Method, device and equipment for evaluating coping scheme and medium

Abstract

The invention discloses a coping scheme evaluation method, device and equipment and a medium, and relates to the technical field of scheme evaluation, the method constructs a cost index system suitable for evaluating a coping scheme for evacuation of hazardous events, and hazard evaluation is carried out on the harm of pollutants of various events and the social and economic influence caused by the pollutants. After the input data is determined, the advantages and disadvantages of the input emergency scheme can be evaluated from three aspects by calling the hazard evaluation model library every time, and then the evaluation result is displayed to a decision maker in a visual mode for reference by the decision maker, so that the optimal response scheme is determined. Therefore, a user can be helped to quickly judge the degree of harm of various consequences, and a visual basis is provided for making decisions by adopting different response schemes.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of solution evaluation, and in particular to a method, device, equipment and medium for evaluating a response solution based on a cost indicator. Background Art

[0002] With the development of society and the advancement of science and technology, users are increasingly demanding new technologies. The disasters caused by nuclear, biological, and chemical hazards have become a significant proportion of sudden disasters worldwide. Toxic and harmful gases, radioactive contamination, etc., pose a serious threat to the human living environment and also threaten human life.

[0003] To handle potential nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) incidents, emergency plans must be developed for the evacuation or protection of organisms around each NBC infrastructure. Because NBC incidents involve hazards such as radioactivity, chemical toxicity, and biological toxicity, and there is a direct quantitative relationship between their concentrations and exposure conditions and human injuries and disease responses, the rationality of emergency plans is often judged by this quantitative relationship.

[0004] However, after a nuclear, biological or chemical incident occurs, hazard assessment is not only related to individual outcomes, but also to factors such as population, economy, and environment. Therefore, when judging the rationality of emergency plans and the costs incurred, if only the simple quantitative relationship existing in the event itself is used as the judgment standard, it will not be conducive to decision makers setting emergency plans with the lowest costs.

[0005] Therefore, how to provide a solution evaluation method that can cover political, environmental and other factors and determine the best solution among the many emergency solutions provided by decision makers is a technical problem that urgently needs to be solved by technical personnel in this field. Summary of the Invention

[0006] In view of the above problems, the present invention provides a method, apparatus, device and medium for evaluating a solution to overcome the above problems or at least partially solve the above problems.

[0007] The present invention provides the following solutions:

[0008] A response plan evaluation method, comprising:

[0009] Obtaining data to be input, the data to be input at least including hazard source information of the target hazard event, hazard concentration distribution information of the target time series, and social situation data and resource data corresponding to the response plan to be evaluated;

[0010] The input data is solved using a hazard assessment model library corresponding to the target hazard event to obtain event hazard assessment results based on population distribution and hazard degree distribution corresponding to the response plans to be evaluated, as well as analysis results of event consequences based on casualties, health effects, and environmental impacts, so as to determine a solution quality evaluation result corresponding to the response plans to be evaluated using the event hazard assessment results and the analysis results;

[0011] Organize the evaluation results of the schemes to generate an evaluation report and perform a visual display;

[0012] The hazard assessment model library includes at least a cost-effectiveness analysis model, a benefit analysis model, and a multi-attribute utility analysis model;

[0013] The cost-effectiveness analysis model is used to calculate the cost paid by the minimum unit of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is superior by judging the ratio of the increased protection cost to the reduction in collective dose;

[0014] The benefit analysis model is used to calculate the total net benefit of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is optimal by judging the sum of the radiation protection cost and the radiation hazard cost;

[0015] The multi-attribute utility analysis model is used to calculate the total utility value of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is excellent by judging the level of the total utility value.

[0016] Preferably, the hazardous substance concentration distribution information of the target time series is obtained by analyzing the spatiotemporal dynamic model of event development.

[0017] Preferably, the ratio of the increased protection cost to the reduction in collective dose is expressed by the following formula:

[0018] ΔX / ΔS

[0019] Where: ΔX represents the increased protection cost of implementing a certain protection plan compared with the previous plan, and ΔS represents the corresponding reduction in collective dose.

[0020] Preferably: the total net benefit is represented by the following formula:

[0021] B=V-(P+X+Y)

[0022] Where: B represents the total net benefit, V represents the gross benefit, P represents all production costs excluding the costs related to radiation protection, X represents the protection cost required to achieve the corresponding protection level, and Y represents the radiation hazard cost corresponding to the protection level.

[0023] Preferably, if only the collective dose is considered, the radiation hazard cost Y is expressed by the following formula:

[0024] Y=αS

[0025] Where: α represents the monetary cost of unit collective dose radiation exposure, and S represents the collective dose.

[0026] Preferably, the radiation hazard cost Y is expressed by the following formula when the distribution of both collective dose and individual dose is determined:

[0027]

[0028] Where: S j represents the collective dose of the jth group of workers, that is, the number of people in the jth group N j and average dose H j The product of j is the additional cost of collective dose imparted to group j.

[0029] Preferably, the total utility value is expressed by the following formula:

[0030]

[0031] Where: U represents the total utility value of the i-th option, u ij represents the partial utility of the i-th plan for factor j; w j Represents the weight factor assigned to factor j.

[0032] A response plan evaluation device, used to execute the response plan evaluation method described above, comprising:

[0033] An input data acquisition unit is used to acquire data to be input, wherein the data to be input includes at least hazard source information of the target hazard event, hazard concentration distribution information of the target time series, and social situation data and resource data corresponding to the response plan to be evaluated;

[0034] A model solving unit is used to solve the input data using the hazard assessment model library corresponding to the target hazard event, and obtain event hazard assessment results based on population distribution and hazard degree distribution corresponding to the response plans to be evaluated, as well as analysis results of event consequences based on casualties, health effects, and environmental impacts, so as to determine a solution quality evaluation result corresponding to the response plans to be evaluated using the event hazard assessment results and the analysis results;

[0035] The display unit is used to organize the evaluation results of the schemes, generate an evaluation report and perform visual display;

[0036] The hazard assessment model library includes at least a cost-effectiveness analysis model, a benefit analysis model, and a multi-attribute utility analysis model;

[0037] The cost-effectiveness analysis model is used to calculate the cost paid by the minimum unit of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is superior by judging the ratio of the increased protection cost to the reduction in collective dose;

[0038] The benefit analysis model is used to calculate the total net benefit of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is optimal by judging the sum of the radiation protection cost and the radiation hazard cost;

[0039] The multi-attribute utility analysis model is used to calculate the total utility value of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is excellent by judging the level of the total utility value.

[0040] A device for evaluating a response plan includes a processor and a memory.

[0041] The memory is used to store program code and transmit the program code to the processor;

[0042] The processor is used to execute the above-mentioned response plan evaluation method according to the instructions in the program code.

[0043] A computer-readable storage medium is used to store program code, and the program code is used to execute the above-mentioned response plan evaluation method.

[0044] According to the specific embodiments provided by the present invention, the present invention discloses the following technical effects:

[0045] The embodiment of the present application provides a response plan evaluation method, device, equipment and medium, which constructs a cost index system suitable for evaluating evacuation response plans for hazardous events, and makes a hazard assessment of the hazards of pollutants in various events and the socioeconomic impacts caused by them. After the input data is determined, each call to the hazard assessment model library can evaluate the pros and cons of the input emergency plan from three aspects, and then display the evaluation results to the decision maker in a visual manner for reference to determine the best response plan. This can help users quickly judge the degree of harm of various consequences and provide an intuitive basis for making decisions on adopting different response plans.

[0046] Of course, any product implementing the present invention does not necessarily need to achieve all of the advantages described above at the same time. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0047] To more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the following briefly introduces the drawings required for use in the embodiments. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be derived from these drawings without inventive effort.

[0048] Figure 1 This is a flow chart of a method for evaluating a response plan provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0049] Figure 2 is a flowchart of the operation processing of the hazard assessment model provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0050] Figure 3 is a schematic diagram of a response plan evaluation device provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0051] Figure 4 Schematic diagram of a response solution evaluation device provided by an embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0052] The following will be combined with the accompanying drawings in the embodiments of the present invention to clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the embodiments described are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0053] See also Figure 1 , is a method for evaluating a response plan provided by an embodiment of the present invention, such as Figure 1 As shown, the method may include:

[0054] S101: Obtaining data to be input, the data to be input including at least hazard source information of the target hazard event, hazard concentration distribution information of the target time series, and social situation data and resource data corresponding to the response plan to be evaluated; the hazard concentration distribution information of the target time series is used to indicate the concentration distribution information of different hazards at different times or time periods after the nuclear accident occurs. For example, it can include the concentration of hazards at different times at the same location, or the concentration of hazards at different locations at the same time. The hazard concentration distribution information of the target time series can be obtained by various means. For example, in one implementation, the embodiment of the present application can provide that the hazard concentration distribution information of the target time series is obtained by analyzing a spatiotemporal dynamic model of event development.

[0055] It can be understood that when evaluating an evacuation plan for a specific accident, the hazard source information of the target hazard event provided in the embodiment of the present application can usually be fixed data, and the hazard concentration distribution information of the target time series input once each time (the concentration distribution is different at different times or time periods) and the social situation data and resource data corresponding to the response plan to be evaluated (different response plans need to consider different social situation data and different resource data) can be input by the user himself, thereby ensuring that the advantages and disadvantages of different response plans to be evaluated can be evaluated every time the hazard assessment model library is used.

[0056] S102: Solving the input data using a hazard assessment model library corresponding to the target hazard event to obtain event hazard assessment results based on population distribution and hazard degree distribution, and event consequence analysis results based on casualties, health effects, and environmental impacts, respectively, corresponding to the response plans to be evaluated, so as to determine a solution quality evaluation result corresponding to the response plans to be evaluated using the event hazard assessment results and the analysis results;

[0057] S103: Sorting out the results of the scheme evaluation to generate an evaluation report and performing a visual display;

[0058] The hazard assessment model library includes at least a cost-effectiveness analysis model, a benefit analysis model, and a multi-attribute utility analysis model;

[0059] The cost-effectiveness analysis model is used to calculate the cost of the smallest unit of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is superior by judging the ratio of the increased protection cost to the reduction in collective dose. In practical applications, the smaller the ratio of the increased protection cost to the reduction in collective dose, the better the response plan to be evaluated. In specific implementation, the embodiment of the present application can provide that the ratio of the increased protection cost to the reduction in collective dose is expressed by the following formula:

[0060] ΔX / ΔS

[0061] Where: ΔX represents the increased protection cost of implementing a certain protection plan compared with the previous plan, and ΔS represents the corresponding reduction in collective dose.

[0062] The benefit analysis model is used to calculate the total net benefit of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is superior by judging the sum of the radiation protection cost and the radiation hazard cost. In practical applications, when determining the specific implementation, the smaller the sum of the radiation protection cost and the radiation hazard cost, the better the response plan to be evaluated. The total net benefit is expressed by the following formula:

[0063] B=V-(P+X+Y)

[0064] Where: B represents the total net benefit, V represents the gross benefit, P represents all production costs excluding the costs related to radiation protection, X represents the protection cost required to achieve the corresponding protection level, and Y represents the radiation hazard cost corresponding to the protection level.

[0065] Furthermore, if only the collective dose is considered, the radiation hazard cost Y is expressed as follows:

[0066] Y=αS

[0067] Where: α represents the monetary cost of unit collective dose radiation exposure, and S represents the collective dose.

[0068] The distribution of radiation hazard cost Y is determined by considering both collective dose and individual dose, and is expressed as follows:

[0069]

[0070] Where: S j represents the collective dose of the jth group of workers, that is, the number of people in the group N j and average dose H j The product of j is the additional cost of collective dose imparted to group j.

[0071] The multi-attribute utility analysis model is used to calculate the total utility value of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is excellent by judging the level of the total utility value. In practical applications, the response plan to be evaluated with a higher total utility value is determined to be more excellent. In specific implementation, the total utility value is expressed by the following formula:

[0072]

[0073] Where: U represents the total utility value of the i-th option, u ij represents the partial utility of the i-th plan for factor j; w j Represents the weight factor assigned to factor j.

[0074] The response plan evaluation method provided in this embodiment utilizes a set of cost and benefit equivalence evaluation methods to assess the hazards of pollutants and the resulting socioeconomic impacts of various events. Once the input data is determined, each call to the hazard assessment model library evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the input emergency plan from three perspectives. The evaluation results are then visually displayed to decision makers for reference and to determine the optimal response plan.

[0075] The following is a detailed introduction to the response solution evaluation method provided in the embodiment of the present application.

[0076] The operation processing flow of the hazard assessment model provided in the embodiment of the present application is as follows: Figure 2 shown.

[0077] (1) Through the system platform, the hazard source information, the distribution of hazardous substance concentrations in a specific time series analyzed by the event development spatiotemporal dynamic model, and the necessary social data and resource data are input into the hazard assessment model library of the corresponding event. The hazard source information can be obtained by using the item simulation analysis model. The event development spatiotemporal dynamic model is used to analyze the diffusion of special aerosol pollutants after the target time period in the future and output the concentration distribution of the released substances in the target time series.

[0078] (2) The model is called for solution, and the event hazard assessment results based on the population distribution and hazard degree distribution, as well as the event consequence prediction results based on information such as casualties, health effects and environmental impacts, are output according to the platform settings and user needs.

[0079] (3) Organize the production hazard assessment report and display it visually on the system platform.

[0080] Hazard assessment is not only related to individual outcomes, but also to factors such as population, economy, and environment. Therefore, all consequences must undergo a cost analysis process to give the comprehensive cost of each consequence. The main problem faced by cost analysis is how to quantify factors such as politics and environment.

[0081] Solution: Use fuzzy mathematics methods to establish cost indicators and cost indicator equivalent evaluation methods to quantify fuzzy factors. Then, a mathematical model for cost utilization analysis can be established to analyze the action plan.

[0082] Three countermeasure optimization methods are adopted for hazard analysis, namely cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-benefit analysis and multi-attribute utility analysis.

[0083] a. Cost-effectiveness analysis.

[0084] To assess the impact of various consequences, the minimum unit cost of each option is calculated, namely the cost-effectiveness ratio ΔX / ΔS, where ΔX is the increased cost of implementing a protection option compared to the previous option, and ΔS is the corresponding reduction in collective dose. The option with the smaller cost-effectiveness ratio is considered the better option. This analysis method only considers the two most basic factors: protection cost and collective dose.

[0085] This method is simple and easy to implement, and does not require a predetermined α value (the monetary cost equivalent to the collective dose per person·Sv, which is stipulated by law by the competent authorities). This method also has some shortcomings, for example, it only produces a better solution, not necessarily the optimal solution, and it cannot determine the optimal protection level.

[0086] b. Interest analysis.

[0087] The cost-benefit analysis method is a method that directly reflects the optimization concept. Its main feature is that it can identify the solution with the maximum total net benefit, namely:

[0088] B=V-(P+X+Y)=maximum

[0089] In the formula, B is the total net benefit, V is the gross benefit, P is all production costs excluding costs related to radiation protection, X is the cost of protection required to achieve the corresponding level of protection, and Y is the radiation hazard cost associated with that level of protection. If V and P are assumed to be unrelated to radiation protection, then to maximize B, the sum of X + Y must be minimized. In other words, the core of cost-benefit analysis is to find the protection plan that minimizes the sum of the radiation protection cost and the radiation hazard cost—the optimal protection plan.

[0090] In practical applications, two methods can be used to calculate the radiation hazard cost Y. One method only considers the collective dose without considering the distribution of individual doses. The corresponding cost-benefit analysis method of this calculation method is called the simple cost-benefit analysis method; the other calculation method considers both the collective dose and the distribution of individual doses, which is called the extended cost-benefit analysis method.

[0091] The radiation hazard cost Y is:

[0092] Y=αS

[0093] Where α is the monetary cost of unit collective dose radiation exposure, yuan / person·Sv; S is the collective dose, person·Sv.

[0094] The difference between the extended cost-benefit analysis method and the simple cost-benefit analysis method is that the analysis not only considers the protection cost and collective dose, but also considers other factors related to radiation protection, such as the distribution of individual doses, different types of population groups, and possible adverse effects of protective measures.

[0095] Taking the impact of individual doses as an example, the distribution of individual doses is often uneven. Larger doses can lead to greater harm, so even at a greater cost, efforts should be made to reduce these larger individual doses. Specifically, when calculating the cost of radiation hazards, the term β, reflecting the distribution of individual doses, is added to the above formula. Y is then calculated as follows:

[0096]

[0097] Where S j represents the collective dose of the jth group of workers, which is the number of people in the group N j and average dose H j The product of j is the additional cost of collective dose given to group j, for different levels of individual dose, β j The greater the individual dose, the greater the j The larger the value, the greater the risk. The cost-benefit analysis method can determine the optimal level of protection and the path to achieving it. This method can be considered a relatively direct reflection of the basic concept of radiation protection optimization.

[0098] c. Multi-attribute utility analysis.

[0099] Multi-attribute utility analysis is a widely used countermeasures method. Its outstanding feature is that it can quantify factors that are difficult to quantify with monetary values, thereby making quantitative judgments on issues that can usually only be analyzed qualitatively, making countermeasures more scientific.

[0100] In the multi-attribute utility analysis method, the utility function is first determined for each factor to be considered, then the corresponding utility value of each plan is calculated, and finally the total utility values of each plan are compared. The plan with a higher total utility value is the best.

[0101] After obtaining the partial utility value of each factor, we weighted them and sum them up to calculate the total utility value of each plan according to the following formula:

[0102]

[0103] In the formula, U represents the total utility value of the i-th plan, u ij represents the partial utility of the i-th plan for factor j; w j represents the weight factor assigned to factor j (j = 1, 2, ..., n), which is normalized, i.e. ∑w j =1.

[0104] This approach may be very attractive for solving high-level strategic problems, but it can be difficult to implement in practice because it requires the precise formulation of utility functions (which are often nonlinear) and the evaluation and assignment of weighting factors.

[0105] In a simulation, partial utility values for the three scenarios, including the number of vehicles used, completion time, and total dose, were calculated and normalized using the Tmin / Ti method. The total utility value for each scenario was then calculated using different weights, as shown in Table 1. Weight 1 was [0.5 0.2 0.2], Weight 2 was [0.3 0.2 0.2], Weight 3 was [0.3 0.2 0.5], and Weight 4 was [0.33 0.33 0.34].

[0106] Table 1 Multi-attribute utility analysis example

[0107]

[0108] According to the evaluation results, the total utility value of the first set of solutions provided in Table 1 is the best.

[0109] In summary, the response plan evaluation method provided in this application constructs a cost indicator system suitable for evaluating evacuation response plans for hazardous incidents, which can help users quickly judge the degree of harm of various consequences and provide an intuitive basis for making decisions on adopting different response plans.

[0110] See also Figure 3 , the embodiment of the present application can also provide a response plan evaluation device, such as Figure 3 As shown, for executing the above-mentioned response plan evaluation method, the device may include:

[0111] The input data acquisition unit 301 is used to acquire data to be input, wherein the data to be input includes at least hazard source information of the target hazard event, hazard concentration distribution information of the target time series, and social situation data and resource data corresponding to the response plan to be evaluated;

[0112] The model solving unit 302 is configured to solve the input data using the hazard assessment model library corresponding to the target hazard event, and obtain event hazard assessment results based on population distribution and hazard degree distribution corresponding to the response plans to be evaluated, as well as analysis results of event consequences based on casualties, health effects, and environmental impacts, so as to determine a solution quality evaluation result corresponding to the response plans to be evaluated using the event hazard assessment results and the analysis results.

[0113] The display unit 303 is used to organize the evaluation results of the schemes, generate an evaluation report and perform visual display;

[0114] The hazard assessment model library includes at least a cost-effectiveness analysis model, a benefit analysis model, and a multi-attribute utility analysis model;

[0115] The cost-effectiveness analysis model is used to calculate the cost paid by the minimum unit of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is superior by judging the ratio of the increased protection cost to the reduction in collective dose;

[0116] The benefit analysis model is used to calculate the total net benefit of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is optimal by judging the sum of the radiation protection cost and the radiation hazard cost;

[0117] The multi-attribute utility analysis model is used to calculate the total utility value of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is excellent by judging the level of the total utility value.

[0118] The present application may also provide a device for evaluating a solution, the device comprising a processor and a memory.

[0119] The memory is used to store program code and transmit the program code to the processor;

[0120] The processor is used to execute the steps of the above-mentioned response plan evaluation method according to the instructions in the program code.

[0121] like Figure 4 As shown, a response solution evaluation device provided by an embodiment of the present application may include: a processor 10, a memory 11, a communication interface 12, and a communication bus 13. The processor 10, the memory 11, and the communication interface 12 all communicate with each other via the communication bus 13.

[0122] In the embodiment of the present application, the processor 10 may be a central processing unit (CPU), a graphics processing unit (GPU), an application-specific integrated circuit, a digital signal processor, a field programmable gate array, or other programmable logic devices.

[0123] The processor 10 may call a program stored in the memory 11 . Specifically, the processor 10 may execute operations in an embodiment of the method for evaluating a response plan.

[0124] The memory 11 is used to store one or more programs. The program may include program code, and the program code includes computer operating instructions. In the embodiment of the present application, the memory 11 stores at least a program for implementing the following functions:

[0125] Obtaining data to be input, the data to be input including at least hazard source information of the target hazard event, hazard concentration distribution information of the target time series, and social situation data and resource data corresponding to each response plan to be evaluated;

[0126] Inputting the data to be input into a hazard assessment model library corresponding to the target hazard event, so as to obtain event hazard assessment results based on population distribution and hazard degree distribution corresponding to each of the response plans to be evaluated, as well as event consequence prediction results based on casualties, health effects, and environmental impacts;

[0127] Calculating the minimum unit cost of each of the response plans to be evaluated using a cost-effectiveness analysis model, so as to determine that the response plan to be evaluated with a smaller ratio of increased protection cost to reduced collective dose is the best;

[0128] Calculating the total net benefit of each of the response plans to be evaluated using a benefit analysis model, so as to determine that the response plan to be evaluated with the smallest sum of the radiation protection cost and the radiation hazard cost is the best;

[0129] The multi-attribute utility analysis model is used to calculate the total utility values of the response plans to be evaluated respectively, so as to determine that the response plan to be evaluated with a high total utility value is the best.

[0130] In one possible implementation, the memory 11 may include a program storage area and a data storage area, wherein the program storage area can store an operating system and application programs required for at least one function (such as a file creation function, a data reading and writing function), etc.; the data storage area can store data created during use, such as initialization data, etc.

[0131] In addition, the memory 11 may include a high-speed random access memory and may also include a non-volatile memory, such as at least one disk storage device or other volatile solid-state storage device.

[0132] The communication interface 12 may be an interface of a communication model, used for connecting to other devices or systems.

[0133] Of course, it needs to be explained that Figure 4 The structure shown does not constitute a limitation on the response solution evaluation device in the embodiment of the present application. In actual applications, the response solution evaluation device may include Figure 4 More or fewer components than shown, or combinations of certain components.

[0134] An embodiment of the present application may also provide a computer-readable storage medium, wherein the computer-readable storage medium is used to store program code, and the program code is used to execute the steps of the above-mentioned response plan evaluation method.

[0135] It should be noted that, in this document, relational terms such as first and second, etc., are used only to distinguish one entity or operation from another entity or operation, and do not necessarily require or imply the existence of any such actual relationship or order between these entities or operations. Moreover, the terms "comprises," "comprising," or any other variants thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, so that a process, method, article, or device comprising a series of elements includes not only those elements, but also other elements not explicitly listed, or elements inherent to such process, method, article, or device. In the absence of further limitations, an element defined by the phrase "comprising a ..." does not exclude the presence of other identical elements in the process, method, article, or device comprising the element.

[0136] Through the description of the above embodiments, it can be seen that those skilled in the art can clearly understand that the present application can be implemented by means of software plus a necessary general hardware platform. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of the present application, or the part that contributes to the prior art, can be embodied in the form of a software product, which can be stored in a storage medium such as ROM / RAM, a magnetic disk, an optical disk, etc., and includes a number of instructions for enabling a computer device (which can be a personal computer, a server, or a network device, etc.) to execute the methods described in various embodiments or certain parts of the embodiments of the present application.

[0137] Each embodiment in this specification is described in a progressive manner. The same or similar parts between the embodiments can be referred to each other. Each embodiment focuses on the differences from other embodiments. In particular, for system or system embodiments, since they are basically similar to method embodiments, the description is relatively simple. For relevant parts, refer to the partial description of the method embodiment. The system and system embodiments described above are merely schematic, wherein 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 may be located in one place or distributed on multiple network units. Some or all of the models can be selected according to actual needs to achieve the purpose of the scheme of this embodiment. Ordinary technicians in this field can understand and implement it without making any creative efforts.

[0138] The above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the scope of protection of the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent replacements, improvements, etc. made within the spirit and principles of the present invention are included in the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A response plan evaluation method, characterized in that: include: Obtaining data to be input, the data to be input at least including hazard source information of the target hazard event, hazard concentration distribution information of the target time series, and social situation data and resource data corresponding to the response plan to be evaluated; The input data is solved using a hazard assessment model library corresponding to the target hazard event to obtain event hazard assessment results based on population distribution and hazard degree distribution corresponding to the response plans to be evaluated, as well as analysis results of event consequences based on casualties, health effects, and environmental impacts, so as to determine a solution quality evaluation result corresponding to the response plans to be evaluated using the event hazard assessment results and the analysis results; Organize the evaluation results of the schemes to generate an evaluation report and perform a visual display; The hazard assessment model library includes at least a cost-effectiveness analysis model, a benefit analysis model, and a multi-attribute utility analysis model; The cost-effectiveness analysis model is used to calculate the cost paid by the minimum unit of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is superior by judging the ratio of the increased protection cost to the reduction in collective dose; The benefit analysis model is used to calculate the total net benefit of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is optimal by judging the sum of the radiation protection cost and the radiation hazard cost; The multi-attribute utility analysis model is used to calculate the total utility value of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is excellent by judging the level of the total utility value.

2. The method for evaluating a response plan according to claim 1, wherein: The concentration distribution information of the target time series of hazards is obtained by analyzing the spatiotemporal dynamic model of event development.

3. The method for evaluating a response plan according to claim 1, wherein: The ratio of the increased protection cost to the reduction in collective dose is expressed by the following formula: ΔX / ΔS Where: ΔX represents the increased protection cost of implementing a certain protection plan compared with the previous plan, and ΔS represents the corresponding reduction in collective dose.

4. The method for evaluating a response plan according to claim 1, wherein: The total net benefit is expressed as follows: B=V-(P+X+Y) Where: B represents the total net benefit, V represents the gross benefit, P represents all production costs excluding the costs related to radiation protection, X represents the protection cost required to achieve the corresponding protection level, and Y represents the radiation hazard cost corresponding to the protection level.

5. The method for evaluating a response plan according to claim 4, wherein: If only the collective dose is considered, the radiation hazard cost Y is expressed by the following formula: Y=αS Where: α represents the monetary cost of unit collective dose radiation exposure, and S represents the collective dose.

6. The method for evaluating a response plan according to claim 4, wherein: The distribution of radiation hazard cost Y is determined by considering both collective dose and individual dose, and is expressed as follows: Where: S j represents the collective dose of the jth group of workers, that is, the number of people in the jth group N j and average dose H j The product of j is the additional cost of collective dose imparted to group j.

7. The method for evaluating a response plan according to claim 1, wherein: The total utility value is expressed by the following formula: Where: U represents the total utility value of the i-th option, u ij represents the partial utility of the i-th plan for factor j; w j Represents the weight factor assigned to factor j.

8. A response plan evaluation device, characterized in that: The device is used to execute the response plan evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 7, comprising: An input data acquisition unit is used to acquire data to be input, wherein the data to be input includes at least hazard source information of the target hazard event, hazard concentration distribution information of the target time series, and social situation data and resource data corresponding to the response plan to be evaluated; A model solving unit is used to solve the input data using the hazard assessment model library corresponding to the target hazard event, and obtain event hazard assessment results based on population distribution and hazard degree distribution corresponding to the response plans to be evaluated, as well as analysis results of event consequences based on casualties, health effects, and environmental impacts, so as to determine a solution quality evaluation result corresponding to the response plans to be evaluated using the event hazard assessment results and the analysis results; The display unit is used to organize the evaluation results of the schemes, generate an evaluation report and perform visual display; The hazard assessment model library includes at least a cost-effectiveness analysis model, a benefit analysis model, and a multi-attribute utility analysis model; The cost-effectiveness analysis model is used to calculate the cost paid by the minimum unit of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is superior by judging the ratio of the increased protection cost to the reduction in collective dose; The benefit analysis model is used to calculate the total net benefit of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is optimal by judging the sum of the radiation protection cost and the radiation hazard cost; The multi-attribute utility analysis model is used to calculate the total utility value of the response plan to be evaluated, so as to determine whether the response plan to be evaluated is excellent by judging the level of the total utility value.

9. A response plan evaluation device, characterized in that: The device includes a processor and a memory: The memory is used to store program code and transmit the program code to the processor; The processor is used to execute the response solution evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 7 according to the instructions in the program code.

10. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that The computer-readable storage medium is used to store program code, and the program code is used to execute the response solution evaluation method according to any one of claims 1 to 7.

Images