DEMATEL-ISM-based beam field toughness evaluation index system

Abstract

The invention discloses a DEMATEL-ISM-based beam field toughness evaluation index system. The method comprises the following steps: proposing a toughness three-stage action curve; analyzing beam field system toughness influence factors including personnel, equipment, management and environment; completing index screening according to indexes with relatively high occurrence frequency of literatures in the evaluation index library, and investigating and investigating experts in fields such as related beam field construction units, college teachers and scholars to obtain an influence weight data set; obtaining a standardized direct influence matrix and a comprehensive influence matrix according to the data set; calculating the centrality and reason degree of each index, determining an overall influence matrix, constructing a reachable matrix, carrying out regional decomposition, and finally screening the indexes in a layered manner to obtain a toughness evaluation index. According to the invention, the evaluation method can be suitable for the analysis and research of the multi-index influence relationship of a multi-index complex system, and can be widely applied to the toughness evaluation of a beam field system.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention relates to the technical field of beam field toughness evaluation, and in particular to a beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM. Background Art

[0002] In recent years, the country has vigorously advocated the construction of resilient transportation. Resilient transportation construction enables transportation infrastructure and transportation systems to have sufficient capabilities to face the destructive impact of various events, which has become a major issue in the country's strategic development. At the same time, safety accidents in beam yards occur frequently, posing a great hidden danger to the personal safety of beam yard construction. Therefore, it is particularly important to conduct resilience assessments on beam yards and improve the safety and reliability of beam yards.

[0003] As for the toughness assessment of beam yards, current research at home and abroad ignores the comprehensiveness of the toughness concept and the complexity of beam yards, resulting in incomplete coverage of indicators. Therefore, from the perspective of the composition of the beam yard system, it is crucial to explore an evaluation index system that comprehensively considers the factors affecting toughness for the toughness assessment of the beam yard system. Summary of the invention

[0004] In view of the shortcomings of the prior art, the purpose of the present invention is to provide a beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM. The evaluation method can be applied to the analysis and research of the multi-index influence relationship of a multi-index complex system, and can be widely used in the toughness evaluation of beam field systems. In order to achieve the above-mentioned purpose and other advantages according to the present invention, a beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM is provided, including:

[0005] S1. Conduct toughness theory analysis for beam field and propose three-stage toughness action curve;

[0006] S2. Analyze the factors affecting the toughness of the beam yard system, including personnel, equipment, management and environment;

[0007] S3. Complete the index screening based on the indexes with high frequency of appearance in the literature of the evaluation index library, and conduct surveys on experts in the field of relevant beam field construction units, university professors and scholars to obtain the impact weight data set;

[0008] S4. According to the impact weight data set in the above steps, a normalized direct impact matrix and a comprehensive impact matrix are obtained;

[0009] S5. Calculate the centrality and causality of each indicator, determine the overall impact matrix, construct the reachability matrix, perform regional decomposition, and finally screen the indicators in layers to obtain the resilience evaluation index.

[0010] Preferably, the three-stage resilience action curve in step S1 includes three stages: resistance, response and recovery.

[0011] Preferably, the personnel in step S2 include construction workers and security personnel; the equipment includes the rationality of the layout of the beam yard, intelligent technology, emergency passages and refuges, stairs, power supply systems, communication equipment, lighting devices, guide signs, broadcasting equipment and fire-fighting equipment; management includes material management, system management, personnel management, operation management and financial management; the environment includes internal environmental impacts and external environmental impacts.

[0012] Preferably, in step S3, an original indicator library is established by collecting and collating indicators in relevant standards, specifications and literature, and then the frequency analysis method is used to select indicators with higher frequencies in the literature in the evaluation indicator library, and indicators with similar concepts are merged. One of the indicators with inclusion relationships is selected, and indicators irrelevant to toughness bearing capacity are removed, thereby completing the preliminary screening of indicators and obtaining evaluation indicators.

[0013] Preferably, in step S4, a direct impact matrix R is constructed as follows:

[0014]

[0015] in, Indicates the value of the kth indicator in the indicator system in the nth data set;

[0016] N represents the number of data sets;

[0017] r k represents the influence coefficient of the kth indicator;

[0018] Get the direct influence matrix R = [r ij ] m×m , each element r in the matrix R ij It is expressed as the influence of index i on index k. For matrix R, find the maximum value of the sum of each column and the sum of each row, and set each element r in R ij Dividing by this maximum value, we can get that the norm will directly affect the matrix G = [g ij ] m×m .

[0019] Preferably, in order to analyze the mutual influence and indirect influence relationship between any two indicators in step S4, the matrix G is multiplied by itself m times (m=0, 1, 2, ..., 1) and summed to obtain a comprehensive influence matrix T, as shown in the following formula:

[0020]

[0021] Where I is the m-order unit matrix, t ij is the value of the i-th row and j-th column in the comprehensive influence matrix.

[0022] Preferably, the centrality and the cause degree in step S5 are respectively expressed as follows:

[0023]

[0024] Among them, M i The larger the value, the more important the indicator i is in the carrying capacity assessment indicator system and should be accepted; N i >0, it means that indicator i mainly affects other indicators; N i When <0, it means that indicator i is mainly affected by other indicators.

[0025] Preferably, in step S5, in order to construct a reachable matrix S=[s ij ] m×m , it is necessary to introduce the factor average threshold λ to process the matrix H; when h ij When s ij The value is 0; when h ij >λ, s ij The value is 1; the calculation formula is as follows:

[0026]

[0027] Preferably, in step S5, regional decomposition is performed, A(d i ) is the index relationship corresponding to the value of 1 in the i-th row of the matrix S; B(d i ) is the index relationship corresponding to the value of 1 in the jth column of the matrix S; then the initial emission layer index C(d i )for:

[0028] C(d i )={d i ∈D|A(d i )∩B(d i )=B(d i )}

[0029] Existence k , d t ∈C(d i ), so that This means that the two areas cannot reach each other; similarly, if This means that the two areas can reach each other.

[0030] Preferably, in step S5, the indicators are processed in layers to construct the final receiving layer indicator set Q(d i ):

[0031] Q(d i )={d i ∈D|A(d i )∩B(di )=A(d i )}

[0032] The above formula is for the first layer. Remove the stratified indicators and re-screen the second layer indicators. Repeat the above steps until the stratification of all indicators is completed.

[0033] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0034] (1) The present invention analyzes the factors affecting toughness bearing capacity from four aspects: personnel, equipment, management and environment, and constructs an original evaluation index library based on relevant standards and literature research.

[0035] (2) The present invention proposes a screening principle for evaluation indicators, preliminarily screens out evaluation indicators through methods such as literature frequency analysis and system analysis, and combines the DEMATEL model with the ISM model, making it applicable to the analysis and study of the multi-indicator influence relationship of a multi-indicator complex system.

[0036] (3) The present invention adopts the Delphi method to obtain the original influence degree data of the indicators, inputs it into the model for experimental analysis, and then conducts secondary screening of the indicators from five perspectives: causality, centrality, regional connectivity, initial sending layer, and final receiving layer. The evaluation indicators are selected as the final toughness evaluation index system, so that it can be widely used in the toughness evaluation of the beam field system. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0037] Figure 1 It is a flow chart of the beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM according to the present invention;

[0038] Figure 2 It is a three-stage action curve diagram of the toughness of the beam field system according to the beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM of the present invention;

[0039] Figure 3 It is a distribution diagram of the cause degree centrality of the equipment evaluation index of the beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM according to the present invention;

[0040] Figure 4 It is a hierarchical relationship diagram of equipment indicators of the beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM according to the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0041] The following will be combined with the drawings in the embodiments of the present invention to clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0042] Reference Figure 1 , a beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM, including the following steps:

[0043] S1. For the beam yard, a resilience theory analysis is conducted and a three-stage resilience action curve is proposed; the three-stage resilience action curve includes three stages: resistance, response and recovery; the beam yard system encounters the risk impact of an unexpected event, at which time the system performance continues to decline until it reaches the response stage, tends to stabilize, and then, through the elimination of fault repair risks, operations are gradually resumed, and system performance begins to rise until it returns to normal.

[0044] S2. Analyze the factors affecting the resilience of the beam yard system, including personnel, equipment, management and environment. In step S2, personnel include construction workers and security personnel. Equipment includes the rationality of the layout of the beam yard, intelligent technology, emergency passages and shelters, stairs, power supply system, communication equipment, lighting devices, guide signs, broadcasting equipment and fire-fighting equipment. Management includes material management, system management, personnel management, operation management and financial management. The environment includes internal and external environmental impacts. Micro-environment level and public health events caused by the biological environment in the beam yard. External environmental factors: extreme weather phenomena, poor geological environment, public security issues, and transportation connection capabilities around the beam yard.

[0045] S3. Complete the index screening according to the indexes with high frequency of appearance in the evaluation index library, and conduct surveys on experts in the field of relevant beam yard construction units, university professors and scholars to obtain the impact weight data set; the index screening and weight data set acquisition; by collecting and collating the standards, specifications and relevant domestic and foreign literature research in the field of rail transit, construct an original index library for the toughness evaluation of the beam yard system consisting of 102 indicators; use the frequency analysis method to select the indexes with high frequency of appearance in the evaluation index library, merge the indicators with similar concepts, select one of the indicators with inclusion relationship, remove the indicators that are not related to the toughness bearing capacity, and complete the preliminary screening of the indicators, and obtain 42 evaluation indicators, as shown in Table 1

[0046] Table 1 Toughness evaluation indicators after preliminary screening

[0047]

[0048] The original data of the DEMATEL-ISM model is mainly obtained by the Delphi method. After preliminary screening, there are 42 indicators. According to the construction principle of the DEMATEL-ISM direct impact matrix, each sample needs to obtain 1,764 data, which is too large and lacks feasibility. Therefore, the survey samples are divided into four categories: personnel, equipment, management, and environment, and obtained separately. The Likert method is used to set the degree of influence of each indicator, where "4" represents a very strong influence, "3" represents a high influence, "2" represents a medium influence, "1" represents a low influence, and "0" represents no influence. Assign values ​​to the degree of influence of the indicators. In order to ensure the rigor and research value of the data, and taking into account the size of the data, the survey subjects are experts in the fields of beam construction units, university professors and scholars related to the project.

[0049] Based on the four types of data obtained, the data were averaged according to the direct impact matrix construction method of the DEMATEL-ISM model to form four matrices of 9×9, 15×15, 10×10 and 8×8, and models needed to be constructed separately for analysis.

[0050] S4. According to the impact weight data set in the above steps, a normalized direct impact matrix and a comprehensive impact matrix are obtained; the normalized direct impact matrix and the comprehensive impact matrix are used as an example to construct a model and perform indicator screening analysis, determine the comprehensive impact matrix T, calculate the cause degree and centrality of each indicator, and the results are as follows: Figure 3 shown.

[0051] The matrix T is further processed to determine the reachable matrix S and perform regional decomposition, as shown in Table 2:

[0052] Table 2 Regional distribution of facility and equipment indicators

[0053]

[0054] S5. Calculate the centrality and causality of each indicator, determine the overall impact matrix, construct the reachability matrix, perform regional decomposition, and finally screen the indicators in layers to obtain the resilience evaluation index. Figure 3 According to the cause degree results of the 15 indicators of the facilities and equipment category, the indicators can be divided into two categories, namely cause indicators and result indicators. Cause degree>0 means that the indicator is the cause of other indicators, including indicators 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 14, and 15. Indicators with cause degree<0 are result indicators, which means that the indicator is the result caused by other indicators, including indicators 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, and 13.

[0055] Centrality: Centrality mainly reflects the influence of influencing factor indicators on toughness bearing capacity. Indicators with a centrality less than 1 indicate that the indicator is not important and should be deleted. Figure 3 The centrality results of the 15 indicators in the category of facilities and equipment show that the centrality values ​​of indicators 1-15 are all greater than 1, indicating that the candidate indicators are all indicators that have a greater impact on toughness bearing capacity. The larger the centrality, the more important the indicator is in the indicator system and the more it should be retained.

[0056] Regional connectivity

[0057] According to d k ,d t The result shows that there is no All regions are connected, so there is no need to filter indicators separately.

[0058] Initial Emission Layer

[0059] According to C(d i )Results show that indicators 1, 8, and 14 are initial emission layer indicators, which means that these three indicators have strong independence and representativeness. Any two elements do not affect each other and should be retained.

[0060] Final receiving layer

[0061] According to the final receiving layer indicator set Q(d i ) to draw a hierarchical relationship diagram of the influencing factors of facilities and equipment, such as Figure 4 shown.

[0062] Figure 4 The influencing factor indicators of facilities and equipment are divided into 7 levels. The first level indicators represent the indicators that have the most direct impact on resilience, that is, when the value of the indicator is changed, it will be fed back to the resilience in a relatively short time, producing the most direct impact; the seventh level indicators represent the most fundamental impact on resilience, that is, when the value of the indicator changes, it will take a long time to affect the resilience bearing capacity, which is the most indirect indicator. Therefore, when constructing a resilience assessment indicator system, the indicators of lower levels should be given priority.

[0063] Although indicators 1 and 14 have strong independence and representativeness, they are at level 7, the highest level, and have weak direct effects on the toughness of the beam field, so they should be deleted; indicator 8 has strong independence and representativeness, and has a strong direct effect on toughness, so it should be retained; indicators 10 and 15 have weak effects on toughness and are not independent, so they should be deleted.

[0064] Finally, the following equipment evaluation indicators were selected: (2) Safety performance of broadcasting equipment (3) Stability of power supply equipment (4) Safety performance of lighting equipment (5) Stability of communication signal system (6) Emergency evacuation capacity of stairs (7) Density of building facilities (8) Fire protection equipment guarantee capacity (9) Setting of emergency passages and shelters (11) Emergency evacuation capacity of exits (12) Setting of safety guidance signs (13) System risk monitoring and early warning.

[0065] The indicators of personnel, management and environment were also screened by the DEMATEL-ISM model through the above steps. Combined with the opinions of experts, the screened indicators were further revised, and finally a beam yard system toughness evaluation index system consisting of 27 evaluation indicators was obtained, as shown in Table 3.

[0066] Table 3 Beam yard system toughness evaluation index system

[0067]

[0068]

[0069] After the above steps are processed, a beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM can be solved.

[0070] Figure 2 It is the three-stage action curve of resilience obtained by analyzing step S1, which is divided into before disturbance, during disturbance and after disturbance. The disturbance can be divided into resistance stage, response stage and recovery stage; while the resilience system focuses on the time span from the start time t0 of the disturbance to the end time t3 of the disturbance.

[0071] The number of devices and processing scales described here are used to simplify the description of the present invention, and the application, modification and variation of the present invention will be obvious to those skilled in the art.

[0072] Although the embodiments of the present invention have been disclosed as above, they are not limited to the applications listed in the specification and implementation modes. They can be fully applied to various fields suitable for the present invention. For those familiar with the art, additional modifications can be easily implemented. Therefore, without departing from the general concept defined by the claims and the scope of equivalents, the present invention is not limited to the specific details and the illustrations shown and described herein.

Claims

1. A beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM, characterized in that: The following steps are involved: S1. Conduct toughness theory analysis for beam field and propose three-stage toughness action curve; S2. Analyze the factors affecting the toughness of the beam yard system, including personnel, equipment, management and environment; S3. Complete the index screening based on the indexes with high frequency of appearance in the literature of the evaluation index library, and conduct surveys on experts in the field of relevant beam field construction units, university professors and scholars to obtain the impact weight data set; S4. According to the impact weight data set in the above steps, a normalized direct impact matrix and a comprehensive impact matrix are obtained; S5. Calculate the centrality and causality of each indicator, determine the overall impact matrix, construct the reachability matrix, perform regional decomposition, and finally screen the indicators in layers to obtain the resilience evaluation index.

2. A beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that: The three-stage resilience action curve in step S1 includes three stages: resistance, response and recovery.

3. A beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM as claimed in claim 2, characterized in that: The personnel in step S2 include construction workers and security personnel; the equipment includes the rationality of the layout of the beam yard, intelligent technology, emergency passages and refuges, stairs, power supply systems, communication equipment, lighting devices, guide signs, broadcasting equipment and fire-fighting equipment; management includes material management, system management, personnel management, operation management and financial management; the environment includes internal environmental impacts and external environmental impacts.

4. A beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM as claimed in claim 3, characterized in that: In step S3, the original indicator library is established by collecting and organizing the indicators in the relevant standards, specifications and literature, and then the frequency analysis method is used to select the indicators with higher frequency of appearance in the literature in the evaluation indicator library, merge the indicators with similar concepts, select one of the indicators with inclusion relationship, and remove the indicators irrelevant to the toughness bearing capacity, so as to complete the preliminary screening of the indicators and obtain the evaluation indicators.

5. A beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM as claimed in claim 4, characterized in that: In step S4, a direct impact matrix R is constructed as follows: in, Indicates the value of the kth indicator in the indicator system in the nth data set; N represents the number of data sets; r k represents the influence coefficient of the kth indicator; Get the direct influence matrix R = [r ij ] m×m , each element r in the matrix R ij It is expressed as the influence of index i on index k. For matrix R, find the maximum value of the sum of each column and the sum of each row, and set each element r in R ij Dividing by this maximum value, we can get that the norm will directly affect the matrix G = [g ij ] m×m .

6. A beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that: In step S4, in order to analyze the mutual influence and indirect influence relationship between any two indicators, the matrix G is multiplied by itself m times (m=0-1, 2, ..., l) and summed to obtain a comprehensive influence matrix T, as shown in the following formula: Where I is the m-order unit matrix, t ij is the value of the i-th row and j-th column in the comprehensive influence matrix.

7. A beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM as claimed in claim 1, characterized in that: The centrality and causality in step S5 are respectively shown as follows: Among them, M i The larger the value, the more important the indicator i is in the carrying capacity assessment indicator system and should be accepted; N i >0, it means that indicator i mainly affects other indicators; N i When <0, it means that indicator i is mainly affected by other indicators.

8. A beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM as claimed in claim 7, characterized in that: In step S5, in order to construct the reachability matrix S = [s ij ] m×m , it is necessary to introduce the factor average threshold λ to process the matrix H; when h ij When s ij The value is 0; when h ij >λ, s ij The value is 1; the calculation formula is as follows:

9. A beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM as claimed in claim 8, characterized in that: In step S5, regional decomposition is performed, A(d i ) is the index relationship corresponding to the value of 1 in the i-th row of the matrix S; B(d i ) is the index relationship corresponding to the value of 1 in the jth column of the matrix S; then the initial emission layer index C(d i )for: C(d i )={d i ∈D|a(d i )∩B(d i )=B(d i )} Existence k , d t ∈C(d i ), so that This means that the two areas cannot reach each other; similarly, if This means that the two areas can reach each other.

10. A beam field toughness evaluation index system based on DEMATEL-ISM as claimed in claim 9, characterized in that: In step S5, the index is layered and the final receiving layer index set Q(d i ): Q(d i )={d i ∈D|A(d i )∩B(d i )=A(d i )} The above formula is for the first layer. Remove the stratified indicators and re-screen the second layer indicators. Repeat the above steps until the stratification of all indicators is completed.

Images