Sustainable evaluation method and system for polluted site remediation technology

Abstract

The invention provides a sustainable evaluation method and system for a contaminated site remediation technology, and relates to the technical field of contaminated site remediation technology assessment, and the method comprises the steps: obtaining a plurality of alternative remediation schemes of a contaminated site and sustainable evaluation index data of the alternative remediation schemes; constructing a decision matrix based on the sustainability index data; standardizing the decision matrix to obtain a standardized weighting matrix; based on the standardized weighting matrix, determining an optimal and worst ideal scheme through an adaptive genetic algorithm; respectively calculating Euclidean distances between each alternative repair scheme and the optimal and worst ideal schemes; calculating the relative proximity between the optimal ideal scheme and the worst ideal scheme; based on the Euclidean distance calculation result, determining a comprehensive similarity score of each alternative repair scheme; and according to the relative proximity and the comprehensive similarity score, carrying out sustainable evaluation on the remediation technology of each polluted site.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of pollution site remediation technology assessment, and particularly to a method and system for evaluating the sustainability of pollution site remediation technology. Background Art

[0002] The research and application of pollution site remediation technology play a crucial role in addressing environmental pollution and restoring ecosystems. Current sustainability assessment methods provide rich data and tools for technology selection, but in practical applications, how to more comprehensively consider remediation effectiveness and how to accurately distinguish between similar solutions still requires further optimization. Therefore, constructing a comprehensive and highly integrated assessment system will be an important direction for the sustainability research of pollution site remediation technology.

[0003] Currently, there are many sustainability assessment methods for pollution site remediation technology. Some studies in the literature have proposed a model that combines life cycle assessment and best management practices to evaluate the sustainability of in-situ heat treatment coupled with chemical methods for remediating organic pollution sites. By calculating the total sustainability score, a comprehensive assessment is provided for pollution site remediation plans. There are also studies that have proposed multi-criteria decision analysis methods to evaluate the sustainability of groundwater pollution remediation technology.

[0004] However, traditional multi-criteria decision methods often rely on local distance calculations and ignore the overall distribution of alternative solutions in multi-dimensional space, thus unable to provide comprehensive and integrated decision support for pollution site remediation. At the same time, although existing multi-criteria decision analysis methods consider multi-dimensional indicators, in the face of insufficient processed data or high similarity between alternative solutions, they are unable to accurately distinguish the advantages and disadvantages of the solutions, resulting in limited decision-making accuracy and unable to meet the customer's needs for comprehensive and high-quality services.

[0005] Therefore, it is crucial to develop a comprehensive and integrated evaluation system, a multi-criteria decision-making scheme for pollution site remediation technology, to evaluate the sustainability of pollution site remediation technology and provide theoretical support and policy recommendations for sustainable site management projects. Summary of the Invention

[0006] In order to solve the technical problems that traditional multi-criteria decision-making methods often rely on local distance calculations, ignore the overall distribution of alternative solutions in multi-dimensional space, and thus cannot provide comprehensive and comprehensive decision-making support for contaminated site remediation. At the same time, although existing multi-criteria decision-making analysis methods consider multi-dimensional indicators, in the face of insufficient data or high similarity of alternative solutions, they ignore the similarity of their overall distribution, cannot accurately distinguish the advantages and disadvantages of solutions, resulting in limited decision-making accuracy and inability to meet the customer's needs for comprehensive and high-quality services, the present invention provides a method and system for evaluating the sustainability of contaminated site remediation technologies.

[0007] The technical solutions provided by the embodiments of the present invention are as follows:

[0008] First aspect:

[0009] A method for evaluating the sustainability of a contaminated site remediation technology provided by an embodiment of the present invention includes:

[0010] S1: Obtain multiple alternative remediation solutions for the contaminated site and sustainability evaluation index data for each alternative remediation solution; wherein, the sustainability evaluation index data includes environmental sustainability evaluation index data, economic sustainability evaluation index data, social sustainability evaluation index data, and efficiency sustainability evaluation index data;

[0011] S2: Based on each sustainability index data, construct a decision matrix;

[0012] S3: Perform a normalization process on the decision matrix to obtain a normalized weighted matrix;

[0013] S4: Based on the normalized weighted matrix, determine the ideal solution for the contaminated site through an adaptive genetic algorithm, wherein the ideal solution includes an optimal ideal solution and a worst ideal solution;

[0014] S5: Calculate the Euclidean distance between each alternative remediation solution and the optimal ideal solution and the worst ideal solution respectively;

[0015] S6: Calculate the relative closeness between the optimal ideal solution and the worst ideal solution;

[0016] S7: Based on the Euclidean distance calculation results, determine the comprehensive similarity score of each alternative remediation solution with respect to the ideal point composed of the minimum sequence of the normalized weighted matrix;

[0017] S8: Evaluate the sustainability of each contaminated site remediation technology according to the relative closeness and the comprehensive similarity score.

[0018] Second aspect:

[0019] A sustainability evaluation system for a contaminated site remediation technology provided by an embodiment of the present invention includes:

[0020] A processor;

[0021] A memory, on which computer-readable instructions are stored. When the computer-readable instructions are executed by the processor, the sustainability evaluation method for the contaminated site remediation technology described in the first aspect is implemented.

[0022] The third aspect:

[0023] A computer-readable storage medium provided by an embodiment of the present invention, on which a computer program is stored. When the program is executed by a processor, the sustainability evaluation method for the contaminated site remediation technology described in the first aspect is implemented.

[0024] The beneficial effects brought by the technical solution provided by the embodiment of the present invention at least include:

[0025] (1) In the embodiment of the present invention, by constructing a decision matrix based on each sustainability index data, performing standardization processing on the decision matrix to obtain a standardized weighted matrix, and based on the standardized weighted matrix, determining the ideal solution for the contaminated site through an adaptive genetic algorithm. Optimizing the remediation plan through the adaptive genetic algorithm and combining multiple dimensions of evaluation indicators can comprehensively consider the distribution of each alternative plan in the multi-dimensional space, avoiding the limitations of traditional methods that only rely on local distance calculation, and paying attention to the overall distribution of alternative plans in the multi-dimensional space, thereby providing comprehensive and comprehensive decision support for the remediation of contaminated sites.

[0026] (2) In the embodiment of the present invention, by calculating the Euclidean distance between each alternative remediation plan and the optimal ideal plan and the worst ideal plan respectively, and calculating the relative proximity between the two, the subtle differences between alternative plans can be effectively distinguished, especially in the case of insufficient data or high similarity between plans. The comprehensive similarity score combines multiple evaluation dimensions and further enhances the discrimination of the plan through weighted calculation, thereby improving the decision-making accuracy and ensuring the accurate evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages of the remediation plan. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0027] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention, the following will briefly introduce the drawings required for the description of the embodiments. Obviously, the following drawings are only some embodiments of the present invention. For those of ordinary skill in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative efforts.

[0028] Figure 1 It is a schematic flow chart of a sustainability evaluation method for a contaminated site remediation technology provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0029] Figure 2 This is a schematic structural diagram of a sustainability evaluation system for a contaminated site remediation technology provided by an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed implementation manners

[0030] Next, the technical solutions in the present invention will be described with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0031] In the embodiments of the present invention, words such as "exemplarily" and "for example" are used to represent examples, illustrations or explanations. Any embodiment or design solution described as an "example" in the present invention should not be construed as being more preferred or having more advantages than other embodiments or design solutions. Rather, the use of the word "example" is intended to present concepts in a specific manner. In addition, in the embodiments of the present invention, the meaning expressed by "and / or" can be both, or either one of the two.

[0032] In the embodiments of the present invention, "image" and "picture" can sometimes be used interchangeably. It should be noted that when their differences are not emphasized, their intended meanings are the same. "Of", "corresponding" and "corresponding" can sometimes be used interchangeably. It should be noted that when their differences are not emphasized, their intended meanings are the same.

[0033] In the embodiments of the present invention, sometimes subscripts such as W1 may be written in a non-subscript form such as W1. When their differences are not emphasized, their intended meanings are the same.

[0034] To make the technical problems, technical solutions and advantages to be solved by the present invention clearer, the following will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments.

[0035] Refer to the attached specification Figure 1 , which shows a schematic flowchart of a sustainability evaluation method for a contaminated site remediation technology provided by an embodiment of the present invention.

[0036] The embodiments of the present invention provide a sustainability evaluation method for a contaminated site remediation technology. This method can be implemented by a sustainability evaluation device for a contaminated site remediation technology. The sustainability evaluation device for a contaminated site remediation technology can be a terminal or a server. The processing flow of the sustainability evaluation method for a contaminated site remediation technology can include the following steps:

[0037] S1: Obtain multiple alternative remediation solutions for the contaminated site and data on the sustainability assessment indicators for each alternative remediation solution. Among them, the sustainability assessment indicator data includes environmental sustainability assessment indicator data, economic sustainability assessment indicator data, social sustainability assessment indicator data, and efficiency sustainability assessment indicator data.

[0038] It should be noted that the environmental sustainability indicators consist of three sub-indicators: climate change, loss of biodiversity, and the impact of pollution on human health. Among them, the factors of climate change consist of energy use, resource consumption, and air pollution; the factors of loss of biodiversity consist of loss of marine biodiversity, loss of freshwater biodiversity, and loss of terrestrial biodiversity; the factors of the impact of pollution on human health consist of increased malnutrition, increased non-cancerous diseases, increased cancer diseases, and increased respiratory diseases.

[0039] The economic sustainability indicators consist of two sub-indicators: internal costs and external costs. Among them, the factors of internal costs consist of materials (such as fibers, polyethylene, concrete, etc.), energy (such as electricity, diesel, etc.), transportation costs, labor costs, and disposal costs (waste disposal); the factors of external costs consist of the environmental impacts of the remediation technology during its life cycle, including environmental costs related to global warming, acidification, eutrophication, and toxicity, etc.

[0040] The social sustainability indicators consist of sub-indicators such as the health and safety of construction workers, public participation and satisfaction, job creation, remediation resilience, and the social benefits of carbon emission reduction. Among them, the factors of the health and safety of construction workers consist of the likelihood of accidents occurring during the entire life cycle of the remediation technology and the risk of pollution exposure during the remediation period; the factors of public participation and satisfaction consist of the situation of public participation in the entire life cycle of the remediation technology and the public's satisfaction during the remediation process; remediation resilience refers to the ability to remediate under variable conditions and the long-term nature of the remediation ability; the social benefits of carbon emission reduction refer to the contribution and response of the remediation technology's entire life cycle to carbon emission reduction.

[0041] The efficiency sustainability indicators include two sub-indicators: remediation effectiveness and soil quality improvement. Among them, the factors of remediation effectiveness consist of remediation time and remediation efficiency; soil quality improvement refers to the impact of the remediation technology's entire life cycle on soil quality (including factors such as changes in soil pH value, cation exchange capacity, organic matter content, and pollutant concentration) and the carbon sequestration capacity of the remediation technology's entire life cycle.

[0042] S2: Construct a decision matrix based on the data of each sustainability indicator.

[0043] Among them, the decision matrix is a tool for multi-criteria decision analysis. It corresponds different alternative solutions to multiple evaluation indicators, helping decision-makers systematically evaluate and compare the advantages and disadvantages of different solutions. The decision matrix is usually used to solve problems involving multiple evaluation criteria and complex trade-offs. Through this matrix, decision-makers can more intuitively see the performance of each alternative solution under each indicator and make data-based decisions.

[0044] In one possible implementation, the decision matrix is specifically:

[0045]

[0046] Among them, S n*4 represents the decision matrix, a ij represents the index evaluation value of the jth evaluation indicator of the ith repair technology solution, where i = 1, 2, 3... n, n represents the total number of repair technology solutions, and j = 1, 2, 3, 4, j represents the serial number of the evaluation indicator.

[0047] In the present invention, each repair technology solution corresponds to multiple evaluation indicators. Through the matrix method, the influencing factors in multiple aspects such as environment, economy, and society can be considered simultaneously, so as to achieve multi-dimensional evaluation and decision-making.

[0048] S3: Standardize the decision matrix to obtain a standardized weighted matrix.

[0049] Among them, the standardized weighted matrix is a commonly used tool in multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). It combines standardization processing and weight weighting, aiming to comprehensively evaluate the performance of different solutions under multiple evaluation indicators and ensure that each indicator can fairly affect the final decision. The standardized weighted matrix not only solves the problem of inconsistent dimensions but also reflects the importance of each indicator through weight setting.

[0050] In one possible implementation, S3 specifically includes:

[0051] S301: Standardize the decision matrix to obtain the standardized index values:

[0052]

[0053] Among them, r ij represents the standardized index value under the jth evaluation indicator of the ith repair technology solution, a ij represents the index evaluation value of the jth evaluation indicator of the ith repair technology solution, and n represents the total number of repair technology solutions.

[0054] S302: Determine the index weights of each standardized index value.

[0055] S303: Calculate the weighted standardized scores of each restoration technical solution according to each index weight and each standardized index value:

[0056] v ij = w j r ij

[0057] where v ij represents the weighted standardized score of the i-th restoration technical solution under the j-th evaluation index, and w j represents the index weight of the j-th evaluation index.

[0058] S304: Obtain the standardized weighted matrix according to the weighted standardized scores of each restoration technical solution:

[0059]

[0060] where V ij represents the standardized weighted matrix, v ij represents the weighted standardized score of the i-th restoration technical solution under the j-th evaluation index, i = 1, 2, 3... n, n represents the total number of restoration technical solutions, and j = 1, 2, 3, 4, j represents the serial number of the evaluation index.

[0061] In the present invention, the standardization process converts the values of all indexes to a unified scale (usually between 0 and 1), eliminates the differences in dimensions, and enables different indexes to be compared under the same standard. At the same time, through the standardization process, the performances of each restoration technical solution under each evaluation index can be fairly compared, avoiding some indexes from occupying an undue proportion in the weighted summation process due to their larger value ranges.

[0062] Furthermore, through the standardized weighted matrix, it can be ensured that the relative importance of each evaluation index is reflected by the preset weight, and the weighted standardized score obtained by multiplying the standardized index value by the weight is a more fair and scientific calculation result. This can provide a clear relative performance of each restoration plan under multi-dimensional evaluation for decision-makers.

[0063] In a possible implementation manner, the determination method of the index weight is specifically: determine the index weight of each standardized index value through the analytic hierarchy process.

[0064] Among them, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a quantitative decision-making method for multi-criteria decision analysis, aiming to help decision-makers comprehensively analyze multiple objectives and evaluation indicators through systematic steps when facing complex decision-making problems, and finally make the best decision. It hierarchizes and structures the problem, uses mathematical models to quantitatively compare the factors at each level, and finally calculates the relative importance of each indicator and the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative plan.

[0065] In the present invention, the advantage of determining the weight of each standardized indicator through the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is that it can provide a systematic and quantitative way to allocate indicator weights, eliminate the subjective bias in traditional decision-making methods, and enhance the objectivity, transparency, and rationality of decision-making. At the same time, the AHP method has high flexibility and adjustability, and can adjust the evaluation weights according to specific situations to ensure that the decision-making process better meets the actual needs.

[0066] Specifically, according to the "1-9 scale method", a judgment matrix A is constructed based on the relative importance obtained by pairwise comparison of each indicator to determine the weight of the indicator. Among them, a ij represents the importance of indicator i compared with indicator j, and 1 / a ij represents the importance of indicator j compared with indicator i

[0067]

[0068] Among them, A represents the judgment matrix, and a ij represents the index evaluation value of the jth evaluation indicator of the ith repair technical solution, where i = 1, 2, 3...n, n represents the total number of repair technical solutions, and j = 1, 2, 3, 4, and j represents the serial number of the evaluation indicator;

[0069] Calculate the comprehensive standardized result:

[0070]

[0071] Among them, represents the weighted average value of the ith repair plan, and n represents the total number of repair technical solutions;

[0072] Calculate the eigenvector:

[0073]

[0074] Among them, w i is the standardized weight of the ith repair plan;

[0075] Calculate the maximum eigenvalue:

[0076]

[0077] Among them, λ max represents the maximum eigenvalue corresponding to the judgment matrix, and w represents the weight vector;

[0078] Determine the final weight:

[0079] W j = WC x × W C

[0080] Among them, W j represents the weighted score of the j-th sustainability evaluation index, WC x represents the adjustment coefficient, and W C represents the weight of the sustainability evaluation index.

[0081] S4: Based on the standardized weighted matrix, determine the ideal solutions for the contaminated site through the Adaptive Genetic Algorithm, where the ideal solutions include the optimal ideal solution and the worst ideal solution.

[0082] Among them, the Adaptive Genetic Algorithm (AGA for short) is an optimization algorithm that improves the traditional Genetic Algorithm (GA). It enhances the adaptability of the algorithm by adjusting certain parameters in the genetic algorithm (such as the selection rate, crossover rate, mutation rate, etc.), thereby improving the search efficiency and accuracy for complex problems.

[0083] In a possible implementation, S4 specifically includes:

[0084] S401: Based on the standardized weighted matrix, construct a multi-objective function for calculating the sustainability score:

[0085] SA = w EC EC + w EF EF + w SO SO + w EN EN

[0086] Among them, SA represents the multi-objective function, EC represents the economic sustainability evaluation index, w EC represents the weight of the economic sustainability evaluation index, EF represents the efficiency sustainability evaluation index, w EF represents the weight of the efficiency sustainability evaluation index, SO represents the social sustainability evaluation index, w SO represents the weight of the social sustainability evaluation index, and EN represents the environmental sustainability evaluation index, w EN represents the weight of the environmental sustainability evaluation index.

[0087] S402: Determine the constraint conditions of the multi-objective function:

[0088]

[0089] Among them, EC min represents the minimum value of the economic sustainability evaluation index, EC max represents the maximum value of the economic sustainability evaluation index, EF min represents the minimum value of the effectiveness sustainability evaluation index, EF max represents the maximum value of the effectiveness sustainability evaluation index, SO min represents the minimum value of the social sustainability evaluation index, SO max represents the maximum value of the social sustainability evaluation index, EN min represents the minimum value of the environmental sustainability evaluation index, EN max represents the maximum value of the environmental sustainability evaluation index.

[0090] S403: Under the constraints of the constraint conditions, optimize the multi-objective function through the adaptive genetic algorithm, and output the optimal ideal solution and the worst ideal solution shown.

[0091] In a possible implementation, the optimal ideal solution is specifically:

[0092] v + = [max{v 11 , v 21 ,..., v n1},..., max{v 14 , v 24 ,..., v n4}]

[0093] Among them, v + represents the optimal ideal solution, max represents the maximum value, v ij represents the weighted standardized score of the i-th repair technology solution under the j-th evaluation index, i = 1, 2, 3... n, n represents the total number of repair technology solutions, j = 1, 2, 3, 4, j represents the serial number of the evaluation index, j = 1 represents the environmental sustainability evaluation index, j = 2 represents the economic sustainability evaluation index, j = 3 represents the social sustainability evaluation index, j = 4 represents the effectiveness sustainability evaluation index.

[0094] The worst ideal solution is specifically:

[0095] v - = [min{v 11 , v 21 ,..., v n1},..., min{v 14 , v 24 ,..., v n4}]

[0096] Among them, v - represents the worst ideal solution, and min represents the minimum value.

[0097] Specifically, the main process of this genetic algorithm is based on the objective function, constraint conditions, and decision variables of chromosome coding; an initial population is generated for calculation. A new fitness function is constructed using the objective function and constraint conditions, and then a new optimized population is generated through selection, crossover, and mutation. This process continues to iterate until the maximum iteration requirement is met. If satisfied, the algorithm outputs the result; otherwise, the next iteration is performed. Finally, positive and negative ideal solutions are obtained.

[0098] In the present invention, the adaptive genetic algorithm dynamically adjusts the parameters of the genetic algorithm, enabling the algorithm to better adapt to the complexity of the problem. This adaptability allows the algorithm to more efficiently find the global optimal solution during the search process and avoid being trapped in the dilemma of local optimal solutions. For the problem of contaminated site remediation, this characteristic is particularly important. At the same time, the multi-objective optimization function combines these different objectives and considers the trade-offs between them, enabling the algorithm to find the optimal balance point among multiple objectives. The adaptive genetic algorithm can efficiently handle multi-objective optimization problems and, by dynamically adjusting the search strategy, can find the optimal solution in a complex multi-objective space.

[0099] Furthermore, the advantage of determining these two ideal solutions is that the decision maker can clearly understand the most ideal and the worst remediation solutions and make further decisions or adjustments based on this information. This comparison can help select a solution that is closest to the optimal solution in reality.

[0100] S5: Calculate the Euclidean distances between each alternative remediation solution and the optimal ideal solution and the worst ideal solution respectively.

[0101] Among them, the Euclidean Distance is a commonly used "straight-line" distance between two points in a metric space, usually used to calculate the relative distance between two points in space. The Euclidean distance is based on the Pythagorean theorem and is the most intuitive distance metric method.

[0102] In a possible implementation manner, S5 is specifically:

[0103] Calculate the Euclidean distances between each remediation technology solution and the optimal ideal solution and the worst ideal solution through the following formula:

[0104]

[0105] Among them, represents the Euclidean distance between the alternative remediation technology solution and the optimal ideal solution, and v ijRepresents the weighted standardized score under the j-th evaluation index of the i-th repair technical solution, where j = 1, 2, 3, 4, and j represents the serial number of the evaluation index. Represents the optimal ideal solution. Represents the Euclidean distance between the alternative repair technical solution and the worst ideal solution. Represents the worst ideal solution.

[0106] In the present invention, calculating the Euclidean distances between each alternative repair solution and the optimal ideal solution and the worst ideal solution helps decision-makers comprehensively and objectively evaluate and compare the advantages and disadvantages of different solutions from a quantitative perspective. This method can quantify the differences between solutions, simplify the decision-making process, comprehensively consider multiple evaluation indicators, and avoid human biases, providing a clear and reasonable basis for subsequent decision-making and ranking.

[0107] S6: Calculate the relative closeness between the optimal ideal solution and the worst ideal solution.

[0108] Among them, the relative closeness is a measure used to compare the closeness between alternative solutions and the ideal solution, and is usually applied in multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). It helps decision-makers evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of solutions by measuring the distances of each alternative solution relative to the optimal solution and the worst solution, and provides a basis for selecting the optimal solution.

[0109] In a possible implementation manner, the calculation formula of the relative closeness is:

[0110]

[0111] Among them, Δ i Represents the relative closeness. Represents the Euclidean distance between the alternative repair technical solution and the optimal ideal solution. Represents the Euclidean distance between the alternative repair technical solution and the worst ideal solution.

[0112] It should be noted that the relative similarity is positively correlated with sustainability. The higher the similarity, the better the sustainability; on the contrary, the lower the similarity, the lower the sustainability.

[0113] In the present invention, by calculating the relative closeness between the optimal ideal solution and the worst ideal solution, and showing that the similarity is positively correlated with sustainability, a scientific and systematic evaluation method can be provided. This method simplifies the decision-making process and helps decision-makers identify the solution that best meets the sustainability goal among multiple alternative solutions.

[0114] S7: Based on the Euclidean distance calculation results, determine the comprehensive similarity score of each alternative repair solution with respect to the ideal point composed of the minimum sequence of the standardized weighted matrix.

[0115] Among them, the comprehensive similarity score is an index that comprehensively measures the similarity between an alternative solution and an ideal solution. It integrates the similarity results of multiple evaluation indicators, thereby providing a comprehensive and objective evaluation basis for decision-makers to help them select the optimal solution.

[0116] In a possible implementation manner, S7 is specifically:

[0117] S701: Based on the Euclidean distance calculation results, calculate the distance similarity and cosine similarity of each repair technical solution through the following formula:

[0118]

[0119] where dis(v i , IP) represents the distance from the ideal point, v i represents the weighted standardized score of the i-th repair technical solution, i = 1, 2, 3... n, n represents the total number of repair technical solutions, IP represents the ideal point, v ij represents the weighted standardized score of the i-th repair technical solution under the j-th evaluation indicator, j = 1, 2, 3, 4, j represents the serial number of the evaluation indicator, cos(v i , IP) represents the cosine distance from the ideal point, represents the worst ideal solution.

[0120] S702: Based on the calculation results of the distance similarity and cosine similarity of each repair technical solution, determine the comprehensive similarity score of each repair technical solution:

[0121]

[0122] where S i represents the comprehensive similarity score of the i-th repair technical solution, γ represents the weight factor, represents the distance similarity of the i-th repair technical solution, represents the cosine similarity of the i-th repair technical solution.

[0123] In the present invention, by combining the Euclidean distance and cosine similarity to calculate the comprehensive similarity score of each remediation technical solution, a more comprehensive, accurate and reliable solution evaluation can be provided. At the same time, calculating the comprehensive similarity score overcomes the limitations of a single similarity metric, takes into account both absolute differences and relative directions, and enhances the objectivity and accuracy of the evaluation results.

[0124] S8: According to the relative closeness and comprehensive similarity score, conduct a sustainability evaluation of each contaminated site remediation technology.

[0125] Optionally, according to the different importance of the relative closeness and comprehensive similarity, different weights can be assigned to these two indicators to determine the final highly sustainable score, and based on the sustainability score, conduct a sustainability evaluation of each contaminated site remediation technology.

[0126] In the present invention, the sustainability evaluation of the remediation technical solution by combining the relative closeness and comprehensive similarity score can comprehensively consider the impacts of multiple dimensions, efficiently evaluate and compare multiple alternative solutions, ensure that the finally selected solution not only meets the balance of environmental, economic and social benefits, but also has high executability, thereby achieving the goal of sustainable contaminated site remediation.

[0127] The beneficial effects brought by the technical solution provided in the embodiment of the present invention at least include:

[0128] (1) In the embodiment of the present invention, by constructing a decision matrix based on the data of each sustainability indicator, standardizing the decision matrix to obtain a standardized weighted matrix, and based on the standardized weighted matrix, determining the ideal solution of the contaminated site through an adaptive genetic algorithm. Optimizing the remediation plan through the adaptive genetic algorithm and combining multiple dimensions of evaluation indicators can comprehensively consider the distribution of each alternative solution in the multi-dimensional space, avoid the limitations of traditional methods that only rely on local distance calculations, and pay attention to the overall distribution of alternative solutions in the multi-dimensional space, thereby providing comprehensive and comprehensive decision-making support for contaminated site remediation.

[0129] (2) In the embodiment of the present invention, by calculating the Euclidean distance between each alternative remediation plan and the optimal ideal plan and the worst ideal plan respectively, and calculating the relative closeness between the two, the subtle differences between alternative solutions can be effectively distinguished, especially in the case of insufficient data or high similarity of solutions. The comprehensive similarity score combines multiple evaluation dimensions and further enhances the discrimination of the plan through weighted calculation, thereby improving the decision-making accuracy and ensuring the accurate evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages of the remediation plan.

[0130] Refer to the attached Figure 2 illustrates the structural schematic diagram of a sustainability evaluation system for a contaminated site remediation technology provided by the present invention.

[0131] The present invention also provides a sustainability evaluation system 20 for a contaminated site remediation technology, which is applied to the sustainability evaluation method of the above-mentioned contaminated site remediation technology, and includes:

[0132] A processor 201.

[0133] A memory 202, on which computer-readable instructions are stored. When the computer-readable instructions are executed by the processor 201, the sustainability evaluation method of the contaminated site remediation technology as in the method embodiment is implemented.

[0134] The sustainability evaluation system 20 for the contaminated site remediation technology provided by the present invention can execute the sustainability evaluation method of the above-mentioned contaminated site remediation technology and achieve the same or similar technical effects. To avoid repetition, the present invention will not elaborate further.

[0135] The beneficial effects brought by the technical solution provided by the embodiment of the present invention at least include:

[0136] (1) In the embodiment of the present invention, by constructing a decision matrix based on each sustainability index data, performing normalization processing on the decision matrix to obtain a normalized weighted matrix, and based on the normalized weighted matrix, determining the ideal solution of the contaminated site through an adaptive genetic algorithm. Optimizing the remediation plan through the adaptive genetic algorithm and combining evaluation indicators in multiple dimensions can comprehensively consider the distribution of each alternative plan in the multi-dimensional space, avoid the limitation of the traditional method that only relies on local distance calculation, and pay attention to the overall distribution of alternative plans in the multi-dimensional space, thereby providing comprehensive and comprehensive decision support for the remediation of contaminated sites.

[0137] (2) In the embodiment of the present invention, by calculating the Euclidean distances between each alternative remediation plan and the optimal ideal plan and the worst ideal plan respectively, and calculating the relative proximity between the two, the subtle differences between alternative plans can be effectively distinguished, especially in the case of insufficient data or high similarity between plans. The comprehensive similarity score combines multiple evaluation dimensions and further enhances the discrimination of the plan through weighted calculation, thereby improving the decision-making accuracy and ensuring the accurate evaluation of the pros and cons of the remediation plan.

[0138] It should be understood that the processor in the embodiments of the present invention may be a central processing unit (CPU), and the processor may also be other general-purpose processors, digital signal processors (DSPs), application specific integrated circuits (ASICs), field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) or other programmable logic devices, discrete gate or transistor logic devices, discrete hardware components, etc. The general-purpose processor may be a microprocessor or the processor may also be any conventional processor, etc.

[0139] It should also be understood that the memory in the embodiments of the present invention may be a volatile memory or a non-volatile memory, or may include both volatile and non-volatile memories. Among them, the non-volatile memory may be a read-only memory (ROM), a programmable ROM (PROM), an erasable PROM (EPROM), an electrically erasable PROM (EEPROM) or a flash memory. The volatile memory may be a random access memory (RAM), which is used as an external cache. By way of example but not limitation, many forms of random access memory (RAM) are available, such as static random access memory (SRAM), dynamic random access memory (DRAM), synchronous dynamic random access memory (SDRAM), double data rate SDRAM (DDR SDRAM), enhanced SDRAM (ESDRAM), synchlink DRAM (SLDRAM) and direct rambus RAM (DR RAM).

[0140] The above embodiments can be implemented in whole or in part by software, hardware (such as circuits), firmware, or any combination thereof. When implemented using software, the above embodiments can be implemented in whole or in part in the form of a computer program product. The computer program product includes one or more computer instructions or computer programs. When the computer instructions or computer programs are loaded or executed on a computer, the processes or functions described in the embodiments of the present invention are generated in whole or in part. The computer can be a general-purpose computer, a special-purpose computer, a computer network, or other programmable devices. The computer instructions can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium or transmitted from one computer-readable storage medium to another. For example, the computer instructions can be transmitted from one website, computer, server, or data center to another website, computer, server, or data center by wired (such as infrared, wireless, microwave, etc.) means. The computer-readable storage medium can be any available medium that can be accessed by a computer or a data storage device such as a server or data center that contains one or more collections of available media. The available medium can be a magnetic medium (such as a floppy disk, hard disk, magnetic tape), an optical medium (such as a DVD), or a semiconductor medium. The semiconductor medium can be a solid-state drive.

[0141] It should be understood that the term "and / or" in this document is merely a description of the association relationship between associated objects, indicating that three relationships can exist. For example, A and / or B can represent: A exists alone, A and B exist simultaneously, and B exists alone. Here, A and B can be singular or plural. In addition, the character " / " in this document generally represents an "or" relationship between the associated objects before and after, but it may also represent an "and / or" relationship, which can be understood specifically by referring to the context before and after.

[0142] In the present invention, "at least one" means one or more, and "a plurality" means two or more. "At least one of the following" or its similar expressions refer to any combination of these items, including any combination of single items or plural items. For example, at least one of a, b, or c can represent: a, b, c, a - b, a - c, b - c, or a - b - c, where a, b, and c can be single or multiple.

[0143] It should be understood that in various embodiments of the present invention, the magnitudes of the sequence numbers of the above processes do not mean the order of execution. The order of execution of each process should be determined by its function and internal logic, and should not constitute any limitation to the implementation process of the embodiments of the present invention.

[0144] Those of ordinary skill in the art can realize that the units and algorithm steps of each example described in combination with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented by electronic hardware, or a combination of computer software and electronic hardware. Whether these functions are executed in a hardware or software manner depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution. Skilled professionals can use different methods to implement the described functions for each specific application, but such implementation should not be considered to exceed the scope of the present invention.

[0145] Those skilled in the art can clearly understand that for the convenience and brevity of description, the specific working processes of the devices, apparatuses, and units described above can refer to the corresponding processes in the foregoing method embodiments and will not be elaborated herein.

[0146] In several embodiments provided by the present invention, it should be understood that the disclosed devices, apparatuses, and methods can be implemented in other ways. For example, the device embodiments described above are merely illustrative. For example, the division of the units is only a logical function division, and there can be other division methods in actual implementation. For example, multiple units or components can be combined or integrated into another device, or some features can be ignored or not executed. Another point is that the displayed or discussed couplings or direct couplings or communication connections to each other can be through some interfaces, and the indirect couplings or communication connections of the devices or units can be in electrical, mechanical, or other forms.

[0147] The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separated, and the components displayed as units may or may not be physical units, that is, they can be located in one place or distributed to multiple network units. Some or all of the units can be selected according to actual needs to achieve the purpose of the solution of this embodiment.

[0148] In addition, the functional units in various embodiments of the present invention can be integrated in a processing unit, or each unit can exist physically alone, or two or more units can be integrated in one unit.

[0149] When the above-mentioned function is implemented in the form of a software functional unit and sold or used as an independent product, it can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium. Based on such an understanding, the technical solution of the present invention, in essence, or the part that contributes to the prior art or a part of the technical solution can be embodied in the form of a software product. This computer software product is stored in a storage medium and includes several instructions for causing a computer device (which may be a personal computer, a server, or a network device, etc.) to execute all or part of the steps of the methods described in various embodiments of the present invention. The aforementioned storage medium includes: various media such as USB flash drives, mobile hard disks, read-only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), magnetic disks, or optical discs that can store program codes.

[0150] An embodiment of the present invention provides a computer-readable storage medium, on which a computer program is stored. When the program is executed by a processor, it implements the sustainability evaluation method of the contaminated site remediation technology as described in the method embodiment.

[0151] The computer-readable storage medium provided by the present invention can implement the steps and effects of the sustainability evaluation method of the contaminated site remediation technology in the above method embodiment. To avoid repetition, the present invention will not elaborate further.

[0152] The beneficial effects brought by the technical solution provided by the embodiment of the present invention at least include:

[0153] (1) In the embodiment of the present invention, by constructing a decision matrix based on each sustainability index data, standardizing the decision matrix to obtain a standardized weighted matrix, and based on the standardized weighted matrix, determining the ideal solution of the contaminated site through an adaptive genetic algorithm. Optimizing the remediation plan through the adaptive genetic algorithm and combining evaluation indicators in multiple dimensions can comprehensively consider the distribution of each alternative plan in the multi-dimensional space, avoid the limitation of the traditional method that only relies on local distance calculation, and pay attention to the overall distribution of alternative plans in the multi-dimensional space, thereby providing comprehensive and comprehensive decision support for the remediation of contaminated sites.

[0154] (2) In the embodiment of the present invention, by calculating the Euclidean distances between each alternative remediation plan and the optimal ideal plan and the worst ideal plan respectively, and calculating the relative closeness between the two, the subtle differences between alternative plans can be effectively distinguished, especially in the case of insufficient data or high similarity of plans. The comprehensive similarity score combines multiple evaluation dimensions and further enhances the discrimination of the plan through weighted calculation, thereby improving the decision-making accuracy and ensuring the accurate evaluation of the pros and cons of the remediation plan.

[0155] As described above, this is only the specific implementation manner of the present invention, but the protection scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any person skilled in the art within the technical scope disclosed by the present invention can easily think of changes or substitutions, which should all be covered within the protection scope of the present invention. Therefore, the protection scope of the present invention shall be subject to the protection scope of the claims.

[0156] The following points need to be explained:

[0157] (1) The accompanying drawings of the embodiments of the present invention only relate to the structures involved in the embodiments of the present invention, and other structures can refer to the general design.

[0158] (2) For clarity, in the accompanying drawings used to describe the embodiments of the present invention, the thickness of the layer or region is enlarged or reduced, that is, these drawings are not drawn according to the actual scale. It can be understood that when an element such as a layer, film, region or substrate is referred to as being "on" or "under" another element, the element can be "directly" on or under the other element or there can be an intermediate element.

[0159] (3) Without conflict, the embodiments of the present invention and the features in the embodiments can be combined with each other to obtain new embodiments.

[0160] As above, this is only the specific implementation manner of the present invention, but the protection scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. The protection scope of the present invention shall be subject to the protection scope of the claims.

Claims

1. A sustainability evaluation method for a contaminated site remediation technology, characterized in that, Including: S1: Obtain multiple alternative remediation solutions for the contaminated site and sustainability assessment index data for each alternative remediation solution; wherein, the sustainability assessment index data includes environmental sustainability assessment index data, economic sustainability assessment index data, social sustainability assessment index data, and effectiveness sustainability assessment index data; S2: Construct a decision matrix based on each sustainability index data; S3: Perform a standardization process on the decision matrix to obtain a standardized weighted matrix; S4: Based on the standardized weighted matrix, determine the ideal solution for the contaminated site through an adaptive genetic algorithm, wherein the ideal solution includes an optimal ideal solution and a worst ideal solution; S5: Calculate the Euclidean distances between each alternative remediation solution and the optimal ideal solution and the worst ideal solution respectively; S6: Calculate the relative closeness between the optimal ideal solution and the worst ideal solution; S7: Based on the Euclidean distance calculation results, determine the comprehensive similarity score of each alternative remediation solution with respect to the ideal point composed of the minimum sequence of the standardized weighted matrix; S8: Conduct a sustainability evaluation of each contaminated site remediation technology according to the relative closeness and the comprehensive similarity score.

2. The sustainability evaluation method for the contaminated site remediation technology according to claim 1, wherein The decision matrix is specifically: Among them, S n*4 represents the decision matrix, and a ij represents the index evaluation value of the j-th evaluation index of the i-th repair technical solution, where i = 1, 2, 3... n, n represents the total number of repair technical solutions, and j = 1, 2, 3, 4, where j represents the serial number of the evaluation index.

3. The sustainability evaluation method of the contaminated site remediation technology according to claim 1, characterized in that, The S3 specifically includes: S301: Standardize the decision matrix to obtain the standardized index values: Among them, r ij represents the standardized index value under the j-th evaluation index of the i-th repair technical solution, a ij represents the index evaluation value of the j-th evaluation index of the i-th repair technical solution, and n represents the total number of repair technical solutions; S302: Determine the index weights of each standardized index value; S303: Calculate the weighted standardized scores of each remediation technology solution according to each index weight and each standardized index value; v ij = w j r ij Among them, v ij represents the weighted standardized score under the j-th evaluation index of the i-th repair technical solution, and w j represents the index weight of the j-th evaluation index; S304: Obtain the standardized weighted matrix according to the weighted standardized scores of each remediation technology solution; Among them, V ij represents the standardized weighted matrix, and v ij represents the weighted standardized score under the j-th evaluation index of the i-th repair technical solution, where i = 1, 2, 3... n, n represents the total number of repair technical solutions, and j = 1, 2, 3, 4, where j represents the serial number of the evaluation index.

4. The sustainability evaluation method for the contaminated site remediation technology according to claim 3, characterized in that The specific method for determining the index weights is: Determine the index weights of each standardized index value through the analytic hierarchy process.

5. The sustainability evaluation method for the contaminated site remediation technology according to claim 1, characterized in that The S4 specifically includes: S401: Based on the standardized weighted matrix, construct a multi-objective function for calculating the sustainability score; SA = w EC EC + w EF EF + w SO SO + w EN EN Among them, SA represents the multi-objective function, EC represents the economic sustainability evaluation index, w EC represents the weight of the economic sustainability evaluation index, EF represents the effectiveness sustainability evaluation index, w EF represents the weight of the effectiveness sustainability evaluation index, SO represents the social sustainability evaluation index, w SO represents the weight of the social sustainability evaluation index, EN represents the environmental sustainability evaluation index, w EN represents the weight of the environmental sustainability evaluation index; S402: Determine the constraint conditions of the multi-objective function; Among them, EC min represents the minimum value of the economic sustainability evaluation index, EC max represents the maximum value of the economic sustainability evaluation index, EF min represents the minimum value of the effectiveness sustainability evaluation index, EF max represents the maximum value of the effectiveness sustainability evaluation index, SO min represents the minimum value of the social sustainability evaluation index, SO max represents the maximum value of the social sustainability evaluation index, EN min represents the minimum value of the environmental sustainability evaluation index, EN max represents the maximum value of the environmental sustainability evaluation index; S403: Under the constraints of the constraint conditions, optimize the multi-objective function through an adaptive genetic algorithm, and output the optimal ideal solution and the worst ideal solution.

6. The sustainability evaluation method of the contaminated site remediation technology according to claim 1, characterized in that The optimal ideal solution is specifically: v + = [max{v 11 , v 21 ,..., v n1},..., max{v 14 , v 24 ,..., v n4}] Among them, v + represents the optimal ideal solution, max represents the maximum value, and v ij represents the weighted standardized score under the j-th evaluation index of the i-th repair technology solution, where i = 1, 2, 3... n, n represents the total number of repair technology solutions, j = 1, 2, 3, 4, j represents the serial number of the evaluation index, j = 1 represents the environmental sustainability evaluation index, j = 2 represents the economic sustainability evaluation index, j = 3 represents the social sustainability evaluation index, and j = 4 represents the efficiency sustainability evaluation index; The worst ideal solution is specifically: v - = [min{v 11 , v 21 ,..., v n1},..., min{v 14 , v 24 ,..., v n4}] Among them, v - represents the worst ideal solution, and min represents the minimum value.

7. The sustainability evaluation method for the contaminated site remediation technology according to claim 1, characterized in that The S5 is specifically: Calculate the Euclidean distances between each remediation technology solution and the optimal ideal solution and the worst ideal solution through the following formula: Among them, represents the Euclidean distance between the alternative repair technical solution and the optimal ideal solution, v ij represents the weighted standardized score of the i-th repair technical solution under the j-th evaluation index, where j = 1, 2, 3, 4, and j represents the serial number of the evaluation index. represents the optimal ideal solution, represents the Euclidean distance between the alternative repair technical solution and the worst ideal solution, represents the worst ideal solution.

8. The sustainability evaluation method of the contaminated site remediation technology according to claim 1, wherein The calculation formula for the relative closeness is: Among them, Δ i represents the relative proximity, represents the Euclidean distance between the alternative repair technical solution and the optimal ideal solution, represents the Euclidean distance between the alternative repair technical solution and the worst ideal solution.

9. The sustainability evaluation method for the contaminated site remediation technology according to claim 1, wherein The S7 is specifically: S701: Based on the Euclidean distance calculation results, calculate the distance similarity and cosine similarity of each remediation technology solution through the following formula: Among them, dis(v i , IP) represents the distance from the ideal point, v i represents the weighted normalized score of the i-th repair technical solution, where i = 1, 2, 3... n, n represents the total number of repair technical solutions, IP represents the ideal point, and v ij represents the weighted normalized score of the i-th repair technical solution under the j-th evaluation index, where j = 1, 2, 3, 4, and j represents the serial number of the evaluation index. cos(v i , IP) represents the cosine distance from the ideal point, represents the worst ideal solution; S702: Determine the comprehensive similarity score of each remediation technology solution based on the calculation results of the distance similarity and cosine similarity of each remediation technology solution; Among them, S i represents the comprehensive similarity score of the i-th repair technical solution, γ represents the weight factor, represents the distance similarity of the i-th repair technical solution, represents the cosine similarity of the i-th repair technical solution.

10. A sustainability evaluation system for a contaminated site remediation technology, characterized in that, Including: A processor; A memory, on which computer-readable instructions are stored, and when the computer-readable instructions are executed by the processor, a method for evaluating the sustainability of the contaminated site remediation technology according to any one of claims 1 to 9 is implemented.

Images