Risk assessment model construction method, assessment method, equipment, medium and product

Abstract

The invention discloses a risk assessment model construction method, an assessment method, equipment, a medium and a product, and relates to the field of resource development risk assessment. The construction method comprises the steps of analyzing risk indexes of solid mineral resource development geology, and constructing a risk assessment model of the solid mineral resource development geology according to an exploration work risk, a geologic feature complexity risk and a geologic feature anomaly risk which are obtained through analysis. According to the method, factors such as the exploration work degree, the geologic feature complexity degree and the geologic feature anomaly degree are comprehensively considered, the solid mineral resource development geologic risks are divided into exploration work risks, geologic feature complexity risks and geologic feature anomaly risks, and risk indexes are adopted to represent the risks; the evaluation method which is scientific, reliable, high in applicability, rich in information and high in readability is provided for risk evaluation of solid mineral resource development geology.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of resource development risk assessment technology, and in particular relates to a method for constructing a geological risk assessment model for solid mineral resource development, an assessment method, equipment, storage medium and products. Background Technology

[0002] Solid mineral resources refer to naturally occurring, solid deposits with exploitable value formed by geological processes within the Earth's crust or on its surface. They are characterized by depletion, scarcity, uneven distribution, non-renewability, and dynamism. Before developing and utilizing solid mineral resources, it is necessary to investigate their spatial distribution, morphology, occurrence, quantity, quality, mining and utilization conditions, and assess their geological risks, construction risks, and production and operation risks.

[0003] Currently, geological risk assessment in development often uses single risk factor indicators. However, geological risk during development is a comprehensive reflection of geological conditions. Each solid mineral resource deposit differs in terms of exploration progress, metallogenic geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology, and mining technology. These different risk factors are interrelated and jointly determine the magnitude of geological risk during the development of the deposit. Traditional geological risk assessment methods do not directly provide a comprehensive calculation method for evaluating development geological risk; that is, they do not consider the comprehensiveness and systematic nature of development geological risk, nor do they consider the impact of the risk levels of risk factors such as exploration progress, metallogenic geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology, and mining technology on the overall development geological risk.

[0004] In fact, the geological risks of solid mineral resource development should have at least two levels. First, there are the inherent risks arising from the distribution of the geological resources themselves, which are inherent attributes of solid mineral resources. Second, there are the risks posed by the quality of geological exploration work and the level of technology to solid mineral resources, which are human-caused risks and can be changed or controlled. However, existing methods do not clearly distinguish between these two types of risks.

[0005] In summary, the current geological risk assessment method for development has shortcomings such as insufficient comprehensiveness and detail, and weak operability. The geological risk assessment results obtained are also difficult to truly reflect the geological risk level of the deposit during development. Summary of the Invention

[0006] The purpose of this invention is to provide a risk assessment model construction method, assessment method, equipment, medium and product to solve the problem that traditional evaluation methods are not comprehensive enough and lack operability, resulting in the geological risk assessment results of development geological risks failing to truly reflect the geological risk level during mineral deposit development.

[0007] This invention solves the above-mentioned technical problems through the following technical solution: a method for constructing a risk assessment model for solid mineral resource development geology, comprising:

[0008] Analyze the risk indicators of geological development for solid mineral resources;

[0009] A risk assessment model for solid mineral resource development geology is constructed based on the risk indicators obtained from the analysis; wherein, the mathematical expression of the risk assessment model is:

[0010]

[0011] Where, r c r represents the geological risk index for solid mineral resource development. l Indicates the risk index of exploration work, u l V represents the risk index indicating the complexity of geological features. l The index represents the risk index of geological anomalies, and ε represents the error parameter.

[0012] The risk of geological feature complexity refers to the risk of unclear geological conditions due to the complexity of the geological conditions, and the risk of geological feature anomaly refers to the risk arising from a significant difference between the inferred geological conditions and conventional geological laws.

[0013] The risk assessment model constructed in this invention includes an exploration work risk index, a geological feature complexity risk index, and a geological feature anomaly risk index. The exploration work risk index is related to the degree of exploration work; the geological feature complexity risk index is related to the average scores of metallogenic geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and ore deposit mining technology conditions; and the geological feature anomaly risk index is related to the degree of fluctuation in the scores of these three factors. The risk assessment model constructed in this invention calculates the risk index for solid mineral resource development geology, comprehensively considering the degree of exploration work risk, the degree of geological feature complexity risk, and the degree of geological feature anomaly risk. It is clear in its approach, comprehensive in its considerations, and logically rigorous. Using risk indices to quantitatively characterize the magnitude of geological risk provides strong operability and offers a scientific, reliable, applicable, information-rich, and highly readable evaluation method for risk assessment in solid mineral resource development geology.

[0014] Furthermore, the formula for calculating the exploration work risk index is as follows:

[0015] r l =k(ω1F1+ω2F2+ω3F3+ω4F4);

[0016] Where F1 represents the exploration type score, F2 represents the exploration project spacing score, F3 represents the exploration project deployment score, F4 represents the exploration depth score, ω1 represents the weight of the exploration type score, ω2 represents the weight of the exploration project spacing score, ω3 represents the weight of the exploration project deployment score, ω4 represents the weight of the exploration depth score, ω1F1+ω2F2+ω3F3+ω4F4 represents the weighted value, and k represents the relationship between the exploration work risk index and the weighted value; ω1+ω2+ω4+ω3=1, ω1>ω2≈ω4>ω3.

[0017] Furthermore, when the highest value of the exploration type score, exploration project spacing score, exploration project deployment score, and exploration depth score is 3, the relationship k between the exploration work risk index and the weighted value is specifically as follows:

[0018] If the weighting value is equal to 1, then the exploration work risk index r l It equals 1;

[0019] If the weighted value ranges from (1,2), then the exploration work risk index r l The value range is (1, 1.5);

[0020] If the weighting value is equal to 2, then the exploration work risk index r l It equals 1.5;

[0021] If the weighted value ranges from (2,3), then the exploration work risk index r l The value range is (1.5, 2);

[0022] If the weighting value is equal to 3, then the exploration work risk index r l It equals 2.

[0023] Furthermore, the formula for calculating the geological feature complexity risk index is as follows:

[0024] u l = (β1+β2+β3+β4+β5) / 5;

[0025] Among them, β1 represents the score of mineralization geological conditions, β2 represents the score of ore body characteristics, β3 represents the score of ore characteristics, β4 represents the score of ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and β5 represents the score of ore deposit mining technology conditions.

[0026] Furthermore, the specific calculation process for the geological feature anomaly risk index includes:

[0027] When calculating the geological feature complexity risk index, obtain the scores of metallogenic geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and ore deposit mining technology conditions.

[0028] Calculate the standard deviation and mean of the scores for metallogenic geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and ore deposit mining technology conditions.

[0029] Calculate the coefficient of variation based on the standard deviation and mean.

[0030] The geological feature anomaly risk index is determined based on the coefficient of variation.

[0031] Furthermore, when the highest value of the metallogenic geological condition score, ore body characteristic score, ore characteristic score, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance score, and deposit mining technology condition score is 3, the geological characteristic anomaly risk index is determined based on the aforementioned coefficient of variation, including:

[0032] If the coefficient of variation is equal to 0, then the geological feature anomaly risk index is equal to 0.

[0033] If the coefficient of variation ranges from (0, 0.33), then the geological feature anomaly risk index ranges from (0, 1.5).

[0034] If the coefficient of variation is 0.33, then the geological feature anomaly risk index is 1.5.

[0035] If the coefficient of variation ranges from (0.33, 0.67), then the geological feature anomaly risk index ranges from (1.5, 3).

[0036] If the coefficient of variation is 0.67, then the geological feature anomaly risk index is 3.

[0037] Based on the same concept, this invention provides a risk assessment method for the geological development of solid mineral resources, including:

[0038] Calculate the risk index for exploration work, the risk index for geological feature complexity, and the risk index for geological feature anomalies;

[0039] Construct a risk assessment model using the risk assessment model construction method described above;

[0040] The risk index for solid mineral resource development geology is calculated based on the risk index of exploration work, the risk index of geological feature complexity, the risk index of geological feature anomaly, and the risk assessment model.

[0041] Preferably, the risk assessment method further includes: assessing the risk level of the solid mineral resource development geology based on the risk index of the solid mineral resource development geology;

[0042] The inherent geological risk index is calculated based on the geological feature complexity risk index and the geological feature anomaly risk index, and the inherent geological risk level of solid mineral resources is assessed based on the inherent geological risk index.

[0043] Based on the same concept, the present invention also provides an electronic device, including a memory, a processor, and a computer program / instructions stored in the memory, wherein the processor executes the computer program / instructions to implement the risk assessment model construction method or risk assessment method as described above.

[0044] Based on the same concept, the present invention also provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program / instruction stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the risk assessment model construction method or risk assessment method as described above.

[0045] Based on the same concept, the present invention also provides a computer program product, including a computer program / instruction, which, when executed by a processor, implements the risk assessment model construction method or risk assessment method as described above.

[0046] Beneficial effects

[0047] Compared with the prior art, the advantages of the present invention are as follows:

[0048] This invention is based on the geological characteristic rating of solid mineral resource exploration work, metallogenic geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and ore deposit mining technology conditions. It comprehensively considers factors such as the degree of exploration work, the complexity of geological characteristics, and the degree of geological anomalies, and classifies the geological risks of solid mineral resource development into exploration work risks, geological characteristic complexity risks, and geological characteristic anomaly risks, and uses a risk index to characterize the magnitude of the risks.

[0049] This invention has a clear concept, comprehensive consideration, rigorous logic, and strong operability. It provides a scientific, reliable, applicable, information-rich, and highly readable evaluation method for risk assessment of geological development of solid mineral resources. Attached Figure Description

[0050] To more clearly illustrate the technical solution of the present invention, the accompanying drawings used in the description of the embodiments will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the accompanying drawings described below are only one embodiment of the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0051] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the risk assessment model construction method for solid mineral resource development geology in this embodiment of the invention;

[0052] Figure 2 This is a flowchart of the risk assessment method for the geological development of solid mineral resources in this embodiment of the invention. Detailed Implementation

[0053] The technical solutions of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings of the embodiments. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0054] The technical solutions of this application will be described in detail below with specific embodiments. The following specific embodiments can be combined with each other, and the same or similar concepts or processes may not be described again in some embodiments.

[0055] Example 1

[0056] Figure 1 A flowchart illustrating the method for constructing a risk assessment model for solid mineral resource development geology provided by this invention is shown. Figure 1 As shown, the method for constructing this risk assessment model includes:

[0057] Step A1: Analyze the risk indicators of the geological conditions for the development of solid mineral resources.

[0058] Geological risks in the development of solid mineral resources are classified into exploration work risks, geological feature complexity risks, and geological feature anomaly risks. Among them, geological feature complexity risks refer to the risks of unclear geological conditions due to complex geological conditions, while geological feature anomaly risks refer to the risks arising from significant differences between the inferred geological conditions and conventional geological laws. Geological feature complexity risks and geological feature anomaly risks are inherent risks of solid mineral resources and should be considered in parallel. Exploration work risks, on the other hand, are human factors that directly affect the overall risks of solid mineral resource development.

[0059] The exploration work risk index is related to the degree of exploration work; the geological feature complexity risk index is related to the average score of the metallogenic geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and ore deposit mining technology conditions; and the geological feature anomaly risk index is related to the degree of fluctuation of the scores of the metallogenic geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and ore deposit mining technology conditions. Based on the exploration work risk, geological feature complexity risk, and geological feature anomaly risk, a risk assessment model for solid mineral resource development geology is constructed, which is more comprehensive, logically rigorous, and more operable, and can more accurately reflect the geological risk level during ore deposit development.

[0060] Step A2: Construct a risk assessment model for the geological development of solid mineral resources based on the risk indicators obtained from the analysis. The specific mathematical expression is as follows:

[0061]

[0062] Where, r c r represents the geological risk index for solid mineral resource development. l Indicates the risk index of exploration work, u l V represents the risk index indicating the complexity of geological features. l The index represents the risk index of geological feature anomalies, and ε represents the error parameter designed to account for the complexity and difficulty in accurately calculating the risk of geological feature anomalies. Considering the calculation error of the geological risk index, the value range of the error parameter ε is set to 0.8 to 1.2.

[0063] Exploration work risk index r l This refers to the risks associated with the scientific and thorough nature of geological exploration work during the general development of solid mineral resources. The calculation is based on geological experts' scoring of the exploration work according to exploration standards, with the risk index r calculated based on this score. l Geological experts scored the completion of exploration work based on four aspects according to exploration specifications: exploration type, spacing of exploration projects, deployment of exploration projects, and exploration depth. The risk index (r) for the exploration work was also considered. l The risk index has a relatively clear correspondence with the weighted values ​​of exploration type score F1, exploration project spacing score F2, exploration project deployment score F3, and exploration depth score F4. Therefore, in a specific embodiment of the present invention, the calculation formula for the exploration work risk index is as follows:

[0064] r l =k(ω1F1+ω2F2+ω3F3+ω4F4) (2)

[0065] Where ω1 represents the weight of the exploration type score, ω2 represents the weight of the exploration project spacing score, ω3 represents the weight of the exploration project deployment score, and ω4 represents the weight of the exploration depth score. ω1F1+ω2F2+ω3F3+ω4F4 represents the weighted value, and k represents the relationship between the exploration work risk index and the weighted value, with ω1+ω2+ω4+ω3=1. Each weight ω1, ω2, ω3, and ω4 represents the importance of the exploration type score F1, exploration project spacing score F2, exploration project deployment score F3, and exploration depth score F4 to the risk of exploration work, respectively, requiring ω1>ω2≈ω4>ω3.

[0066] The exploration type score F1 is an expert rating for whether the exploration type was reasonably determined in the actual exploration work. The exploration type score reflects whether the determined exploration type can serve as a basis for future mine development and utilization. The scoring criteria for the exploration type score F1 are shown in Table 1.

[0067] Table 1 Scoring Criteria for Exploration Types

[0068]

[0069] The F2 score, representing the spacing between exploration works, is an expert assessment of whether the actual exploration work utilized the spacing between works appropriately. This score reflects whether the exploration works can laterally control the ore body. The scoring criteria for the F2 score are shown in Table 2.

[0070] Table 2 Scoring Criteria for Spacing Between Exploration Projects

[0071]

[0072] The F3 score for exploration engineering deployment is an expert assessment of the rationality of the actual exploration work deployment. It reflects whether systematic sampling engineering control was implemented. The scoring criteria for the F3 score are shown in Table 3.

[0073] Table 3 Scoring Criteria for Exploration Project Deployment

[0074]

[0075]

[0076] The exploration depth score F4 is an expert rating of whether the actual exploration depth is reasonable. The exploration depth score reflects whether the exploration depth can control the ore body vertically. The scoring criteria for the exploration depth score F4 are shown in Table 4.

[0077] Table 4 Scoring Criteria for Exploration Depth

[0078]

[0079] Based on the weighted value ω1F1+ω2F2+ω3F3+ω4F4 of the exploration type score F1, the exploration project spacing score F2, the exploration project deployment score F3, and the exploration depth score F4, the exploration work risk index r is determined. l The value of r is determined. l The principles for determining the value of are shown in Table 5.

[0080] Table 5. Principles for Determining the Risk Index of Exploration Work

[0081]

[0082] To ensure the accuracy of the risk index for exploration work, the average value of the results from three or more experts is generally used as the final risk index for exploration work.

[0083] Geological Feature Complexity Risk Index u l It represents the risk to the development of solid mineral resources caused by the complexity of mineral geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and ore deposit mining technology conditions. The higher the complexity, the more unfavorable it is to the development of mineral resources.

[0084] Geological Feature Complexity Risk Index u l The calculation is based on exploration conclusions, and the geological feature complexity risk index is calculated based on these conclusions. Exploration conclusions include metallogenic geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and ore deposit mining technology conditions. A grade is assigned to each of these factors, and the geological feature complexity risk index u is calculated. l The calculation is based on the arithmetic mean of the following scores: metallogenic geological conditions score β1, ore body characteristic score β2, ore characteristic score β3, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance score β4, and ore deposit mining technology conditions score β5. Therefore, in a specific embodiment of this invention, the formula for calculating the geological feature complexity risk index is:

[0085] u l =(β1+β2+β3+β4+β5) / 5 (3)

[0086] The metallogenic geological condition score β1 is the score assigned to the complexity level of metallogenic geological conditions, and the scoring basis is shown in Table 6.

[0087] Table 6. Assignment Criteria for Metallogenic Geological Condition Scoring

[0088]

[0089] The orebody characteristic score β2 is a score of the occurrence of the orebody, and its scoring basis is shown in Table 7.

[0090] Table 7. Assignment Criteria for Ore Body Characteristic Scores

[0091]

[0092] The ore characteristic score β3 is a score of the ore composition, and its scoring basis is shown in Table 8.

[0093] Table 8. Assignment Criteria for Ore Characteristic Scores

[0094]

[0095]

[0096] The performance score β4 for ore processing and beneficiation technology is a complex score for the performance of processing and beneficiation technology, and its scoring basis is shown in Table 9.

[0097] Table 9. Assignment Standards for Performance Scoring of Ore Processing and Beneficiation Technologies

[0098]

[0099] The mining technology condition score β5 is a score of the complexity of the mining technology conditions of the deposit, and its scoring basis is shown in Table 10.

[0100] Table 10: Scoring Criteria for Mining Technical Conditions of Mineral Deposits

[0101]

[0102] According to formula (3) and Tables 6 to 10, the maximum value of the geological feature complexity risk index is 3 and the minimum value is 1.

[0103] To ensure the accuracy of the geological feature complexity risk index, the average of the values ​​obtained by more than three experts is generally used as the final geological feature complexity risk index.

[0104] Geological Feature Anomaly Risk Index v l The degree of anomaly, which represents the degree of discrepancy between the geological conditions of mineralization, the characteristics of the ore body, the characteristics of the ore, the performance of ore processing and beneficiation technology, and the mining technology conditions of the deposit and conventional predictions or inferences, poses a risk to the development of solid mineral resources. The higher the degree of anomaly, the more unfavorable it is to the development of mineral resources.

[0105] Geological Feature Anomaly Risk Index v l The calculation is based on the coefficients of variation of the following: metallogenic geological condition score β1, ore body characteristic score β2, ore characteristic score β3, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance score β4, and ore deposit mining technology condition score β5. In a specific embodiment of the present invention, the specific calculation process of the geological characteristic anomaly risk index includes:

[0106] When calculating the geological feature complexity risk index, obtain the scores of metallogenic geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and ore deposit mining technology conditions.

[0107] Calculate the standard deviation and mean of the scores for metallogenic geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and ore deposit mining technology conditions.

[0108] The coefficient of variation is calculated based on the standard deviation and the mean; that is, the coefficient of variation is equal to the ratio of the standard deviation to the mean.

[0109] The geological feature anomaly risk index is determined based on the coefficient of variation, as shown in Table 11.

[0110] Table 11 Principles for Determining the Risk Index of Geological Feature Anomalies

[0111]

[0112] like Figure 2 As shown in the figure, the risk assessment method for solid mineral resource development geology provided by this embodiment of the invention includes the following steps:

[0113] Step B1: Calculate the exploration work risk index, the geological feature complexity risk index, and the geological feature anomaly risk index;

[0114] Step B2: Construct a risk assessment model (such as formulas (1) to (3)) using the risk assessment model construction method in the embodiments of this application;

[0115] Step B3: Calculate the geological risk index for solid mineral resource development based on the exploration work risk index, geological feature complexity risk index, geological feature anomaly risk index, and risk assessment model.

[0116] In a specific embodiment of the present invention, the risk assessment method further includes risk level assessment based on the risk index of the geological conditions for the development of solid mineral resources, as shown in Table 12.

[0117] Table 12 Geological Risk Classification for Solid Mineral Resource Development

[0118] Development Geological Risk Index grade Remark 0～2 Ⅰ The geological risks of resource development are extremely small. 2～4 Ⅱ Resource development has relatively low geological risks. 4～6 Ⅲ Geological risks in resource development are generally low. 6～8 Ⅳ Resource development carries significant geological risks. 8～10 Ⅴ Resource development carries extremely high geological risks

[0119] Geological Feature Complexity Risk Index u l Risk index v of geological feature anomalies l The arithmetic mean represents the inherent geological risk of solid mineral resources. In a specific embodiment of the present invention, the risk assessment method further includes calculating the geological feature complexity risk index u. l and geological feature anomaly risk index v l The arithmetic mean (i.e., the inherent geological risk index) is used to assess the inherent geological risk level of solid mineral resources based on the arithmetic mean, as shown in Table 13.

[0120] Table 13 Classification of Inherent Geological Risks of Solid Mineral Resources

[0121] Inherent geological risk index grade Remark 0～1 Ⅰ Solid mineral resources have low inherent geological risks 1～2 Ⅱ The inherent geological risks of solid mineral resources are generally 2～3 Ⅲ Solid mineral resources inherently carry high geological risks.

[0122] Development geological risk refers to the geological risks associated with developing solid mineral resources under existing conditions, which may change through the redesign and arrangement of geological exploration work; while inherent geological risk refers to the inherent geological risks of solid mineral resources, which cannot be adjusted.

[0123] A lower geological risk index indicates a lower geological risk during the development of solid mineral resources, meaning that the geological conditions of the solid mineral resources are more favorable for their development and utilization. Conversely, a higher geological risk index indicates a higher geological risk during development, meaning that the geological conditions of the solid mineral resources are less favorable for their development and utilization.

[0124] Clearly, when both the development geological risk and inherent geological risk levels are high, the higher the level and the lower the development value of the solid mineral resource. Conversely, when both levels are low, the development value of the solid mineral resource is high. When the development geological risk is low and the inherent geological risk is high, it indicates high-quality geological exploration and accurate resource control. Conversely, when the development geological risk is high and the inherent geological risk is low, it indicates poor-quality geological exploration, amplifying the geological risks during solid mineral resource development. This risk can be reduced by improving the quality of exploration work.

[0125] Example 2

[0126] From 2019 to 2023, a geological exploration unit conducted exploration of a gold mine area, specifically the detailed exploration phase, and prepared a detailed exploration report for the gold mine area. The mine construction unit needs to conduct a development geological risk assessment of this gold mine area as the basis for designing mining operations. The calculation steps for the development geological risk index of this gold mine are as follows:

[0127] Step 1: Three geological experts were hired to analyze the risk factors based on the exploration specifications, detailed exploration report conclusions, and actual exploration work. The scores for each risk factor were obtained, including exploration type, exploration project spacing, exploration project deployment, exploration depth, weight value, metallogenic geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and ore deposit mining technology conditions, as shown in Table 14.

[0128] Table 14: Value Assignment Table for Geological Risk Factors of a Gold Mine

[0129]

[0130]

[0131]

[0132] Step 2: Based on the risk assignment results (or scoring results) for the gold mine exploration work in Table 14, determine the exploration work risk index r. l.

[0133] Based on the scoring results in Table 14, we know that F1 is 1, F2 is 2, F3 is 2, F4 is 2, ω1 is 0.35, ω2 is 0.25, ω3 is 0.15, and ω4 is 0.25. Therefore, the exploration work risk index r l for:

[0134] r l =k(0.35×1+0.25×2+0.15×2+0.25×2) (4)

[0135] Get r l =k(1.65). Based on Table 5 and the values ​​obtained from multiple experts, the exploration work risk index r is obtained. l It is 1.25.

[0136] Step 3: Based on the scoring results of the geological complexity risk of this gold mine in Table 14, determine the geological complexity risk index u. l .

[0137] Based on the scoring results in Table 14, β1 is 2.5, β2 is 1.0, β3 is 1.0, β4 is 1.3, and β5 is 3.0. Therefore, the geological feature complexity risk index u l for:

[0138] u l = (2.5 + 1.0 + 1.0 + 1.3 + 3.0) / 5 (5)

[0139] Get u l =1.76.

[0140] Step 4: Based on the scoring results of the geological feature variability risk of this gold mine in Table 14, determine the geological feature anomaly risk index v. l .

[0141] Based on the scoring results in Table 14, β1 is 2.5, β2 is 1.0, β3 is 1.0, β4 is 1.3, and β5 is 3.0. Therefore, the geological feature complexity risk index v l for:

[0142]

[0143] Get v l =f(0.53).

[0144] Based on Table 11 and the values ​​obtained from multiple experts, the geological feature anomaly risk index v is obtained. l It is 2.38.

[0145] Step 5: Based on the calculation results of Steps 2 to 4, determine the risk index r of the geological conditions for solid mineral resource development. c .

[0146] Development Geological Risk Index r c for:

[0147]

[0148] Get r c =2.59. Based on Table 12, the geological risk level for the gold mine development is classified as Level II, indicating relatively low geological risk.

[0149] Step 6: Determine the inherent geological risk index based on the calculation results of Steps 3 and 4.

[0150] Inherent geological risk index for:

[0151]

[0152] get Based on Table 13, the inherent geological risk level of the gold mine is classified as Level III, indicating a high inherent geological risk.

[0153] According to the inherent geological risk index Development Geological Risk Index r c The value indicates that the gold mine's exploration project is of relatively high quality and layout, and the resource control is accurate. However, the gold mine has inherent geological risks, and its development requires careful consideration.

[0154] Example 3

[0155] This invention also provides an electronic device, which includes: a memory, a processor, and a computer program / instructions stored in the memory. The processor executes the computer program / instructions to implement the risk assessment model construction method or risk assessment method in this application.

[0156] Although not shown, the electronic device includes a processor that can perform various appropriate operations and processes based on programs and / or data stored in read-only memory (ROM) or loaded from a storage portion into random access memory (RAM). The processor can be a multi-core processor or may contain multiple processors. In some embodiments, the processor may include a general-purpose main processor and one or more specialized coprocessors, such as a central processing unit, graphics processing unit (GPU), neural network processor (NPU), digital signal processor (DSP), etc. Various programs and data required for device operation are also stored in RAM. The processor, ROM, and RAM are interconnected via a bus. Input / output (I / O) interfaces are also connected to the bus.

[0157] The processor and memory described above are used together to execute programs / instructions stored in the memory. When the program / instructions are executed by the computer, they can implement the methods, steps, or functions described in the above embodiments.

[0158] Although not shown, embodiments of the present invention also provide a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program / instruction stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the risk assessment model construction method or risk assessment method of the embodiments of this application.

[0159] Readable storage media include both permanent and non-permanent, removable and non-removable media that can store information using any method or technology. Information can be computer-readable instructions, data structures, program modules, or other data. Examples of computer storage media include, but are not limited to, phase-change memory (PRAM), static random access memory (SRAM), dynamic random access memory (DRAM), other types of random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), flash memory or other memory technologies, CD-ROM, digital versatile optical disc (DVD) or other optical storage, magnetic tape, disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other non-transferable medium that can be used to store information accessible by a computing device. As defined herein, computer-readable media does not include transient media, such as modulated data signals and carrier waves.

[0160] Although not shown, embodiments of the present invention also provide a computer program product, including: a computer program / instructions, which, when executed by a processor, implement the risk assessment model construction method or risk assessment method of the embodiments of this application.

[0161] The above description only discloses specific embodiments of the present invention, but the scope of protection of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any changes or modifications that can be easily conceived by those skilled in the art within the scope of the technology disclosed in the present invention should be included within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for constructing a risk assessment model for the geological development of solid mineral resources, characterized in that, The construction method includes: Analyze the risk indicators of geological development for solid mineral resources; A risk assessment model for solid mineral resource development geology is constructed based on the risk indicators obtained from the analysis; wherein, the mathematical expression of the risk assessment model is: Where, r c r represents the geological risk index for solid mineral resource development. l Indicates the risk index of exploration work, u l The risk index representing the complexity of geological features, v l The index represents the risk index of geological anomalies, and ε represents the error parameter. The risk of geological feature complexity refers to the risk of unclear geological conditions due to the complexity of the geological conditions, and the risk of geological feature anomaly refers to the risk arising from a significant difference between the inferred geological conditions and conventional geological laws.

2. The risk assessment model construction method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The formula for calculating the risk index of the exploration work is as follows: r l =k(ω1F1+ω2F2+ω3F3+ω4F4); Where F1 represents the exploration type score, F2 represents the exploration project spacing score, F3 represents the exploration project deployment score, F4 represents the exploration depth score, ω1 represents the weight of the exploration type score, ω2 represents the weight of the exploration project spacing score, ω3 represents the weight of the exploration project deployment score, ω4 represents the weight of the exploration depth score, ω1F1+ω2F2+ω3F3+ω4F4 represents the weighted value, and k represents the relationship between the exploration work risk index and the weighted value; ω1+ω2+ω4+ω3=1, ω1>ω2≈ω4>ω3.

3. The risk assessment model construction method according to claim 2, characterized in that, When the highest value of the exploration type score, exploration project spacing score, exploration project deployment score, and exploration depth score is 3, the relationship k between the exploration work risk index and the weighted value is as follows: If the weighting value is equal to 1, then the exploration work risk index r l It equals 1; If the weighted value ranges from (1,2), then the exploration work risk index r l The value range is (1, 1.5); If the weighting value is equal to 2, then the exploration work risk index r l It equals 1.5; If the weighted value ranges from (2,3), then the exploration work risk index r l The value range is (1.5, 2); If the weighting value is equal to 3, then the exploration work risk index r l It equals 2.

4. The risk assessment model construction method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The formula for calculating the geological feature complexity risk index is as follows: u l ＝(β1+β2+β3+β4+β5) / 5； Among them, β1 represents the score of mineralization geological conditions, β2 represents the score of ore body characteristics, β3 represents the score of ore characteristics, β4 represents the score of ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and β5 represents the score of ore deposit mining technology conditions.

5. The risk assessment model construction method according to any one of claims 1 to 4, characterized in that, The specific calculation process for the geological feature anomaly risk index includes: When calculating the geological feature complexity risk index, the scores for metallogenic geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and ore deposit mining technology conditions are obtained. Calculate the standard deviation and mean of the scores for metallogenic geological conditions, ore body characteristics, ore characteristics, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance, and ore deposit mining technology conditions. Calculate the coefficient of variation based on the standard deviation and mean. The geological feature anomaly risk index is determined based on the coefficient of variation.

6. The risk assessment model construction method according to claim 5, characterized in that, When the highest value of the metallogenic geological condition score, ore body characteristic score, ore characteristic score, ore processing and beneficiation technology performance score, and ore deposit mining technology condition score is 3, the geological characteristic anomaly risk index is determined based on the aforementioned coefficient of variation, including: If the coefficient of variation is equal to 0, then the geological feature anomaly risk index is equal to 0. If the coefficient of variation ranges from (0, 0.33), then the geological feature anomaly risk index ranges from (0, 1.5). If the coefficient of variation is 0.33, then the geological feature anomaly risk index is 1.

5. If the coefficient of variation ranges from (0.33, 0.67), then the geological feature anomaly risk index ranges from (1.5, 3). If the coefficient of variation is 0.67, then the geological feature anomaly risk index is 3.

7. A risk assessment method for the geological development of solid mineral resources, characterized in that, The risk assessment methods include: Calculate the risk index for exploration work, the risk index for geological feature complexity, and the risk index for geological feature anomalies; A risk assessment model is constructed using the risk assessment model construction method described in any one of claims 1 to 6; The risk index for solid mineral resource development geology is calculated based on the exploration work risk index, the geological feature complexity risk index, the geological feature anomaly risk index, and the risk assessment model. Preferably, the risk assessment method further includes: assessing the risk level of the solid mineral resource development geology based on the risk index of the solid mineral resource development geology; The inherent geological risk index is calculated based on the geological feature complexity risk index and the geological feature anomaly risk index, and the inherent geological risk level of solid mineral resources is assessed based on the inherent geological risk index.

8. An electronic device comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program / instructions stored in the memory, characterized in that, The processor executes the computer program / instructions to implement the risk assessment model construction method as described in any one of claims 1 to 6 or the risk assessment method as described in claim 7.

9. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program / instructions stored thereon, characterized in that, When the computer program / instruction is executed by the processor, it implements the risk assessment model construction method as described in any one of claims 1 to 6 or the risk assessment method as described in claim 7.

10. A computer program product comprising a computer program / instructions, characterized in that, When the computer program / instruction is executed by the processor, it implements the risk assessment model construction method as described in any one of claims 1 to 6 or the risk assessment method as described in claim 7.

Images