a scoring method for the qualitative factors, and calculating the qualitative factor comment set through a membership function; the quantitative factor adopts a semi-trapezoidal distribution function as a membership function to determine the membership;
s32: determining a set of rating criteria
Wherein, G ij (i =1,2, \8230;, n; j =1,2, \8230;, m) is the evaluation criterion, n is the number of factors, and m is the evaluation criterion dimension;
s33: the process of evaluating the target to be evaluated by adopting the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method comprises the following steps:
in a first step, a criterion layer (B) and a set of factor weights W for the criterion layer (B) are established i (ii) a Let criterion layer B = { B = { (B) 1 ,B 2 ,B 3 ,…,B n H, criterion layer factor B: set of weights W = { W = { (W) i1 ,W i2 ,W i3 ,…,W in } T Finger level B i (ii) a The importance of each factor in the index factor layer (C) to the criterion layer factor B is 0<ω ip <1, wherein
Wherein, p =1,2, \8230k; k is a criterion layer factor B; the number of each factor in the index factor layer (C) contained;
and secondly, carrying out fuzzy comprehensive evaluation on the factors of the criterion layer (B), wherein a single-factor membership matrix of the comprehensive evaluation is as follows:
the comprehensive evaluation membership degree matrix D is as follows:
the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation set of the i-th factor is as follows:
finally, obtaining the comprehensive evaluation result of the factors of the criterion layer (B):
thirdly, carrying out fuzzy comprehensive evaluation on factors of the target layer (A)
Furthermore, the invention also provides a specific embodiment, and the evaluation process of a certain limestone mine project is carried out by applying the method.
Step 1: and (3) making a standard which is not lower than the requirement of the relevant policy of China by combining the relevant achievements of research scholars and the characteristics of research targets and referring to relevant standard, advanced cases, expert scoring and other means. The results are shown in Table 3.
TABLE 3 factor evaluation criteria (G)
Step 2: and calculating the weight of the evaluation factor. The experts compare the importance degrees of all factors in each level evaluation pairwise to obtain judgment matrixes A-B and B-C, and solve the maximum characteristic root lambda of each matrix max And checking the consistency of the characteristic vectors omega to finally obtain the weight values of all the factors. The results are shown in tables 4 to 12.
TABLE 4A-B decision matrix
| A | B1 | B2 | B3 |
| B1 | 1 | 1/2 | 1/4 |
| B2 | 2 | 1 | 1/2 |
| B3 | 4 | 2 | 1 |
TABLE 5B 1-C decision matrix
| B1-C | C1 | C2 | C3 |
| C1 | 1 | 1/3 | 1 |
| C2 | 3 | 1 | 3 |
| C3 | 1 | 1/3 | 1 |
TABLE 6, B2-C decision matrix
| B2-C | C4 | C5 |
| C4 | 1 | 3 |
| C5 | 1/3 | 1 |
TABLE 7, B3-C decision matrix
| B3-C | C6 | C7 |
| C6 | 1 | 2 |
| C7 | 1/2 | 1 |
TABLE 8 evaluation factor weights and consistency test results
| Matrix array | Results of omega normalization | λ max | n | CI | RI | CR | Consistency |
| A-B | ω＝[0.1429,0.2857,0.5714] | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0.58 | 0 | By passing |
| B1-C | ω＝[0.2,0.6,0.2] | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | / | By passing |
| B2-C | ω＝[0.75,0.25] | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | / | By passing |
| B3-C | ω＝[0.6667,0.3333] | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | / | By passing |
TABLE 9 evaluation index factor weight (W) for limestone mine ecological restoration treatment
And step 3: and performing hierarchical analysis-fuzzy mathematics comprehensive evaluation. As shown in fig. 2, a hierarchical analysis-fuzzy mathematics comprehensive evaluation model is formed, a quantitative factor comment set is calculated by a membership function, a qualitative factor comment set is obtained by adopting an expert scoring method, and the result is shown in table 8 and a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation matrix.
TABLE 10 fuzzy comprehensive evaluation matrix (D)
And comprehensively evaluating the factors of the criterion layer (B). According to formula B i ＝W i ·R i The relationship of each factor relative to the comment set under the ith factor of the layer B is obtained through calculation, and the calculation result is shown in Table 11.
TABLE 11 evaluation results
As can be seen from the table, in a certain limestone mine ecological remediation project to be evaluated, the factor of "B1 mine geological environment factor" is the worst, the probability of belonging to "complex" is 59%, the probability of belonging to "medium" is 22%, and the probability of belonging to "normal" is 19%. The factor of "B3 landscape destruction" is best, with a probability of 36.67% for "normal", 30% for "normal", and 33.33% for "complex".
According to the maximum membership principle, factors evaluated as 'complex' in three factors of the B criterion layer include B1 mine geological environment and B2 mine geological disaster, and B3 landform landscape destruction factors are evaluated as 'normal'. Therefore, in the subsequent limestone mine ecological management and restoration process, the influences of two factors, namely B1 mine geological environment and B2 mine geological disaster, are fully considered.
Carrying out fuzzy comprehensive evaluation on the factors of the target layer (A):
in the formula:
the calculation results are shown in Table 12.
TABLE 12 fuzzy comprehensive evaluation results of the factors of the target layer (A)
According to the evaluation result, 50.62% of limestone mine ecological restoration treatment projects are possibly 'complex', 22.57% of limestone mine ecological restoration treatment projects are possibly 'medium', and 26.81% of limestone mine ecological restoration treatment projects are possibly 'normal'. Therefore, the ecological restoration and treatment project level of a certain limestone mine to be evaluated is 'complex'.
While the invention has been described with reference to a preferred embodiment, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and detail may be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.
Claims (10)
1. A limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method is characterized by comprising the following steps:
constructing a limestone mine ecological management and restoration difficulty and easiness evaluation index model;
determining the weight of the evaluation factor by using an analytic hierarchy process;
and comprehensively judging the target to be evaluated by adopting a fuzzy mathematical method.
2. The limestone mine geological environment problem recovery governance evaluation method of claim 1,
the limestone mine ecological management and restoration difficulty and easiness evaluation index model comprises a target layer, a criterion layer and an index factor layer, wherein the target layer is constructed by combining the background and experience of the limestone mine ecological management and restoration field, the criterion layer forms a primary factor influencing the target layer, and the index factor layer forms a secondary factor influencing the target layer.
3. The limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method as claimed in claim 2, wherein,
the evaluation factors of the criterion layers consist of limestone mine slope conditions, mine geological disasters and landscape destruction, and each criterion layer corresponds to the evaluation factor of the index factor layer.
4. The limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method as claimed in claim 3,
the evaluation factors of the index factor layer comprise mine slope height, mine slope angle, mine slope type, mine dangerous rock, mine unstable slope, terrain and landform destruction and land occupation and destruction, wherein the evaluation factors corresponding to the limestone mine slope condition are the mine slope height, the mine slope angle and the mine slope type; the evaluation factors corresponding to the mine geological disaster are mine dangerous rocks and mine unstable slopes; and the evaluation factors corresponding to the landform landscape destruction are landform destruction and land occupation and damage.
5. The limestone mine geological environment problem recovery governance evaluation method of claim 4,
the evaluation factors of the index factor layer are divided into qualitative factors and quantitative factors, wherein the quantitative factors comprise mine side slope height, mine side slope angle, mine unstable slope, terrain and landform damage and land occupation and damage, and the evaluation factors of each quantitative factor are graded according to respective attributes.
6. The limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method as claimed in claim 1,
the process of determining the weight of an evaluation factor using an analytic hierarchy process comprises the following steps:
judging by adopting a 1-9 scale method, and constructing a comparison scale according to the relative importance of the evaluation factors;
establishing a comparison judgment matrix for the evaluation factors through scoring;
finding the maximum characteristic root λ of its matrix max And a feature vector omega, calculating and sequencing the importance index factors;
checking whether the constructed judgment matrix conforms to consistency check;
and calculating to obtain the weight of the comprehensive evaluation factor.
7. The limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method as claimed in claim 6,
and (3) a process of constructing a comparison judgment matrix, specifically comparing the criterion layer comparison matrix with the target layer and the index factor layer to obtain a comparison matrix.
8. The limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method as claimed in claim 7,
in the process of constructing the comparison judgment matrix, the comparison scale value comprises a reciprocal besides natural numbers of 1-9, wherein the reciprocal means that if the ratio of the importance of the elements i to the importance of the elements j is a ij Then the ratio of the importance of elements j to i is a ij ＝1/a ij 。
9. The limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method as claimed in claim 1,
the process of comprehensively evaluating the target to be evaluated by adopting a fuzzy mathematical method comprises the following steps:
determining a membership matrix, determining the membership of the qualitative factors by adopting a percentage statistical method, obtaining a qualitative factor comment set by adopting a scoring method for the qualitative factors, and calculating the qualitative factor comment set through a membership function; the quantitative factor adopts a semi-trapezoidal distribution function as a membership function to determine the membership;
determining a set of rating criteria
Wherein, G ij (i =1,2, \8230;, n; j =1,2, \8230;, m) is the evaluation criterion, n is the number of factors, and m is the evaluation criterion dimension;
and evaluating the target to be evaluated by adopting a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method.
10. The limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method as claimed in claim 9,
the process of evaluating the target to be evaluated by adopting the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method comprises the following steps:
step 1: establishing a criterion layer and factor weight sets W of the criterion layer i (ii) a Let criterion layer B = { B = { (B) 1 ,B 2 ,B 3 ,…,B n -criterion layer factor B: set of weights W = { W = { (W) i1 ,W i2 ,W i3 ,…,W in } T Finger criteria layer refers to B i (ii) a The importance of each factor in the index factor layer to the criterion layer factor B is 0<ω ip <1, wherein
Wherein, p =1,2, \8230k; k is a criterion layer factor B; the number of each factor in the contained index factor layer;
step 2: and carrying out fuzzy comprehensive evaluation on the factors of the criterion layer, wherein a single factor membership matrix of the comprehensive evaluation is as follows:
the comprehensive evaluation membership matrix D is as follows:
the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation set of the ith factor is as follows:
finally, obtaining the comprehensive evaluation result of the factors of the criterion layer:
and 3, step 3: carrying out fuzzy comprehensive evaluation on factors of a target layer:
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202211257919.XA CN115587703A (en) | 2022-10-13 | 2022-10-13 | Limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202211257919.XA CN115587703A (en) | 2022-10-13 | 2022-10-13 | Limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN115587703A true CN115587703A (en) | 2023-01-10 |
Family
ID=84780315
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202211257919.XA Pending CN115587703A (en) | 2022-10-13 | 2022-10-13 | Limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN115587703A (en) |
Cited By (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN116523183A (en) * | 2023-07-03 | 2023-08-01 | 中南大学 | Comprehensive evaluation method for safety and ecological restoration of high-steep side slope of abandoned mine |
-
2022
- 2022-10-13 CN CN202211257919.XA patent/CN115587703A/en active Pending
Cited By (2)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN116523183A (en) * | 2023-07-03 | 2023-08-01 | 中南大学 | Comprehensive evaluation method for safety and ecological restoration of high-steep side slope of abandoned mine |
| CN116523183B (en) * | 2023-07-03 | 2023-10-20 | 中南大学 | Comprehensive evaluation method for safety and ecological restoration of high-steep side slope of abandoned mine |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CN108280553B (en) | Mountain torrent disaster risk zoning and prediction method based on GIS-neural network integration | |
| CN110163500B (en) | Fuzzy fault tree-based oil storage tank area fire explosion risk assessment method | |
| CN111582386A (en) | Random forest based geological disaster multi-disaster comprehensive risk evaluation method | |
| CN108256141B (en) | Main and aftershock joint vulnerability analysis method based on Copula theory | |
| CN110069878B (en) | Quantitative scoring and optimizing method for well drilling completion plugging material | |
| CN112330168A (en) | Green mine construction evaluation method based on fuzzy mathematics and hierarchical analysis | |
| CN109934398A (en) | A kind of drill bursting construction tunnel gas danger classes prediction technique and device | |
| CN113570226A (en) | Method for evaluating occurrence probability grade of tunnel water inrush disaster in fault fracture zone | |
| Chen et al. | Application of group decision-making AHP of confidence index and cloud model for rock slope stability evaluation | |
| CN111242499A (en) | Existing tunnel lining structure disease evaluation method based on hierarchy-extension analysis | |
| CN110011976B (en) | Network attack destruction capability quantitative evaluation method and system | |
| CN116108758A (en) | Landslide susceptibility evaluation method | |
| CN115587703A (en) | Limestone mine geological environment problem recovery treatment evaluation method | |
| CN113222347A (en) | Open blasting safety risk grey system evaluation method | |
| CN106971109A (en) | A kind of assessment strategy of the bug excavation method based on index weights | |
| CN109118004B (en) | Prediction method for suitable area for engineering construction site selection | |
| CN112100851A (en) | Method for evaluating tunnel water inrush disaster risk based on set pair analysis | |
| CN114936751A (en) | Parking lot site selection planning method based on GIS and multi-line constraint condition | |
| Chen | Research on the credit risk assessment of Chinese online peer-to-peer lending borrower on logistic regression model | |
| CN115829326A (en) | Mountain road construction risk evaluation method based on optimized combination weighting model | |
| CN115689387A (en) | Comprehensive evaluation method and system for collapse disaster risk of karst tunnel | |
| CN108280289A (en) | Bump danger classes prediction technique based on local weighted C4.5 algorithms | |
| CN108712436B (en) | Network space security measurement method based on differential manifold | |
| CN115358454A (en) | Coal and gas outburst prediction method based on extension-fuzzy hierarchical analysis theory | |
| CN115456325A (en) | Analysis method for disaster fortification capability of non-coal mine |
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 |