Earthquake landslide risk assessment method and device

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of geological disaster prediction, and discloses an earthquake landslide risk assessment method and device, and the method comprises the steps: selecting a reference tree, obtaining the inclination number of the reference tree, setting an inclination number threshold value, and comparing the inclination number with the inclination number threshold value. In the invention, when the inclination quantity is less than or equal to the set threshold value, the inclination can be deduced to be mainly caused by unexpected factors. On the contrary, when the inclination number exceeds the threshold value, the inclination angle of the tree is further analyzed. In the process, the inclination angle is divided into three ranges, the first range corresponds to the first grade of landslide danger, the second range corresponds to the second grade, and the third range corresponds to the third grade. And calculating the total inclination angle of all inclined trees to obtain an average inclination angle, and comparing the average inclination angle with a set inclination angle range to judge a corresponding landslide risk grade.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention relates to the technical field of geological disaster prediction, and in particular to a method and device for evaluating the hazard of earthquake landslide. Background Art

[0002] Earthquake landslide refers to a natural disaster caused by large-scale sliding or collapse of soil, rocks and other materials due to the vibration during an earthquake, which causes the soil, rocks and vegetation on the mountain or slope to slide or move downward. Earthquake landslides usually occur in mountainous or hilly areas near the epicenter, especially in areas with loose soil, unstable rock formations or steep slopes.

[0003] Among the seismic parameters, when the peak ground acceleration exceeds 0.2g or lasts for a long time, the earthquake will greatly increase the probability of landslides. For example, the energy release of thrust earthquakes is more likely to cause chain damage. The Newmark displacement model is often used for quantitative assessment. By calculating the integral difference between the critical acceleration and the actual seismic motion, areas with a displacement greater than 10cm are high-risk areas. This method of prediction using the Newmark displacement model is a scientific data prediction with strong credibility.

[0004] In addition, since there will be certain signs in nature before earthquakes and landslides, although it is not necessarily reliable to rely solely on the signs in nature to reflect the risk of earthquakes and landslides, if scientific data predictions are combined with the signs in nature to verify each other, it will increase the credibility of the earthquake and landslide risk. Summary of the invention

[0005] In view of the problems existing in the above-mentioned prior art, the purpose of the present invention is to provide a method and device for earthquake landslide hazard assessment, so as to combine the scientific data prediction of earthquake landslide hazard with natural omens to verify each other and improve credibility.

[0006] In order to achieve the above-mentioned purpose, the present invention provides the following technical solutions: a method for assessing the hazard of earthquake landslide, comprising: step one, selecting a number of trees on a potential landslide mountain as a reference, and after scientific data predicts the hazard of earthquake landslide, obtaining the number of tilted trees among the reference trees, and recording the tilted number as a basis for subsequent judgment; step two, setting a tilt number threshold when the trees tilt according to the accident factor information and the number of reference trees information, the tilt number threshold representing that when the number of tilted trees does not exceed it, the cause of the reference tree tilt is an accident factor; step three, comparing the number of reference tree tilts with the tilt number threshold, if the tilt number is less than or equal to the tilt number threshold, it means that the cause of the reference tree tilt is an accident factor, and if the tilt number is greater than the tilt number threshold, it means that the cause of the reference tree tilt is caused by the hazard of earthquake landslide.

[0007] In some embodiments, the inclination angle ranges of the reference trees are divided into a first range, a second range, and a third range in order from small to large, and the earthquake landslide hazard levels are arranged from small to large as level one, level two, and level three, the first range of inclination angles corresponds to level one of earthquake landslide hazard, the second range of inclination angles corresponds to level two of earthquake landslide hazard, and the third range of inclination angles corresponds to level three of earthquake landslide hazard.

[0008] In some embodiments, when the number of tilts is greater than a tilt number threshold, the total number of tilted reference trees and the tilt angle of each tilted tree are obtained through a sensor, the tilt angle of each tilted tree is added together to obtain a total tilt angle, the total tilt angle is divided by the total number of tilted trees to obtain an average tilt angle, the average tilt angle is compared with the tilt angle range, and the tilt angle range into which the average tilt angle falls and the corresponding earthquake landslide hazard level are determined.

[0009] In some embodiments, if the average inclination angle falls within the first range of inclination angles, the corresponding earthquake landslide hazard level is level one; if the average inclination angle falls within the second range of inclination angles, the corresponding earthquake landslide hazard level is level two; if the average inclination angle falls within the third range of inclination angles, the corresponding earthquake landslide hazard level is level three.

[0010] In some embodiments, after the earthquake landslide hazard level is derived based on the average tilt angle, the difference in tilt angles among the inclined trees is further determined. If the difference in tilt angles is large, the earthquake landslide hazard level derived based on the average tilt angle is upgraded. If the difference in tilt angles is small, the earthquake landslide hazard level derived based on the average tilt angle is maintained.

[0011] In some embodiments, the maximum and minimum inclination angles are obtained, and the inclination angle difference value is obtained by subtracting the minimum inclination angle from the maximum inclination angle. At the same time, a inclination angle difference value threshold is set according to the earthquake landslide hazard level previously obtained by the average inclination angle size. This inclination angle difference value threshold is the normal difference value of the inclination angles of each tree under this earthquake landslide hazard level. The inclination angle difference value is compared with the inclination angle difference value threshold, and different responses are obtained according to the comparison result.

[0012] In some embodiments, if the inclination angle difference value is less than or equal to the inclination angle difference value threshold, it means that the inclination angle difference of each inclined tree meets the difference standard under this earthquake landslide hazard level. In this case, the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained according to the average inclination angle of the trees is maintained. If the inclination angle difference value is greater than the inclination angle difference value threshold, it means that the inclination angle difference of each inclined tree does not meet the difference standard under this earthquake landslide hazard level. In this case, the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained according to the average inclination angle of the trees is increased by one level. If the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained according to the average inclination angle of the trees is itself level three, the earthquake landslide hazard level is always maintained at level three.

[0013] In some embodiments, the earthquake landslide hazard level defined according to the reference trees is the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained according to natural feedback, and the natural feedback earthquake landslide hazard level is divided into level one, level two and level three; the earthquake landslide level obtained by scientific prediction is divided into weak level, medium level and extra-large level according to the magnitude in the scientific classification, and the natural feedback earthquake landslide hazard level is corresponded to the scientific prediction earthquake landslide hazard level, that is, level one corresponds to weak level, level two corresponds to medium level, and level three corresponds to extra-large level. According to this correspondence rule, it is judged whether the scientific prediction earthquake landslide hazard level N is consistent with the natural feedback earthquake landslide hazard level, and different responses are made according to the judgment results.

[0014] In some embodiments, if level N is consistent with the natural feedback earthquake-landslide hazard level, level N is maintained; if level N is inconsistent with the natural feedback earthquake-landslide hazard level, N is adjusted to the level closest to N in the natural feedback earthquake-landslide hazard level.

[0015] The present invention also provides the following technical solutions:

[0016] The present invention further provides an earthquake landslide hazard assessment device, comprising a computer-readable storage medium, wherein the computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program, and the computer program is executed by a processor to implement the above-mentioned earthquake landslide hazard assessment method.

[0017] Compared with the prior art, the technical solution provided by the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0018] First, in the present invention, when the number of tilts is less than or equal to a set threshold, it can be inferred that these tilts are mainly caused by unexpected factors. On the contrary, when the number of tilts exceeds the threshold, the tilt angle of the tree is further analyzed. In this process, the tilt angle is divided into three ranges: the first range corresponds to the first level of landslide hazard level, the second range corresponds to the second level, and the third range corresponds to the third level. By calculating the total tilt angle of all tilted trees, the average tilt angle is obtained, and it is compared with the set tilt angle range to determine the corresponding landslide risk level.

[0019] Secondly, in the present invention, the earthquake landslide hazard level is dynamically adjusted by the tilt angle difference value. If the tilt angle difference value is less than or equal to the tilt angle difference value threshold, it means that the tilt angle difference of each tilted tree meets the difference standard under this earthquake landslide hazard level, and the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained according to the tilt angle size of the tree is maintained. If the tilt angle difference value is greater than the tilt angle difference value threshold, it means that the tilt angle difference of each tilted tree does not meet the difference standard under this earthquake landslide hazard level. In this case, the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained according to the tilt angle size of the tree is increased by one level. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0020] Figure 1 It is a schematic diagram of the process steps of the present invention;

[0021] Figure 2 It is a schematic diagram of the logical structure of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0022] 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.

[0023] It is to be understood that the term "one" should be understood as "at least one" or "one or more", that is, in one embodiment, the number of an element may be one, while in another embodiment, the number of the element may be multiple, and the term "one" should not be understood as a limitation on the quantity.

[0024] The earthquake landslide hazard assessment method provided by the present invention is as follows: Figure 1 and Figure 2 As shown, the following steps are included:

[0025] The first step is to select several trees located on the potential landslide mountain as monitoring reference objects. The selection of these trees should take into account their growth status, health status and distribution characteristics to ensure that they can accurately reflect the stability of the ground. After scientific data prediction through the Newmark displacement model, the areas where there is a risk of landslide are determined, and high-precision tilt sensors are deployed in these areas to continuously monitor the tilt status of the reference trees. These sensors can record the tilt angle and change trend of trees in a specific time period in real time, thereby providing important data support for subsequent risk assessment. By regularly collecting and analyzing these tilt data, it can be determined whether the trees have obvious tilt phenomena. When the Newmark displacement model predicts that there is a risk of earthquake landslide, the tilt status of the reference trees over a period of time is obtained through sensors to determine whether the reference trees are tilted, that is, the number of tilted trees among all reference trees is obtained through sensors, and this tilt number is recorded as a basis for subsequent judgment.

[0026] In the second step, considering the influence of accidental tilt factors caused by accidental impact and other factors, the tilt number threshold of the reference trees is set according to the total number of reference trees. This tilt number threshold represents that the tilt of reference trees less than or equal to this tilt number threshold is judged as an accidental tilt factor, which has nothing to do with the earthquake landslide risk. In the process of earthquake landslide risk assessment, in addition to earthquake factors, the tilt of trees may also be affected by a variety of unexpected factors. Therefore, when setting the tilt number threshold of reference trees, these non-seismic factors must be fully considered. First, changes in weather conditions are one of the main factors causing tree tilt. For example, strong winds or heavy rains will exert external forces on trees, especially those with shallow roots or unstable growth, which are prone to tilt due to strong wind swaying. In addition, drastic changes in soil moisture may also affect the stability of trees, especially after rainfall, the increased saturation of the soil will lead to a decrease in the support force of the root system, which will cause the tree to tilt. Secondly, animal activities are also a factor that cannot be ignored. Large animals such as cattle and horses may hit the trunks when they move around trees, causing the trees to tilt. The burrowing behavior of small animals such as rodents may also affect the root structure of trees, causing them to tilt. In addition, artificial interference such as construction, road construction, and logging activities may damage the soil structure and increase the risk of tree tilt. The growth characteristics of the trees themselves will also affect their stability. Some trees with unbalanced growth or attacked by pests and diseases may have different root development and distribution, making them more likely to tilt under external forces. Based on these known unexpected tilt factors, a reasonable threshold for the number of tilts is set to distinguish between normal environmental changes and potential landslide hazards. When the number of tilts monitored is less than or equal to the threshold, it can be reasonably inferred that these tilts are mainly caused by unexpected factors, rather than precursors to earthquake landslides. This judgment not only helps to improve the accuracy of the assessment, but also can reduce the waste of resources and unnecessary emergency responses caused by misjudgment to a certain extent.

[0027] The third step is to compare the tilt count with the tilt count threshold, and come up with different responses based on the comparison results. If the tilt count is less than or equal to the tilt count threshold, it means that the reason why the reference tree tilts is most likely due to unexpected factors and has nothing to do with the risk of earthquake landslides. For example, it is caused by strong winds, rainfall, animal activities or human interference, rather than the direct impact of earthquake landslides. If the tilt count is greater than the tilt count threshold, it means that the reason why the reference tree tilts is likely due to the risk of earthquake landslides. In this case, further judgment is made on the reference tree.

[0028] Step 4: After the above judgment, when the tilt number is greater than the tilt number threshold, the reason for the reference tree tilt may be due to the earthquake landslide hazard. On this basis, the tilt angle of the tilted tree is used to further judge the possibility of earthquake landslide hazard. Generally speaking, trees with larger tilt angles are more likely to be subjected to stronger external forces or have their roots damaged, which in turn implies potential geological instability. Therefore, the value of the tilt angle can not only reflect the current state of the tree, but also serve as an important basis for judging the landslide risk. On this basis, according to historical reference information, the tilt angle range of the reference tree corresponds to different earthquake landslide hazard levels. The tilt angle range is arranged from small to large, namely the first range, the second range and the third range; the earthquake landslide hazard level is arranged from small to large, namely level one, level two and level three. The first range of tilt angles corresponds to the first level of earthquake landslide hazard, the second range of tilt angles corresponds to the second level of earthquake landslide hazard, and the third range of tilt angles corresponds to the third level of earthquake landslide hazard. Based on the above content, when the number of tilts is greater than the tilt number threshold, the total number of reference tree tilts and the tilt angle of each tilted tree are obtained through the sensor, and the tilt angles of each tilted tree are added to obtain the total tilt angle, and the total tilt angle is divided by the total number of tree tilts to obtain the average tilt angle. The average tilt angle is compared with the tilt angle range to determine the tilt angle range in which the average tilt angle falls and the corresponding earthquake landslide hazard level. If the average tilt angle falls into the first range of tilt angles, the corresponding earthquake landslide hazard level is level one; if the average tilt angle falls into the second range of tilt angles, the corresponding earthquake landslide hazard level is level two; if the average tilt angle falls into the third range of tilt angles, the corresponding earthquake landslide hazard level is level three. In general, in the earthquake landslide hazard assessment, when the monitored tilt number exceeds the set threshold, the tilt angle of the reference tree needs to be further analyzed to determine the potential landslide risk. Generally speaking, trees with larger tilt angles are more likely to be affected by strong external forces or have damaged roots, indicating that the geology may be unstable. Therefore, the tilt angle becomes an important indicator for assessing landslide risk. Based on historical data, researchers divided the tilt angle into three ranges: the first range corresponds to the first level of landslide hazard, the second range corresponds to the second level, and the third range corresponds to the third level. When the number of tilts exceeds the threshold, the tilt angle of each tilted tree is obtained through the sensor, the total tilt angle is calculated, and the average tilt angle is obtained. Then, the average value is compared with the preset tilt angle range to determine the corresponding landslide risk level: if the average tilt angle falls into the first range, the landslide hazard level is level one; if it falls into the second range, it is level two; if it falls into the third range, it is level three. This systematic evaluation process provides a scientific basis for judging the potential risk of earthquake landslides, which helps to take preventive measures in a timely manner and reduce disaster risks.

[0029] Combining the first to fourth steps, first, select a number of healthy and reasonably distributed trees as monitoring reference objects, predict potential landslide hazard areas through the Newmark displacement model, and deploy high-precision tilt sensors in these areas to record the tilt angles and change trends of trees in real time to provide data support. Secondly, set a tilt number threshold to distinguish between accidental tilts caused by natural factors (such as strong winds, rainfall, animal activities, etc.) and tilt phenomena related to earthquake landslide hazards. When the tilt number is less than or equal to the set threshold, it can be inferred that these tilts are mainly caused by unexpected factors, and the landslide hazard level is considered to be zero. On the contrary, when the tilt number exceeds the threshold, the tilt angle of the tree is further analyzed to assess the potential landslide risk. The size of the tilt angle usually reflects the degree of external force on the tree, and a larger tilt angle may indicate geological instability. Therefore, based on historical data, the tilt angle is divided into three ranges: the first range corresponds to the first level of landslide hazard, the second range corresponds to the second level, and the third range corresponds to the third level. By calculating the total tilt angle of all tilted trees, the average tilt angle is obtained, and it is compared with the set tilt angle range to determine the corresponding landslide risk level. This process ensures that potential risks can be identified in a timely and accurate manner during earthquake landslide hazard assessment, thereby providing a scientific basis for the formulation of emergency management and prevention measures and reducing the losses and impacts caused by natural disasters. Through this systematic monitoring and assessment method, the early warning capability of earthquake landslide risks can be effectively improved, providing necessary support for ensuring the safety of local residents and infrastructure.

[0030] According to the above content, the higher the earthquake landslide hazard level, the greater the impact on the tilt angle of the reference trees. In addition, since the higher the earthquake landslide hazard level, the greater the impact on the geological environment, when the earthquake landslide hazard level is higher, in addition to the larger tilt angle of the reference trees, there is another performance, that is, the tilt angle of each tilted tree should be irregular. Because the greater the fluctuation of the geological environment, the more chaotic the damage to the tree planting environment, corresponding to the tilt angle of the trees, the tilt angle of the trees should also be irregular. In general, the higher the earthquake landslide hazard level, the more irregular the tilt angles of multiple trees appear, mainly because the high hazard level represents the violent fluctuation and instability of the geological environment. This environmental change will have complex and diverse effects on the growth of trees and the stability of the root system. When an earthquake occurs or the landslide hazard increases, the physical and chemical properties of the soil may change significantly, resulting in loose soil structure and weakened root support. In this case, the root system of the tree may be damaged to varying degrees, and the root system of some trees may completely lose its fixation to the soil, while other trees may still maintain relative stability. Under highly unstable soil conditions, the root damage of tilted trees will also vary due to differences in tree species, individual growth conditions, root depth and soil structure, resulting in different trees showing different tilt angles under the same environmental conditions. Therefore, although all trees are threatened by earthquake landslides, due to their differences in growth habits, root development and sensitivity to external forces, they ultimately show irregularities in tilt angles. This irregularity not only reflects the diversity of external forces affecting trees, but also reveals the complexity and uncertainty of the geological environment, thus providing an important reference for assessing landslide risks and formulating disaster prevention strategies. High-risk landslides are often accompanied by severe soil flow and displacement. This chaotic geological background makes the tilt angles of trees more random and inconsistent, further emphasizing the potential threat of earthquake landslides to the stability of ecosystems and vegetation. Under this condition, the difference in tilt angles among tilted trees is further judged. If the difference in tilt angles is too large, the earthquake landslide hazard level derived from the size of the tilt angle can be upgraded. If the difference in tilt angles is small, the earthquake landslide hazard level derived from the size of the tilt angle is maintained. Specifically, the tilt angles of all tilted trees are obtained through sensors, the maximum tilt angle and the minimum tilt angle are found, and the tilt angle difference value is obtained by subtracting the minimum tilt angle from the maximum tilt angle. At the same time, the tilt angle difference value threshold is set according to the earthquake landslide hazard level previously obtained by the tilt angle. This tilt angle difference value threshold is the normal difference value of the tilt angles of each tree under this earthquake landslide hazard level. The tilt angle difference value is compared with the tilt angle difference value threshold, and different responses are obtained based on the comparison results.If the tilt angle difference value is less than or equal to the tilt angle difference value threshold, it means that the tilt angle difference of each tilted tree meets the difference standard under this earthquake landslide hazard level. In this case, the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained based on the tilt angle of the tree can be maintained. If the tilt angle difference value is greater than the tilt angle difference value threshold, it means that the tilt angle difference of each tilted tree does not meet the difference standard under this earthquake landslide hazard level. In this case, the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained based on the tilt angle of the tree is increased by one level. If the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained based on the tilt angle of the tree is already the largest level three, then even if the tilt angle difference value is greater than the tilt angle difference value threshold, the earthquake landslide hazard level will remain at level three.

[0031] The earthquake landslide hazard level obtained above is the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained based on natural feedback. The natural feedback earthquake landslide hazard level is divided into level one, level two and level three. The earthquake landslide level obtained by scientific prediction is divided into weak level (less than 4.0), medium and large level (4.0-7.9) and extra large level (8.0 and above) according to the magnitude in the scientific classification. Therefore, the natural feedback earthquake landslide hazard level corresponds to the scientific prediction earthquake landslide hazard level, that is, level one corresponds to weak level (less than 4.0), level two corresponds to medium and large level (4.0-7.9), and level three corresponds to extra large level (8.0 and above). According to this corresponding rule, it is judged whether the scientific prediction earthquake landslide hazard level N obtained by the Newmark displacement model is consistent with the natural feedback earthquake landslide hazard level, and different responses are made according to the judgment results. If level N is consistent with the natural feedback earthquake landslide hazard level, maintain level N. If level N is inconsistent with the natural feedback earthquake landslide hazard level, adjust N to the level closest to N in the natural feedback earthquake landslide hazard level. For example:

[0032] 1. When the natural feedback earthquake landslide hazard level is level 1, corresponding to the weak level (less than 4.0), if N is 3.2, 3.2 falls into the weak level, at this time, maintain 3.2; if N is 4.1, 4.1 does not meet the weak level, at this time, adjust 4.1 to 3.9.

[0033] Second, when the natural feedback earthquake landslide hazard level is level 2, corresponding to medium and large levels (4.0-7.9). If N is 3.9, 3.9 does not meet the medium and large levels, then adjust 3.9 to 4.0; if N is 8.1, 8.1 does not meet the medium and large levels, then adjust 8.1 to 7.9.

[0034] In the embodiments disclosed in the present invention, the processes described above with reference to the flowchart can be implemented as a computer software program. The embodiments disclosed in the present invention include a computer program product, which includes a computer program carried on a computer-readable medium, and the computer program contains program code for executing the method shown in the flowchart. In such an embodiment, the computer program can be downloaded and installed from the network through the communication part, and / or installed from a removable medium. When the computer program is executed by the central processing unit, the above functions defined in the method of the present application are executed. It should be noted that the computer-readable medium mentioned above in the present application can be a computer-readable signal medium or a computer-readable storage medium or any combination of the above two. The computer-readable storage medium can be, for example, but not limited to, an electrical, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared or semiconductor system, device or device, or any combination of the above. More specific examples of computer-readable storage media can include, but are not limited to: an electrical connection with one or more wire segments, a portable computer disk, a hard disk, a random access memory, a read-only memory, an erasable programmable read-only memory, an optical fiber, a portable compact disk read-only memory, an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination of the above. In the present application, a computer-readable storage medium may be any tangible medium containing or storing a program that can be used by or in combination with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device. In the present application, a computer-readable signal medium may include a data signal propagated in a baseband or as part of a carrier wave, which carries a computer-readable program code. Such propagated data signals may take a variety of forms, including but not limited to electromagnetic signals, optical signals, or any suitable combination of the above. A computer-readable signal medium may also be any computer-readable medium other than a computer-readable storage medium, which may send, propagate, or transmit a program for use by or in combination with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device. The program code contained on the computer-readable medium may be transmitted using any suitable medium, including but not limited to: wireless segments, wire segments, optical cables, RF, etc., or any suitable combination of the above.

[0035] The flowcharts and block diagrams in the accompanying drawings illustrate the possible architecture, functions and operations of the systems, methods and computer program products according to various embodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each box in the flowchart or block diagram can represent a module, a program segment or a part of a code, and the module, a program segment or a part of a code contains one or more executable instructions for implementing the specified logical functions. It should also be noted that in some alternative implementations, the functions marked in the boxes can also occur in a different order than the order marked in the accompanying drawings. For example, two boxes represented in succession can actually be executed substantially in parallel, and they can sometimes be executed in the opposite order, depending on the functions involved. It should also be noted that each box in the block diagram and / or flowchart, and the combination of boxes in the block diagram and / or flowchart, can be implemented with a dedicated hardware-based system that performs the specified function or operation, or can be implemented with a combination of dedicated hardware and computer instructions.

[0036] Those skilled in the art should understand that the above description is only a specific implementation mode of the present application, but the protection scope of the present application is not limited thereto. Any technician familiar with the technical field can easily think of changes or substitutions within the technical scope disclosed in the present application, which should be covered by the protection scope of the present application.

Claims

1. A method for assessing the risk of earthquake landslides, characterized in that: include: Step 1: Select several trees on the potential landslide mountain as reference. After the scientific data predicts the earthquake landslide hazard, obtain the number of tilted trees among the reference trees and record the tilted number as a basis for subsequent judgment. Step 2: setting a tilt number threshold when a tree tilts according to the accident factor information and the reference tree number information, wherein the tilt number threshold represents that when the tilt number of the tilted tree does not exceed the threshold, the cause of the reference tree tilting is an accident factor; Step three, compare the tilt count of the reference tree with the tilt count threshold. If the tilt count is less than or equal to the tilt count threshold, it means that the cause of the reference tree tilt is an unexpected factor. If the tilt count is greater than the tilt count threshold, it means that the cause of the reference tree tilt is caused by earthquake landslide risk.

2. The earthquake landslide hazard assessment method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The inclination angle ranges of the reference trees are arranged from small to large, namely the first range, the second range and the third range. The earthquake landslide hazard levels are arranged from small to large, namely level one, level two and level three. The first range of inclination angles corresponds to level one of earthquake landslide hazard, the second range of inclination angles corresponds to level two of earthquake landslide hazard, and the third range of inclination angles corresponds to level three of earthquake landslide hazard.

3. The earthquake landslide hazard assessment method according to claim 2, characterized in that: When the number of tilts is greater than the tilt number threshold, the total number of tilted reference trees and the tilt angle of each tilted tree are obtained through the sensor, the tilt angle of each tilted tree is added to get the total tilt angle, the total tilt angle is divided by the total number of tilted trees to get the average tilt angle, the average tilt angle is compared with the tilt angle range, and the tilt angle range into which the average tilt angle falls and the corresponding earthquake landslide hazard level are determined.

4. The earthquake landslide hazard assessment method according to claim 3, characterized in that: If the average inclination angle falls within the first range of inclination angles, the corresponding earthquake landslide hazard level is level one; if the average inclination angle falls within the second range of inclination angles, the corresponding earthquake landslide hazard level is level two; if the average inclination angle falls within the third range of inclination angles, the corresponding earthquake landslide hazard level is level three.

5. The earthquake landslide hazard assessment method according to claim 4, characterized in that: After the earthquake landslide hazard level is obtained based on the average tilt angle, the difference in tilt angles among the tilted trees is further judged. If the difference in tilt angles is large, the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained based on the average tilt angle will be upgraded. If the difference in tilt angles is small, the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained based on the average tilt angle will be maintained.

6. The earthquake landslide hazard assessment method according to claim 5, characterized in that: Get the maximum and minimum inclination angles, subtract the minimum inclination angle from the maximum inclination angle to get the inclination angle difference value, and at the same time, set the inclination angle difference value threshold according to the earthquake landslide hazard level previously obtained by the average inclination angle. This inclination angle difference value threshold is the normal difference value of the inclination angles of each tree under this earthquake landslide hazard level. Compare the inclination angle difference value with the inclination angle difference value threshold, and come up with different responses based on the comparison results.

7. The earthquake landslide hazard assessment method according to claim 6, characterized in that: If the inclination angle difference value is less than or equal to the inclination angle difference value threshold, it means that the inclination angle difference of each tilted tree meets the difference standard under this earthquake landslide hazard level. In this case, the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained based on the average inclination angle of the trees is maintained. If the inclination angle difference value is greater than the inclination angle difference value threshold, it means that the inclination angle difference of each tilted tree does not meet the difference standard under this earthquake landslide hazard level. In this case, the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained based on the average inclination angle of the trees is increased by one level. If the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained based on the average inclination angle of the trees is itself level three, the earthquake landslide hazard level will always be maintained at level three.

8. The earthquake landslide hazard assessment method according to claim 7, characterized in that: The earthquake landslide hazard level defined according to the reference trees is the earthquake landslide hazard level obtained according to natural feedback. The natural feedback earthquake landslide hazard level is divided into level one, level two and level three. The earthquake landslide level obtained by scientific prediction is divided into weak, medium and large and extra-large levels according to the magnitude in the scientific classification. The natural feedback earthquake landslide hazard level is corresponded to the scientific prediction earthquake landslide hazard level, that is, level one corresponds to weak, level two corresponds to medium and large, and level three corresponds to extra-large. According to this correspondence rule, it is judged whether the scientific prediction earthquake landslide hazard level N is consistent with the natural feedback earthquake landslide hazard level, and different responses are made according to the judgment results.

9. The earthquake landslide hazard assessment method according to claim 8, characterized in that: If level N is consistent with the natural feedback earthquake-landslide hazard level, level N will be maintained. If level N is inconsistent with the natural feedback earthquake-landslide hazard level, N will be adjusted to the level closest to N in the natural feedback earthquake-landslide hazard level.

10. An earthquake landslide hazard assessment device, characterized in that: The invention comprises a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program, wherein the computer program is executed by a processor to implement a method for assessing the hazard of earthquake landslides as claimed in any one of claims 1 to 9.

Images