中国地质环境监测院
中国地质灾害防治工程行业协会
主办

基于信息量、加权信息量与逻辑回归耦合模型的云南罗平县崩滑灾害易发性评价对比分析

杨得虎, 朱杰勇, 刘帅, 马博, 代旭升. 基于信息量、加权信息量与逻辑回归耦合模型的云南罗平县崩滑灾害易发性评价对比分析[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报, 2023, 34(5): 43-53. doi: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.202208030
引用本文: 杨得虎, 朱杰勇, 刘帅, 马博, 代旭升. 基于信息量、加权信息量与逻辑回归耦合模型的云南罗平县崩滑灾害易发性评价对比分析[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报, 2023, 34(5): 43-53. doi: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.202208030
YANG Dehu, ZHU Jieyong, LIU Shuai, MA Bo, DAI Xusheng. Comparative analyses of susceptibility assessment for landslide disasters based on information value, weighted information value and logistic regression coupled model in Luoping County, Yunnan Province[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2023, 34(5): 43-53. doi: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.202208030
Citation: YANG Dehu, ZHU Jieyong, LIU Shuai, MA Bo, DAI Xusheng. Comparative analyses of susceptibility assessment for landslide disasters based on information value, weighted information value and logistic regression coupled model in Luoping County, Yunnan Province[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2023, 34(5): 43-53. doi: 10.16031/j.cnki.issn.1003-8035.202208030

基于信息量、加权信息量与逻辑回归耦合模型的云南罗平县崩滑灾害易发性评价对比分析

详细信息
    作者简介: 杨得虎(1998-),男,云南曲靖人,硕士研究生,主要研究方向为工程地质与水文地质。E-mail:2389245896@qq.com
    通讯作者: 朱杰勇(1961-),男,云南昆明人,教授,硕士生导师,主要研究方向为矿产普查与勘探、地质灾害、工程地质与水文地质。E-mail:zhujieyong@kmust.edu.cn
  • 中图分类号: P694

Comparative analyses of susceptibility assessment for landslide disasters based on information value, weighted information value and logistic regression coupled model in Luoping County, Yunnan Province

More Information
  • 以罗平县崩滑地质灾害为研究对象,选取工程岩组、坡度、坡向、高程、起伏度、曲率、地貌类型、距河流距离、距断裂距离9个评价因子,基于共线性诊断和相关性分析对其进行独立性检验。然后采用信息量法计算各评价因子分类分级的信息量值,采用层次分析法和逻辑回归法对各评价因子进行权重的定量计算,从而构建信息量、加权信息量和信息量-逻辑回归耦合易发性评价模型并进行对比分析。基于GIS的自然断点法将评价结果划分为非、低、中和高4个等级,并采用ROC曲线对其精度进行检验。结果表明:3种评价模型的AUC值分别为0.757、0.723和0.852,信息量-逻辑回归耦合模型的精度最高,模型结果分区与崩滑地质灾害点的分布较吻合,其非、低、中和高的面积(分级比)分别为771.1 km2(25.55%)、836.6 km2(27.73%)、864.36 km2(28.64%)和545.94 km2(18.08%)。

  • 加载中
  • 图 1  研究区概况

    Figure 1. 

    图 2  崩滑评价因子分类分级图

    Figure 2. 

    图 3  崩滑易发性评价结果

    Figure 3. 

    图 4  ROC曲线

    Figure 4. 

    表 1  评价因子VIF计算结果表

    Table 1.  Calculation results of VIF for evaluation factors

    评价因子 TOL VIF
    工程岩组 0.818 1.222
    坡度 0.656 1.524
    坡向 0.954 1.048
    高程 0.904 1.107
    地貌类型 0.713 1.402
    起伏度 0.669 1.495
    曲率 0.970 1.031
    距断裂距离 0.945 1.058
    距河流距离 0.717 1.396
    下载: 导出CSV

    表 2  评价因子之间的相关系数矩阵

    Table 2.  Correlation coefficient matrix of evaluation factors

    评价因子 工程岩组 坡度 坡向 高程 地貌类型 起伏度 曲率 距断裂距离 距河流距离
    工程岩组 1
    坡度 0.07 1
    坡向 −0.09 0.07 1
    高程 0.03 −0.08 0.08 1
    地貌类型 0.02 0.11 0.03 0.01 1
    起伏度 0.11 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.01 1
    曲率 0.07 −0.07 0.08 0.03 0.06 0.04 1
    距断裂距离 0.09 −0.03 −0.04 0.06 0.09 −0.05 0.08 1
    距河流距离 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.06 0.07 1
    下载: 导出CSV

    表 3  评价因子分类分级信息量值

    Table 3.  Information value of classification levels for evaluation factors

    评价因子 因子分级 崩滑数量 栅格数量 信息量值 加权信息量值
    工程岩组 软硬相间碳酸盐岩夹碎屑岩岩组 2 205041 0.1347 0.0396
    块状结构坚硬玄武岩岩组 50 1817099 1.1717 0.3433
    坚硬层状碳酸盐岩岩组 97 15380267 −0.3014 −0.0883
    第四系冲洪积松散岩组 5 661729 −0.1206 −0.0353
    坡度
    /(°)
    0~6 7 3162705 −1.3501 −0.2012
    6~12 33 3790902 0.0193 0.0029
    12~18 50 3707425 0.4571 0.0681
    18~24 31 3008341 0.1880 0.0280
    24~30 17 2054943 −0.0316 −0.0047
    30~36 5 1186737 −0.7064 −0.1053
    36~60 11 1091533 0.1657 0.0247
    60~90 0 33429 0 0
    坡向 16 2219489 −0.1692 −0.0129
    东北 15 1920437 −0.0891 −0.0068
    22 2493207 0.0329 0.0025
    东南 31 2704414 0.2946 0.0224
    20 2304895 0.0161 0.0012
    西南 13 1974899 −0.2601 −0.0198
    西 17 2138397 −0.0714 −0.0054
    西北 20 2280277 0.0269 0.0020
    高程/m 715~860 8 350496 0.9848 0.1468
    860~1200 8 1149066 −0.2025 −0.0233
    1200~1350 14 1312775 0.2239 0.4811
    1350~1500 26 3226787 −0.0097 −0.1776
    1500~1650 26 3079467 0.3627 −0.0402
    1650~1800 29 2366839 −0.1401 1.8675
    1800~1950 30 4047954 −0.5067 −0.8614
    1950~2420 13 2530843 −0.5067 −3.6224
    地貌类型 岩溶低中山地貌 22 2824754 −0.0904 −0.0037
    构造侵蚀剥蚀地貌 18 1200919 0.5643 0.0231
    岩溶中山地貌 40 3833292 0.2021 0.0083
    岩溶盆地地貌 0 1948623 0 0
    峰林谷地地貌 0 91609 0 0
    峰丛洼地地貌 16 3752094 −0.6927 −0.0284
    断块上升岩溶地貌 1 177099 −0.4119 −0.0169
    断坳盆地 1 116724 0.0049 0.0002
    石丘(垅岗) 2 390319 −0.5091 −0.0209
    侵蚀谷地地貌 52 2561268 0.8677 0.0356
    构造侵蚀岩溶地貌 2 1167462 −1.6047 −0.0658
    起伏度/m 0~4 13 4183395 −1.0071 −0.0594
    4~8 40 4306129 0.0879 0.0052
    8~15 74 5697380 0.4232 0.0249
    15~23 17 2685735 −0.2956 −0.0174
    23~30 2 750479 −1.1607 −0.0684
    30~38 7 294073 1.0289 0.0607
    38~50 0 128414 0 0
    50~220 1 57698 0.7117 0.0419
    曲率 <0 70 7431512 0.0997 0.0041
    0 20 3330755 −0.3505 −0.0144
    >0 64 7301960 0.0277 0.0011
    距断裂距离/m 0~600 70 6123046 0.2934 0.0194
    600~1200 26 4659019 −0.4237 −0.0279
    1200~1800 20 2742459 −0.1561 −0.0103
    1800~2400 8 1599989 −0.5336 −0.0352
    2400~3000 5 1028561 −0.5617 −0.0371
    >3000 25 1911080 0.4281 0.0282
    距河流距离/m 0~600 57 3404716 0.6748 0.0445
    600~1200 32 2816455 0.2872 0.0189
    1200~1800 21 2280631 0.0771 0.0051
    1800~2400 14 1898512 −0.1451 −0.0096
    2400~3000 6 1564553 −0.7989 −0.0528
    >3000 24 6099326 −0.7731 −0.0511
    下载: 导出CSV

    表 4  评价因子分类分级判断矩阵及其权重

    Table 4.  Judgment matrix and weight of classification levels for evaluation factors

    评价因子 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 权重 CI/CR
    工程岩组 1 2 4 2 6 8 4 4 6 0.31 0.003
    0.002
    坡度 1/2 1 2 1 3 4 2 2 3 0.155
    坡向 1/4 1/2 1 1/2 2 2 1 1 2 0.083
    高程 1/2 1 2 1 3 4 2 2 3 0.155
    起伏度 1/6 1/3 1/2 1/3 1 1 1/2 1/2 1 0.046
    曲率 1/8 1/4 1/2 1/4 1 1 1/2 1/2 1 0.041
    距断裂距离 1/4 1/2 1 1/2 2 2 1 1 2 0.082
    距河流距离 1/4 1/2 1 1/2 2 2 1 1 2 0.082
    地貌类型 1/6 1/3 1/2 1/3 1 1 1/2 1/2 1 0.046
    下载: 导出CSV

    表 5  逻辑回归分析结果

    Table 5.  Results of logistic regression analysis

    评价因子 B S.E Wals df sig
    工程岩组 0.698 0.261 7.142 1 0.002
    坡度 1.331 0.513 6.721 1 0.000
    坡向 0.761 0.862 0.780 1 0.007
    高程 0.309 0.246 1.570 1 0.002
    地貌类型 0.171 0.421 0.165 1 0.006
    起伏度 0.641 0.304 4.455 1 0.005
    曲率 1.523 0.907 2.820 1 0.003
    距断裂距离 0.528 0.365 2.090 1 0.004
    距河流距离 0.458 0.264 3.001 1 0.000
    常量 −0.165 0.142 1.336 1 0.005
      注:B为回归系数,S.E为标准误,wals为卡方值,df为自由度,sig为显著性。
    下载: 导出CSV

    表 6  崩滑易发性等级分布预测结果

    Table 6.  Prediction results of landslide susceptibility grade distribution

    易发性等级信息量模型加权信息量模型信息量-逻辑回归耦合模型
    分级比/%崩滑比/%分级面积/km2分级比/%崩滑比/%分级面积/km2分级比/%崩滑比/%分级面积/km2
    非易发区17.565.84529.9616.177.14489.0325.556.49771.1
    低易发区28.2714.29853.1831.8015.58959.0227.7320.13836.6
    中易发区32.4631.17979.6433.8235.061020.6828.6425.32864.36
    高易发区21.7148.70655.2218.2042.21549.2718.0848.05545.94
    下载: 导出CSV
  • [1]

    赵维城. 论云南地貌体系[J]. 云南地理环境研究,1998,10(增刊1):47 − 55. [ZHAO Weicheng. On Yunnan geomorphological system[J]. Yunnan Geographic Environment Research,1998,10(Sup 1):47 − 55. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    ZHAO Weicheng. On Yunnan geomorphological system[J]. Yunnan Geographic Environment Research, 1998, 10(Sup 1): 47 − 55. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [2]

    陶云,唐川,段旭. 云南滑坡泥石流灾害及其与降水特征的关系[J]. 自然灾害学报,2009,18(1):180 − 186. [TAO Yun,TANG Chuan,DUAN Xu. Landslide and debris flow hazards in Yunnan and their relationship with precipitation characteristics[J]. Journal of Natural Disasters,2009,18(1):180 − 186. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    TAO Yun, TANG Chuan, DUAN Xu. Landslide and debris flow hazards in Yunnan and their relationship with precipitation characteristics[J]. Journal of Natural Disasters, 2009, 18(1): 180 − 186. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [3]

    汪民. 关于地质灾害防治需要关注的几个问题[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2022,33(1):1 − 5. [WANG Min. Several problems needing attention in the prevention and control of geological disasters[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2022,33(1):1 − 5. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    WANG Min. Several problems needing attention in the prevention and control of geological disasters[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2022, 33(1): 1 − 5. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [4]

    梁丽萍,刘延国,唐自豪,等. 基于加权信息量的地质灾害易发性评价——以四川省泸定县为例[J]. 水土保持通报,2019,39(6):176 − 182. [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 Soil and Water Conservation,2019,39(6):176 − 182. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    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 Soil and Water Conservation, 2019, 39(6): 176 − 182. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [5]

    YU Chenglong,CHEN Jianping. Application of a GIS-based slope unit method for landslide susceptibility mapping in Helong city:Comparative assessment of ICM,AHP,and RF model[J]. Symmetry,2020,12(11):1848.

    [6]

    杨峰,薛桂澄,柳长柱,等. 基于层次分析法的地质灾害危险性评估——以文昌木兰湾新区建设项目为例[J]. 资源环境与工程,2021,35(1):72 − 75. [YANG Feng,XUE Guicheng,LIU Changzhu,et al. Geological disaster risk assessment based on analytic hierarchy process[J]. Resources Environment & Engineering,2021,35(1):72 − 75. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    YANG Feng, XUE Guicheng, LIU Changzhu, et al. Geological disaster risk assessment based on analytic hierarchy process[J]. Resources Environment & Engineering, 2021, 35(1): 72 − 75. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [7]

    辛存林,施紫越,任文秀,等. 甘肃天水市北山地质灾害危险度区划[J]. 兰州大学学报(自然科学版),2020,56(1):16 − 24. [XIN Cunlin,SHI Ziyue,REN Wenxiu,et al. Geological hazard zoning in Beishan Mountain of Tianshui District[J]. Journal of Lanzhou University (Natural Sciences),2020,56(1):16 − 24. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    XIN Cunlin, SHI Ziyue, REN Wenxiu, et al. Geological hazard zoning in Beishan Mountain of Tianshui District[J]. Journal of Lanzhou University (Natural Sciences), 2020, 56(1): 16 − 24. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [8]

    段顺荣,李延福,李春阳. 基于GIS和层次分析法的青海甘德县地质灾害危险性评价[J]. 矿产勘查,2021,12(2):453 − 460. [DUAN Shunrong,LI Yanfu,LI Chunyang. Geological hazard risk assessment based on GIS and analytical hierarchy process in Gande County,Qinghai Province[J]. Mineral Exploration,2021,12(2):453 − 460. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    DUAN Shunrong, LI Yanfu, LI Chunyang. Geological hazard risk assessment based on GIS and analytical hierarchy process in Gande County, Qinghai Province[J]. Mineral Exploration, 2021, 12(2): 453 − 460. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [9]

    张钟远,邓明国,徐世光,等. 镇康县滑坡易发性评价模型对比研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2022,41(1):157 − 171. [ZHANG Zhongyuan,DENG Mingguo,XU Shiguang,et al. Comparison of landslide susceptibility assessment models in Zhenkang County,Yunnan Province,China[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2022,41(1):157 − 171. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    ZHANG Zhongyuan, DENG Mingguo, XU Shiguang, et al. Comparison of landslide susceptibility assessment models in Zhenkang County, Yunnan Province, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2022, 41(1): 157 − 171. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [10]

    邓念东,崔阳阳,郭有金. 基于频率比-随机森林模型的滑坡易发性评价[J]. 科学技术与工程,2020,20(34):13990 − 13996. [DENG Niandong,CUI Yangyang,GUO Youjin. Frequency ratio-random forest-model-based landslide susceptibility assessment[J]. Science Technology and Engineering,2020,20(34):13990 − 13996. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    DENG Niandong, CUI Yangyang, GUO Youjin. Frequency ratio-random forest-model-based landslide susceptibility assessment[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2020, 20(34): 13990 − 13996. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [11]

    周天伦,曾超,范晨,等. 基于快速聚类-信息量模型的汶川及周边两县滑坡易发性评价[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2021,32(5):137 − 150. [ZHOU Tianlun,ZENG Chao,FAN Chen,et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment based on K-means cluster information model in Wenchuan and two neighboring counties,China[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2021,32(5):137 − 150. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    ZHOU Tianlun, ZENG Chao, FAN Chen, et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment based on K-means cluster information model in Wenchuan and two neighboring counties, China[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2021, 32(5): 137 − 150. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [12]

    蒋万钰,陈冠,孟兴民,等. 基于卷积神经网络模型的区域滑坡敏感性评价——以川藏铁路沿线为例[J]. 兰州大学学报(自然科学版),2022,58(2):203 − 211. [JIANG Wanyu,CHEN Guan,MENG Xingmin,et al. Evaluation of regional landslide susceptibility based on the convolution neural network model:A case study along the Sichuan Tibet Railway[J]. Journal of Lanzhou University (Natural Sciences),2022,58(2):203 − 211. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    JIANG Wanyu, CHEN Guan, MENG Xingmin, et al. Evaluation of regional landslide susceptibility based on the convolution neural network model: A case study along the Sichuan Tibet Railway[J]. Journal of Lanzhou University (Natural Sciences), 2022, 58(2): 203 − 211. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [13]

    刘璐瑶,高惠瑛,李照. 基于CF与Logistic回归模型耦合的永嘉县滑坡易发性评价[J]. 中国海洋大学学报(自然科学版),2021,51(10):121 − 129. [LIU Luyao,GAO Huiying,LI Zhao. Landslide susceptibility assessment based on coupling of CF model and logistic regression model in Yongjia County[J]. Periodical of Ocean University of China,2021,51(10):121 − 129. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    LIU Luyao, GAO Huiying, LI Zhao. Landslide susceptibility assessment based on coupling of CF model and logistic regression model in Yongjia County[J]. Periodical of Ocean University of China, 2021, 51(10): 121 − 129. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [14]

    金朝,费雯丽,丁卫,等. 基于信息量模型和Logistic回归模型的地质灾害易发性评价——以十堰市郧阳区为例[J]. 资源环境与工程,2021,35(6):845 − 850. [JIN Zhao,FEI Wenli,DING Wei,et al. Evaluation of geological disaster susceptibility based on information model and logistic regression model[J]. Resources Environment & Engineering,2021,35(6):845 − 850. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    JIN Zhao, FEI Wenli, DING Wei, et al. Evaluation of geological disaster susceptibility based on information model and logistic regression model[J]. Resources Environment & Engineering, 2021, 35(6): 845 − 850. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [15]

    吉日伍呷,田宏岭,韩继冲. 基于不同机器学习算法的地震滑坡易发性评价——以鲁甸地震为例[J]. 昆明理工大学学报(自然科学版),2022,47(2):47 − 56. [JI R,TIAN Hongling,HAN Jichong. Evaluation of the susceptibility of earthquake landslides based on different machine learning algorithms:Taking Ludian earthquake as an example[J]. Journal of Kunming University of Science and Technology (Natural Science),2022,47(2):47 − 56. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    JI R, TIAN Hongling, HAN Jichong. Evaluation of the susceptibility of earthquake landslides based on different machine learning algorithms: Taking Ludian earthquake as an example[J]. Journal of Kunming University of Science and Technology (Natural Science), 2022, 47(2): 47 − 56. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [16]

    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. [FAN Zhiyin,GOU Xiaofeng,QIN Mingyue,et al. Information and logistic regression models based coupling analysis for susceptibility of geological hazards[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology,2018,26(2):340 − 347. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    FAN Zhiyin, GOU Xiaofeng, QIN Mingyue, et al. Information and logistic regression models based coupling analysis for susceptibility of geological hazards[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 2018, 26(2): 340 − 347. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [17]

    张晓东. 基于遥感和GIS的宁夏盐池县地质灾害风险评价研究[D]. 北京:中国地质大学(北京),2018. [ZHANG Xiaodong. Study on geological disaster risk assessment based on RS and GIS in Yanchi County,Ningxia[D]. Beijing:China University of Geosciences,2018. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    ZHANG Xiaodong. Study on geological disaster risk assessment based on RS and GIS in Yanchi County, Ningxia[D]. Beijing: China University of Geosciences, 2018. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [18]

    陈立华,李立丰,吴福,等. 基于GIS与信息量法的北流市地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 地球与环境,2020,48(4):471 − 479. [CHEN Lihua,LI Lifeng,WU Fu,et al. Evaluation of the geological hazard vulnerability in the Beiliu City based on GIS and information value model[J]. Earth and Environment,2020,48(4):471 − 479. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    CHEN Lihua, LI Lifeng, WU Fu, et al. Evaluation of the geological hazard vulnerability in the Beiliu City based on GIS and information value model[J]. Earth and Environment, 2020, 48(4): 471 − 479. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [19]

    杨盼盼,王念秦,郭有金,等. 基于加权信息量模型的临潼区滑坡易发性评价[J]. 长江科学院院报,2020,37(9):50 − 56. [YANG Panpan,WANG Nianqin,GUO Youjin,et al. Assessment of landslide susceptibility in Lintong district using weighted information value model[J]. Journal of Yangtze River Scientific Research Institute,2020,37(9):50 − 56. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    YANG Panpan, WANG Nianqin, GUO Youjin, et al. Assessment of landslide susceptibility in Lintong district using weighted information value model[J]. Journal of Yangtze River Scientific Research Institute, 2020, 37(9): 50 − 56. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [20]

    庞栋栋,刘刚,何敬,等. 基于层次分析法的甘肃省地质灾害风险评估分析[J]. 国土资源信息化,2021(6):41 − 47. [PANG Dongdong,LIU Gang,HE Jing,et al. Analysis of geological hazard risk assessment in Gansu Province based on analytic hierarchy process[J]. Land and Resources Informatization,2021(6):41 − 47. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    PANG Dongdong, LIU Gang, HE Jing, et al. Analysis of geological hazard risk assessment in Gansu Province based on analytic hierarchy process[J]. Land and Resources Informatization, 2021(6): 41 − 47. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [21]

    郭谦. 层次分析法在生态环境综合评价应用中的优化[J]. 国土资源遥感,2008,20(3):104 − 107. [GUO Qian. The optimization of AHP in its application to the comprehensive evaluation of ecological environment[J]. Remote Sensing for Land & Resources,2008,20(3):104 − 107. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    GUO Qian. The optimization of AHP in its application to the comprehensive evaluation of ecological environment[J]. Remote Sensing for Land & Resources, 2008, 20(3): 104 − 107. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [22]

    张玘恺,凌斯祥,李晓宁,等. 九寨沟县滑坡灾害易发性快速评估模型对比研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2020,39(8):1595 − 1610. [ZHANG Qikai,LING Sixiang,LI Xiaoning,et al. Comparison of landslide susceptibility mapping rapid assessment models in Jiuzhaigou County,Sichuan Province,China[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering,2020,39(8):1595 − 1610. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    ZHANG Qikai, LING Sixiang, LI Xiaoning, et al. Comparison of landslide susceptibility mapping rapid assessment models in Jiuzhaigou County, Sichuan Province, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2020, 39(8): 1595 − 1610. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [23]

    杜国梁,杨志华,袁颖,等. 基于逻辑回归-信息量的川藏交通廊道滑坡易发性评价[J]. 水文地质工程地质,2021,48(5):102 − 111. [DU Guoliang, YANG Zhihua, YUAN Ying, et al. Landslide susceptibility mapping in the Sichuan-Tibet traffic corridor using logistic regression-information value method[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 2021, 48(5):102 − 111. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    DU Guoliang, YANG Zhihua, YUAN Ying, et al. Landslide susceptibility mapping in the Sichuan-Tibet traffic corridor using logistic regression-information value method[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 2021, 48(5): 102 − 111. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [24]

    杜国梁,杨志华,袁颖,等. 基于逻辑回归-信息量的川藏交通廊道滑坡易发性评价[J]. 水文地质工程地质,2021,48(5):102 − 111. [DU Guoliang,YANG Zhihua,YUAN Ying,et al. Landslide susceptibility mapping in the Sichuan-Tibet traffic corridor using logistic regression-information value method[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology,2021,48(5):102 − 111. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    DU Guoliang, YANG Zhihua, YUAN Ying, et al. Landslide susceptibility mapping in the Sichuan-Tibet traffic corridor using logistic regression-information value method[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 2021, 48(5): 102 − 111. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [25]

    王涛,刘甲美,栗泽桐,等. 中国地震滑坡危险性评估及其对国土空间规划的影响研究[J]. 中国地质,2021,48(1):21 − 39. [WANG Tao, LIU Jiamei, LI Zetong, et al. Seismic landslide hazard assessment of China and its impact on national territory spatial planning[J]. Geology in China, 2021, 48(1):21 − 39. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    WANG Tao, LIU Jiamei, LI Zetong, et al. Seismic landslide hazard assessment of China and its impact on national territory spatial planning[J]. Geology in China, 2021, 48(1): 21 − 39. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [26]

    周苏华,付宇航,邢静康,等. 基于不同统计模型的肯尼亚滑坡危险性评价[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2023,34(4): 114 − 124. [ZHOU Suhua, FU Yuhang, XING Jingkang, et al. Assessment of landslide hazard risk in Kenya based on different statistical models[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2023, 34(4):114 − 124. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    ZHOU Suhua, FU Yuhang, XING Jingkang, et al. Assessment of landslide hazard risk in Kenya based on different statistical models[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2023, 34(4): 114 − 124. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    [27]

    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)

    [28]

    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 assessment based on coupling of woe model and logistic regression model[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology,2023,31(1):165 − 175. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    LIU Luyao, GAO Huiying. Landslide susceptibility assessment based on coupling of woe model and logistic regression model[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 2023, 31(1): 165 − 175. (in Chinese with English abstract)

  • 加载中

(4)

(6)

计量
  • 文章访问数:  681
  • PDF下载数:  122
  • 施引文献:  0
出版历程
收稿日期:  2022-08-22
修回日期:  2022-10-14
刊出日期:  2023-10-25

目录