Evaluation of geological hazard susceptibility of collapse and landslide in Yuanyang County using slope units and random forest modeling
-
摘要: 针对基于栅格单元与定性定量方法模型在地质灾害易发性评价中存在模型预测精度低且使用较为频繁的不足与弊端,采用斜坡单元与机器学习方法之一的随机森林模型相结合开展元阳县崩滑地质灾害易发性评价。在ArcGIS中,利用曲率分水岭法划分出7851个斜坡单元。经过大量统计研究与地质环境条件分析,选取工程地质岩组、地貌类型、高程、坡度、坡向、曲率、起伏度、河流距离、断层距离等9个因子作为评价指标,并通过SPSS软件,将9个评价指标与灾点发育特征的关系进行数据分析,得出各评价指标权重。在SPSS中,采用随机森林模型,建立易发性评价模型,将元阳县崩滑地质灾害易发性划分为低、中、高、极高4类,所占面积分别为410.06 km2、470.21 km2、550.02 km2和776.87 km2,分别占元阳县面积的18.58%、21.30%、24.92%和35.20%。经与详查结果对比,评价结果与实际高度吻合。利用ROC曲线得出区划结果精度AUC值为92.7%,区划结果相当好。研究显示,元阳县中部和西南两个部分地质灾害集中,易发性极高。Abstract: The model based on grid unit and qualitative and quantitative method has the disadvantages of low prediction accuracy and frequent use in the evaluation of geological hazard susceptibility, was utilized to evaluate the potential for collapse and landslide in Yuanyang County. Using ArcGIS, 7851 slope units were divided via the curvature watershed method. Through a large number of statistical study and analysis of geological environment condition, nine evaluation factors were selected, including engineering geological petrofabric, landform type, elevation, gradient, slope direction, curvature, ups and downs, rivers, distance and fault distance. These factors were analyzed and their weights determined using SPSS software, in conjunction with data on the development characteristics of disaster points. The random forest model was then applied to establish a vulnerability evaluation model, which categorized landslide geological disaster in Yuanyang County into four types: low, medium, high and extremely high, occupying an area of 410.06 km2, 470.21 km2, 550.02 km2 and 776.87 km2 respectively. These areas correspond to 18.58%, 21.30%, 24.92% and 35.20% of Yuanyang County’s total area. The evaluation results were compared with the detailed investigation results and were found to be highly consistent. The accuracy of ROC curve was calculated at 92.7%, indicating a high level of accuracy. The central and southwest parts of Yuanyang County were found to be highly susceptible to geological disasters.
-
0. 引言
矿产开采诱发的地面塌陷现象十分普遍,加强对矿区地面塌陷研究已成为矿区可持续发展的重要课题之一。矿区地面塌陷与区域地质背景、矿床特征、开采方式和深度、采空区处置措施、水文地质条件等密切相关[1-2]。应城石膏矿位于湖北省云梦应城盆地的西北缘,面积约30 km2,距今已有近400年开采历史。1949年以前多为老窿开采,1960—1970年,老窿塌陷发育最多,2013—2016年,采空塌陷发育最多,早期的老窿型开采和后期的规模化开采相续形成了应城矿区地面塌陷。矿区内多处地面塌陷,表现为陷坑和地面不均匀沉降,造成道路和管线破坏、房屋开裂、农田毁坏等,对当地居民生产生活、道路和管道基础设施安全运营等造成了较大的影响。针对膏盐矿区地面塌陷,何伟等[3]根据采动岩层内冒落带、裂隙带和弯曲带的“三带”理论,结合实测资料,建立数值模型,对地下开采诱发的地表变形进行了分析。刘硕等[4] 基于Hoek-Brown 强度准则,建立数值仿真模型,结合山东肥城某石膏矿工程实践,评价了硬石膏采房群的整体稳定性。夏开宗等[5]针对采用房柱法开采石膏矿体,将石膏矿柱简化为满足西原模型的黏弹塑性体流变模型,建立了石膏矿矿柱−护顶层支撑体系的流变力学体模型,认为矿柱的塑性大变形流变特性对采空区的失稳起着至关重要的作用。陈乐求等[6]针对矿柱法开采石膏矿体,开展了石膏矿采空区充填加固技术的试验研究。刘轩廷等[7]针对充填开采法矿区,在考虑了充填体对间柱侧压作用的基础上,建立了顶板−间柱支撑体系的力学模型,探究了充填体作用下支撑体系的破坏机制。魏军才[8] 对邵东县城石膏矿老采空区地面变形的成因进行了分析,认为顶板岩性、地质构造是地面变形的基础条件,不规范开采是导致地面变形的主要诱发因素,地面不断加载及地下水动力作用加剧了地面变形的产生。郑怀昌等[9] 通过对石膏矿采空区顶板大面积冒落情况的调查,发现矿区水文地质和工程地质对顶板的冒落有很大影响,冒落也多集中于丰雨季,认为隔离矿柱对控制顶板大面积冒落及向相邻采空区扩展作用重大。章求才等[10]针对衡山石膏矿经过多年开采,于2009 年发生了大面积地面塌陷,分析了顶板破断机理及其影响因素。郑怀昌等[11]结合岩体力学的相关理论和数值模拟技术,认为石膏矿柱流变特性使其强度变低,采区扩大,石膏矿柱应力增大,诱发了石膏矿采场顶板冒落及大规模采空区顶板冒落。张向阳[12] 基于 Kachanov 蠕变损伤理论对采空区顶板的蠕变损伤过程进行了解析分析,采空区顶板的蠕变损伤断裂经历断裂孕育和裂隙扩展两个阶段。贺桂成等[13]采用FLAC3D对衡山县石膏矿闭坑前后空区引发的地面塌陷机理进行了分析,认为闭坑后矿柱不足以支承上覆围岩压力而引起采空区顶板垮落,形成垮落拱,最终在地表形成“漏斗型”塌陷区。Castellanza等[14] 针对废弃矿山遗留矿柱会受到风化作用的特性,根据膏岩试验数据拟合结果,建立风化模型对矿柱失稳时间预测。
上述工作为膏盐矿区地面塌陷地质灾害研究奠定了较好的基础,然而,仍然存在有不足之处:对诱发石膏矿地面塌陷地质灾害成因机制的分析还存在不足,尤其是老窿对地面塌陷地质灾害影响的成因机制分析成果较少,由于不同区域的石膏矿,受膏组成矿特征、开采历史、开采方式等影响,地面塌陷地质灾害特征和成因机制具有明显的差异性,还需要结合实际情况进一步开展研究。
为此,针对应城石膏矿区开展野外补充调查、工程地质测绘,进一步掌握矿区地质灾害的实际情况,采取内外动力多因子关联分析法和地质分析法,基于采动岩层内冒落带、裂隙带和弯曲带的“三带”理论,分析地面塌陷类型及发育分布规律,研究采空型地面塌陷地质灾害的主要影响因素,对老窿型和采空型地面塌陷的成因机制进行分析,对石膏矿风险管理和安全评估、监测预警体系构建具有一定的参考意义。
1. 应城石膏矿分布及成矿特征
1.1 石膏矿分布特征
应城市地处鄂中丘陵与江汉平原的过渡地带,整体地势为西北高,东南低,地貌类型按成因划分为河流冲积平原和丘陵两类。应城石膏矿位于湖北省云应盆地的西北缘,应城市现有10个膏矿开采区,矿区主要分布于丘陵地区,主要开采膏组为G-1—G-3、G-5和G-7—G-11,开采矿区分布如图1所示。矿区目前主要开采的含矿层位是谢家湾下含矿层和谢家湾上含矿层,谢家湾下含矿层含纤维石膏膏组五层G-1—G-5,总厚15.90~91.10 m;谢家湾上含矿层含纤维石膏膏组八层G-6—G-13,总厚23.92~181.51 m。
1.2 成矿特征
应城石膏矿膏组矿体总体产状比较平缓,一般倾角为6°~8°,部分倾角近于或大于10°,与较深色的围岩接触界线较为明显,接触面较平整,极易从接触界面与围岩分开,其产状与围岩大体一致,见图2(a),局部与围岩有极微小角度斜交,见图2(b),在红色地层中,有时穿过层理插入不同围岩中,见图2(c)。
膏组矿体主要是薄层状、似层状纤维石膏矿层,厚度稳定,一般为2~25 cm,最厚可达47 cm左右,延长较远,相邻两个膏组间距8~17 m。矿体围岩以泥质粉砂岩和泥质石膏岩为主,单轴抗压强度为2.5~20.7 MPa,岩石强度较低,属软岩、极软岩。
2. 地面塌陷发育特征及分布规律分析
根据调查,应城市膏矿开采区共发育有27处地面塌陷,主要分布于城北街道办事处和杨岭镇境内(图1),规模以小—中型为主,其中小型11处,中型16处,如图3b所示。
2.1 老窿型地面塌陷坑
由于私人无序开采,导致矿区内留下许多废弃的井筒、巷道,截至1960年已形成大小老窿约240处,私人矿井开采面大都呈扇形展布且开采层埋深浅,一般小于100 m,由于开采深度较浅,采空区顶板变形对地面的影响较大,上覆岩体破坏后容易在地面产生塌陷坑。应城市老窿型塌陷共18处,陷坑整体呈NE向分布,与坑道展布方向基本一致,在地表多呈近圆形或不规则状,一般上大下小,上口直径2~2.5 m,大者达5 m,坑深2~3 m,大者达10 m,表现为直径大小和深度不等的陷坑单体或群体,主要发育在浅埋采空区和老窿分布范围内,如柳林村邓湾南塌陷点(图3a中CB-TX0003),为椭圆形塌陷单坑,发育在老窿周边,邹郭村黄花山水库塌陷点(图3a中CB-TX0012),为圆形单坑,地下开采深度仅35 m。
2.2 采空型地面塌陷
采空型地面塌陷主要表现为地面不均匀沉陷,其变形强度较低,主要表现为地基下沉,地面房屋和道路出现开裂变形、农田毁坏等。应城市采空型塌陷共9处,其变形通常较为缓慢,但通过逐年累积,这些破坏日趋严重,部分房屋已成为危房,直接影响居民住户的居住和生产生活条件。有的裂缝贯穿墙体,严重危及房屋整体安全(图3c)。另外,区内由于不均匀地面沉降使部分农田出现倾斜,失水现象较为严重。这类变形在矿区分布十分普遍,主要出现在深埋采空区范围内或陷坑周边。
2.3 地面塌陷发育规律分析
通过调查和统计分析,应城市企业规模化开采形成采空区面积约16 km2,由于历史开采形成的老窿大约240处,应城市老窿及规模化开采采空区空间分布如图4所示,统计分析表明,下方为规模化开采采空区的老窿共128个,其中发生老窿型塌陷共18处,占比约12.5%;下方无规模化开采采空区的老窿共112个,未发生老窿型地面塌陷,说明老窿型地面塌陷与下方大范围采空区密切相关。
通过统计分析,应城市共发育9处采空型地面塌陷,其中6处地面塌陷采深采厚比小于60,2处地面塌陷采深采厚比为60~80,1处地面塌陷采深采厚比为80~100,该处地面塌陷发育于李咀石膏矿区,虽然采深采厚比较大,推测是由于其他扰动因素的增强,或者李咀石膏矿区的开矿时间比较早,回填率较低,导致了该地面塌陷的发育(图5)。随着采深采厚比的减小,采空区地面塌陷逐渐增多,且采空型塌陷主要发育在采深采厚比小于60的区域,且采深采厚比越小,地面塌陷越容易发育,地表变形越强烈,塌陷影响越大。
3. 地面塌陷成因机制分析
石膏矿开采工作面初次来压后,在其不断推进过程中,上覆岩体的破坏主要可分为三带:冒落带、断裂带和弯曲带。冒落带是采出空间顶板岩层在自重力作用下垮塌,堆积在采空区,形成冒落带;断裂带随着井下石膏矿采区的扩大而逐步向上发展,当到一定范围时,断裂带高度达到最大;弯曲带即弯曲下沉带,位于断裂带之上直至地表,弯曲带中的岩体移动基本上是成层的、整体性移动。
3.1 老窿型地面塌陷成因机制分析
3.1.1 充水型老窿塌陷
充水型老窿塌陷下方规模化开采巷道采空区多有充填且埋深较深,下方规模化开采采空区冒裂带向上发展,但由于规模化开采采空区与老窿埋深间隔较大,冒落带、断裂带之和小于两者之间埋深间隔,规模化采空区并未与老窿连通(图6)。老窿采空后,采区内是半充填状态,或局部未充填状态,闭坑后,洞口被回填,但回填土并没有填满采区,仅填满老窿竖井,地下水通过透水的竖井回填土以及裂隙不断流入采空区,直至采空区完全饱水。采空区内的石膏层与泥岩夹层是隔水层,此时,老窿采空区内是饱水的,老窿回填后经过多年的沉积压密作用下处于相对平衡状态,老窿塌陷地表变形表现为小水坑常年积水无明显变化、周边地表无明显变形及农田无漏水现象,如图3a中CB-TX0003所示柳林村邓湾南地面塌陷点。
3.1.2 不充水型老窿塌陷
不充水型老窿塌陷下方存在规模化开采巷道采空区,且下方规模化开采采空区与老窿埋深间隔较小,冒落带、断裂带之和远大于两者之间埋深间隔,规模化采空区直接与老窿连通(图7),大都表现为老窿洞口缓慢塌陷,具有发展性。由于老窿底部与规模化采空区连通,地下水的流动带动土中的细颗粒运移,导致老窿内负压,竖井中的土体向下垮落变形,慢慢扩展到地表,表现为地表塌陷坑持续扩大。此外,由于部分膏矿企业持续对规模化开采采空区进行抽水,老窿内的积水被疏干后,连接第四系潜水层、承压含水层以及基岩裂隙水与规模化开采采空区的通道,地下水缓慢的在此通道中不断的流动,从地表通过老窿到采空区,再被抽出到地表,老窿中回填的细颗粒也不断地发生移动,导致此类塌陷,经回填后一段时间还会再次产生塌陷,如图8所示新建街社区三矿2号地面塌陷点。
3.2 采空型地面塌陷成因机制分析
应城石膏矿规模化开采形成的采空区,开采深度较深,这种采空区造成的塌陷一般表现为地面的不均匀沉降,弯曲带影响地表,伴随地面下沉的一些表现形式为房屋裂缝、地表裂缝变形、农田失水等现象,影响范围一般比较大,如新建街社区三矿1号地面塌陷点。
3.2.1 矿柱破坏型采空塌陷
房柱法开采导致的采空区失稳主要表现为矿柱和顶板的破坏垮落。采用房柱式采矿过程中,随着矿石不断采出和矿柱侧向应力的逐渐消减,采场上覆岩层的应力转移到矿柱上,使矿柱应力增加并产生压缩变形。当矿山企业闭坑后,由于矿柱被回采破坏导致矿柱强度降低,个别或局部矿柱破坏从而引起顶板冒落。该采场顶板及上覆岩层压应力逐渐转移到相邻矿柱,导致相邻矿柱也相继遭到破坏,顶板冒落范围进一步扩大,从而引起采空区顶板垮落并通过三带影响逐渐传递到地面,地表主要见地面沉降、隆起和建筑物开裂等,如柳林村邓湾北地面塌陷点(图9)。
3.2.2 弯曲沉降型采空塌陷
长壁式充填法开采的采空区主要采用矸石充填,将开采洗选过程中产生的矸石固体废物作为骨料充填入采空区,进而改善采场围岩变形和覆岩沉降程度,有效控制地表沉陷。因此采空区充填体的充填率及其强度对上覆岩层的运动状态起着至关重要的作用,不同充填率会导致上覆岩层运移结构形态和特征都存在明显区别。当采空区充填率低时,充填体不能对顶板下沉起到支撑作用,随着采空区范围的扩大,采空区顶板逐渐垮落破碎,与采空区固体充填体相互混合形成新的支撑体,直到采空区充填体被压密实,支撑体的压缩和采空区顶板的下沉达到平衡状态。此过程中采空区顶板随开采范围的扩大发生持续破断,形成的冒落带、断裂带及弯曲带随着工作面的推进而不断向上覆岩层传递,直到这种变形发展到地面,地表主要表现为建筑物开裂、地表裂缝等,如新建街社区三矿1号地面塌陷点(图10)。
4. 结论
(1)地面塌陷主要表现两种形式:一种是塌陷坑,在地表多呈近圆形或不规则状,表现为直径大小和深度不等的陷坑单体或群体,主要发育在浅埋采空区和老窿分布范围内;另一种是地面不均匀沉陷,其变形强度较低,主要表现为地基下沉,地面房屋、道路等地物出现开裂变形、农田毁坏。
(2)地面塌陷发育规律:老窿型地面塌陷与下方大范围采空区密切相关,当老窿下方存在规模化开采采空区且埋深较浅时,老窿与采空区连通,老窿井口附近形成地面塌陷;采空型地面塌陷的发生则受采深采厚比的影响较大,随着采深采厚比的减小,采空区地面塌陷逐渐增多,且采空型地面塌陷主要发育在采深采厚比小于60的区域。
(3)老窿型地面塌陷包含充水型和不充水型两种类型,充水型老窿塌陷下方规模化开采巷道采空区多有充填且埋深较深,冒裂带未影响至老窿,老窿与大范围采空区不连通,塌陷后表现为小水坑常年积水且塌陷趋于稳定;不充水型老窿塌陷下方存在规模化开采巷道采空区,且由于冒裂带的影响与老窿采空区连通,塌陷后表现为地表塌陷坑持续扩大,或者人工充填后一段时间又再次塌陷,重复回填又塌陷。
(4)采空型地面塌陷主要与矿柱破坏和充填率相关。矿柱破坏主要是矿柱在闭坑前被回采导致强度降低,局部破坏垮塌,采空区顶板垮落并通过三带影响逐渐传递到地面,主要表现为地面沉陷、隆起和建筑物开裂等;在充填率低的情况下,上覆岩土体在重力作用下,逐渐形成冒落带、断裂带以及弯曲带并随着工作面的推进而不断向上覆岩层传递,直至变形发展到地面,主要表现为建筑物开裂、地表裂缝等。
-
表 1 随机森林模型参数
Table 1 Summary table of Random forest model parameters
参数名 参数值 训练用时/s 0.156 数据切分 0.7 数据洗牌 是 交叉验证 否 节点分裂评价准则 gini 决策树数量 100 有放回采样 TRUE 袋外数据测试 FALSE 划分时考虑的最大特征比例 auto 内部节点分裂的最小样本数 2 叶子节点的最小样本数 1 叶子节点中样本的最小权重 0 树的最大深度 10 叶子节点的最大数量 50 节点划分不纯度的阈值 0 表 2 数据集精确率
Table 2 Summary table of dataset accuracy
准确率 召回率 精确率 F1 训练集 0.920 0.920 0.926 0.920 测试集 0.705 0.705 0.705 0.704 注:F1为精确率和召回率的调和平均。 表 3 易发性分级数据统计
Table 3 Sueceptibility classification data statistics
易发性等级 灾点数 比重/% 区间面积/km2 比重/% 低 19 7.34 410.06 18.58 中 21 8.11 470.21 21.30 高 77 29.73 550.02 24.92 极高 142 54.83 776.87 35.20 表 4 评价结果对比表
Table 4 Comparison table of evaluation results
结果来源 易发性等级 灾点数 比重/% 区间面积/km2 比重/% 本文评价结果 低 19 7.34 410.06 18.58 中 21 8.11 470.21 21.30 高 77 29.73 550.02 24.92 极高 142 54.83 776.87 35.20 详查评价结果 低 0 0.00 369.70 16.75 中 19 7.34 511.18 23.16 高 80 30.89 591.30 26.79 极高 157 60.62 734.98 33.30 -
[1] 殷坤龙,张桂荣. 地质灾害风险区划与综合防治对策[J]. 安全与环境工程,2003,10(1):32 − 35. [YIN Kunlong,ZHANG Guirong. Risk zonation of geo-hazards and its comprehensive control[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering,2003,10(1):32 − 35. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-1556.2003.01.010 YIN Kunlong, ZHANG Guirong. Risk zonation of geo-hazards and its comprehensive control[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering, 2003, 10(1): 32-35. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-1556.2003.01.010
[2] 田述军,张珊珊,唐青松,等. 基于不同评价单元的滑坡易发性评价对比研究[J]. 自然灾害学报,2019,28(6):137 − 145. [TIAN Shujun,ZHANG Shanshan,TANG Qingsong,et al. Comparative study of landslide susceptibility assessment based on different evaluation units[J]. Journal of Natural Disasters,2019,28(6):137 − 145. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.13577/j.jnd.2019.0615 TIAN Shujun, ZHANG Shanshan, TANG Qingsong, et al. Comparative study of landslide susceptibility assessment based on different evaluation units[J]. Journal of Natural Disasters, 2019, 28(6): 137-145. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.13577/j.jnd.2019.0615
[3] 王磊,常鸣,邢月龙. 基于信息量法模型与GIS的滑坡地质灾害风险性评价[J]. 地质灾害与环境保护,2021,32(2):14 − 20. [WANG Lei,CHANG Ming,XING Yuelong. Risk assessment of landslide geological hazards based on information method model and GIS[J]. Journal of Geological Hazards and Environment Preservation,2021,32(2):14 − 20. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-4362.2021.02.003 WANG Lei, CHANG Ming, XING Yuelong. Risk assessment of landslide geological hazards based on information method model and GIS[J]. Journal of Geological Hazards and Environment Preservation, 2021, 32(2): 14-20. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-4362.2021.02.003
[4] 于成龙. 和龙市典型地质灾害风险性区划与地质环境承载力综合评价研究[D]. 长春: 吉林大学, 2021 YU Chenglong. Study on risk mapping of typical geological hazards and comprehensive evaluation of geological environment carrying capacity in Helong City[D]. Changchun: Jilin University, 2021. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[5] 朱浩濛, 马晓峰, 张义顺. 基于斜坡单元下的层次分析法在地质灾害易发性区划中的应用[C]//防治地灾 除险安居——浙江省地质学会2017年学术年会论文集. 杭州, 2017: 79 − 84. ZHU Haomeng, MA Xiaofeng, ZHANG Yishun. Application of analytic hierarchy process based on slope unit in geological disaster-prone regionalization[C]//Prevention and control of local disasters, removal of risks and housing: Proceedings of the 2017 Academic Annual Conference of Zhejiang Geological Society. Hangzhou, 2017: 79 − 84.
[6] 赵晓燕,谈树成,李永平. 基于斜坡单元与组合赋权法的东川区地质灾害危险性评价[J]. 云南大学学报(自然科学版),2021,43(2):299 − 305. [ZHAO Xiaoyan,TAN Shucheng,LI Yongping. Risk assessment of geological hazards in Dongchuan District based on the methods of slope unit and combination weighting[J]. Journal of Yunnan University (Natural Sciences Edition),2021,43(2):299 − 305. (in Chinese with English abstract) ZHAO Xiaoyan, TAN Shucheng, LI Yongping. Risk assessment of geological hazards in Dongchuan District based on the methods of slope unit and combination weighting[J]. Journal of Yunnan University (Natural Sciences Edition), 2021, 43(2): 299-305. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[7] 李益敏,李驭豪,赵志芳. 基于确定性系数模型的泸水市泥石流易发性评价[J]. 水土保持研究,2019,26(4):336 − 342. [LI Yimin,LI Yuhao,ZHAO Zhifang. Assessment on susceptibility of debris flow in Lushui based on the certain factor model[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation,2019,26(4):336 − 342. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2019.04.050 LI Yimin, LI Yuhao, ZHAO Zhifang. Assessment on susceptibility of debris flow in Lushui based on the certain factor model[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2019, 26(4): 336-342. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.13869/j.cnki.rswc.2019.04.050
[8] 胡燕,李德营,孟颂颂,等. 基于证据权法的巴东县城滑坡灾害易发性评价[J]. 地质科技通报,2020,39(3):187 − 194. [HU Yan,LI Deying,MENG Songsong,et al. Landslide susceptibility evaluation in Badong County based on weights of evidence method[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology,2020,39(3):187 − 194. (in Chinese with English abstract) HU Yan, LI Deying, MENG Songsong, et al. Landslide susceptibility evaluation in Badong County based on weights of evidence method[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology, 2020, 39(3): 187-194. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[9] 牛瑞卿,彭令,叶润青,等. 基于粗糙集的支持向量机滑坡易发性评价[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版),2012,42(2):430 − 439. [NIU Ruiqing,PENG Ling,YE Runqing,et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment based on rough sets and support vector machine[J]. Journal of Jilin University (Earth Science Edition),2012,42(2):430 − 439. (in Chinese with English abstract) NIU Ruiqing, PENG Ling, YE Runqing, et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment based on rough sets and support vector machine[J]. Journal of Jilin University (Earth Science Edition), 2012, 42(2): 430-439. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[10] 郑迎凯,陈建国,王成彬,等. 确定性系数与随机森林模型在云南芒市滑坡易发性评价中的应用[J]. 地质科技通报,2020,39(6):131 − 144. [ZHENG Yingkai,CHEN Jianguo,WANG Chengbin,et al. Application of certainty factor and random forests model in landslide susceptibility evaluation in Mangshi City,Yunnan Province[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology,2020,39(6):131 − 144. (in Chinese with English abstract) ZHENG Yingkai, CHEN Jianguo, WANG Chengbin, et al. Application of certainty factor and random forests model in landslide susceptibility evaluation in Mangshi City, Yunnan Province[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology, 2020, 39(6): 131-144. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[11] 陆跃萍. 从元阳县城滑坡灾害看山区城镇建设的环境因素[J]. 云南环境科学,1993,12(1):39 − 41. [LU Yueping. Environmental factors of urban construction in mountainous areas from landslide disaster in Yuanyang County[J]. Yunnan Environmental Science,1993,12(1):39 − 41. (in Chinese with English abstract) LU Yueping. Environmental factors of urban construction in mountainous areas from landslide disaster in Yuanyang County[J]. Yunnan Environmental Science, 1993, 12(1): 39-41. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12] 戚琦. 基于GIS和目标层次联合分析方法的元阳县地质灾害易发程度评价研究[D]. 北京: 中国地质大学(北京), 2012 QI Qi. Study on the evaluation of the susceptibility of geological hazards occurring in Yuan yang County based on the combination of AHP and GIS[D]. Beijing: China University of Geosciences, 2012. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[13] 屠水云,张钟远,付弘流,等. 基于CF与CF-LR模型的地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2022,33(2):96 − 104. [TU Shuiyun,ZHANG Zhongyuan,FU Hongliu,et al. Geological hazard susceptibility evaluation based on CF and CF-LR model[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2022,33(2):96 − 104. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.2022.02-12 TU Shuiyun, ZHANG Zhongyuan, FU Hongliu, et al. Geological hazard susceptibility evaluation based on CF and CF-LR model[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2022, 33(2): 96-104. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.2022.02-12
[14] 温鑫,范宣梅,陈兰,等. 基于信息量模型的地质灾害易发性评价—以川东南古蔺县为例[J]. 地质科技通报,2022,41(2):290 − 299. [WEN Xin,FAN Xuanmei,CHEN Lan,et al. Susceptibility assessment of geological disasters based on an information value model:A case of Gulin County in southeast Sichuan[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology,2022,41(2):290 − 299. (in Chinese with English abstract) WEN Xin, FAN Xuanmei, CHEN Lan, et al. Susceptibility assessment of geological disasters based on an information value model: a case of Gulin County in Southeast Sichuan[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology, 2022, 41(2): 290-299. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[15] 毕鸿基,聂磊,曾超,等. 基于三种多变量不安定指数分析模型的汶川县地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2022,33(1):123 − 131. [BI Hongji,NIE Lei,ZENG Chao,et al. Geological hazard susceptibility evaluation in Wenchuan area based on three models of multivariate instability index analysis[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2022,33(1):123 − 131. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.2022.01-15 BI Hongji, NIE Lei, ZENG Chao, et al. Geological hazard susceptibility evaluation in Wenchuan area based on three models of multivariate instability index analysis[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2022, 33(1): 123-131. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.2022.01-15
[16] 韩用顺,孙湘艳,刘通,等. 基于证据权-投影寻踪模型的藏东南地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 山地学报,2021,39(5):672 − 686. [HAN Yongshun,SUN Xiangyan,LIU Tong,et al. Susceptibility evaluation of geological hazards based on evidence weight-projection pursuit model in southeast Tibet,China[J]. Mountain Research,2021,39(5):672 − 686. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.16089/j.cnki.1008-2786.000629 HAN Yongshun, SUN Xiangyan, LIU Tong, et al. Susceptibility evaluation of geological hazards based on evidence weight-projection pursuit model in southeast Tibet, China[J]. Mountain Research, 2021, 39(5): 672-686. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.16089/j.cnki.1008-2786.000629
[17] 祁于娜,王磊. 层次分析-熵值定权法应用于山区城镇地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 测绘通报,2021(6):112 − 116. [QI Yuna,WANG Lei. Application of AHP-entropy weight method in hazards susceptibility assessment in mountain town[J]. Bulletin of Surveying and Mapping,2021(6):112 − 116. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.13474/j.cnki.11-2246.2021.0187 QI Yuna, WANG Lei. Application of AHP-entropy weight method in hazards susceptibility assessment in mountain town[J]. Bulletin of Surveying and Mapping, 2021(6): 112-116. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.13474/j.cnki.11-2246.2021.0187
[18] 曹文霞. 基于组合赋权法的交口县地质灾害易发性评价研究[D]. 太原: 太原理工大学, 2021 CAO Wenxia. Study on geohazard susceptibility evaluation based on combination weighting method in Jiaokou Country[D]. Taiyuan: Taiyuan University of Technology, 2021. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[19] 孙长明,马润勇,尚合欣,等. 基于滑坡分类的西宁市滑坡易发性评价[J]. 水文地质工程地质,2020,47(3):173 − 181. [SUN Changming,MA Runyong,SHANG Hexin,et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment in Xining based on landslide classification[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology,2020,47(3):173 − 181. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.16030/j.cnki.issn.1000-3665.201906074 SUN Changming, MA Runyong, SHANG Hexin, et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment in Xining based on landslide classification[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 2020, 47(3): 173-181. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.16030/j.cnki.issn.1000-3665.201906074
[20] 姬永涛, 王鲜, 郝业, 等. 基于斜坡单元的陕西省城镇地质灾害风险调查评价——以西安市蒋村街道为例[J]. 灾害学, 2022,37(4): 211-219 JI Yongtao, WANG Xian, HAO Ye, et al. Investigation and evaluation of urban geological hazard risk based on slope unit in Shaanxi Province: A case study of Jiangcun street in Xi’an[J]. Disaster, 2022,37(4): 211-219. ( in Chinese with English abstract)
[21] 邹凤钗,冷洋洋,陶小郎,等. 基于斜坡单元的滑坡风险识别—以贵州万山浅层土质斜坡为例[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2022,33(3):114 − 122. [ZOU Fengchai,LENG Yangyang,TAO Xiaolang,et al. Landslide hazard identification based on slope unit:A case study of shallow soil slope in Wanshan,Guizhou Province[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2022,33(3):114 − 122. (in Chinese with English abstract) ZOU Fengchai, LENG Yangyang, TAO Xiaolang, et al. Landslide hazard identification based on slope unit: a case study of shallow soil slope in Wanshan, Guizhou Province[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2022, 33(3): 114-122. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[22] 王家柱, 高延超, 铁永波, 等. 基于斜坡单元的山区城镇滑坡灾害易发性评价——以康定为例[J]. 沉积与特提斯地质: 1 − 17(2021-05-10)[2022-07-10]. WANG Jiazhu, GAO Yanchao, TIE Yongbo, et al. Evaluation of landslide hazard susceptibility in mountainous towns based on slope element: A case study of Kangding City[J]. Sedimentary and Tethyan Geology: 1 − 17(2021-05-10)[2022-07-10]. DOI: 10.19826/j.cnki.1009-3850.2021.03001.( in Chinese with English abstract)
[23] 胡瑞林,陈平,庄茂国,等. “坡长制斜坡地质灾害防治体系”的建立与技术要点[J]. 工程地质学报,2020,28(4):748 − 761. [HU Ruilin,CHEN Ping,ZHUANG Maoguo,et al. Establishment and technical essentials of slope-geohazard prevention system of slope-unit administrant[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology,2020,28(4):748 − 761. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2020-057 HU Ruilin, CHEN Ping, ZHUANG Maoguo, et al. Establishment and technical essentials of slope-geohazard prevention system of slope-unit administrant[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 2020, 28(4): 748-761. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2020-057
[24] 申泽西,张强,吴文欢,等. 青藏高原及横断山区地质灾害易发区空间格局及驱动因子[J]. 地理学报,2022,77(5):1211 − 1224. [SHEN Zexi,ZHANG Qiang,WU Wenhuan,et al. Spatial pattern and attribution analysis of the regions with frequent geological disasters in the Tibetan Plateau and Hengduan mountains[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica,2022,77(5):1211 − 1224. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.11821/dlxb202205012 SHEN Zexi, ZHANG Qiang, WU Wenhuan, et al. Spatial pattern and attribution analysis of the regions with frequent geological disasters in the Tibetan Plateau and Hengduan Mountains[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2022, 77(5): 1211-1224. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.11821/dlxb202205012
[25] 杨硕,李德营,严亮轩,等. 基于随机森林模型的乌江高陡岸坡滑坡地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 安全与环境工程,2021,28(4):131 − 138. [YANG Shuo,LI Deying,YAN Liangxuan,et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment in high and steep bank slopes along Wujiang River based on random forest model[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering,2021,28(4):131 − 138. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.13578/j.cnki.issn.1671-1556.20200956 YANG Shuo, LI Deying, YAN Liangxuan, et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment in high and steep bank slopes along Wujiang River based on random forest model[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering, 2021, 28(4): 131-138. (in Chinese with English abstract) DOI: 10.13578/j.cnki.issn.1671-1556.20200956
[26] 吴润泽,胡旭东,梅红波,等. 基于随机森林的滑坡空间易发性评价:以三峡库区湖北段为例[J]. 地球科学,2021,46(1):321 − 330. [WU Runze,HU Xudong,MEI Hongbo,et al. Spatial susceptibility assessment of landslides based on random forest:A case study from Hubei section in the Three Gorges Reservoir area[J]. Earth Science,2021,46(1):321 − 330. (in Chinese with English abstract) WU Runze, HU Xudong, MEI Hongbo, et al. Spatial susceptibility assessment of landslides based on random forest: a case study from Hubei section in the Three Gorges Reservoir area[J]. Earth Science, 2021, 46(1): 321-330. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[27] 王存智,张炜,李晨冬,等. 基于GIS和层次分析法的沙溪流域滑坡地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 中国地质调查,2022,9(5):51 − 60. [WANG Cunzhi,ZHANG Wei,LI Chendong,et al. Vulnerability evaluation of landslide geological disasters in Shaxi Basin based on GIS and analytic hierarchy process[J]. Geological Survey of China,2022,9(5):51 − 60. (in Chinese with English abstract) [WANG Cunzhi, ZHANG Wei, LI Chendong, et al. Vulnerability evaluation of landslide geological disasters in Shaxi Basin based on GIS and analytic hierarchy process[J]. Geological Survey of China, 2022, 9(5): 51-60.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[28] 黄敬军,甘义群,缪世贤,等. 江苏省地质环境区划评价指标体系初步研究[J]. 中国地质,2011,38(6):1599 − 1606. [HUANG Jingjun,GAN Yiqun,MIAO Shixian,et al. A preliminary study of the evaluation index system for geo-environment regionalization in Jiangsu[J]. Geology in China,2011,38(6):1599 − 1606. (in Chinese with English abstract) [HUANG Jingjun, GAN Yiqun, MIAO Shixian, et al. A preliminary study of the evaluation index system for geo-environment regionalization in Jiangsu[J]. Geology in China, 2011, 38(6): 1599-1606.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[29] 刘磊,殷坤龙,张俊. 三峡库区万州主城区第四系堆积层厚度的估算方法及应用[J]. 地质科技情报,2016,35(1):177 − 183. [LIU Lei,YIN Kunlong,ZHANG Jun. Estimation method of the quaternary deposits thickness and its application in Wanzhou central district,Three Gorges Reservoir region[J]. Geological Science and Technology Information,2016,35(1):177 − 183. (in Chinese with English abstract) LIU Lei, YIN Kunlong, ZHANG Jun. Estimation method of the quaternary deposits thickness and its application in Wanzhou central district, Three Gorges Reservoir region[J]. Geological Science and Technology Information, 2016, 35(1): 177-183. (in Chinese with English abstract)