Controllability detailed planning evaluation method and related equipment

Abstract

The invention belongs to the technical field of urban planning, and discloses a control detailed planning evaluation method and related equipment, and the method comprises the steps: carrying out the unit division of a target planning region, comparing the distribution data of each planning element in each unit in an overall planning scheme and a control detailed planning scheme, and carrying out the calculation of the overall planning scheme; and finally, the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme is evaluated according to the conflict total score of each planning element corresponding to each unit, so that the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme can be evaluated scientifically and objectively. Therefore, a reference basis is provided for the optimization of a control detailed planning scheme.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present application relates to the field of urban planning technology, and in particular to a control detailed planning evaluation method and related equipment. Background Art

[0002] Regulatory detailed planning is a type of planning based on the city master plan or zoning plan, which aims to determine the control indicators of land use nature and intensity of use in the construction area, the control location of roads and engineering pipelines, and the planning requirements for spatial environmental control. Regulatory detailed planning can provide guidance and constraints for urban construction and development, provide detailed planning and design guidance for specific construction projects, ensure that all construction and development activities meet planning requirements, and promote the orderly development of the city.

[0003] The control detailed plan is usually prepared by relevant departments according to the requirements of the city master plan or zoning plan. Generally, it is manually prepared by relevant planners based on their experience. There is currently a lack of scientific and reasonable evaluation methods for the prepared control detailed planning schemes, resulting in the rationality of the control detailed planning schemes only relying on the experience of planners. Summary of the invention

[0004] The purpose of this application is to provide a control detailed planning evaluation method and related equipment, which can scientifically and objectively evaluate the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme, thereby providing a reference basis for the optimization of the control detailed planning scheme.

[0005] In a first aspect, the present application provides a control detailed planning evaluation method for evaluating the rationality of a control detailed planning scheme, comprising the steps of: A1. Divide the target planning area into multiple units; A2. Obtain the distribution data of each planning element in the master planning scheme of the target planning area in each of the units, recorded as the first distribution data; and obtain the distribution data of each planning element in the control detailed planning scheme of the target planning area in each of the units, recorded as the second distribution data; A3. Calculate the total conflict score of each planning element in each unit according to the first distribution data and the second distribution data; A4. Evaluate the rationality of the controlling detailed planning scheme based on the total conflict score.

[0006] This control detailed planning evaluation method, after dividing the target planning area into units, compares the distribution data of each planning element in the overall planning scheme and the control detailed planning scheme in each unit to obtain the total conflict score of each planning element corresponding to each unit, and finally evaluates the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme according to the total conflict score of each planning element corresponding to each unit. It can scientifically and objectively evaluate the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme, thereby providing a reference basis for the optimization of the control detailed planning scheme.

[0007] Preferably, the planning elements include control line elements and public service facility elements; The distribution data corresponding to the control line element includes distribution area; The distribution data corresponding to the public service facility element includes the affected area and also includes the construction quantity and / or construction area.

[0008] Preferably, step A3 comprises: A301. Calculate the amount of conflict between each of the first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of each of the planning elements in each of the units; A302. Based on the conflict frequency conversion rule, according to the conflict amount, calculate the conflict score between each of the first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of each planning element in each unit; A303. Calculate the total conflict score of each planning element in each unit according to the conflict score.

[0009] Due to the differences in the control forms and management requirements of various planning elements, it is impossible to directly compare the severity of conflicts at the same level based on the amount of conflicts. Therefore, it is difficult to comprehensively evaluate the conflict severity of each unit based on the conflict situation of each planning element. Here, after the conflict amount of each differentiated planning element is converted into the same frequency, an equal-level comparison can be achieved, so that the conflict severity of each unit can be accurately evaluated based on the conflict situation of each planning element.

[0010] Preferably, the conflict same-frequency conversion rule is: ; ; ; in, is the conflict amount between the kth item of the first distribution data of the jth planning element in the ith unit and the corresponding second distribution data, is the average value of the conflict amount between the kth item of the first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of the jth planning element in each unit, is the standard deviation of the conflict amount between the kth item of the first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of the jth planning element in each unit, for The deviation from the mean, for The scoring factor of , is the scoring coefficient, is the scoring function, for The assigned value of is the weight value of the jth planning element, is the conflict score between the kth item of the first distribution data in the ith unit of the jth planning element and the corresponding second distribution data.

[0011] Based on the above conflict frequency conversion rules, the conflict amount of each planning element is converted into a conflict frequency, which can effectively achieve equal-level comparison of the conflict severity of different planning elements.

[0012] Preferably, the scoring function is: ; ; ; Where n is the number of sorting intervals, , , They are all sorted intervals. , , are sorting interval demarcation values. , , All are reference scores. After sorting the scoring factors of the conflict amount between the kth item of the first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of the jth planning element in each unit in descending order, The sorting sequence number, N is the total number of planning elements, for Sort by percentage.

[0013] Preferably, step A303 includes: Calculating a comprehensive conflict score of each planning element in each unit according to a conflict score between each item of the first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of each planning element in each unit; The total conflict score of each planning element in each unit is calculated according to the comprehensive conflict score.

[0014] Preferably, step A4 comprises: Classifying each of the units according to the total conflict score of each of the planning elements in each of the units; Evaluate the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme based on the classification results.

[0015] In a second aspect, the present application provides a control detailed planning evaluation device for evaluating the rationality of a control detailed planning scheme, including: A partitioning module is used to divide the target planning area into multiple units; An acquisition module is used to acquire distribution data of each planning element in the overall planning scheme of the target planning area in each of the units, recorded as first distribution data; and to acquire distribution data of each planning element in the control detailed planning scheme of the target planning area in each of the units, recorded as second distribution data; A calculation module, used for calculating the total conflict score of each planning element in each unit according to the first distribution data and the second distribution data; An evaluation module is used to evaluate the rationality of the controlling detailed planning scheme according to the total conflict score.

[0016] In a third aspect, the present application provides an electronic device comprising a processor and a memory, wherein the memory stores a computer program executable by the processor, and when the processor executes the computer program, it runs the steps in the control detailed planning evaluation method described above.

[0017] In a fourth aspect, the present application provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, and when the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps in the control detailed planning evaluation method described above are executed.

[0018] Beneficial effects: The present application provides a control detailed planning evaluation method and related equipment. After dividing the target planning area into units, the distribution data of each planning element in the overall planning scheme and the control detailed planning scheme in each unit are compared to obtain the total conflict score of each planning element corresponding to each unit. Finally, the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme is evaluated according to the total conflict score of each planning element corresponding to each unit. The rationality of the control detailed planning scheme can be evaluated scientifically and objectively, thereby providing a reference basis for the optimization of the control detailed planning scheme. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0019] Figure 1 A flowchart of a control detailed planning evaluation method provided in an embodiment of the present application.

[0020] Figure 2A schematic diagram of the structure of a control detailed planning evaluation device provided in an embodiment of the present application.

[0021] Figure 3 A schematic diagram of the structure of an electronic device provided in an embodiment of the present application.

[0022] Explanation of reference numerals: 1. Division module; 2. Acquisition module; 3. Calculation module; 4. Evaluation module; 301. Processor; 302. Memory; 303. Communication bus. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0023] The technical solutions in the embodiments of the present application will be clearly and completely described below in conjunction with the drawings in the embodiments of the present application. Obviously, the described embodiments are only a part of the embodiments of the present application, rather than all of the embodiments. The components of the embodiments of the present application described and shown in the drawings here can be arranged and designed in various different configurations. Therefore, the following detailed description of the embodiments of the present application provided in the drawings is not intended to limit the scope of the application claimed for protection, but merely represents the selected embodiments of the present application. Based on the embodiments of the present application, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without making creative work belong to the scope of protection of the present application.

[0024] It should be noted that similar reference numerals and letters represent similar items in the following drawings, so once an item is defined in one drawing, it does not need to be further defined and explained in subsequent drawings. At the same time, in the description of this application, the terms "first", "second", etc. are only used to distinguish the description and cannot be understood as indicating or implying relative importance.

[0025] With the acceleration of urbanization, the importance of urban planning has become increasingly prominent. In the urban planning system, the control detailed planning, as a key link between the upper and lower levels, directly affects the sustainable development of the city. However, the traditional control detailed planning evaluation method often has problems such as strong subjectivity and the evaluation results are not objective and comprehensive enough. In order to solve these problems, this application proposes an innovative control detailed planning evaluation method, which aims to improve the scientificity and objectivity of the evaluation.

[0026] In urban planning practice, we often encounter such a situation: a city's master plan has been completed, and a more detailed control detailed plan needs to be formulated next. However, how to ensure that the control detailed plan is consistent with the master plan while meeting the actual needs of the specific area is a complex issue. The evaluation method proposed in this application is designed to solve this problem.

[0027] Please refer to Figure 1 , Figure 1It is a control detailed planning evaluation method in some embodiments of the present application, which is used to evaluate the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme, including the steps of: A1. Divide the target planning area into multiple units; A2. Obtain the distribution data of each planning element in the master planning scheme of the target planning area in each unit, recorded as the first distribution data; and obtain the distribution data of each planning element in the control detailed planning scheme of the target planning area in each unit, recorded as the second distribution data; A3. Calculate the total conflict score of each planning element in each unit according to the first distribution data and the second distribution data; A4. Evaluate the rationality of the controlling detailed planning scheme based on the total conflict score.

[0028] This control detailed planning evaluation method, after dividing the target planning area into units, compares the distribution data of each planning element in the overall planning scheme and the control detailed planning scheme in each unit to obtain the total conflict score of each planning element corresponding to each unit, and finally evaluates the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme according to the total conflict score of each planning element corresponding to each unit. It can scientifically and objectively evaluate the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme, thereby providing a reference basis for the optimization of the control detailed planning scheme.

[0029] Among them, the target planning area, that is, the planning area targeted by the control detailed planning scheme to be evaluated, can be but is not limited to urban areas, districts under the jurisdiction of a city, street areas or county areas.

[0030] Among them, the controlling detailed planning scheme is a planning scheme formulated based on the overall planning scheme.

[0031] In step A1, the target planning area may be divided into multiple units by gridding, or the units may be divided according to administrative divisions, functional divisions or geographical features, or according to the boundaries of national land space planning, but not limited thereto. The purpose of unit division is to analyze and evaluate the control detailed planning scheme in a more refined manner.

[0032] Specifically, planning elements include but are not limited to control line elements and public service facility elements. Control line elements include but are not limited to at least one of permanent basic farmland, ecological protection land, urban development land, and industrial land; public service facility elements include but are not limited to at least one of educational facilities, cultural facilities, sports facilities, medical facilities, social welfare facilities, water supply facilities, power supply facilities, drainage facilities, gas facilities, fire protection facilities, flood control facilities, emergency shelter facilities, and central urban green space.

[0033] Among them, the control line element is generally planned through the control line (the control line is such as a red line, a green line, a blue line, etc., and the area surrounded by the control line is the land use area), and the distribution data corresponding to the control line element includes the distribution area. Therefore, the first distribution data corresponding to the control line element includes the first distribution area, and the second distribution data corresponding to the control line element includes the second distribution area.

[0034] In step A2, for each control line element, the area occupied by the land use area of ​​the corresponding control line element in the overall planning scheme (i.e., the area surrounded by the control line, and the same control line element may have multiple land use areas) in each unit is obtained as the first distribution area of ​​the corresponding control line element in each unit; similarly, the area occupied by the land use area of ​​the corresponding control line element in the controlling detailed planning scheme is obtained in each unit as the second distribution area of ​​the corresponding control line element in each unit.

[0035] Among them, the distribution data corresponding to the public service facility element includes the affected area, and also includes the construction quantity and / or the construction area (for example, the distribution data corresponding to educational facilities, medical facilities, social welfare facilities, emergency shelter facilities, etc. include both the construction quantity and the construction area; the distribution data corresponding to sports facilities, water supply facilities, power supply facilities, drainage facilities, gas facilities, fire protection facilities, flood control facilities, etc. include the construction quantity, but not the construction area; the central urban green space includes the construction area, but not the construction quantity; but not limited to this). Thus, the first distribution data corresponding to the public service facility element includes the first affected area, and also includes the first construction quantity and / or the first construction area, and the second distribution data corresponding to the public service facility element includes the second affected area, and also includes the second construction quantity and / or the second construction area. This application introduces the indicator of affected area to measure the impact of public service facilities on surrounding areas. At the same time, the two indicators of construction quantity and construction area are also taken into consideration to more comprehensively evaluate the planning of public service facilities.

[0036] Among them, each facility corresponding to the public service facility element can provide corresponding public services to residents within a certain range around it, and the service range of each facility of the public service facility element is characterized by the influence area. The influence area is generally a circular area with the location of the corresponding facility as the center and the influence radius of the corresponding facility as the radius (but not limited to this), wherein the influence radius of the facility corresponding to each public service facility element can be the corresponding reference radius or the effective radius converted according to the corresponding reference radius and local traffic conditions. For example, the reference radius of the facilities corresponding to various public service facility elements can be determined in advance based on data statistics, and a query table can be prepared, and the reference radius of the facilities corresponding to each public service facility element can be obtained by querying the query table in real time. For example, the effective radius can be calculated in the following manner: first, a circular reference area is generated with the location of the facility corresponding to the corresponding public service facility element as the center and the reference radius as the radius; then, the number of various traffic facilities in the circular reference area is counted, and the weighted sum of the number of various traffic facilities is calculated (the weight value corresponding to the number of various traffic facilities can be set according to actual needs) as the reference traffic parameter; then, the radius adjustment coefficient is calculated according to the reference traffic parameter (for example, a plurality of different traffic parameter ranges are pre-set, and a corresponding reference radius adjustment coefficient is assigned to each traffic parameter range; and the corresponding reference radius adjustment coefficient is obtained in real time according to the traffic parameter range into which the reference traffic parameter falls, as the calculation result of the radius adjustment coefficient; or, a conversion formula between the reference traffic parameter and the radius adjustment coefficient is pre-set, and the radius adjustment coefficient is calculated in real time according to the reference traffic parameter using the conversion formula; the specific conversion formula can be set according to actual needs and is not limited here); finally, the radius adjustment coefficient is multiplied by the reference radius to obtain the effective radius.

[0037] Thus, in step A2, for each public service facility element, the influence area of ​​each facility of the corresponding public service facility element in the master plan is obtained (the acquisition method is referred to in the previous text), the union of the parts of these influence areas falling in each unit is obtained, and the area of ​​the union is calculated as the first influence area of ​​the corresponding public service facility element in each unit (since the influence areas of each facility of the same public service facility element may overlap, the area of ​​the overlapping parts is not calculated repeatedly in the same unit, and therefore the area of ​​the union is calculated as the influence area); similarly, the influence area of ​​each facility of the corresponding public service facility element in the controlling detailed plan is obtained, the union of the parts of these influence areas falling in each unit is obtained, and the area of ​​the union is calculated as the second influence area of ​​the corresponding public service facility element in each unit.

[0038] Furthermore, in step A2, for each public service facility element, the number of facilities distributed in each unit and / or the total area of ​​facilities (the total area of ​​facilities refers to the sum of the areas of the corresponding facilities in each unit) of the corresponding public service facility element in the master planning scheme are obtained as the first construction number and / or first construction area of ​​the corresponding public service facility element in each unit; similarly, the number of facilities distributed in each unit and / or the total area of ​​facilities of the corresponding public service facility element in the controlling detailed planning scheme are obtained as the second construction number and / or second construction area of ​​the corresponding public service facility element in each unit.

[0039] In some embodiments, step A3 comprises: A301. Calculate the amount of conflict between each first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of each planning element in each unit; A302. Based on the conflict frequency conversion rule, according to the conflict amount, calculate the conflict score between each first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of each planning element in each unit; A303. Calculate the total conflict score of each planning element in each unit based on the conflict score.

[0040] Due to the differences in the control methods and control requirements of various planning elements, it is impossible to directly compare the severity of conflicts at the same level based on the amount of conflicts. Therefore, it is difficult to comprehensively evaluate the conflict severity of each unit by combining the conflict situations of various planning elements. Here, after the conflict amounts of each differentiated planning element are converted into conflict frequencies, equal-level comparison can be achieved, so that the conflict severity of each unit can be accurately evaluated by comprehensively combining the conflict situations of various planning elements.

[0041] Among them, in step A301, for the control line element, its first distribution data and second distribution data each have only one item, namely, the distribution area; for the public service facility element, its first distribution data and second distribution data each have two or three items, namely, the affected area and the construction quantity and / or construction area.

[0042] Among them, the conflict amount refers to the shortage or excess of the second distribution data relative to the corresponding first distribution data; some planning elements require that the scale in the control detailed planning scheme (the scale may refer to the area and / or quantity) shall not exceed the scale in the overall planning scheme (such as industrial land). For such planning elements, the conflict amount is the excess of the second distribution data relative to the corresponding first distribution data (if the second distribution data does not exceed the corresponding first distribution data, the conflict amount is recorded as zero); other planning elements require that the scale in the control detailed planning scheme shall not be less than the scale in the overall planning scheme (such as educational facilities, medical facilities, social welfare facilities, etc.). For such planning elements, the conflict amount is the shortage of the second distribution data relative to the corresponding first distribution data (if the second distribution data is not less than the corresponding first distribution data, the conflict amount is recorded as zero).

[0043] Thus, in step A301, for the planning elements that are required not to exceed the scale in the control detailed planning scheme in the overall planning scheme, the difference between each second distribution data and the corresponding first distribution data in each unit is calculated. If the difference is greater than zero, the difference is used as the conflict amount between the corresponding first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of the corresponding planning element in the corresponding unit. Otherwise, the conflict amount between the corresponding first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of the corresponding planning element in the corresponding unit is set to zero. For planning elements that are required to have a scale in the controlling detailed planning scheme no less than that in the overall planning scheme, the difference between each first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data in each unit is calculated. If the difference is greater than zero, the difference is used as the conflict amount between the corresponding item of the first distribution data of the corresponding planning element in the corresponding unit and the corresponding second distribution data. Otherwise, the conflict amount between the corresponding item of the first distribution data of the corresponding planning element in the corresponding unit and the corresponding second distribution data is set to zero.

[0044] Preferably, the conflict same frequency conversion rule is: ; ; ; in, is the conflict amount between the kth first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of the jth planning element in the i-th unit, is the average value of the conflict between the kth first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of the jth planning element in each unit, is the standard deviation of the conflict between the kth first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of the jth planning element in each unit, for The deviation from the mean, for The scoring factor of , is the scoring coefficient (which can be set according to actual needs, for example is 50, is 10, but not limited to this), is the scoring function, for The assigned value of is the weight value of the jth planning element (set according to actual needs. Preferably, for the control line element, It can be taken as 5. For public service facilities, It can be taken as 3, so as to better achieve equal level comparison of conflict severity of different planning elements, but it is not limited to this). is the conflict score between the kth first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of the jth planning element in the ith unit.

[0045] Based on the above conflict frequency conversion rules, the conflict amount of each planning element is converted into a conflict frequency, which can effectively achieve equal-level comparison of the conflict severity of different planning elements.

[0046] The scoring function may be a continuous function or a piecewise function. For example, in some embodiments, the scoring function is a piecewise function, and the specific expression is: ; ; ; Where n is the number of sorting intervals, , , They are all sorted intervals. , , are sorting interval demarcation values. , , All are reference scores. After sorting the scoring factors of the conflict amount between the kth item of the first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of the jth planning element in each unit in descending order, The sorting number of After sorting in descending order, The sorting number of N is the total number of planning elements. for The number of sorting intervals, the boundary values ​​between the sorting intervals, and the reference score value corresponding to each sorting interval can be set according to actual needs; for example, there are four sorting intervals, namely [0, 25%), [25%, 50%), [50%, 75%), and [75%, 100%], and the corresponding reference score values ​​are 0, 1, 2, and 3, respectively, so that the larger the conflict score, the more serious the conflict, but the present invention is not limited thereto.

[0047] The design of the above scoring function is based on the idea of ​​sorting intervals. The scoring factors of the conflict quantity are arranged in descending order, and then different scores are assigned according to their positions in the sorting. This method can effectively handle the differences between different planning elements, making the evaluation results more objective and reliable.

[0048] Further, step A303 includes: Calculate the comprehensive conflict score of each planning element in each unit according to the conflict score between each first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of each planning element in each unit; The total conflict score of each planning element in each unit is calculated based on the comprehensive conflict score.

[0049] For each planning element, the sum of the conflict scores between each first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of the corresponding planning element in each unit can be calculated as the comprehensive conflict score of the corresponding planning element in the corresponding unit. Therefore, for the control line element, its comprehensive conflict score is actually equal to its only one conflict score.

[0050] Among them, for the control line elements, the comprehensive conflict scores of the corresponding control line elements in each unit are taken as the total conflict scores of the corresponding control line elements in each unit; for the public service facility elements, the comprehensive conflict scores of the corresponding public service facility elements in each unit are converted into conflict frequencies to obtain the total conflict scores of the corresponding public service facility elements in each unit.

[0051] Among them, the method of converting the comprehensive conflict scores of the corresponding public service facility elements in each unit into conflict frequency conversion can refer to the conflict frequency conversion rule mentioned above, which mainly replaces the conflict amount with the comprehensive conflict score as the input in the calculation formula of the conflict frequency conversion rule; specifically, the comprehensive conflict scores of the corresponding public service facility elements in each unit are converted into conflict frequency through the following formula: ; ; ; in, is the comprehensive conflict score of the jth public service facility element in the i-th unit, is the average value of the comprehensive conflict score of the jth public service facility element in each unit, is the standard deviation of the comprehensive conflict score of the jth public service facility element in each unit, for The deviation from the mean, for The scoring factor of for The assigned value of is the weight value of the jth public service facility element (set according to actual needs, preferably, is taken as 3, but not limited to this), is the total conflict score of the j-th planning element in the i-th unit.

[0052] in, It can be calculated by the following formula: ; ; ; in, After sorting the scoring factors of the comprehensive conflict scores of the jth public service facility element in each unit in descending order, The sorting number of After sorting in descending order, ), for Sort by percentage.

[0053] Specifically, step A4 includes: A401. Classify each unit according to the total conflict score of each planning element in each unit; A402. Evaluate the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme based on the classification results.

[0054] Wherein, step A401 includes: The average conflict exceedance value for each cell is calculated according to the following formula: ; ; in, is the average conflict limit value of the i-th unit, K is the number of planning elements, is the excess value of the total conflict score of the j-th planning element in the i-th unit, is the total conflict score of the jth planning element in the i-th unit, is the preset total conflict score threshold (which can be set according to actual needs); The units are classified according to the average conflict exceedance value.

[0055] Among them, the classification categories of units include multiple categories, such as applicable units, timely optimization units and key optimization units, among which, applicable units indicate that the conflict between the planning results of the control detailed planning scheme and the master planning scheme in the corresponding unit is within an acceptable range, and the planning results of the control detailed planning scheme in the corresponding unit may not be adjusted; timely optimization units indicate that the conflict between the planning results of the control detailed planning scheme and the master planning scheme in the corresponding unit exceeds the acceptable range, but the degree of excess is low, and you can decide whether to adjust the planning results of the control detailed planning scheme in the corresponding unit; key optimization units indicate that the conflict between the planning results of the control detailed planning scheme and the master planning scheme in the corresponding unit seriously exceeds the acceptable range, and the planning results of the control detailed planning scheme in the corresponding unit must be adjusted.

[0056] The corresponding average conflict limit value range segment may be set in advance for each classification category, and the classification category of each unit may be determined in real time according to the average conflict limit value range segment into which the calculated average conflict limit value falls.

[0057] Among them, in step A402, the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme can be evaluated according to the number or quantity proportion of the key optimization units (that is, the proportion of the number of key optimization units in the total number of units). For example, multiple rationality levels (such as excellent, good, medium, poor, etc.) are preset, and the quantity range or quantity proportion range corresponding to each rationality level is set, and the rationality level of the control detailed planning scheme is determined in real time according to the quantity range that the number of key optimization units falls into or the quantity proportion range that the quantity proportion of key optimization units falls into, as the rationality evaluation result of the control detailed planning scheme.

[0058] In step A402, the rationality parameter may be calculated by the following formula, and the rationality parameter may be used as the rationality evaluation result of the control detailed planning scheme, or the rationality level of the control detailed planning scheme may be determined according to the rationality parameter (preset multiple rationality levels, set the rationality parameter range corresponding to each rationality level, and determine the rationality level of the control detailed planning scheme in real time according to the calculated rationality parameter) as the rationality evaluation result of the control detailed planning scheme: ; ; in, is the rationality parameter, is the total area of ​​the target planning area, is the area of ​​the ith unit, is the proportional coefficient of the ith unit, m is the number of classification categories of the unit, Indicates the 1st to mth classification categories, is the reference proportional coefficient corresponding to the 1st to mth classification categories (can be set according to actual needs), is the classification category of the i-th unit, Indicates that the classification category of the i-th unit belongs to the m-th classification category. In this way, the number and area proportion of each type of unit (that is, the proportion of the unit area in the total area of ​​the target planning area) are comprehensively considered, so as to better reflect the degree of conflict between the controlling detailed planning scheme and the overall planning scheme, and the evaluation result is more scientific and objective.

[0059] In order to better assist planners in optimizing the control detailed planning scheme, after step A4, the following may also be included: A5. Generate an evaluation report including the rationality evaluation results of the controlling detailed planning scheme and the classification results of each unit.

[0060] The evaluation report can be generated according to a preset template, but is not limited thereto. The classification results of each unit can be recorded in the evaluation report in the form of a list and / or a distribution diagram (for example, on the basis of the unit distribution diagram, each unit is filled with a color according to the unit classification results, so that units of different classification categories have different filling colors). Planners can intuitively obtain the rationality evaluation results of the overall control detailed planning scheme from the evaluation report, and quickly determine whether the planning results of the control detailed planning scheme in each unit need to be adjusted, so as to make targeted adjustments and improve optimization efficiency.

[0061] As can be seen from the above, the control detailed planning evaluation method divides the target planning area into multiple units; obtains the distribution data of each planning element in the overall planning scheme of the target planning area in each unit, recorded as the first distribution data; and obtains the distribution data of each planning element in the control detailed planning scheme of the target planning area in each unit, recorded as the second distribution data; calculates the total conflict score of each planning element in each unit according to the first distribution data and the second distribution data; evaluates the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme according to the total conflict score; thereby being able to scientifically and objectively evaluate the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme, and provide a reference basis for the optimization of the control detailed planning scheme.

[0062] refer to Figure 2 The present application provides a control detailed planning evaluation device for evaluating the rationality of a control detailed planning scheme, including: Division module 1, used to divide the target planning area into multiple units (refer to step A1 above for details); Acquisition module 2 is used to obtain the distribution data of each planning element in the overall planning scheme of the target planning area in each unit, recorded as the first distribution data; and obtain the distribution data of each planning element in the control detailed planning scheme of the target planning area in each unit, recorded as the second distribution data (refer to step A2 above for details); Calculation module 3, used for calculating the total conflict score of each planning element in each unit according to the first distribution data and the second distribution data (refer to step A3 above for details); Evaluation module 4 is used to evaluate the rationality of the controlling detailed planning scheme based on the total conflict score (refer to step A4 above for details).

[0063] In some embodiments, the control detailed planning evaluation device further comprises: The report module is used to generate an evaluation report including the rationality evaluation results of the controlling detailed planning scheme and the classification results of each unit (refer to step A5 above for details).

[0064] Please refer to Figure 3 , Figure 3 A schematic diagram of the structure of an electronic device provided in an embodiment of the present application. The present application provides an electronic device, including: a processor 301 and a memory 302. The processor 301 and the memory 302 are interconnected and communicate with each other through a communication bus 303 and / or other forms of connection mechanisms (not shown). The memory 302 stores a computer program executable by the processor 301. When the electronic device is running, the processor 301 executes the computer program to execute the control detailed planning evaluation method in any optional implementation of the above embodiment to achieve the following functions: dividing the target planning area into multiple units; obtaining distribution data of each planning element in the overall planning scheme of the target planning area in each unit, recorded as first distribution data; and obtaining distribution data of each planning element in the control detailed planning scheme of the target planning area in each unit, recorded as second distribution data; calculating the total conflict score of each planning element in each unit according to the first distribution data and the second distribution data; and evaluating the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme according to the total conflict score.

[0065] An embodiment of the present application provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon. When the computer program is executed by a processor, the control detailed planning evaluation method in any optional implementation of the above embodiment is executed to achieve the following functions: dividing a target planning area into multiple units; obtaining distribution data of each planning element in the overall planning scheme for the target planning area in each unit, recorded as first distribution data; and obtaining distribution data of each planning element in the control detailed planning scheme for the target planning area in each unit, recorded as second distribution data; calculating the total conflict score of each planning element in each unit based on the first distribution data and the second distribution data; and evaluating the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme based on the total conflict score. Among them, the computer-readable storage medium can be implemented by any type of volatile or non-volatile storage device or a combination thereof, such as static random access memory (SRAM), electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM), programmable red-only memory (PROM), read-only memory (ROM), magnetic storage, flash memory, magnetic disk or optical disk.

[0066] In the embodiments provided in the present application, it should be understood that the disclosed devices and methods can be implemented in other ways. The device embodiments described above are merely schematic. For example, the division of the units is only a logical function division. There may be other division methods in actual implementation. For example, multiple units or components can be combined or integrated into another system, or some features can be ignored or not executed. Another point is that the mutual coupling or direct coupling or communication connection shown or discussed can be through some communication interfaces, and the indirect coupling or communication connection of the devices or units can be electrical, mechanical or other forms.

[0067] In addition, the units described as separate components may or may not be physically separated, and the components shown as units may or may not be physical units, and may be located in one place or distributed on multiple network units. Some or all of the units may be selected according to actual needs to achieve the purpose of the solution of this embodiment.

[0068] Furthermore, the functional modules in the various embodiments of the present application may be integrated together to form an independent part, or each module may exist separately, or two or more modules may be integrated to form an independent part.

[0069] In this document, relational terms such as first and second, etc. are used merely to distinguish one entity or operation from another entity or operation, but do not necessarily require or imply any such actual relationship or order between these entities or operations.

[0070] The above description is only an embodiment of the present application and is not intended to limit the protection scope of the present application. For those skilled in the art, the present application may have various modifications and variations. Any modification, equivalent replacement, improvement, etc. made within the spirit and principle of the present application shall be included in the protection scope of the present application.

Claims

1. A control detailed planning evaluation method is used to evaluate the rationality of a control detailed planning scheme, characterized in that: Includes steps: A1. Divide the target planning area into multiple units; A2. Obtaining the distribution data of each planning element in the overall planning scheme of the target planning area in each of the units, recorded as the first distribution data; and obtaining distribution data of each of the planning elements in the control detailed planning scheme of the target planning area in each of the units, recorded as second distribution data; A3. Calculate the total conflict score of each planning element in each unit according to the first distribution data and the second distribution data; A4. Evaluate the rationality of the controlling detailed planning scheme based on the total conflict score.

2. The control detailed planning evaluation method according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The planning elements include control line elements and public service facility elements; The distribution data corresponding to the control line element includes distribution area; The distribution data corresponding to the public service facility element includes the affected area, and also includes the construction quantity and / or construction area.

3. The control detailed planning evaluation method according to claim 2 is characterized in that: Step A3 includes: A301. Calculate the amount of conflict between each of the first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of each of the planning elements in each of the units; A302. Based on the conflict frequency conversion rule, according to the conflict amount, calculate the conflict score between each of the first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of each planning element in each unit; A303. Calculate the total conflict score of each planning element in each unit according to the conflict score.

4. The control detailed planning evaluation method according to claim 3 is characterized in that: The conflict same frequency conversion rule is: ； ； ； in, is the conflict amount between the kth item of the first distribution data of the jth planning element in the ith unit and the corresponding second distribution data, is the average value of the conflict amount between the kth item of the first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of the jth planning element in each unit, is the standard deviation of the conflict amount between the kth item of the first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of the jth planning element in each unit, for The deviation from the mean, for The scoring factor of , is the scoring coefficient, is the scoring function, for The assigned value of is the weight value of the jth planning element, is the conflict score between the kth item of the first distribution data in the ith unit of the jth planning element and the corresponding second distribution data.

5. The control detailed planning evaluation method according to claim 4 is characterized in that: The scoring function is: ； ； ； Where n is the number of sorting intervals, , , They are all sorted intervals. , , are sorting interval demarcation values. , , All are reference scores. After sorting the scoring factors of the conflict amount between the kth item of the first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of the jth planning element in each unit in descending order, The sorting sequence number, N is the total number of planning elements, for Sort by percentage.

6. The control detailed planning evaluation method according to claim 3 is characterized in that: Step A303 includes: Calculating a comprehensive conflict score of each planning element in each unit according to a conflict score between each item of the first distribution data and the corresponding second distribution data of each planning element in each unit; The total conflict score of each planning element in each unit is calculated according to the comprehensive conflict score.

7. The regulatory detailed planning evaluation method according to claim 1 is characterized in that: Step A4 includes: Classifying each of the units according to the total conflict score of each of the planning elements in each of the units; Evaluate the rationality of the control detailed planning scheme based on the classification results.

8. A control detailed planning evaluation device, used to evaluate the rationality of a control detailed planning scheme, characterized in that: include: A partitioning module is used to divide the target planning area into multiple units; An acquisition module, used for acquiring distribution data of each planning element in the overall planning scheme of the target planning area in each of the units, recorded as first distribution data; and obtaining distribution data of each of the planning elements in the control detailed planning scheme of the target planning area in each of the units, recorded as second distribution data; A calculation module, used for calculating the total conflict score of each planning element in each unit according to the first distribution data and the second distribution data; An evaluation module is used to evaluate the rationality of the controlling detailed planning scheme according to the total conflict score.

9. An electronic device, characterized in that: It comprises a processor and a memory, wherein the memory stores a computer program executable by the processor, and when the processor executes the computer program, it runs the steps in the control detailed planning assessment method as described in any one of claims 1 to 7.

10. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that: When the computer program is executed by a processor, the steps in the control detailed planning assessment method as described in any one of claims 1 to 7 are executed.

Images