Administrative region earthquake risk level expression and engineering siting method, system and medium

Abstract

The application discloses an administrative region earthquake risk grade expression and engineering site selection method, system and medium, and the administrative region earthquake risk grade expression is based on fuzzy sets, so that the administrative region grade simultaneously contains a conventional grade and internal deviation (lower deviation and upper deviation), and information loss caused by averaging is reduced; and important engineering site selection based on the fuzzy grade is provided to realize sorting and screening of candidate sites.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of earthquake disaster risk assessment technology, specifically involving a method, system, and medium for expressing earthquake risk levels and engineering site selection in administrative regions. Background Technology

[0002] Existing seismic hazard / risk zoning typically involves first calculating ground motion parameters (such as PGA) or risk indices at control points or grid scales, and then classifying them according to thresholds to form a risk level map. To meet the needs of emergency management, territorial spatial planning, and other applications that use administrative regions as management units, site-level results are often aggregated according to administrative boundaries and the "average assignment-reclassification" method is used to obtain the seismic risk level of the administrative region.

[0003] However, risks within administrative regions often exhibit significant spatial heterogeneity. Determining a single risk level solely based on average values ​​can mask the existence of a small number of high-risk (or low-risk) sub-zones, making it impossible to distinguish between relatively safer or more dangerous areas within the same administrative region level. When selecting sites for important projects (emergency command centers, communication hubs, power facilities, etc.), planning departments may be forced to struggle to identify safer sub-zones within higher-level administrative regions, thus creating decision-making risks. Summary of the Invention

[0004] To address the problems existing in the prior art, this invention provides an expression of earthquake risk levels and engineering site selection for administrative regions, which can explicitly express the level deviations within administrative regions without disrupting the existing classification system and comparability.

[0005] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides the following solution: A method for expressing seismic risk levels and selecting engineering sites within an administrative region, comprising: Using the grid results of site-level ground motion parameters as input, the grid is divided into M risk levels according to preset rules, and a level code and level value are assigned. At the administrative region scale, the number of rasters at each level is counted, the average risk value is calculated and mapped to the conventional level; the proportion of rasters below / above the conventional level within the administrative region is counted respectively, and a fuzzy risk level triple F is constructed. i =(G i ,L i ,R i ); Write Fi into the legend, annotations, or attribute fields of the administrative region risk level map to form the expressive results; When selecting sites for important projects, the site grade of the candidate sites and the administrative region's F level should be considered. i This enables differentiated identification and more secure sub-region positioning within the same level.

[0006] As a preferred option, each grid cell is divided into M seismic risk levels based on a preset grading threshold; wherein the grading threshold is determined by the quantile method, standard deviation method or fixed threshold method, and the threshold can be determined separately for ground motion parameters with different probability levels.

[0007] Preferred site-level ground motion parameters include: peak ground acceleration (PGA), response spectrum, or seismic risk index derived therefrom.

[0008] This invention also provides a system for expressing earthquake risk levels and selecting engineering sites in administrative regions, comprising: The first processing module is used to take the grid results of site-level ground motion parameters as input, divide the grid into M risk levels according to preset rules, and assign level codes and level values. The second processing module is used to count the number of rasters at each level at the administrative region scale, calculate the average risk assignment and map it to the regular level; and count the proportion of rasters below / above the regular level within the administrative region, constructing a fuzzy risk level triple F. i =(G i ,L i ,R i ); The third processing module is used to write Fi into the legend, annotations or attribute fields of the administrative region risk level map to form the express results; The fourth processing module is used to combine the site level of candidate sites with the F level of the administrative region when selecting sites for important projects. i This enables differentiated identification and more secure sub-region positioning within the same level.

[0009] Preferably, the first processing module divides each grid cell into M seismic risk levels based on a preset grading threshold; wherein the grading threshold is determined by the quantile method, standard deviation method or fixed threshold method, and the threshold can be determined separately for ground motion parameters with different probability levels.

[0010] Preferred site-level ground motion parameters include: peak ground acceleration (PGA), response spectrum, or seismic risk index derived therefrom.

[0011] The present invention also provides a medium on which a computer program is stored, wherein the computer program, when running, executes a method for expressing the seismic risk level of an administrative region and for engineering site selection.

[0012] Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of the present invention are as follows: This invention takes the site-level seismic hazard / risk index raster results as input, maps the raster cells to discrete level codes m and level assignments Hm according to preset grading thresholds, and counts the number of raster cells at each level at the administrative region scale and calculates the average risk assignment H. i The administrative region has been classified as having a regular risk level of G.i Further statistics on areas with GDP levels below / above G are needed. i Grid ratio L i R i Constructing an administrative region-specific risk level F i =(G i , L i , R i The fuzzy risk level is then written into the legend, annotations, or attribute fields of the risk level map, thereby explicitly expressing the level deviation within the administrative region without changing the original classification system and comparability. Based on F i The system, along with candidate point grid levels, can identify relatively low-risk sub-regions within the same conventional level, enabling site selection ranking and constraint screening for important projects such as emergency command centers and power and communication hubs. This invention can reduce information loss caused by administrative region averaging and improve the precision and interpretability of planning decisions. Attached Figure Description

[0013] To more clearly illustrate the technical solution of the present invention, the drawings used in the embodiments are briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0014] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating the method for expressing earthquake risk levels and selecting engineering sites within an administrative region, as described in an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0015] The technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. 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.

[0016] To make the above-mentioned objects, features and advantages of the present invention more apparent and understandable, the present invention will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments.

[0017] Example 1 like Figure 1 As shown, this invention provides a method for expressing the seismic risk level of an administrative region and for engineering site selection, comprising: S1: Obtain grid data of site-level ground motion parameters in the study area and establish a grid with a unified coordinate system and spatial resolution; S2: Based on the preset grading threshold, each grid cell is divided into one of M seismic risk levels, denoted as the level code m, and a level value h is assigned to each level. m ; S3: For any administrative region i, count the number of grid cells at each level within it. And calculate the average risk assignment for the administrative region. ; where h im Assign a score to the m-th level of danger in administrative region i (e.g., low danger h). i1 =0, Low to Medium Risk i2 =1. Medium to high risk h i3 =2, High-risk h i3 =3); It represents the total number of level m hazardous grids in administrative region i.

[0018] S4: Based on the level assignment range, Hi is mapped to the administrative region's conventional risk level G. i ; S5: Calculate the administrative region i that is lower than G. i Grid ratio L i and higher than G i The raster percentage Ri is used to construct the administrative region fuzzy risk level F. i =(G i , L i , R i ); S6: Generate an earthquake risk level map for the administrative region, and assign F i Write legends, notes, or attribute fields to express both the general level and the internal deviation.

[0019] S7: Obtain the grade code G required by the candidate condition. thr ; S8: Obtain the fuzzy risk level F of the administrative region where the candidate point is located. i =(G i , L i , R i ); S9: Perform constraint screening on candidate points, including at least: when G i ≤G thr Retained at the time, or when L i ≤R thr Time retention, where G thr The maximum permissible standard level threshold; S10: Rank the candidate points, with ranking criteria including at least: preference selection G i The lowest among them, then choose L. i The lowest among them.

[0020] As one embodiment of the present invention, in S1, the site-level ground motion parameters include peak ground acceleration (PGA), response spectrum value, or earthquake risk index derived therefrom; preferably, the PGA corresponding to a 1% exceedance probability within 100 years is used.

[0021] As one embodiment of the present invention, in S2, the grading threshold is determined by the quantile method, the standard deviation method, or the fixed threshold method, and the threshold can be determined separately for ground motion parameters with different probability levels.

[0022] In one embodiment of the present invention, step S5 includes: , .

[0023] lower boundary Characterized by a level lower than the traditional H i The dangerous error, that is, within the administrative region, is below " i The number of grid cells corresponding to the danger level. Percentage of total grids Proportion, For less than " i The danger assignment difference of the region marked "". Upper boundary Characterized by a higher level than traditional H i The dangerous error, that is, within the administrative region, is higher than " i The number of grid cells corresponding to the danger level. Percentage of total grids Proportion, For less than " i The danger assignment difference of the area.

[0024] As one embodiment of the present invention, the administrative region annotation in step S6 adopts "G" i (L i ,R i )" or "(G i ,L i ,R i Output in “)” format and explain L in the legend. i Indicates lower deviation, R i This indicates the upper deviation.

[0025] Using the raster results of the site-level seismic risk index / seismic motion parameters as input, the raster is divided into M risk levels according to preset rules, and a level code and level value are assigned. The number of rasteres at each level is counted at the administrative region scale, the average risk value is calculated and mapped to a conventional level. The proportion of rasteres below / above the conventional level within the administrative region is counted, and a fuzzy risk level triple F is constructed.i =(G i ,L i ,R i ); The Fi value will be written into the legend, annotations, or attribute fields of the administrative region risk level map to form the expressive results; When selecting sites for important projects, the site level of candidate sites will be combined with the F value of the administrative region where they are located. i This enables differentiated identification and more secure sub-region positioning within the same level.

[0026] Example 2 This invention provides a method for expressing earthquake risk levels and selecting engineering sites within an administrative region, comprising: Step 1: Construction of Fuzzy Seismic Risk Levels for Administrative Regions (1) Data preparation Obtain site-level ground motion parameters or risk index raster data for the study area. Preferably, use the peak ground acceleration (PGA) with a 1% exceedance probability over 100 years or a risk index derived therefrom. Simultaneously, obtain administrative boundary vector data, unifying projection and resolution.

[0027] (2) Raster hierarchy and value assignment Each grid cell is divided into M levels according to a threshold, for example: low, low-medium, medium-high, and high; and each level is assigned a value Hm, for example, 0, 1, 2, and 3. The threshold can be set using the quantile method or the fixed threshold method. Taking a four-level division as an example, the level assignment range can be set as: [0, 0.5), [0.5, 1.5), [1.5, 2.5), [2.5, 3] (example).

[0028] (3) Average value assigned to administrative regions and regular grades Count the number of grid cells at each level for administrative region i. Calculate the average value: Based on the assigned range, H̄ i Mapped to regular level G i .

[0029] (4) Lower deviation and upper deviation In statistical administrative regions i, the value is lower than G. i Grid ratio ; statistics higher than G i Grid ratio When the administrative levels are completely identical within an administrative region, L i =R i =0, corresponding to a clarity level; when there are many lower-level sub-regions, L... i Increases when higher-level subregions exist, R i Increase.

[0030] (5) Membership degree representation To form continuous membership degrees in the sense of fuzzy sets, F can be...i Mapped to G i Centered on the center, with widths of L to the left and right respectively. i With R i Triangular or trapezoidal membership function μ i (t). Taking a triangle as an example: when t∈[G] i- L i G i When μ i (t)=(t-(G i -L i )) / L i When t∈[G] i G i +R i When μ i (t)=((G i +R i )-t) / R i Otherwise μ i (t)=0. When L i or R i When the membership value is 0, it can degenerate into a one-sided trapezoidal or rectangular membership degree.

[0031] (6) Drafting output F of each administrative region i Write it into the attribute table and mark it in the map annotation with "G" i (L i ,R i The text is displayed as follows: For example, "H(0.5,0)" indicates that the general level is high, and there is a lower-level sub-region with a percentage of 0.5. This expression does not change the original rendering method of administrative region levels, but only enhances the legend / annotation information.

[0032] Step 2: Site selection for important projects (1) Obtain the set of candidate points (or candidate plots) and the grade threshold G required by the engineering conditions. thr .

[0033] (2) Apply hard constraints to candidate points: retain G i Below the allowable threshold G thr The administrative region; and retaining the deviation L i Below the allowable threshold G th The administrative region where it is located.

[0034] (3) Sort the remaining candidate points: G is selected first. i The lower one; when G i When the two are the same or similar, L should be selected first. i Smaller administrative districts or sub-districts.

[0035] (4) Output a recommended site selection list and its explanatory indicators (Gthr G i L i R i This provides verifiable evidence for decision-making departments.

[0036] The same approach can be used to construct F for different regions, different number of levels M, different ground motion probability levels, and different resolution grids. i And complete the site selection analysis.

[0037] This invention has at least the following characteristics: 1) It is compatible with the existing risk classification system and administrative regions, without changing the original level map, but only enhancing the amount of information at the expression level; 2) Through L i R i Explicitly characterize the hierarchical dispersion and deviation within administrative regions, and identify relatively low-risk sub-regions within the same conventional level; 3) Provide interpretable constraints and ranking criteria for the site selection of important projects, reducing the site selection risks caused by non-safety factors such as convenient transportation alone; 4) It is easy to implement on a GIS platform, the calculation process is clear and verifiable, and it is suitable for promotion at the provincial / municipal / county level.

[0038] Example 3 This invention also provides a system for expressing earthquake risk levels and selecting engineering sites in administrative regions, comprising: The first processing module is used to take the grid results of site-level ground motion parameters as input, divide the grid into M risk levels according to preset rules, and assign level codes and level values. The second processing module is used to count the number of rasters at each level at the administrative region scale, calculate the average risk assignment and map it to the regular level; and count the proportion of rasters below / above the regular level within the administrative region, constructing a fuzzy risk level triple F. i =(G i ,L i ,R i ); The third processing module is used to write Fi into the legend, annotations or attribute fields of the administrative region risk level map to form the express results; The fourth processing module is used to combine the site level of candidate sites with the F level of the administrative region when selecting sites for important projects. i This enables differentiated identification and more secure sub-region positioning within the same level.

[0039] As one embodiment of the present invention, the first processing module divides each grid cell into M seismic risk levels according to a preset grading threshold; wherein, the grading threshold is determined by the quantile method, the standard deviation method or the fixed threshold method, and the threshold can be determined separately for ground motion parameters with different probability levels.

[0040] As one embodiment of the present invention, the site-level ground motion parameters include: peak ground acceleration (PGA), response spectrum value, or seismic risk index derived therefrom.

[0041] Example 4 The present invention also provides a medium on which a computer program is stored, wherein the computer program, when running, executes a method for expressing the seismic risk level of an administrative region and for engineering site selection.

[0042] The embodiments described above are merely preferred embodiments of the present invention and are not intended to limit the scope of the present invention. Various modifications and improvements made to the technical solutions of the present invention by those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit of the present invention should fall within the protection scope defined by the claims of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for expressing seismic risk levels and selecting engineering sites within an administrative region, characterized in that, include: Using the grid results of site-level ground motion parameters as input, the grid is divided into M risk levels according to preset rules, and a level code and level value are assigned. At the administrative region scale, the number of rasters at each level is counted, the average risk value is calculated and mapped to the conventional level; the proportion of rasters below / above the conventional level within the administrative region is counted, and a fuzzy risk level triple F is constructed. i =(G i ,L i ,R i ); Write Fi into the legend, annotations, or attribute fields of the administrative region risk level map to form the expressive results; When selecting sites for important projects, the site grade of the candidate sites and the administrative region's F level should be considered. i This enables differentiated identification and more secure sub-region positioning within the same level.

2. The method for expressing seismic risk levels and selecting engineering sites within administrative regions as described in claim 1, characterized in that, Each grid cell is divided into M seismic risk levels based on a preset grading threshold. The grading threshold is determined by the quantile method, standard deviation method, or fixed threshold method, and the threshold can be determined separately for ground motion parameters with different probability levels.

3. The method for expressing seismic risk levels and selecting engineering sites within administrative regions as described in claim 2, characterized in that, Site-level ground motion parameters include: peak ground acceleration (PGA), response spectrum, or seismic risk index derived therefrom.

4. A system for expressing seismic risk levels and selecting engineering sites within an administrative region, characterized in that, include: The first processing module is used to take the grid results of site-level ground motion parameters as input, divide the grid into M risk levels according to preset rules, and assign level codes and level values. The second processing module is used to count the number of rasters at each level at the administrative region scale, calculate the average risk assignment and map it to the regular level; and count the proportion of rasters below / above the regular level within the administrative region, constructing a fuzzy risk level triple F. i =(G i ,L i ,R i ); The third processing module is used to write Fi into the legend, annotations or attribute fields of the administrative region risk level map to form the express results; The fourth processing module is used to combine the site level of candidate sites with the F-level of the administrative region when selecting sites for important projects. i This enables differentiated identification and more secure sub-region positioning within the same level.

5. The system for expressing seismic risk levels and selecting engineering sites in administrative regions as described in claim 4, characterized in that, The first processing module divides each grid cell into M seismic risk levels based on a preset grading threshold. The grading threshold is determined by the quantile method, standard deviation method, or fixed threshold method, and the threshold can be determined separately for ground motion parameters with different probability levels.

6. The system for expressing seismic risk levels and selecting engineering sites in administrative regions as described in claim 5, characterized in that, Site-level ground motion parameters include: peak ground acceleration (PGA), response spectrum, or seismic risk index derived therefrom.

7. A medium, characterized in that, The medium stores a computer program that, when running, executes the method for expressing the seismic risk level of an administrative region and selecting engineering sites as described in any one of claims 1-3.

Images