Geologic Hazards Susceptibility Assessment Based on Weighted Information Value—A Case Study in Luding County, Sichuan Province

Liang Liping; Liu Yanguo; Tang Zihao; Zou Qiang; Li Jingji

doi:10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2019.06.026

您当前的位置：

首页 >

文章列表页 >

Geologic Hazards Susceptibility Assessment Based on Weighted Information Value—A Case Study in Luding County, Sichuan Province

- Geologic Hazards Susceptibility Assessment Based on Weighted Information Value—A Case Study in Luding County, Sichuan Province
- Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation Vol. 39, Issue 6, Pages: 176-182(2019)
- 作者机构：
  
  1. 成都理工大学地球科学学院,四川,成都,610059
  2. 西南科技大学环境与资源学院,四川,绵阳,621010
  3. 中科院山地灾害与环境研究所,四川,成都,610041
  4. 成都理工大学生态环境学院,四川,成都,610059
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
- DOI：10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2019.06.026
  CLC：
- Published：2019
- 稿件说明：
移动端阅览
Liang Liping, Liu Yanguo, Tang Zihao, et al. Geologic Hazards Susceptibility Assessment Based on Weighted Information Value—A Case Study in Luding County, Sichuan Province[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2019, 39(6): 176-182.
DOI：

Liang Liping, Liu Yanguo, Tang Zihao, et al. Geologic Hazards Susceptibility Assessment Based on Weighted Information Value—A Case Study in Luding County, Sichuan Province[J]. Bulletin of Soiland Water Conservation, 2019, 39(6): 176-182. DOI： 10.13961/j.cnki.stbctb.2019.06.026.

摘要

[目的] 对四川省泸定县进行地质灾害易发性评价，为该区地质灾害预防预测提供依据。[方法] 借助谷歌影像解译，获取崩塌、滑坡、泥石流等地质灾害隐患点279处。选取地形地貌、岩性构造、气象水文、土壤与土地利用（LULC）4个方面构建评价指标体系。运用确定性系数法确定因子权重，并结合信息量法构成加权信息量模型。通过ArcGIS空间分析平台，开展灾害易发性评价。[结果] 研究区极高和高易发区分别占总研究区面积的13.54%，26.49%。地质灾害点共225处落在极高易发区和高易发区内，占总样本灾害点的80.65%。通过受试者工作特征曲线（ROC）的线下面积（AUC）进行检验，其值为0.793，评价模型精度良好。[结论] 对四川省泸定县的地质灾害易发性进行了等级划分，采用的加权信息量方法的易发性评价结果可信。

Abstract

[Objective] The susceptibility of geological disaster was evaluated

in order to provide a theoretical basis for geological disaster prevention in Luding County

Sichuan Province.[Methods] With the help of Google image interpretation

279 potential geological disaster points such as collapse

landslides and debris flows were obtained. The evaluation index system was constructed from four aspects including topography

lithologic structure

meteorological hydrology

soil and land use(LULC). The weight of the factors is determined by the deterministic coefficient method

and the weighted information model was constructed by the information quantity method. Disaster vulnerability was assessed by the ArcGIS spatial analysis.[Results] The extremely high and high risk areas accounted for 13.54% and 26.49% of the total study area

respectively. A total of 225 geological disaster sites were located in the extremely high and high risk areas

accounting for 80.65% of the total sample disaster points. The test was performed by the offline area(AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve(ROC)

and its value was 0.793

and the accuracy of the evaluation model was excellent.[Conclusion] The geological disasters in Luding County was classified

and the risk assessment results of the weighted information method were reliable.

关键词

Keywords

references

任敬,范宣梅,赵程,等.贵州省都匀市滑坡易发性评价研究[J].水文地质工程地质,2018,45(5):165-172.

张向营,张春山,孟华君,等.基于GIS和信息量模型的京张高铁滑坡易发性评价[J].地质力学学报,2018,24(1):96-105.

吴赛儿,陈剑, ZHOU Wendy,等.基于逻辑回归模型的泥石流易发性评价与检验:以金沙江上游奔子栏-昌波河段为例[J].现代地质,2018,32(3):611-622.

王佳佳,殷坤龙,肖莉丽.基于GIS和信息量的滑坡灾害易发性评价:以三峡库区万州区为例[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2014,33(4):797-808.

李远远,梅红波,任晓杰,等.基于确定性系数和支持向量机的地质灾害易发性评价[J].地球信息科学学报,2018,20(12):1699-1709.

徐艳琴,白淑英,徐永明.基于两种方法的攀西泥石流易发性评价对比分析[J].水土保持研究,2018,25(3):285-291.

黄发明,殷坤龙,蒋水华,等.基于聚类分析和支持向量机的滑坡易发性评价[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2018,37(1):156-167.

夏辉,殷坤龙,梁鑫,等.基于SVM-ANN模型的滑坡易发性评价:以三峡库区巫山县为例[J].中国地质灾害与防治学报,2018,29(5):13-19.

刘永垚,第宝锋,詹宇,等.基于随机森林模型的泥石流易发性评价:以汶川地震重灾区为例[J].山地学报,2018,36(5):765-773.

刘坚,李树林,陈涛.基于优化随机森林模型的滑坡易发性评价[J].武汉大学学报:信息科学版,2018,43(7):1085-1091.

孙小凡,张鹏,党超.基于GIS的城市滑坡灾害易发性评价:以湖北省宜昌市城区为例[J].水土保持通报,2018,38(6):304-309,385.

李军,周成虎.基于栅格GIS滑坡风险评价方法中格网大小选取分析[J].遥感学报,2003,7(2):86-92,161.

樊芷吟,苟晓峰,秦明月,等.基于信息量模型与Logistic回归模型耦合的地质灾害易发性评价[J].工程地质学报,2018,26(2):340-347.

倪化勇,李宗亮,巴仁基,等.四川泸定县泥石流灾害成因、特征与防治建议[J].工程地质学报,2010,18(1):91-99.

张波,石长柏,肖志勇,等.基于GIS和加权信息量的湖北鄂州地质灾害易发性区划[J].中国地质灾害与防治学报,2018,29(3):101-107.

Shortlifffe E H, Buchanan G G. A model of inexact reasoning in medicine[J]. Mathematical Biossciences,1975, 23(3/4):351-379.

Heckerman D. Probabilistic interpretation of MYCIN's certainty factors[C]//Kanal L N, Lemmer J F. Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence. New York:Elsevier, 1986.

刘艳辉,刘传正,唐灿,等.基于确定性系数模型的地质灾害多因子权重计算方法[J].中国地质灾害与防治学报,2015,26(1):92-97.

马玉宽,赵安.基于确定性系数法的鄱阳湖孕螺环境因子敏感性分析[J].自然灾害学报,2016,25(5):64-73.

陈祖杰.基于GIS的青川县滑坡灾害易发性评价与区划[D].四川绵阳:西南科技大学,2017.

曹慧.基于RS与GIS的土地利用与地质灾害相关性分析[D].四川成都:成都理工大学,2007.

胡芹龙,王运生.基于GIS的川西地貌过渡带滑坡灾害易发性评价[J].成都理工大学学报:自然科学版,2018,45(6):746-753.

Views

860

下载量

CSCD

Alert me when the article has been cited

提交

Tools

Publicity Resources

Research status and hotspots of plant diversity in desertified areas of China based on CiteSpace

Spatiotemporal evolution of ecosystem service value in mountain- oasis-desert system of typical arid regions——A case study at Manas River basin

Spatiotemporal changes and driving mechanisms of vegetation cover in Dongting Lake area based on kNDVI and structural equation model

Runoff and sediment yield characteristics of typical soil slopes in Xin’an River basin under different rainfall intensities and slope gradients

Effects of vegetation restoration duration on runoff and sediment yield in slopes of waste dumps in alpine mining areas

Related Author

No data

Related Institution

No data

⁰