Method and system for evaluating reliability of frozen soil automatic observation instrument in parallel observation stage

Abstract

The invention relates to a reliability evaluation method and system for a frozen soil automatic observation instrument in a parallel observation stage. The method comprises the following steps: obtaining observation data collected by an automatic frozen soil observation instrument, and comparing to obtain a first evaluation result about whether the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is complete or not; determining artificial observation data based on an artificial frozen soil device, and calculating a data error to obtain a second evaluation result about whether the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observer is accurate; artificial frozen soil data are determined, comparability test is carried out, and the consistency degree of the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument and the data collected by artificial observation is obtained and serves as a third evaluation result; and performing reliability evaluation on the frozen soil automatic observation instrument according to the first evaluation result, the second evaluation result and the third evaluation result. The integrity, the accuracy and the comparability of the data acquired by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument are evaluated, and the automatic frozen soil observation instrument passes the reliability evaluation only when all the data reach the standard, so that the evaluation accuracy of the automatic frozen soil observation instrument can be improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of evaluation of automatic permafrost observation instruments, and particularly to a method and system for evaluating the reliability of an automatic permafrost observation instrument during the parallel observation stage. Background Art

[0002] Permafrost refers to various rocks and soils with a temperature below zero degrees Celsius and containing ice, which has rheological properties and its long-term strength is much lower than its instantaneous strength characteristics. When observing permafrost, the freezing layer is often determined according to the position and length of the frozen water in the permafrost device buried in the soil. Permafrost observation is often closely related to meteorological observation stations. Currently, there are approximately 2,450 manned meteorological observation stations built across the country, and all ground meteorological tasks are uniformly installed in the observation field. Among them, there are approximately 1,172 stations with permafrost observation tasks, and the distribution is as Figure 1 shown, including two methods: manual observation and automatic observation. As Figure 2 shown, according to the unified layout of the observation field, the manual permafrost device is installed 50 cm west of the deep soil temperature on the southeast side of the observation field, and the permafrost sensor for automatic observation is also installed on the southeast side of the observation field, 50 cm south of the deep soil temperature observation position. The straight pipe of the permafrost sensor is installed in three graded ways. First, when D < 150 cm, an outer sleeve pipe (the depth can be one of 50 cm, 100 cm, or 150 cm) is installed 50 cm south of the corresponding 80 cm deep soil temperature. Second, when 300 cm > D ≥ 150 cm, it needs to be installed in two sections, and outer sleeve pipes with lengths of 150 cm and 300 cm are installed 50 cm south of the corresponding 80 cm and 160 cm deep soil temperatures respectively. Third, when 450 cm > D ≥ 300 cm, the sensor is installed in three sections, and outer sleeve pipes with lengths of 150 cm, 300 cm, and 450 cm are installed 50 cm south of the corresponding 80 cm, 160 cm, and 320 cm deep soil temperatures respectively. The outer sleeve pipes of permafrost are all installed by the drilling method. The standard depth of the flexible pipe of the manual permafrost device is 50 - 450 cm, and it serves as the standard value for parallel observation comparison.

[0003] When conducting permafrost observation, the equipment evaluation during the parallel observation stage requires at least two years for operational operation, and is generally divided into three stages. The first stage is mainly manual observation and supplemented by automatic observation in the first year. Through the evaluation in the first year, it enters the second stage in the second year, which is mainly automatic observation and supplemented by manual observation. Through the evaluation in the second stage, it enters the third stage of single-track operational operation. If the evaluation is not passed, the parallel observation in the current stage continues. Combining the test and trial operation experiences of five models of automatic permafrost observation instruments from 2019 to 2021, after each permafrost period ends, the equipment data of each set of automatic permafrost observation instruments in the parallel observation stage of each model is evaluated. However, the traditional evaluation method is relatively limited and there are problems with inaccurate evaluation. Summary of the Invention

[0004] Based on this, in order to solve the above technical problems, a reliability evaluation method and system for the parallel observation stage of a frozen soil automatic observator are provided, which can improve the accuracy of the evaluation of the frozen soil automatic observator.

[0005] A reliability evaluation method for the parallel observation stage of a frozen soil automatic observator, the method comprising:

[0006] Obtain the observation data collected during the operation of the frozen soil automatic observator and determine the reference observation data;

[0007] Compare the observation data with the reference observation data to obtain a first evaluation result on whether the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observator is complete;

[0008] Determine the artificial observation data based on the artificial frozen soil device, use the artificial observation data as a comparison data sample, and calculate the data error of the observation data according to the comparison data sample to obtain a second evaluation result on whether the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observator is accurate;

[0009] Determine the artificial frozen soil data collected by the artificial frozen soil device, and extract the observed frozen soil data from the observation data; conduct a comparability test on the observed frozen soil data and the artificial frozen soil data to obtain the consistency degree between the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observator and the data collected by artificial observation as a third evaluation result;

[0010] Conduct a reliability evaluation on the frozen soil automatic observator according to the first evaluation result, the second evaluation result, and the third evaluation result.

[0011] In one of the embodiments, comparing the observation data with the reference observation data to obtain a first evaluation result on whether the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observator is complete includes:

[0012] Determine the standard format of the reference observation data, compare the observation data with the reference observation data, and judge whether the observation data is collected according to the standard format to obtain a first judgment result;

[0013] Conduct a one-by-one inspection of the observation data according to the reference observation data, and calculate the data integrity rate of the frozen soil automatic observator;

[0014] Obtain an integrity rate threshold. When the data integrity rate is greater than or equal to the integrity rate threshold, obtain a first evaluation result that the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observator is complete; when the data integrity rate is less than the integrity rate threshold, obtain a first evaluation result that the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observator is incomplete.

[0015] In one embodiment, artificial observation data is determined based on an artificial frozen soil device, and the artificial observation data is used as a comparison data sample. According to the comparison data sample, the data error of the observation data is calculated to obtain a second evaluation result on whether the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observer is accurate, including:

[0016] According to the comparison data sample, it is determined whether the number of samples in the observation data reaches a quantity threshold. If the quantity threshold is not reached, the reliability evaluation of the automatic frozen soil observer is stopped;

[0017] If the number of samples in the observation data reaches the quantity threshold, the number of artificially observed frozen soil layers in the artificial observation data is obtained, and the number of automatically observed frozen soil layers in the observation data is determined;

[0018] Based on the number of artificially observed frozen soil layers and the number of automatically observed frozen soil layers, the standard deviation is calculated;

[0019] If the standard deviation is greater than the deviation threshold, a second evaluation result that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observer is inaccurate is obtained; if the standard deviation is less than or equal to the deviation threshold, a second evaluation result that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observer is accurate is obtained.

[0020] In one embodiment, calculating the standard deviation based on the number of artificially observed frozen soil layers and the number of automatically observed frozen soil layers includes:

[0021] Based on the number of artificially observed frozen soil layers and the number of automatically observed frozen soil layers, the frozen soil measurement value and the frozen soil observation value are determined, and the number of comparison observation samples is determined;

[0022] According to the frozen soil measurement value, the frozen soil observation value, and the number of comparison observation samples, the systematic error is calculated;

[0023] The measurement difference between the frozen soil measurement value and the frozen soil observation value is calculated, and the standard deviation is calculated according to the measurement difference, the systematic error, and the number of comparison observation samples.

[0024] In one embodiment, determining the artificial frozen soil data collected by the artificial frozen soil device and extracting the observed frozen soil data from the observation data includes:

[0025] Based on the artificial frozen soil data, the cumulative value of the freezing depth of the artificial frozen soil device is used as the standard freezing thickness;

[0026] Based on the observed frozen soil data, the thickness value identified by the automatic frozen soil observer is determined, and the thickness value is compared with the standard freezing thickness to obtain a comparison result.

[0027] In one embodiment, a comparability test is performed on the observed frozen soil data and the artificial frozen soil data, and the degree of consistency between the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument and the data collected by artificial observation is obtained as the third evaluation result, including:

[0028] Calculate the freezing thickness consistency rate according to the thickness value and the standard freezing thickness identified by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument;

[0029] Determine the thickness data of each frozen soil layer that is not correctly identified from the thickness values identified by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument according to the comparison result;

[0030] Calculate the average value of the thickness data of each frozen soil layer that is not correctly identified as the misjudgment average value; and calculate the freeze-thaw trend data according to the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument and the data collected by artificial observation;

[0031] When the freezing thickness consistency rate is greater than or equal to the target consistency rate, and the misjudgment average value is less than or equal to the target misjudgment value, and the freeze-thaw trend data is greater than or equal to the reference data, it is obtained that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument passes the comparability evaluation as the third evaluation result.

[0032] In one embodiment, calculating the freeze-thaw trend data according to the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument and the data collected by artificial observation includes:

[0033] Obtain the lower limit observation values corresponding to the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument and the data collected by artificial observation respectively;

[0034] Make a comparison curve according to each of the lower limit observation values, and analyze and calculate the freeze-thaw trend data based on the comparison curve.

[0035] In one embodiment, performing a reliability evaluation on the automatic frozen soil observation instrument according to the first evaluation result, the second evaluation result, and the third evaluation result includes:

[0036] When the first evaluation result is that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is complete, and the second evaluation result is that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is accurate, and the third evaluation result is that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument passes the comparability evaluation, the evaluation result that the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is reliable is obtained.

[0037] A reliability evaluation system for the parallel observation stage of an automatic frozen soil observation instrument, the system includes:

[0038] An observation data acquisition module, configured to acquire the observation data collected during the operation of the automatic frozen soil observation instrument and determine the reference observation data;

[0039] A data integrity evaluation module, configured to compare the observed data with the reference observed data to obtain a first evaluation result on whether the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is complete;

[0040] A data accuracy evaluation module, configured to determine artificial observation data based on an artificial frozen soil device, use the artificial observation data as a comparison data sample, and calculate the data error of the observed data according to the comparison data sample to obtain a second evaluation result on whether the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is accurate;

[0041] A data comparability evaluation module, configured to determine the artificial frozen soil data collected by the artificial frozen soil device, and extract the observed frozen soil data from the observed data; perform a comparability test on the observed frozen soil data and the artificial frozen soil data, and obtain the consistency degree between the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument and the data collected by artificial observation as a third evaluation result;

[0042] A reliability evaluation module, configured to perform a reliability evaluation on the automatic frozen soil observation instrument according to the first evaluation result, the second evaluation result, and the third evaluation result.

[0043] In one embodiment, the data integrity evaluation module is further configured to determine the standard format of the reference observed data, compare the observed data with the reference observed data, judge whether the observed data is collected according to the standard format to obtain a first judgment result; perform a one-by-one inspection on the observed data according to the reference observed data, calculate the data integrity rate of the automatic frozen soil observation instrument; obtain an integrity rate threshold, and when the data integrity rate is greater than or equal to the integrity rate threshold, obtain the first evaluation result that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is complete; when the data integrity rate is less than the integrity rate threshold, obtain the first evaluation result that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is incomplete.

[0044] The above reliability evaluation method and system for the parallel observation stage of the automatic frozen soil observation instrument compare the observed data collected during the operation of the automatic frozen soil observation instrument with the artificial observation data collected by the artificial frozen soil device, evaluate three indicators of the data integrity, data accuracy, and data comparability of the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument, and the automatic frozen soil observation instrument can only pass the reliability evaluation when all indicators meet the standards, which can improve the accuracy of the evaluation of the automatic frozen soil observation instrument. Description of the Drawings

[0045] Figure 1 It is a distribution diagram of the installation of the automatic frozen soil observation instrument in the background technology;

[0046] Figure 2 It is a schematic diagram of the installation layout of the automatic frozen soil observation instrument in the parallel observation stage in the background technology;

[0047] Figure 3 It is an application environment diagram of the reliability evaluation method for the parallel observation stage of the automatic frozen soil observatory in an embodiment;

[0048] Figure 4 It is a schematic flow diagram of the reliability evaluation method for the parallel observation stage of the automatic frozen soil observatory in an embodiment;

[0049] Figure 5 It is a schematic diagram of the optimal upper and lower limit matching in an embodiment;

[0050] Figure 6 It is a schematic diagram for comparing the consistency of the observation data between the automatic frozen soil observatory and the artificial frozen soil device in an embodiment;

[0051] Figure 7 It is an example diagram of the freezing and thawing trends of the data of the automatic frozen soil observatory and the frozen soil device in an embodiment;

[0052] Figure 8 It is a structural block diagram of the reliability evaluation system for the parallel observation stage of the automatic frozen soil observatory in an embodiment;

[0053] Figure 9 It is an internal structure diagram of a computer device in an embodiment. Detailed implementation manners

[0054] In order to make the purpose, technical solutions and advantages of the present application clearer, the present application will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are only used to explain the present application and are not used to limit the present application.

[0055] It can be understood that the terms "first", "second", etc. used in the present application can be used herein to describe the evaluation results, but these evaluation results are not limited by these terms. These terms are only used to distinguish the first evaluation result from another evaluation result. For example, without departing from the scope of the present application, the first evaluation result can be called the second evaluation result, and similarly, the second evaluation result can be called the first evaluation result. Both the first evaluation result and the second evaluation result are evaluation results, but they are not the same evaluation result.

[0056] The reliability evaluation method for the parallel observation stage of the automatic frozen soil observatory provided by the embodiments of the present application can be applied to the application environment as Figure 3 shown. As Figure 3As shown, the application environment includes a computer device 110 and a frozen soil automatic observation instrument 120, which are connected and communicate through a network. The computer device 110 can obtain the observation data collected during the operation of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument 120 and determine the reference observation data; the computer device 110 compares the observation data with the reference observation data to obtain a first evaluation result on whether the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observation instrument 120 is complete; the computer device 110 determines the artificial observation data based on the artificial frozen soil device, uses the artificial observation data as a comparison data sample, and calculates the data error of the observation data according to the comparison data sample to obtain a second evaluation result on whether the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observation instrument 120 is accurate; the computer device 110 determines the artificial frozen soil data collected by the artificial frozen soil device and extracts the observed frozen soil data from the observation data; conducts a comparability test on the observed frozen soil data and the artificial frozen soil data to obtain a third evaluation result on the consistency degree between the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observation instrument 120 and the data collected by the artificial observation; the computer device 110 conducts a reliability evaluation on the frozen soil automatic observation instrument 120 according to the first evaluation result, the second evaluation result, and the third evaluation result. Among them, the computer device 110 can be but is not limited to various devices such as personal computers, laptop computers, smartphones, robots, etc.

[0057] In one embodiment, as Figure 4 shown, a method for evaluating the reliability of a frozen soil automatic observation instrument during the parallel observation stage is provided, including the following steps:

[0058] Step 402, obtain the observation data collected during the operation of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument and determine the reference observation data.

[0059] Among them, the observation data may include data such as the station number of the station area where the data is collected daily, file time, device longitude and latitude, altitude, service type, device identification bit, device ID, and data time per minute, upper and lower limits of eight layers of frozen soil, hourly extreme values and occurrence times, data quality control flag codes, and corresponding formats.

[0060] Step 404, compare the observation data with the reference observation data to obtain a first evaluation result on whether the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observation instrument is complete.

[0061] The first evaluation result is to evaluate the ability of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument to collect data.

[0062] In one embodiment, a reliability evaluation method for the parallel observation stage of a frozen soil automatic observer may further include a process of evaluating the integrity of the collected data. The specific process includes: determining the standard format of the reference observation data, comparing the observation data with the reference observation data, judging whether the observation data is collected according to the standard format, and obtaining the first judgment result; checking the observation data one by one according to the reference observation data, and calculating the data integrity rate of the frozen soil automatic observer; obtaining the integrity rate threshold. When the data integrity rate is greater than or equal to the integrity rate threshold, the first evaluation result that the collected data of the frozen soil automatic observer is complete is obtained; when the data integrity rate is less than the integrity rate threshold, the first evaluation result that the collected data of the frozen soil automatic observer is incomplete is obtained.

[0063] Specifically, when evaluating the integrity of the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observer, it is mainly to check whether the frozen soil automatic observer collects data normally according to the standard format every minute, including the station area station number, file time, equipment longitude and latitude, altitude, service type, equipment identification bit, equipment ID and data time per minute, upper and lower limits of eight-layer frozen soil, hourly extreme values and occurrence times, data quality control flag codes and corresponding formats, etc. during the frozen soil period (excluding the time of missing observations caused by external interference factors). All the minute data are checked one by one. The ratio of the correct number of minutes (M) to the total number of observations that should be made (N) represents the data integrity rate (δ) of the frozen soil automatic observer. The calculation formula can be expressed as: When δ≥98.00%, the frozen soil automatic observer passes the integrity test; otherwise, the frozen soil automatic observer is unqualified and fails the evaluation.

[0064] Step 406: Determine the manual observation data based on the artificial frozen soil device, use the manual observation data as the comparison data sample, and calculate the data error of the observation data according to the comparison data sample to obtain the second evaluation result on whether the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observer is accurate.

[0065] The second evaluation result reflects the data quality obtained by the device.

[0066] In one embodiment, a reliability evaluation method for a parallel observation phase of an automatic frozen soil observation instrument is provided, and further includes a process for evaluating whether the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is accurate. The specific process includes: determining whether the number of samples in the observation data reaches a quantity threshold based on comparison data samples, and if the quantity threshold is not reached, stopping the reliability evaluation of the automatic frozen soil observation instrument; if the number of samples in the observation data reaches the quantity threshold, obtaining the number of manually observed frozen soil layers in the manually observed data, and determining the number of automatically observed frozen soil layers in the observation data; calculating the standard deviation based on the number of manually observed frozen soil layers and the number of automatically observed frozen soil layers; if the standard deviation is greater than the deviation threshold, a second evaluation result is obtained that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is inaccurate; if the standard deviation is less than or equal to the deviation threshold, a second evaluation result is obtained that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is accurate.

[0067] Specifically, in one embodiment, the process of calculating the standard deviation may include: determining the frozen soil measurement value and the frozen soil observation value based on the number of manually observed frozen soil layers and the number of automatically observed frozen soil layers, and determining the number of comparative observation samples; calculating the systematic error based on the frozen soil measurement value, the frozen soil observation value, and the number of comparative observation samples; calculating the measurement difference between the frozen soil measurement value and the frozen soil observation value, and calculating the standard deviation based on the measurement difference, the systematic error, and the number of comparative observation samples.

[0068] In this embodiment, the manual observation data of the artificial soil freezing device at 08:00 can be selected as the basis for comparison data inspection and evaluation with the frozen soil automatic observation instrument. First, check whether the comparison data samples of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument meet 10 or more. If they meet, continue the inspection. Otherwise, the marking samples are too few and stop the evaluation of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument.

[0069] Frozen soil is the most special element in meteorology. There are several unstable layers, each with different upper and lower limits. Therefore, it is necessary to optimally match the upper and lower limits of the comparison samples, such as Figure 5 As shown, Figure 5 (a) shows the comparison between automatic (left) and manual (right) observations. The number of automatic observation layers (data files store up to 8 layers) is greater than that of manual observations (historically, up to 6 layers have been observed nationwide). The minimum error values ​​of the upper and lower limits of the two layers are matched for comparison. The non-frozen soil records between the automatic layers are the frozen soil depths that were missed by the observation instrument; Figure 5 (b) shows the comparison between automatic (left) and manual (right) observations. The number of automatic observation layers is less than that of manual observations, and they are matched into two layers for comparison of upper and lower limits. The non-frozen soil records in the artificial layer are the result of the observation instrument misjudging the frozen soil depth due to multiple measurements. Figure 5 (c) shows the comparison of automatic (left) and manual (right) observations. The number of automatic and manual observation layers is the same, and the corresponding upper and lower limits are matched into two layers. Based on this principle, a matching upper and lower limit comparison data set is formed. Then, the systematic error and standard deviation can be calculated, and the abnormal wild values ​​exceeding 3 times the standard deviation can be eliminated.

[0070] Among them, the systematic error The algorithm formula can be expressed as: x dt is the measured value of the automatic frozen soil monitor at the t-th moment, and x st is the observed value of the artificial frozen soil device at the t-th moment, and n is the number of comparison observation samples.

[0071] The algorithm formula of the standard deviation σ (cm) can be expressed as: xi is the difference between the i-th measurement of the automatic frozen soil monitor and the artificial frozen soil device, is the systematic error, and n is the number of comparison observation samples.

[0072] When σ ≤ 2 cm, it passes the accuracy test; otherwise, the automatic frozen soil monitor is unqualified and fails the evaluation.

[0073] Step 408: Determine the artificial frozen soil data collected by the artificial frozen soil device, and extract the observed frozen soil data from the observed data; perform a comparability test on the observed frozen soil data and the artificial frozen soil data, and obtain the consistency degree between the data collected by the automatic frozen soil monitor and the data collected by the artificial observation as the third evaluation result.

[0074] Among them, the third evaluation result can be used to reflect the consistency degree of the automatic frozen soil monitor and the artificial frozen soil device in obtaining frozen soil data.

[0075] In one embodiment, a reliability evaluation method for the parallel observation stage of an automatic frozen soil monitor may further include a process of determining the freezing thickness. The specific process includes: based on the artificial frozen soil data, taking the cumulative value of the freezing depth of the artificial frozen soil device as the standard freezing thickness; based on the observed frozen soil data, determining the thickness value identified by the automatic frozen soil monitor, and comparing the thickness value with the standard freezing thickness to obtain a comparison result.

[0076] When evaluating, the cumulative value of the freezing depth of the artificial frozen soil device (the daily cumulative freezing thickness) can be used as the standard freezing thickness, denoted by B, unit: cm; count the frozen soil thickness values where the automatic frozen soil monitor and the artificial frozen soil device are frozen consistently, as the correctly identified thickness value of the automatic frozen soil monitor, denoted by B 1 in cm.

[0077] Next, in one embodiment, a method for evaluating the reliability of a parallel observation stage of a frozen soil automatic observatory may further include a process of comparing data for consistency. The specific process includes: calculating the freezing thickness consistency rate based on the thickness value identified by the frozen soil automatic observatory and the standard freezing thickness; determining each thickness data of the frozen soil layer that is not correctly identified from the thickness values identified by the frozen soil automatic observatory according to the comparison result; calculating the average value of each thickness data of the frozen soil layer that is not correctly identified as the misjudgment mean value; and calculating the freeze-thaw trend data based on the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observatory and the data collected by manual observation. When the freezing thickness consistency rate is greater than or equal to the target consistency rate, and the misjudgment mean value is less than or equal to the target misjudgment value, and the freeze-thaw trend data is greater than or equal to the reference data, it is obtained that the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observatory passes the comparability evaluation as the third evaluation result.

[0078] Specifically, as Figure 6 shown, within the upper and lower limits observed by the manual frozen soil device, the thickness value of the frozen soil that is not correctly identified by the frozen soil automatic observatory can be counted, represented by B 2 , unit: cm. For example, the daily cumulative freezing layer thickness of the manual frozen soil device is: B = 150 - 130 + 105 - 90 + 30 - 15 = 50 cm; the consistent thickness B 1 of the freezing day = 35 cm; the maximum frozen soil depth of both devices on the day is 150 cm, and the daily systematic error is -13.0 cm; the freezing thickness daily consistency rate = 35 ÷ 50 = 70.00%; the thickness of the frozen soil layer that is not correctly identified by the frozen soil automatic observatory, that is, the daily misjudgment value B 2 = 105 - 90 + 75 - 60 + 33 - 30 + 15 - 0 = 48.0 cm.

[0079] The computer device can conduct a comparability test on three sub-indicators of the consistency rate, misjudgment mean value, and freeze-thaw trend of the observation data of the manual frozen soil device and the frozen soil automatic observatory. Among them, the algorithm for the freezing thickness consistency rate ρ (%) can be expressed as: represents the percentage of the thickness value (B 1 ) of the frozen soil layer correctly identified by the frozen soil automatic observatory during the inspection and evaluation period to the reference standard freezing depth value (B). The algorithm for the misjudgment mean value θ (cm) can be expressed as: represents the average value of the thickness (B 2 ) of the frozen soil layer that is not correctly identified by the frozen soil automatic observatory during the inspection and evaluation period. The algorithm for the correlation ο (dimensionless) of the maximum frozen soil layer data can be expressed as:

[0080] In one embodiment, a method for evaluating the reliability of a frozen soil automatic observer during the parallel observation stage may further include the process of determining the freeze-thaw trend. The specific process includes: respectively obtaining the lower limit observed values corresponding to the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observer and the data collected by manual observation; making a comparison curve based on each lower limit observed value, and analyzing and calculating the freeze-thaw trend data based on the comparison curve.

[0081] During the inspection and evaluation period, a comparison curve graph can be made using the lower limit observed values (i.e., the daily maximum frozen soil depth) corresponding to the first layer of the manual frozen soil device and the frozen soil automatic observer every day, as Figure 7 shown, which is used to analyze the freeze-thaw change law, change trend, and data correlation of the frozen soil automatic observer.

[0082] Step 410, perform a reliability evaluation on the frozen soil automatic observer according to the first evaluation result, the second evaluation result, and the third evaluation result.

[0083] Specifically, when the first evaluation result is that the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observer is complete, and the second evaluation result is that the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observer is accurate, and the third evaluation result is that the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observer passes the comparability evaluation, a reliable evaluation result of the frozen soil automatic observer is obtained.

[0084] That is, when the test results are ρ≥80.00%, θ≤6 cm, ο≥0.80, and the automatic and manual maximum frozen soil layer trend graphs are continuous and smooth, without obvious breaks and jumps, the comparability evaluation is passed; otherwise, the frozen soil automatic observer is unqualified and fails the evaluation.

[0085] After each frozen soil period ends, by evaluating the equipment data of each set of frozen soil automatic observers, within five consecutive years, if the number of devices of this type of frozen soil automatic observer that achieve single-track operation reaches 75% or more of all installed models, the reliability evaluation standard for the parallel observation stage of the frozen soil automatic observer is met, and the evaluation is passed.

[0086] It should be understood that although the various steps in the above flow chart are shown in sequence according to the arrows, these steps are not necessarily executed in the order indicated by the arrows. Unless otherwise clearly stated in this article, the execution of these steps has no strict order limit, and these steps can be executed in other orders. Moreover, at least a part of the steps in the above flow chart may include multiple sub-steps or multiple stages. These sub-steps or stages are not necessarily executed at the same time, but can be executed at different times. The execution order of these sub-steps or stages is not necessarily sequential, but can be executed alternately or in turn with at least a part of other steps or sub-steps or stages of other steps.

[0087] In one embodiment, as Figure 8As shown, a reliability evaluation system for the parallel observation stage of a frozen soil automatic observator is provided, including: an observation data acquisition module 810, a data integrity evaluation module 820, a data accuracy evaluation module 830, a data comparability evaluation module 840, and a reliability evaluation module 850, where:

[0088] The observation data acquisition module 810 is used to obtain the observation data collected during the operation of the frozen soil automatic observator and determine the reference observation data;

[0089] The data integrity evaluation module 820 is used to compare the observation data with the reference observation data to obtain the first evaluation result on whether the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observator is complete;

[0090] The data accuracy evaluation module 830 is used to determine the manual observation data based on the artificial frozen soil device, use the manual observation data as the comparison data sample, and calculate the data error of the observation data according to the comparison data sample to obtain the second evaluation result on whether the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observator is accurate;

[0091] The data comparability evaluation module 840 is used to determine the artificial frozen soil data collected by the artificial frozen soil device and extract the observed frozen soil data from the observation data; perform a comparability test on the observed frozen soil data and the artificial frozen soil data, and obtain the consistency degree between the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observator and the data collected by the manual observation as the third evaluation result;

[0092] The reliability evaluation module 850 is used to perform a reliability evaluation on the frozen soil automatic observator according to the first evaluation result, the second evaluation result, and the third evaluation result.

[0093] In one embodiment, the data integrity evaluation module 820 is further used to determine the standard format of the reference observation data, compare the observation data with the reference observation data, judge whether the observation data is collected according to the standard format to obtain the first judgment result; perform a one-by-one inspection on the observation data according to the reference observation data, calculate the data integrity rate of the frozen soil automatic observator; obtain the integrity rate threshold, and when the data integrity rate is greater than or equal to the integrity rate threshold, obtain the first evaluation result that the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observator is complete; when the data integrity rate is less than the integrity rate threshold, obtain the first evaluation result that the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observator is incomplete.

[0094] In one embodiment, the data accuracy evaluation module 830 is further configured to determine whether the number of samples in the observed data reaches a quantity threshold according to the comparison data sample. If the quantity threshold is not reached, the reliability evaluation of the automatic permafrost monitor is stopped. If the number of samples in the observed data reaches the quantity threshold, the number of manually observed permafrost layers in the manual observation data is obtained, and the number of automatically observed permafrost layers in the observed data is determined. The standard deviation is calculated based on the number of manually observed permafrost layers and the number of automatically observed permafrost layers. If the standard deviation is greater than the deviation threshold, a second evaluation result that the data collected by the automatic permafrost monitor is inaccurate is obtained. If the standard deviation is less than or equal to the deviation threshold, a second evaluation result that the data collected by the automatic permafrost monitor is accurate is obtained.

[0095] In one embodiment, the data accuracy evaluation module 830 is further configured to determine the permafrost measurement value and the permafrost observation value based on the number of manually observed permafrost layers and the number of automatically observed permafrost layers, and determine the number of comparative observation samples. The systematic error is calculated according to the permafrost measurement value, the permafrost observation value, and the number of comparative observation samples. The measurement difference between the permafrost measurement value and the permafrost observation value is calculated, and the standard deviation is calculated according to the measurement difference, the systematic error, and the number of comparative observation samples.

[0096] In one embodiment, the data comparability evaluation module 840 is further configured to use the cumulative value of the freezing depth of the manual permafrost device as the standard freezing thickness based on the manual permafrost data. Based on the observed permafrost data, the thickness value identified by the automatic permafrost monitor is determined, and the thickness value is compared with the standard freezing thickness to obtain a comparison result.

[0097] In one embodiment, the data comparability evaluation module 840 is further configured to calculate the freezing thickness consistency rate according to the thickness value identified by the automatic permafrost monitor and the standard freezing thickness. According to the comparison result, the thickness data of each permafrost layer that is not correctly identified is determined from the thickness values identified by the automatic permafrost monitor. The average value of the thickness data of each permafrost layer that is not correctly identified is calculated as the misjudgment mean value. And the freeze-thaw trend data is calculated according to the data collected by the automatic permafrost monitor and the data collected by the manual observation. When the freezing thickness consistency rate is greater than or equal to the target consistency rate, and the misjudgment mean value is less than or equal to the target misjudgment value, and the freeze-thaw trend data is greater than or equal to the reference data, a third evaluation result that the data collected by the automatic permafrost monitor passes the comparability evaluation is obtained.

[0098] In one embodiment, the data comparability evaluation module 840 is further configured to respectively obtain the lower limit observation values corresponding to the data collected by the automatic permafrost monitor and the data collected by the manual observation. The comparison curves are made according to the respective lower limit observation values, and the freeze-thaw trend data is calculated based on the analysis of the comparison curves.

[0099] In one embodiment, the reliability evaluation module 850 is further configured to obtain an evaluation result that the frozen soil automatic observation instrument is reliable when the first evaluation result is that the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observation instrument is complete, the second evaluation result is that the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observation instrument is accurate, and the third evaluation result is that the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observation instrument passes the comparability evaluation.

[0100] In one embodiment, a computer device is provided. The computer device may be a terminal, and its internal structure diagram may be as Figure 9 shown. The computer device includes a processor, a memory, a network interface, a display screen, and an input device connected through a system bus. Among them, the processor of the computer device is used to provide computing and control capabilities. The memory of the computer device includes a non-volatile storage medium and an internal memory. The non-volatile storage medium stores an operating system and a computer program. The internal memory provides an environment for the operation of the operating system and the computer program in the non-volatile storage medium. The network interface of the computer device is used to communicate with an external terminal through a network connection. When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements a method for evaluating the reliability of a frozen soil automatic observation instrument during the parallel observation stage. The display screen of the computer device may be a liquid crystal display screen or an electronic ink display screen. The input device of the computer device may be a touch layer covering the display screen, or a button, a trackball, or a touchpad provided on the housing of the computer device, or an external keyboard, a touchpad, or a mouse, etc.

[0101] Those skilled in the art can understand that Figure 9 the structure shown in

[0102] is only a block diagram of some structures related to the solution of the present application, and does not constitute a limitation on the computer device to which the solution of the present application is applied. A specific computer device may include more or fewer components than those shown in the figure, or combine some components, or have a different component layout.

[0103] The technical features of the above embodiments can be combined arbitrarily. For the sake of brevity of description, not all possible combinations of the technical features in the above embodiments are described. However, as long as there is no contradiction in the combination of these technical features, it should be considered as the scope recorded in this specification.

[0103] The above-described embodiments merely represent several implementation manners of the present application. Their descriptions are relatively specific and detailed, but should not be construed as a limitation on the scope of the invention patent. It should be noted that for those of ordinary skill in the art, without departing from the concept of the present application, several modifications and improvements can still be made, and these all belong to the protection scope of the present application. Therefore, the protection scope of the patent of the present application shall be subject to the appended claims.

Claims

1. A reliability evaluation method for the parallel observation phase of a frozen soil automatic observation instrument, characterized in that: The method comprises: Obtain the observation data collected during the operation of the automatic frozen soil observation instrument and determine the reference observation data; Comparing the observation data with the reference observation data to obtain a first evaluation result of whether the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observation instrument is complete; Determine artificial observation data based on the artificial soil freezing device, use the artificial observation data as a comparison data sample, and calculate the data error of the observation data according to the comparison data sample to obtain a second evaluation result of whether the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is accurate; Determine the artificial frozen soil data collected by the artificial frozen soil device, and extract the observed frozen soil data from the observed data; perform a comparability test on the observed frozen soil data and the artificial frozen soil data, and obtain the consistency between the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument and the data collected by manual observation as a third evaluation result; The reliability of the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is evaluated based on the first evaluation result, the second evaluation result, and the third evaluation result.

2. The reliability evaluation method for the parallel observation phase of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument according to claim 1 is characterized in that: Comparing the observation data with the reference observation data to obtain a first evaluation result of whether the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is complete, including: Determining a standard format of the reference observation data, comparing the observation data with the reference observation data, judging whether the observation data is collected according to the standard format, and obtaining a first judgment result; Checking the observation data one by one according to the reference observation data, and calculating the data integrity rate of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument; Obtain a completeness rate threshold. When the data completeness rate is greater than or equal to the completeness rate threshold, a first evaluation result is obtained that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is complete; when the data completeness rate is less than the completeness rate threshold, a first evaluation result is obtained that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is incomplete.

3. The reliability evaluation method for the parallel observation phase of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument according to claim 1 is characterized in that: Determining artificial observation data based on the artificial soil freezing device, taking the artificial observation data as a comparison data sample, and calculating the data error of the observation data according to the comparison data sample, to obtain a second evaluation result of whether the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is accurate, including: Determining whether the number of samples in the observation data reaches a quantity threshold according to the comparison data samples, and if the number threshold is not reached, stopping the reliability evaluation of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument; If the number of samples in the observation data reaches a quantity threshold, obtaining the number of manually observed frozen soil layers in the manual observation data, and determining the number of automatically observed frozen soil layers in the observation data; Calculating a standard deviation based on the manually observed frozen soil layer quantity and the automatically observed frozen soil layer quantity; If the standard deviation is greater than the deviation threshold, a second evaluation result is obtained that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is inaccurate; if the standard deviation is less than or equal to the deviation threshold, a second evaluation result is obtained that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is accurate.

4. The reliability evaluation method for the parallel observation phase of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument according to claim 3 is characterized in that: The standard deviation is calculated based on the manually observed frozen soil layer quantity and the automatically observed frozen soil layer quantity, including: Determine the frozen soil measurement value and the frozen soil observation value based on the manually observed frozen soil layer quantity and the automatically observed frozen soil layer quantity, and determine the number of comparative observation samples; Calculate the system error based on the frozen soil measurement value, the frozen soil observation value, and the number of comparative observation samples; The measurement difference between the frozen soil measurement value and the frozen soil observation value is calculated, and the standard deviation is calculated based on the measurement difference, the systematic error, and the number of comparative observation samples.

5. The reliability evaluation method for the parallel observation phase of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument according to claim 1 is characterized in that: Determining the artificial frozen soil data collected by the artificial frozen soil device, and extracting observed frozen soil data from the observed data, including: Based on the artificial frozen soil data, the accumulated value of the freezing depth of the artificial frozen soil device is used as the standard freezing thickness; Based on the observed frozen soil data, a thickness value identified by the frozen soil automatic observation instrument is determined, and the thickness value is compared with the standard frozen thickness to obtain a comparison result.

6. The reliability evaluation method for the parallel observation phase of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument according to claim 5 is characterized in that: The observed frozen soil data and the artificial frozen soil data are subjected to a comparability test, and the consistency between the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument and the data collected by manual observation is obtained as a third evaluation result, including: Calculating the freezing thickness consistency rate according to the thickness value and the standard freezing thickness identified by the frozen soil automatic observation instrument; Determine each incorrectly identified frozen soil layer thickness data from the thickness values ​​identified by the frozen soil automatic observation instrument according to the comparison result; Calculate the average value of each of the incorrectly identified frozen soil layer thickness data as the misjudgment mean; and calculate the freeze-thaw trend data based on the data collected by the frozen soil automatic observation instrument and the data collected by manual observation; When the freezing thickness consistency rate is greater than or equal to the target consistency rate, the misjudgment mean is less than or equal to the target misjudgment value, and the freeze-thaw trend data is greater than or equal to the reference data, the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument passes the comparability evaluation as the third evaluation result.

7. The reliability evaluation method for the parallel observation phase of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument according to claim 6 is characterized in that: The freeze-thaw trend data is calculated based on the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument and the data collected by manual observation, including: Respectively obtain the lower limit observation values ​​corresponding to the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument and the data collected by manual observation; A comparison curve is prepared according to each of the lower limit observation values, and freeze-thaw trend data is analyzed and calculated based on the comparison curve.

8. The reliability evaluation method for the parallel observation phase of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The reliability of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument is evaluated according to the first evaluation result, the second evaluation result, and the third evaluation result, including: When the first evaluation result is that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is complete, and the second evaluation result is that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is accurate, and the third evaluation result is that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument passes the comparability assessment, a reliable evaluation result of the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is obtained.

9. A reliability evaluation system for the parallel observation phase of a frozen soil automatic observation instrument, characterized in that: The system comprises: The observation data acquisition module is used to obtain the observation data collected during the operation of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument and determine the reference observation data; A data integrity evaluation module, used for comparing the observation data with the reference observation data to obtain a first evaluation result of whether the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is complete; A data accuracy evaluation module is used to determine the artificial observation data based on the artificial soil freezing device, use the artificial observation data as a comparison data sample, and calculate the data error of the observation data according to the comparison data sample to obtain a second evaluation result of whether the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is accurate; A data comparability evaluation module is used to determine the artificial frozen soil data collected by the artificial frozen soil device and extract the observed frozen soil data from the observed data; perform a comparability test on the observed frozen soil data and the artificial frozen soil data to obtain the consistency between the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument and the data collected by manual observation as a third evaluation result; A reliability evaluation module is used to evaluate the reliability of the automatic frozen soil observation instrument according to the first evaluation result, the second evaluation result, and the third evaluation result.

10. The parallel observation phase reliability evaluation system of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument according to claim 9 is characterized in that: The data integrity evaluation module is further used to determine the standard format of the reference observation data, compare the observation data with the reference observation data, determine whether the observation data is collected in accordance with the standard format, and obtain a first judgment result; check the observation data one by one according to the reference observation data, and calculate the data integrity rate of the frozen soil automatic observation instrument; Obtain a completeness rate threshold. When the data completeness rate is greater than or equal to the completeness rate threshold, a first evaluation result is obtained that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is complete; when the data completeness rate is less than the completeness rate threshold, a first evaluation result is obtained that the data collected by the automatic frozen soil observation instrument is incomplete.

Images