Sensitivity and susceptibility assessment of geological hazard factors: A case study of Xinping County in the Ailao mountain area of Yunnan Province, China
-
摘要:
针对地质灾害敏感因子选取和易发性评价问题，为寻求适宜云南省哀牢山区地质灾害易发性评价分区方法，论文选择新平县为典型研究区，选择了工程地质岩组、距断裂距离、高程、坡度、坡向、距水系距离、距道路距离和地类等因子，应用证据权法进行了地质灾害因子敏感性分析和易发性评价。评价结果显示：地质灾害高易发区面积
1532.94 km2、灾点占比74.06%；中易发区面积2119.07 km2、灾点占比24.69%。评价结果与历史地质灾害空间分布特征相符，证明了此次所选取的评价因子和评价模型的合理性，支持云南省哀牢山区灾害防治。Abstract:In response to the selection of sensitive factors for geological disasters and susceptibility assessment, and seeking an appropriate method for evaluating the susceptibility of geological disasters in the Ailao mountain area of Yunnan Province, this paper selects Xinping County as a typical research area, with eight key factors including engineering geological rock formations, distance from fault structures, elevation, slope, slope direction, river buffer zone, roads buffer zone, and land type. The weights of evidence method based on Bayesian theory is applied to conduct a sensitivity analysis and susceptibility evaluation of geological hazard factors. The evaluation results show that the areas with high and medium susceptibility to geological disasters covering
1532.94 km2 and2119.07 km2, respectively, with 74.06% and 24.69% of geological disaster points falling within these regions. These findings are highly consistent with the spatial distribution of historical geological disasters, proving the rationality of the chosen evaluation factors and models. This study provides valuable insights for the evaluation of geological disaster susceptibility in the Ailao mountain area of Yunnan Province. -
-
表 1 数据简介
Table 1. Data overview introduction
数据 灾点及
致灾要素类型 来源 地灾 地灾点 矢量点 地质灾害历年调查数据 地质 工程地质岩组 矢量面 地质灾害调查与区划报告[15] 距断裂距离 矢量线和缓冲区 地质灾害调查与区划报告[15] 地形地貌 高程 栅格 12.5 m DEM， https://asf.alaska.edu/ 坡度 栅格 根据DEM，应用ArcGIS提取 坡向 栅格 根据DEM，应用ArcGIS提取 道路 距道路距离 矢量线缓冲区 根据矢量线用ArcGIS制作 水系 距水系距离 矢量线缓冲区 根据矢量线用ArcGIS制作 土地类型 地类 栅格 ESA WorldCover 10 m 2020， https://esa-worldcover.org/en 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 因素证据权重计算结果表
Table 2. Results of factor evidence weight calculation
因
素因素分级 因素分级
面积百分
比（%）灾点数
百分比
（%）β W+ W− Wf 因
素因素分级 因素分级
面积百分
比（%）灾点数
百分比
（%）β W+ W− Wf 工
程
岩
组块状次硬岩组（A） 9.92 23.94 2.41 0.8824 − 0.1693 1.0517 坡
度/
(°)<8 10.63 10.47 0.98 − 0.0144 0.0017 − 0.0161 块状次软岩组（B） 13.32 3.49 0.26 − 1.3393 0.1075 − 1.4468 8～15 25.22 30.92 1.23 0.2041 − 0.0794 0.2835 层状软硬岩组（C） 74.45 69.83 0.94 − 0.0642 0.1665 0.2307 15～25 40.78 41.15 1.01 0.0089 − 0.0062 0.0151 层状软弱岩组（D） 1.42 1 0.70 − 0.3520 0.0043 − 0.3563 25～35 19.2 15.46 0.81 − 0.2170 0.0453 − 0.2623 松散岩组（E） 0.9 1.75 1.94 0.6658 − 0.0086 0.6744 35～45 3.83 2 0.52 − 0.6514 0.0189 − 0.6703 距
断
裂
距
离/
m0～50 1.01 2.99 2.96 1.0855 − 0.0202 1.1057 45～69 0.34 0 0.00 0.0000 0.0034 0.0034 50～100 1.01 1.25 1.24 0.2158 − 0.0024 0.2182 距
河
流
距
离/
m<50 6 6.8 1.13 0.1252 − 0.0086 0.1338 100～300 4.06 8.73 2.15 0.7659 − 0.0499 0.8158 50～100 5.91 7.05 1.19 0.1763 − 0.0122 0.1885 300～500 4.05 7.48 1.85 0.6157 − 0.0365 0.6522 100～300 22.56 29.47 1.31 0.2673 − 0.0935 0.3608 500～ 1000 9.83 10.47 1.07 0.0640 − 0.0072 0.0712 300～500 19.88 20.4 1.03 0.0260 − 0.0066 0.0326 > 1000 80.05 69.08 0.86 − 0.1475 0.4388 − 0.5863 500～ 1000 31.79 27.96 0.88 − 0.1284 0.0546 − 0.1830 高
程/
m<800 10.45 9.73 0.93 − 0.0717 0.0080 − 0.0797 > 1000 13.86 8.31 0.60 − 0.5113 0.0624 − 0.5737 800～ 1100 14.44 14.46 1.00 0.0020 − 0.0003 0.0023 距
道
路
距
离/
m<50 4.63 7.23 1.56 0.4464 − 0.0277 0.4741 1100 ～1300 10.94 7.98 0.73 − 0.3157 0.0327 − 0.3484 50～100 4.55 7.48 1.64 0.4968 − 0.0312 0.5280 1300 ～1500 13.62 17.71 1.30 0.2630 − 0.0486 0.3116 100～300 17.11 26.43 1.54 0.4354 − 0.1194 0.5548 1500 ～1700 14.53 18.7 1.29 0.2528 − 0.0501 0.3029 300～500 15.02 19.2 1.28 0.2459 − 0.0505 0.2964 1700 ～1900 11.14 18.95 1.70 0.5317 − 0.0921 0.6238 500～ 1000 28.64 25.19 0.88 − 0.1286 0.0473 − 0.1759 1900 ～2100 8.94 10.22 1.14 0.1340 − 0.0142 0.1482 > 1000 30.04 14.46 0.48 − 0.7315 0.2013 − 0.9328 2100 ～2500 11.43 2 0.17 − 1.7462 0.1013 − 1.8475 地
类林地（A） 70.37 47.38 0.67 − 0.3959 0.5752 0.9711 2500 ～3200 4.52 0.25 0.06 − 2.8976 0.0438 − 2.9414 灌木（B） 0.4 0.5 1.25 0.2097 − 0.0009 0.2106 坡
向北东（NE） 14.73 17.96 1.22 0.1979 − 0.0385 0.2364 草地（C） 13.55 14.46 1.07 0.0655 − 0.0107 0.0762 东（E） 13.72 20.95 1.53 0.4236 − 0.0876 0.5112 耕地（D） 11.34 26.18 2.31 0.8378 − 0.1834 1.0212 南东（SE） 12.99 14.21 1.09 0.0902 − 0.0142 0.1044 建筑（E） 0.64 2.49 3.89 1.3701 − 0.0189 1.3890 南（S） 12.73 12.22 0.96 − 0.0409 0.0058 − 0.0467 裸地（F） 3.47 8.98 2.59 0.9509 − 0.0588 1.0097 南西（SW） 10.93 7.23 0.66 − 0.4129 0.0407 − 0.4536 开阔水域（G） 0.22 0 0.00 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 西（W） 10.43 6.48 0.62 − 0.4757 0.0431 − 0.5188 北西（NW） 11.34 8.23 0.73 − 0.3206 0.0345 − 0.3551 北（N） 13.14 12.72 0.97 − 0.0323 0.0048 − 0.0371
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 地质灾害易发性分区表
Table 3. Geological hazard susceptibility zoning table
易发性分区 面积/km2 占总面积/% 灾点数 灾点百分比/% 高 1532.94 36.11 297 74.06 中 2119.07 49.92 99 24.69 低 592.72 13.97 5 1.25
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 曹慧,何政伟,陈亮. 云南某县地质灾害与土地利用类型相关性分析[J]. 测绘科学,2007,32(2):114 − 115. [CAO Hui,HE Zhengwei,CHEN Liang. The relevancy analysis of geological hazard and land-use types in some County of Yunnan Province[J]. Science of Surveying and Mapping,2007,32(2):114 − 115. (in Chinese with English abstract)] doi: 10.3771/j.issn.1009-2307.2007.02.041
CAO Hui, HE Zhengwei, CHEN Liang. The relevancy analysis of geological hazard and land-use types in some County of Yunnan Province［J］. Science of Surveying and Mapping, 2007, 32（2）: 114 − 115. （in Chinese with English abstract） doi: 10.3771/j.issn.1009-2307.2007.02.041
[2] 仲冰. 云南省新平县滑坡灾害风险评估研究[D]. 北京:中国地质大学(北京),2008. [ZHONG Bing. Study on risk assessment of landslide disaster in Xinping County,Yunnan Province[D]. Beijing:China University of Geosciences,2008. (in Chinese with English abstract)]
ZHONG Bing. Study on risk assessment of landslide disaster in Xinping County, Yunnan Province［D］. Beijing: China University of Geosciences, 2008. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[3] 徐为. 基于区域风险评估的降雨型地质灾害监测预警方法研究——以云南哀牢山新平县为例[D]. 北京:中国科学院大学,2013. [XU Wei. Study on monitoring and early warning method of rainfall geological disasters based on regional risk assessment:A case study of Xinping County,Ailao mountain,Yunnan Province[D]. Beijing:University of Chinese Academy of Sciences,2013. (in Chinese with English abstract)]
XU Wei. Study on monitoring and early warning method of rainfall geological disasters based on regional risk assessment: A case study of Xinping County, Ailao mountain, Yunnan Province［D］. Beijing: University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2013. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[4] 康杰. 云南新平县地质灾害形成机制及易发性分区研究[D]. 昆明:昆明理工大学,2021. [KANG Jie. Study on formation mechanism and susceptibility zoning of geological disasters in Xinping County,Yunnan Province[D]. Kunming:Kunming University of Science and Technology,2021. (in Chinese with English abstract)]
KANG Jie. Study on formation mechanism and susceptibility zoning of geological disasters in Xinping County, Yunnan Province［D］. Kunming: Kunming University of Science and Technology, 2021. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[5] 金德山. 县域地质灾害调查是构筑地灾防治工作体系的基石——以云南省为例[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2005,16(3):28 − 30. [JIN Deshan. County territory investigation of geo-disaster is the footstone of geo-disaster control system:Taking the Yunnan Province as a example[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2005,16(3):28 − 30. (in Chinese with English abstract)] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-8035.2005.03.007
JIN Deshan. County territory investigation of geo-disaster is the footstone of geo-disaster control system: Taking the Yunnan Province as a example［J］. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2005, 16（3）: 28 − 30. （in Chinese with English abstract） doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-8035.2005.03.007
[6] BONHAM-CARTER G,AGTERBERG F,WRIGHT D. Weights of evidence modelling:A new approach to mapping mineral potentia[J]. Paper - Geological Survey of Canada,1990:171 − 183.
[7] AGTERBERG F P. Combining indicator patterns in weights of evidence modeling for resource evaluation[J]. Nonrenewable Resources,1992,1(1):39 − 50. doi: 10.1007/BF01782111
[8] AGTERBERG F P,BONHARN-CARTER G F. Weights of evidence modeling and weighted logistic regression for mineral potential mapping[M]//Computers in Geology - 25 Years of Progress. Oxford:Oxford University Press,1994.
[9] LUSTED LEE B. An introduction to medical decision making[J]. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation,1970,49(5):322.
[10] SPIEGELHALTER D J,KNILL-JONES R P. Statistical and knowledge-based approaches to clinical decision-support systems,with an application in gastroenterology[J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (General),1984,147(1):35. doi: 10.2307/2981737
[11] 闫怡秋,杨志华,张绪教,等. 基于加权证据权模型的青藏高原东部巴塘断裂带滑坡易发性评价[J]. 现代地质,2021,35(1):26 − 37. [YAN Yiqiu,YANG Zhihua,ZHANG Xujiao,et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment based on weight-of-evidence modeling of the Batang fault zone,eastern Tibetan Plateau[J]. Geoscience,2021,35(1):26 − 37. (in Chinese with English abstract)] doi: 10.19657/j.geoscience.1000-8527.2020.091
YAN Yiqiu, YANG Zhihua, ZHANG Xujiao, et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment based on weight-of-evidence modeling of the Batang fault zone, eastern Tibetan Plateau［J］. Geoscience, 2021, 35（1）: 26 − 37. （in Chinese with English abstract） doi: 10.19657/j.geoscience.1000-8527.2020.091
[12] 刘璐瑶,高惠瑛. 基于证据权与Logistic回归模型耦合的滑坡易发性评价[J]. 工程地质学报,2023,31(1):165 − 175. [LIU Luyao,GAO Huiying. Landslide susceptibility evaluation based on the coupling of evidence weight and Logistic regression model[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology,2023,31(1):165 − 175. (in Chinese with English abstract)] doi: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2020-482
LIU Luyao, GAO Huiying. Landslide susceptibility evaluation based on the coupling of evidence weight and Logistic regression model［J］. Journal of Engineering Geology, 2023, 31（1）: 165 − 175. （in Chinese with English abstract） doi: 10.13544/j.cnki.jeg.2020-482
[13] 黄发明,石雨,欧阳慰平,等. 基于证据权和卡方自动交互检测决策树的滑坡易发性预测[J]. 土木与环境工程学报(中英文),2022,44(5):16 − 28. [HUANG Faming,SHI Yu,OUYANG Weiping,et al. Landslide susceptibility prediction modeling based on weight of evidence and Chi-square automatic interactive detection decision tree[J]. Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering,2022,44(5):16 − 28. (in Chinese with English abstract)]
HUANG Faming, SHI Yu, OUYANG Weiping, et al. Landslide susceptibility prediction modeling based on weight of evidence and Chi-square automatic interactive detection decision tree［J］. Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering, 2022, 44（5）: 16 − 28. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[14] 孙滨,祝传兵,康晓波,等. 基于信息量模型的云南东川泥石流易发性评价[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2022,33(5):119 − 127. [SUN Bin,ZHU Chuanbing,KANG Xiaobo,et al. Susceptibility assessment of debris flows based on information model in Dongchuan,Yunnan Province[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2022,33(5):119 − 127. (in Chinese with English abstract)]
SUN Bin, ZHU Chuanbing, KANG Xiaobo, et al. Susceptibility assessment of debris flows based on information model in Dongchuan, Yunnan Province［J］. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2022, 33（5）: 119 − 127. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[15] 云南地质环境监测总站,云南地质工程第二勘察院. 云南省新平县地质灾害调查与区划报告[R]. 2003. [Yunnan Geological Environment Monitoring Station,The Second Survey Institute of Geological engineering. Geological hazards survey and division in Xinping County,Yunnan Province[R]. 2003. (in Chinese)]
Yunnan Geological Environment Monitoring Station, The Second Survey Institute of Geological engineering. Geological hazards survey and division in Xinping County, Yunnan Province［R］. 2003. （in Chinese）
[16] 尹洪峰,谢博,赵体,等. 云南省新平县地质灾害发育特征及防治对策研究[J]. 长春工程学院学报(自然科学版),2006,7(2):54 − 56. [YIN Hongfeng,XIEBo,ZHAOTi,et al. Research on developing characteristics and preventing measures of geology disaster in Xinping Country of Yunnan Province[J]. Journal of Changchun Institute of Technology (Natural Sciences Edition),2006,7(2):54 − 56. (in Chinese with English abstract)] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-8984.2006.02.018
YIN Hongfeng, XIEBo, ZHAOTi, et al. Research on developing characteristics and preventing measures of geology disaster in Xinping Country of Yunnan Province［J］. Journal of Changchun Institute of Technology （Natural Sciences Edition）, 2006, 7（2）: 54 − 56. （in Chinese with English abstract） doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-8984.2006.02.018
[17] 自然资源部.地质灾害风险调查评价技术要求(1∶
50000 )::FXPC/ZRZY B-01[S]. 2020. [Ministry of Natural Resources of the People's Republic of China.Technical requirements of survey and evaluation for geohazard risk (1: 50 000):FXPC/ZRZY B-01[S]. 2020. (in Chinese)]Ministry of Natural Resources of the People's Republic of China.Technical requirements of survey and evaluation for geohazard risk (1: 50 000):FXPC/ZRZY B-01［S］. 2020. （in Chinese）
[18] HOYER A,KUSS O. Meta-analysis of full ROC curves with flexible parametric distributions of diagnostic test values[J]. Research Synthesis Methods,2020,11(2):301 − 313. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1395
[19] WALKER S P. The ROC curve redefined:Optimizing sensitivity (and specificity) to the lived reality of cancer[J]. New England Journal of Medicine,2019,380(17):1594 − 1595. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1814951
[20] OMAR L,IVRISSIMTZIS I. Using theoretical ROC curves for analysing machine learning binary classifiers[J]. Pattern Recognition Letters,2019,128:447 − 451. doi: 10.1016/j.patrec.2019.10.004
-
图(5)
表(3)
计量
- 文章访问数: 215
- PDF下载数: 0
- 施引文献: 0