| 区域泥石流孕灾环境危险性评价——以北京军都山区为例 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 程维明,夏遥,曹玉尧,宋杨,刘海江.区域泥石流孕灾环境危险性评价——以北京军都山区为例[J].地理研究,2013,32(4):595-606. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 程维明 夏遥 曹玉尧 宋杨 刘海江 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 1. 中国科学院地理科学与资源研究所, 资源与环境信息系统国家重点实验室, 北京100101;
2. 中国环境监测总站, 北京100012 |
| |
| 基金项目： | 国家科技支撑计划，科技基础性专项，国家自然科学基金项目 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 以北京军都山区实测泥石流沟谷数为基准,基于因子叠加、信息量模型和FCM-粗糙集三种方法,分别获得了泥石流灾害发生的危险性等级分布,结果表明:①各分区单位面积内泥石流沟谷数都随着危险性评价等级的提高而增多;②因子叠加法和信息量模型法可得出五级泥石流灾害危险性分级,而粗糙集法只得出三级分级;③以实际泥石流沟谷落在评价区数目为标准,信息量模型法有90%以上的泥石流沟谷在危险性高和极高区域;粗糙集法得到危险区域覆盖了63.72%的泥石流沟谷分布;④从单位面积泥石流沟谷数与泥石流沟谷分布比率可得,信息量模型法评价精度较高,因子叠加法没有形成良好的梯度,而粗糙集法计算等级结果与其他方法存在差异,故须在其他区域进行进一步研究。
|
| 关 键 词： | 泥石流 孕灾环境 危险性 评价 军都山区 |
| 收稿时间： | 2012-05-25 |
| 修稿时间： | 2012-11-17 |
Regional hazard assessment of disaster environment for debris flows:Taking Jundu Mountain, Beijing as an example |
| |
| CHENG Weiming,XIA Yao,CAO Yuyao,SONG Yang,LIU Haijiang.Regional hazard assessment of disaster environment for debris flows:Taking Jundu Mountain, Beijing as an example[J].Geographical Research,2013,32(4):595-606. |
| |
| Authors: | CHENG Weiming XIA Yao CAO Yuyao SONG Yang LIU Haijiang |
| |
| Institution: | 1. State Key Laboratory of Resources and Environmental Information System, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China;
2. China National Environmental Monitoring Centre, Beijing 100012, China |
| |
| Abstract: | In this paper,three analysis methods,such as,factors weighting-superposition one, information amount model one and FCM-rough set one,are firstly presented and analyzed. FCM-rough set method integrates the advantages of fuzzy C-means clustering method(FCM) and rough set theory,which is a data-driven method.On the basis of spatial distributions of 339 gully numbers of the debris flows from field surveying in Jundu Mountains of Beijing, hazard assessment maps of the debris flows are compiled based on the three methods,and then the assessment results are compared.The conclusions can be drawn as follows:1)The methods of factors weighting-superposition one and information amount model one can draw 5 levels of hazard classification results of debris flows,by contrast,FCM-rough set method can only draw 3 levels of classification results.2)Based on the results of the three assessment methods,on the whole,gully numbers of debris flows in the hazard zones increase,when hazard assessment levels change from low to high.3)Taking the actual gully numbers of debris flows located in different hazard zones as judging standard,information amount model method can obtain better results,which possesses more than 90% of gully numbers of debris flows in high and very high hazard zones;FCM-rough set method can reach 63.72% of the gully distribution of debris flows in dangerous zones.4)Taking ratio of gully numbers within unit area and gully distribution of debris flows as judging standard,and information amount model method is relatively good to the general gully distribution of debris flows,which possesses high precision evaluation.The results obtained by factors weighting-superposition method have not obvious difference in high and very high hazard zones,and a good gradient is not formed.FCM-rough set method covers most of gully distribution of debris flows in dangerous zones,but its calculation results are not good,and the method could be promoted in other similar regional disaster environment for future study. |
| |
| Keywords: | debris flow hazard assessment disaster environment assessment Jundu Mountains |
| 本文献已被 CNKI 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
| 点击此处可从《地理研究》浏览原始摘要信息 |
| 点击此处可从《地理研究》下载免费的PDF全文 |
|
