Relay protection drawing checking method and device, electronic equipment and storage medium

Abstract

This application discloses a method, device, electronic equipment, and storage medium for verifying relay protection drawings. First, a standardized feature database is constructed based on the relay protection design information. Then, the wiring, cable, and panel status data of field equipment are automatically collected through image recognition. Automated multi-dimensional comparison replaces manual verification. At the same time, logical constraint verification and risk level assessment are integrated to effectively avoid the subjective errors of manual operation and the information asymmetry caused by the iteration of drawing versions. This achieves the technical effects of reducing human verification errors, ensuring consistency between drawing and actual information, improving verification efficiency and precision, accurately identifying hidden violations, reducing the risk of abnormal operation of protection devices, and realizing standardized archiving and traceability of verification results, thus comprehensively ensuring the safe and stable operation of the power grid.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This disclosure relates to the field of data processing technology, and in particular to a method, apparatus, electronic device and storage medium for verifying relay protection drawings. Background Technology

[0002] Relay protection, as the core defense line for the safe and stable operation of power systems, is widely used in the acceptance and periodic maintenance of new and expanded power grid projects. With the development of smart grid technology, related technologies have built a complete technical system covering schematic diagram analysis, terminal wiring verification, and pressure plate status confirmation through collaborative work of drawing design, on-site construction, and operation and maintenance management.

[0003] Existing verification methods rely on manual comparison of paper or electronic drawings with physical objects on site. This can lead to human errors such as misreading wiring numbers due to fatigue and missed checks of pressure plate status. Furthermore, outdated drawing versions can cause a disconnect between the drawing and the actual information, affecting the standardized archiving and traceability of verification results. This traditional operating mode is not only inefficient and unable to meet the refined acceptance requirements under complex operating conditions, but it can also lead to hidden wiring errors causing protection devices to malfunction or fail to operate, seriously threatening the safety of power grid operation. Summary of the Invention

[0004] This disclosure provides a method, apparatus, electronic device, and storage medium for verifying relay protection drawings.

[0005] According to a first aspect of this disclosure, a method for verifying relay protection drawings is provided, comprising:

[0006] Obtain relay protection design information and device logic rules, parse and extract equipment topology relationships, terminal connection relationships and electrical logic constraints from the design information, and establish a standard feature database; Collect real-scene images of relay protection field equipment, identify terminal markings, cable connection status and device panel status in the real-scene images, and generate field feature data; The field feature data is compared with the standard feature database in multiple dimensions to verify the consistency between the field wiring relationship and the design drawings, and whether the actual state of the device conforms to the electrical logic constraints. Based on the comparison results, the location of the discrepancies and the violations are determined, the operational risk level caused by each discrepancy is assessed, and a verification result containing discrepancy markers and risk rating information is generated.

[0007] Optionally, the step of acquiring relay protection design information and device logic rules, parsing and extracting equipment topology relationships, terminal connection relationships, and electrical logic constraints from the design information, and establishing a standard feature database includes: By batch importing design files of various formats through a standardized interface, the design files are subjected to format unification and noise reduction processing to obtain standardized design data. The graphic symbols in the standardized design data are subjected to symbol recognition to extract component type, position coordinates and connection node information, and structured graph data containing equipment topology relationships are generated. Semantic analysis is performed on the structured graph data to extract terminal connection relationships and electrical logic constraints, and the device topology relationships, terminal connection relationships and electrical logic constraints are associated and stored in a standard feature database.

[0008] Optionally, the process of acquiring real-scene images of the relay protection field equipment, identifying terminal block markings, cable connection status, and device panel status in the real-scene images, and generating field feature data includes: Under preset acquisition conditions, panoramic and close-up images of the relay protection cabinet are acquired to obtain the original real-scene image; Image segmentation processing is performed on the original real-scene image to separate the terminal area, cable connection area and device panel area, resulting in multiple region of interest images. Character recognition and status classification are performed on each region of interest image to extract terminal numbers, cable connection relationships and routes, identify the on / off status of the pressure plate and the status of the panel indicator, and generate on-site feature data.

[0009] Optionally, the step of comparing the field feature data with the standard feature database in multiple dimensions to verify the consistency between the field wiring relationship and the design drawings, and whether the actual state of the device conforms to the electrical logic constraints, includes: Based on the topology matching algorithm, the field terminal identification and cable connection status are mapped to the field topology diagram, and the terminal connection relationship in the standard feature database is mapped to the standard topology diagram. The difference metric between the two topology diagrams is calculated to verify the consistency between the field wiring and the design drawings. By using a logic rule verification mechanism, the status of the field device panel is matched with the electrical logic constraints in the standard feature database to determine whether the activation / deactivation status of the protection element and the status of the functional soft pressure plate meet the preset logic conditions. When a wiring inconsistency or logic violation is detected, the corresponding difference and violation type are recorded.

[0010] Optionally, the step of using a logic rule verification mechanism to match the status of the field device panel with the electrical logic constraints in the standard feature database, and to determine whether the enabled / disabled status of the protection element and the status of the functional soft switch meet the preset logic conditions, includes: Read a set of predefined rules for a specific protection device from the standard feature database. The set of rules includes the mapping relationship and mutual exclusion logic between the pressure plate state and the protection function activation state. Extract the position coordinates and visual state of the pressure plate on the device panel from the on-site feature data, and convert them into logical state variables; The logical state variables are substituted into the rule set for reasoning operations to identify whether there are logical anomalies that violate the protection outlet pressure plate status requirements or conflict with the functions of adjacent devices, and output the logical consistency verification result.

[0011] Optionally, the step of determining the location of the discrepancy and the violation based on the comparison results, assessing the operational risk level caused by each discrepancy, and generating a verification result containing discrepancy markers and risk rating information includes: The discrepancies were compiled into a list by summarizing the locations where the on-site wiring did not correspond to the design drawings and the violations that did not comply with the wiring construction specifications. Based on the preset risk assessment model, the consequences of each difference in the difference list that may lead to protection malfunction, protection failure, or alarm of adjacent devices are analyzed, and the severity of the consequences is quantified into multiple preset risk levels. Based on the location information of the differences and the corresponding operational risk levels, a verification report is generated that includes difference point markers, risk rating descriptions, and rectification suggestions. The verification report is then pushed to a mobile terminal or production management system to form a rectification closed loop.

[0012] According to a second aspect of this disclosure, a verification device for relay protection drawings is provided, comprising: The acquisition unit is used to acquire relay protection design information and device logic rules, parse and extract the equipment topology relationship, terminal connection relationship and electrical logic constraint in the design information, and establish a standard feature database. The acquisition unit is used to acquire real-scene images of relay protection field equipment, identify terminal markings, cable connection status and device panel status in the real-scene images, and generate field feature data. The comparison unit is used to compare the field feature data with the standard feature database in multiple dimensions, and to verify the consistency between the field wiring relationship and the design drawings, as well as whether the actual state of the device conforms to the electrical logic constraints. The generation unit is used to determine the location of differences and violations based on the comparison results, assess the operational risk level caused by each difference, and generate verification results containing difference markers and risk rating information.

[0013] Optionally, the acquisition unit is further configured to: By batch importing design files of various formats through a standardized interface, the design files are subjected to format unification and noise reduction processing to obtain standardized design data. The graphic symbols in the standardized design data are subjected to symbol recognition to extract component type, position coordinates and connection node information, and structured graph data containing equipment topology relationships are generated. Semantic analysis is performed on the structured graph data to extract terminal connection relationships and electrical logic constraints, and the device topology relationships, terminal connection relationships and electrical logic constraints are associated and stored in a standard feature database.

[0014] Optionally, the acquisition unit is further configured to: Under preset acquisition conditions, panoramic and close-up images of the relay protection cabinet are acquired to obtain the original real-scene image; Image segmentation processing is performed on the original real-scene image to separate the terminal area, cable connection area and device panel area, resulting in multiple region of interest images. Character recognition and status classification are performed on each region of interest image to extract terminal numbers, cable connection relationships and routes, identify the on / off status of the pressure plate and the status of the panel indicator, and generate on-site feature data.

[0015] Optionally, the comparison unit is further configured to: Based on the topology matching algorithm, the field terminal identification and cable connection status are mapped to the field topology diagram, and the terminal connection relationship in the standard feature database is mapped to the standard topology diagram. The difference metric between the two topology diagrams is calculated to verify the consistency between the field wiring and the design drawings. By using a logic rule verification mechanism, the status of the field device panel is matched with the electrical logic constraints in the standard feature database to determine whether the activation / deactivation status of the protection element and the status of the functional soft pressure plate meet the preset logic conditions. When a wiring inconsistency or logic violation is detected, the corresponding difference and violation type are recorded.

[0016] Optionally, the comparison unit is further configured to: Read a set of predefined rules for a specific protection device from the standard feature database. The set of rules includes the mapping relationship and mutual exclusion logic between the pressure plate state and the protection function activation state. Extract the position coordinates and visual state of the pressure plate on the device panel from the on-site feature data, and convert them into logical state variables; The logical state variables are substituted into the rule set for reasoning operations to identify whether there are logical anomalies that violate the protection outlet pressure plate status requirements or conflict with the functions of adjacent devices, and output the logical consistency verification result.

[0017] Optionally, the generation unit is further configured to: The discrepancies were compiled into a list by summarizing the locations where the on-site wiring did not correspond to the design drawings and the violations that did not comply with the wiring construction specifications. Based on the preset risk assessment model, the consequences of each difference in the difference list that may lead to protection malfunction, protection failure, or alarm of adjacent devices are analyzed, and the severity of the consequences is quantified into multiple preset risk levels. Based on the location information of the differences and the corresponding operational risk levels, a verification report is generated that includes difference point markers, risk rating descriptions, and rectification suggestions. The verification report is then pushed to a mobile terminal or production management system to form a rectification closed loop.

[0018] According to a third aspect of this disclosure, an electronic device is provided, comprising: At least one processor; and A memory communicatively connected to the at least one processor; wherein, The memory stores instructions that can be executed by the at least one processor to enable the at least one processor to perform the method described in the first aspect above.

[0019] According to a fourth aspect of this disclosure, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium is provided storing computer instructions, wherein the computer instructions are configured to cause the computer to perform the method described in the first aspect above.

[0020] According to a fifth aspect of this disclosure, a computer program product is provided, comprising a computer program that, when executed by a processor, implements the method described in the first aspect above.

[0021] The relay protection drawing verification method, device, electronic equipment, and storage medium disclosed herein first construct a standardized feature database based on relay protection design information. Then, it automatically collects wiring, cable, and panel status data of field equipment through image recognition, replacing manual verification with automated multi-dimensional comparison. At the same time, it integrates logical constraint verification and risk level assessment, effectively avoiding the subjective errors of manual operation and the information asymmetry caused by drawing version iterations. Therefore, it can solve the technical problems of existing verification methods that rely on manual methods, such as wiring misreading and status omissions, as well as the disconnect between drawings and field information, low verification efficiency, difficulty in meeting the requirements of refined acceptance, and the fact that hidden wiring errors can easily cause protection devices to malfunction or fail to operate, threatening the safety of the power grid. It achieves the technical effects of reducing human verification errors, ensuring consistency between drawing and actual information, improving verification efficiency and refinement, accurately identifying hidden violations, reducing the risk of abnormal operation of protection devices, and realizing standardized archiving and traceability of verification results, thus comprehensively ensuring the safe and stable operation of the power grid.

[0022] It should be understood that the description in this section is not intended to identify key or essential features of the embodiments of this application, nor is it intended to limit the scope of this application. Other features of this application will become readily apparent from the following description. Attached Figure Description

[0023] The accompanying drawings are provided to better understand this solution and do not constitute a limitation of this disclosure. Wherein: Figure 1 A flowchart illustrating a method for verifying relay protection drawings provided in this embodiment of the disclosure; Figure 2 A schematic diagram of the structure of a verification device for relay protection drawings provided in this embodiment of the present disclosure; Figure 3 A schematic block diagram of an example electronic device provided for embodiments of this disclosure. Detailed Implementation

[0024] The exemplary embodiments of this disclosure are described below with reference to the accompanying drawings, including various details of the embodiments to aid understanding, and should be considered merely exemplary. Therefore, those skilled in the art will recognize that various changes and modifications can be made to the embodiments described herein without departing from the scope and spirit of this disclosure. Similarly, for clarity and brevity, descriptions of well-known functions and structures are omitted in the following description.

[0025] The following description, with reference to the accompanying drawings, outlines a method, apparatus, electronic device, and storage medium for verifying relay protection drawings according to embodiments of the present disclosure.

[0026] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating a method for verifying relay protection drawings provided in an embodiment of this disclosure.

[0027] like Figure 1 As shown, the method includes the following steps: Step 101: Obtain relay protection design information and device logic rules, parse and extract the equipment topology relationship, terminal connection relationship and electrical logic constraint in the design information, and establish a standard feature database; The design information at least covers the relay protection system design content expressed in the form of drawings, documents, or structured data. Through intelligent analysis of the acquired design information, the system extracts equipment topology relationships representing the interconnection between devices, terminal connection relationships representing specific electrical connection points, and electrical logic constraints reflecting the operating logic or circuit constraints of the protection devices.

[0028] The extracted information is standardized, organized, and stored as a standard feature database for subsequent comparison and reasoning. This database establishes a consistent comparison benchmark between design information and field-collected information, thus enabling automated difference detection and logical consistency verification.

[0029] As a specific implementation method, by importing the protection device manufacturer's diagram, schematic diagram, wiring terminal diagram, manufacturer's instruction manual, and protection device logic, and using technologies such as image recognition, natural language processing, or knowledge graphs, a structured database containing the above-mentioned equipment topology relationships, terminal connection relationships, and electrical logic constraints can be generated. This database can then be used to verify one by one with the actual information such as wiring terminals, wiring numbers, and pressure plate status identified in subsequently collected field images or videos.

[0030] Step 102: Acquire real-scene images of the relay protection field equipment, identify the terminal markings, cable connection status, and device panel status in the real-scene images, and generate field feature data; Real-world images can be obtained through imaging devices capable of capturing the appearance and internal wiring status of equipment, covering the actual physical form of the equipment to be verified and its electrical connections. Image recognition processing is then performed on the acquired real-world images to identify on-site feature information, including at least the unique identification information of the terminals, the actual connection relationships between cables, and the real-time status of various components on the device panel.

[0031] Terminal block identifiers uniquely identify the physical location and number of terminals. Cable connection status reflects the actual wiring topology. Device panel status includes observable operating or configuration statuses such as pressure plate activation / deactivation, indicator light display, and LCD panel parameters. Based on the above identification results, structured field feature data is generated. This data is organized in a format comparable to the aforementioned standard feature database, thus providing real-world input information for subsequent consistency comparisons.

[0032] As a specific implementation method, high-definition cameras, mobile terminals, or inspection robots can be used to collect images of wiring, device panels, and pressure plates inside the cabinet. Using a dedicated image segmentation model or character recognition algorithm, the current status of terminal block numbers, cable labels, and soft and hard pressure plates can be identified under complex backgrounds or uneven lighting conditions, forming a field feature dataset for comparison with the results of drawing analysis item by item.

[0033] Step 103: Compare the field feature data with the standard feature database in multiple dimensions to verify the consistency between the field wiring relationship and the design drawings, and whether the actual state of the device conforms to the electrical logic constraints. The comparison process unfolds from at least two dimensions: first, it verifies the consistency between the on-site wiring relationships and the terminal connection relationships defined in the design drawings to determine whether the actual physical connections deviate from the design intent; second, it verifies whether the actual state of the device conforms to the electrical logic constraints to determine whether the current configuration or operating state of the on-site equipment meets the preset logic rules. This multi-dimensional comparison is not a simple point-by-point comparison, but rather a comprehensive judgment combining the topological relationships between devices, the transmission paths of electrical signals, and the functional logic of the protection devices.

[0034] The consistency verification of wiring relationships focuses on the static physical connection correctness, including the correspondence between terminals and cables, the integrity of connection paths, etc.; while the verification of electrical logic constraints focuses on the dynamic functional rationality, that is, based on the protection logic rules in the design stage (for example, a certain pressure plate should be in the engaged or disengaged state under certain conditions, or a certain terminal should have a specific level state), it judges whether the device panel status, soft pressure plate status or observable electrical characteristics collected on site conform to the expected behavioral logic.

[0035] By cross-validating these two dimensions, we can identify actual wiring errors, missing wiring, redundant wiring, and discrepancies with the design, such as improper device configuration or abnormal status. The results will output comparisons including the location, type, and potential impact of these discrepancies. For example, as a specific implementation, we can compare the terminal block diagrams stored in the database with the actual acquired terminal wiring images, checking the terminal numbers and connections one by one. Simultaneously, based on the schematic diagram, manufacturer's manual, and protection logic rules, we can verify whether the on-site pressure plate activation / deactivation status meets the logical constraint that "a certain protection outlet pressure plate should be activated during operation," and identify whether there are conflicts between the schematic diagram and the protection logic, or whether they may affect the function of adjacent devices.

[0036] Step 104: Determine the location of the discrepancy and the violation based on the comparison results, assess the operational risk level caused by each discrepancy, and generate a verification result containing discrepancy markers and risk rating information.

[0037] Based on this, the operational risks that each discrepancy or violation may cause are assessed, and a corresponding risk level is assigned. The operational risk assessment considers at least the potential impact of the discrepancy on performance indicators such as the functional integrity, correct operation, selectivity, or speed of the relay protection device, as well as the severity of potential impact on adjacent equipment or system-level failures. Based on the above assessment results, a verification result containing discrepancy location identifiers and risk rating information is generated. This verification result is presented in a structured or visual form, clearly distinguishing different risk levels such as minor deviations, general defects, or serious hidden dangers, thus providing a quantitative basis for subsequent intervention decisions (such as whether immediate shutdown for rectification is necessary, whether it can be included in routine maintenance plans, or only for record-keeping and observation). Simultaneously, the verification result also includes spatial location markers for the discrepancy locations, facilitating rapid location of the problem by on-site personnel.

[0038] As a specific implementation method, it can identify all discrepancies between the wiring terminal diagram and the actual wiring, and assess the potential consequences, such as causing protection malfunctions or triggering alarms in adjacent devices. Based on this, the severity of the consequences can be rated, and a detailed report containing the discrepancy location, violation type, and risk level can be generated. Furthermore, the discrepancies can be pushed to mobile terminals to guide on-site rectification and support post-rectification re-verification, forming a closed-loop management system.

[0039] In some embodiments, the steps of acquiring relay protection design information and device logic rules, parsing and extracting equipment topology relationships, terminal connection relationships, and electrical logic constraints from the design information, and establishing a standard feature database include: By batch importing design files of various formats through a standardized interface, the design files are subjected to format unification and noise reduction processing to obtain standardized design data. The graphic symbols in the standardized design data are subjected to symbol recognition to extract component type, position coordinates and connection node information, and structured graph data containing equipment topology relationships are generated. Semantic analysis is performed on the structured graph data to extract terminal connection relationships and electrical logic constraints, and the device topology relationships, terminal connection relationships and electrical logic constraints are associated and stored in a standard feature database.

[0040] A standardized interface is set up to support batch import of design files in various formats, including but not limited to CAD electronic drawings, PDF vector files, raster scanned images, and structured data tables. For each type of imported file, the system automatically performs format unification and noise reduction processing: for CAD files, its graphic elements and layer information are directly extracted; for PDF files, vectorization or rasterization processing is performed first; for scanned paper drawings, image enhancement algorithms are used to remove background noise, correct geometric distortion, and all files are uniformly converted to high-resolution bitmap format for subsequent recognition.

[0041] Building upon this foundation, a pre-trained graphic symbol recognition model is invoked. This model, constructed based on a deep convolutional neural network, can identify common component symbols in relay protection drawings, such as circuit breakers, transformers, relay contacts, pressure plates, and terminal blocks. The recognition process outputs the type label, position coordinates in the drawing, and precise location of pins or connection nodes for each component symbol. Subsequently, based on the identified component node information, the connectivity relationships between nodes are extracted by tracing the connection lines (including straight lines, polylines, and lines with turning marks), thereby generating a structured graph with components as vertices and connections as edges. This graph data fully represents the topological relationships between devices.

[0042] Semantic analysis is performed on the structured diagram data: natural language processing technology is used to parse the text annotations in the diagram, such as extracting terminal numbers from terminal block annotations and circuit numbers from cable annotations, and combining them with the connection relationships in the diagram data to form a precise correspondence between terminals; at the same time, electrical logic constraints are extracted based on preset electrical rule templates (such as "the corresponding circuit breaker should be tripped after differential protection starts") and logical expressions.

[0043] The generated device topology (stored in a graph structure), terminal connection relationship (stored in a terminal mapping table), and electrical logic constraint (stored in a rule statement) are associated through component identifiers and stored together in the standard feature database to form a standardized data structure that can be used for subsequent comparison and query.

[0044] In some embodiments, the process of acquiring real-scene images of relay protection field equipment, identifying terminal block identifiers, cable connection status, and device panel status in the real-scene images, and generating field feature data includes: Under preset acquisition conditions, panoramic and close-up images of the relay protection cabinet are acquired to obtain the original real-scene image; Image segmentation processing is performed on the original real-scene image to separate the terminal area, cable connection area and device panel area, resulting in multiple region of interest images. Character recognition and status classification are performed on each region of interest image to extract terminal numbers, cable connection relationships and routes, identify the on / off status of the pressure plate and the status of the panel indicator, and generate on-site feature data.

[0045] Under preset acquisition conditions, real-scene images of the relay protection cabinet are acquired. These preset acquisition conditions include, but are not limited to, fixed shooting distance, illumination compensation parameters, and multi-angle shooting procedures. Specifically, a high-resolution industrial camera or a mobile terminal equipped with an autofocus lens is used to sequentially acquire panoramic images and close-up images of various local areas within the cabinet, following a predetermined shooting path. The panoramic images cover the entire cabinet's equipment layout, while the close-up images focus on each row of terminal blocks, each device panel, and each set of pressure plates. Adjacent close-up images have an overlap of no less than 20% to ensure the accuracy of stitching or correlation positioning, thereby obtaining original real-scene images containing both panoramic and local information.

[0046] The original real-world image is input into a pre-trained image segmentation model. This model employs a deep learning-based instance segmentation network, capable of recognizing pixel-level semantics in the input image and separating the terminal block area, cable connection area, and device panel area, generating corresponding region of interest (ROI) images for each. The terminal block area image primarily includes the terminal block number, terminal sequence number, and wiring hole features; the cable connection area image primarily includes the cable routing, the location of the connected terminals, and labels or color codes on the cables; and the device panel area image primarily includes components such as pressure plates, indicator lights, LCD displays, and buttons.

[0047] Targeted processing is performed on the images of each region of interest: For the terminal block area, the optical character recognition model is used to extract the terminal number string, and the complete terminal number sequence is restored by combining the geometric arrangement of the terminal blocks; For the cable connection area, the starting and ending terminals of each cable are identified by the cable path tracing algorithm to extract the cable connection relationship and direction, and the loop number on the cable label is parsed using character recognition; For the device panel area, a classifier is used to classify the pressure plate image into status (engaged or unengaged), and the color and on / off status of the indicator lights, as well as the values ​​or codes displayed on the LCD screen, are identified to obtain the device panel status.

[0048] The extracted terminal numbers, cable connection relationships and routes, pressure plate activation / deactivation status, and panel indicator status are uniformly packaged according to a preset data structure to generate field feature data that can be used for subsequent comparison.

[0049] In some embodiments, the step of comparing the field feature data with the standard feature database in multiple dimensions to verify the consistency between the field wiring relationship and the design drawings, and whether the actual state of the device conforms to the electrical logic constraints, includes: Based on the topology matching algorithm, the field terminal identification and cable connection status are mapped to the field topology diagram, and the terminal connection relationship in the standard feature database is mapped to the standard topology diagram. The difference metric between the two topology diagrams is calculated to verify the consistency between the field wiring and the design drawings. By using a logic rule verification mechanism, the status of the field device panel is matched with the electrical logic constraints in the standard feature database to determine whether the activation / deactivation status of the protection element and the status of the functional soft pressure plate meet the preset logic conditions. When a wiring inconsistency or logic violation is detected, the corresponding difference and violation type are recorded.

[0050] For consistency verification of wiring relationships, a graph-based topology matching algorithm is employed. Specifically, terminal identifiers and cable connection statuses extracted from field feature data are mapped to an undirected or directed field topology graph. Each terminal or device port serves as a vertex, and each existing cable connection serves as an edge, with edge attributes including cable number, loop number, and other identification information. Simultaneously, starting from the terminal connection relationship table in the standard feature database, the ideal connection relationships defined in the design drawings are mapped to a standard topology graph, with vertex and edge definitions consistent with the field topology graph. Subsequently, a difference metric between the two topology graphs is calculated. This calculation process includes: comparing the vertex sets of the two graphs one by one, marking missing terminals in the field or redundant terminals not present in the design; comparing the edge sets, using graph isomorphism or subgraph matching algorithms to identify missing connections (present in the design but not in the field), redundant connections (present in the field but not in the design), and connection errors (the two ends of an edge are inconsistent with the design), and counting the number of differences and their topological distances.

[0051] While performing wiring consistency verification, the logical rule verification of the actual device state is executed in parallel. Specifically, a logical rule verification engine is established, which loads electrical logic constraints stored in the standard feature database, such as production rules like "if the main protection operates, the outlet pressure plate should be in the engaged state" or "under normal operating conditions, the functional soft pressure plate should be in the disengaged state." The device panel status in the field feature data—including the mechanical position (engaged or disengaged) of the hard pressure plate, the logic value of the soft pressure plate, the indicator light status, and the parameter codes displayed on the LCD screen—is used as fact input. The rule engine performs pattern matching on each logical constraint: for the condition part (prerequisite), it checks whether the field state meets the condition; if it does, it determines whether the conclusion part (expected state) matches the actual state.

[0052] When the activation indicator of a certain protective element is detected, the rule engine queries the status of the corresponding output pressure plate. If the pressure plate is in the exit state, it is determined to be a logic violation. When the topology comparison detects wiring inconsistencies (such as missing or incorrect connections) or the rule engine detects a logic violation (such as the pressure plate status not conforming to preset logic), the system automatically generates a difference record. The record contains the spatial location identifier of the difference point (such as cabinet number, terminal block number, terminal sequence number, or device panel coordinates), the difference type code (wiring omission / redundancy / incorrect connection / logic violation), and the name of the specific electrical node or component involved in the violation. The above information is stored in a temporary difference list for subsequent use in generating verification results.

[0053] In some embodiments, the step of using a logic rule verification mechanism to match the status of the field device panel with the electrical logic constraints in the standard feature database, and to determine whether the enabled / disabled status of the protection element and the status of the functional soft switch meet the preset logic conditions includes: Read a set of predefined rules for a specific protection device from the standard feature database. The set of rules includes the mapping relationship and mutual exclusion logic between the pressure plate state and the protection function activation state. Extract the position coordinates and visual state of the pressure plate on the device panel from the on-site feature data, and convert them into logical state variables; The logical state variables are substituted into the rule set for reasoning operations to identify whether there are logical anomalies that violate the protection outlet pressure plate status requirements or conflict with the functions of adjacent devices, and output the logical consistency verification result.

[0054] The system reads a predefined set of rules for a specific protection device from a standard feature database. This set of rules is stored in a structured language (such as JSON, XML, or a custom rule script) and contains two core logical components: first, the mapping relationship between the pressure plate status and the protection function activation status, such as "In a line protection device, when the 'distance protection enabled' pressure plate is in the enabled state, the distance protection function is enabled; when the 'distance protection output' pressure plate is in the enabled state, tripping output is allowed"; second, mutual exclusion logic, such as "When the maintenance pressure plate is in the enabled state, all protection output pressure plates should be automatically deactivated" or "The 'remote operation permitted' and 'local operation permitted' pressure plates in the same bay cannot be in the enabled state simultaneously." Next, the system extracts pressure plate information from the device panel images in the field feature data. Specifically, using a deep learning-based pressure plate detection and classification model, each pressure plate element in the device panel image is located, and the region of interest and its geometric center coordinates (as the pressure plate position coordinates) of each pressure plate are output. An image classifier then determines the state of this region as "enabled" (e.g., a toggle switch pointing to the ON position or a knob pointing to the enabled mark) or "disabled" (pointing to the OFF position).

[0055] Each pressure plate's state is represented as a logical state variable. For example, a Boolean variable `P_i = True` represents the i-th pressure plate being engaged, and `False` represents it being disengaged. Simultaneously, the correspondence between its physical location coordinates and the pressure plate numbers specified in the design document is recorded, establishing a mapping table. Next, these logical state variables are substituted into the rule set read from the standard feature database, and inference operations are performed. The inference process employs forward chaining or a rule engine based on the Rete algorithm: for each rule, it checks whether the states of each pressure plate or protective element in its preconditions match the current logical state variable; if they match, the conclusion is deemed valid, and it checks whether the other pressure plate states or protection function activation states required by the conclusion are consistent with the actual variables. For example, if a mutually exclusive rule stipulates that "the outlet pressure plate must be disengaged when the maintenance pressure plate is engaged," and the current inference detects that the maintenance pressure plate's logical variable is True, while the corresponding outlet pressure plate is also True, a logical anomaly record is generated, identified as "violation of protection outlet pressure plate state requirements." For example, if the mapping rule stipulates that "the function soft pressure plates of protection A and protection B cannot be put into operation at the same time", but both are actually True, then the output will be "adjacent device function conflict" error.

[0056] Each anomaly generated by inference is categorized by type (exit plate violation, mutual exclusion violation, missing functional dependency, etc.) and associated with a specific plate identifier or protection element. The output logic consistency verification result is encapsulated, which includes the violation rule number, the plate variables involved and their actual state, expected state, and risk description.

[0057] In some embodiments, determining the location of discrepancies and violations based on the comparison results, assessing the operational risk level caused by each discrepancy, and generating a verification result containing discrepancy markers and risk rating information includes: The discrepancies were compiled into a list by summarizing the locations where the on-site wiring did not correspond to the design drawings and the violations that did not comply with the wiring construction specifications. Based on the preset risk assessment model, the consequences of each difference in the difference list that may lead to protection malfunction, protection failure, or alarm of adjacent devices are analyzed, and the severity of the consequences is quantified into multiple preset risk levels. Based on the location information of the differences and the corresponding operational risk levels, a verification report is generated that includes difference point markers, risk rating descriptions, and rectification suggestions. The verification report is then pushed to a mobile terminal or production management system to form a rectification closed loop.

[0058] The consistency verification process obtains information on discrepancies between on-site wiring and design drawings, including but not limited to: wiring present in the terminal block diagram but missing on-site; redundant wiring present on-site but not defined in the terminal block diagram; and incorrect wiring caused by mismatched terminal numbers and cable labels. Simultaneously, the logic rule verification process identifies violations of electrical logic constraints, such as inconsistent outlet pressure plate status or simultaneous activation of mutually exclusive pressure plates. Furthermore, physical wiring issues that do not conform to wiring construction specifications (such as insufficient cable bending radius, loose crimps, and unclear labeling) are also included in the discrepancy list. Each discrepancy record includes the precise spatial coordinates of the discrepancy point (cabinet number, terminal block number, terminal sequence number, pressure plate name, etc.), the discrepancy type code, and supporting images collected on-site.

[0059] Each item in the discrepancy list is quantitatively analyzed based on a pre-defined risk assessment model. This model, grounded in fault tree analysis or analytic hierarchy process (AHP), pre-defines the propagation path of consequences for each type of discrepancy: for example, missing wiring may lead to the loss of corresponding protection functions, resulting in protection failure; incorrect wiring may cause unexpected signal interference, leading to protection malfunction; abnormal connection of the output pressure plate may prevent tripping commands from being executed; functional conflicts between adjacent devices may trigger cascading alarms. The model outputs a risk score through weighted calculation based on the type of discrepancy, the importance of the involved electrical nodes, and the criticality of the circuit. This score is then mapped to multiple pre-defined risk levels, such as Level I (critical, must be rectified immediately), Level II (serious, should be rectified as soon as possible), Level III (moderate, can be rectified in a planned manner), and Level IV (minor, only a warning). A brief consequence description is also included in the risk assessment results, such as "This missing wiring will prevent the differential protection from obtaining current sampling from the opposite side, which may cause protection failure." Finally, a verification report is generated based on the above discrepancy location information and the corresponding operational risk level.

[0060] The report uses a combination of text and images: each discrepancy is highlighted or labeled with a number on drawings or panoramic images of the site; a risk rating description is included, clearly defining the level, possible consequences, and urgency of each discrepancy; and targeted rectification suggestions are provided based on a pre-set knowledge base, such as "Please refer to the design drawings to supplement the jumper wire between terminals A3-B5" or "Please switch the LP2 pressure plate from the active state to the deactivated state." The generated verification report is pushed to mobile terminals (such as tablets or smart helmets for on-site inspectors) for real-time viewing and rectification work. Simultaneously, it interacts with the production management system (such as the two-ticket system or equipment defect management system) via an application programming interface to automatically create rectification work orders and track the rectification status. After rectification is completed, on-site personnel can take repeat images using their mobile terminals and send them back to the system. The system automatically re-executes the verification to confirm the rectification effect, thus realizing a complete process from discrepancy discovery, risk assessment, rectification order issuance, to closed-loop verification.

[0061] Corresponding to the aforementioned method for verifying relay protection drawings, this invention also proposes a device for verifying relay protection drawings. Since the device embodiments of this invention correspond to the method embodiments described above, details not disclosed in the device embodiments can be referred to in the method embodiments, and will not be repeated here.

[0062] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of a relay protection drawing verification device provided in an embodiment of this disclosure, as shown below. Figure 2 As shown, it includes: Acquisition unit 21 is used to acquire relay protection design information and device logic rules, parse and extract equipment topology relationships, terminal connection relationships and electrical logic constraints in the design information, and establish a standard feature database; The acquisition unit 22 is used to acquire real-scene images of relay protection field equipment, identify terminal markings, cable connection status and device panel status in the real-scene images, and generate field feature data. The comparison unit 23 is used to compare the field feature data with the standard feature database in multiple dimensions, and to verify the consistency between the field wiring relationship and the design drawings, as well as whether the actual state of the device conforms to the electrical logic constraints. The generation unit 24 is used to determine the location of the difference and the violation based on the comparison results, assess the operational risk level caused by each difference, and generate a verification result containing difference markers and risk rating information.

[0063] Furthermore, in one possible implementation of this disclosure, the acquisition unit 21 is further configured to: By batch importing design files of various formats through a standardized interface, the design files are subjected to format unification and noise reduction processing to obtain standardized design data. The graphic symbols in the standardized design data are subjected to symbol recognition to extract component type, position coordinates and connection node information, and structured graph data containing equipment topology relationships are generated. Semantic analysis is performed on the structured graph data to extract terminal connection relationships and electrical logic constraints, and the device topology relationships, terminal connection relationships and electrical logic constraints are associated and stored in a standard feature database.

[0064] Furthermore, in one possible implementation of this disclosure embodiment, the acquisition unit 22 is further configured to: Under preset acquisition conditions, panoramic and close-up images of the relay protection cabinet are acquired to obtain the original real-scene image; Image segmentation processing is performed on the original real-scene image to separate the terminal area, cable connection area and device panel area, resulting in multiple region of interest images. Character recognition and status classification are performed on each region of interest image to extract terminal numbers, cable connection relationships and routes, identify the on / off status of the pressure plate and the status of the panel indicator, and generate on-site feature data.

[0065] Furthermore, in one possible implementation of this disclosure, the comparison unit 23 is further configured to: Based on the topology matching algorithm, the field terminal identification and cable connection status are mapped to the field topology diagram, and the terminal connection relationship in the standard feature database is mapped to the standard topology diagram. The difference metric between the two topology diagrams is calculated to verify the consistency between the field wiring and the design drawings. By using a logic rule verification mechanism, the status of the field device panel is matched with the electrical logic constraints in the standard feature database to determine whether the activation / deactivation status of the protection element and the status of the functional soft pressure plate meet the preset logic conditions. When a wiring inconsistency or logic violation is detected, the corresponding difference and violation type are recorded.

[0066] Furthermore, in one possible implementation of this disclosure, the comparison unit 23 is further configured to: Read a set of predefined rules for a specific protection device from the standard feature database. The set of rules includes the mapping relationship and mutual exclusion logic between the pressure plate state and the protection function activation state. Extract the position coordinates and visual state of the pressure plate on the device panel from the on-site feature data, and convert them into logical state variables; The logical state variables are substituted into the rule set for reasoning operations to identify whether there are logical anomalies that violate the protection outlet pressure plate status requirements or conflict with the functions of adjacent devices, and output the logical consistency verification result.

[0067] Furthermore, in one possible implementation of this disclosure embodiment, the generation unit 24 is further configured to: The discrepancies were compiled into a list by summarizing the locations where the on-site wiring did not correspond to the design drawings and the violations that did not comply with the wiring construction specifications. Based on the preset risk assessment model, the consequences of each difference in the difference list that may lead to protection malfunction, protection failure, or alarm of adjacent devices are analyzed, and the severity of the consequences is quantified into multiple preset risk levels. Based on the location information of the differences and the corresponding operational risk levels, a verification report is generated that includes difference point markers, risk rating descriptions, and rectification suggestions. The verification report is then pushed to a mobile terminal or production management system to form a rectification closed loop.

[0068] It should be noted that the foregoing explanation of the method embodiments also applies to the apparatus of the embodiments of this disclosure, and the principle is the same. Therefore, the embodiments of this disclosure are not limited thereto.

[0069] According to embodiments of this disclosure, this disclosure also provides an electronic device, a readable storage medium, and a computer program product.

[0070] Figure 3 A schematic block diagram of an example electronic device 400 that can be used to implement embodiments of the present disclosure is shown. The electronic device is intended to represent various forms of digital computers, such as laptop computers, desktop computers, workstations, personal digital assistants, servers, blade servers, mainframe computers, and other suitable computers. The electronic device may also represent various forms of mobile devices, such as personal digital assistants, cellular phones, smartphones, wearable devices, and other similar computing devices. The components shown herein, their connections and relationships, and their functions are merely illustrative and are not intended to limit the implementation of the present disclosure described and / or claimed herein.

[0071] like Figure 3 As shown, device 400 includes a computing unit 401, which can perform various appropriate actions and processes based on a computer program stored in ROM (Read-Only Memory) 402 or a computer program loaded from storage unit 408 into RAM (Random Access Memory) 403. RAM 403 may also store various programs and data required for the operation of device 400. The computing unit 401, ROM 402, and RAM 403 are interconnected via bus 404. I / O (Input / Output) interface 405 is also connected to bus 404.

[0072] Multiple components in device 400 are connected to I / O interface 405, including: input unit 406, such as keyboard, mouse, etc.; output unit 407, such as various types of monitors, speakers, etc.; storage unit 408, such as disk, optical disk, etc.; and communication unit 409, such as network card, modem, wireless transceiver, etc. Communication unit 409 allows device 400 to exchange information / data with other devices through computer networks such as the Internet and / or various telecommunications networks.

[0073] The computing unit 401 can be various general-purpose and / or special-purpose processing components with processing and computing capabilities. Some examples of the computing unit 401 include, but are not limited to, CPUs (Central Processing Units), GPUs (Graphics Processing Units), various special-purpose AI (Artificial Intelligence) computing chips, various computing units running machine learning model algorithms, DSPs (Digital Signal Processors), and any suitable processor, controller, microcontroller, etc. The computing unit 401 performs the various methods and processes described above, such as the method for verifying relay protection drawings. For example, in some embodiments, the method for verifying relay protection drawings may be implemented as a computer software program, which is tangibly contained in a machine-readable medium, such as storage unit 408. In some embodiments, part or all of the computer program may be loaded and / or installed on device 400 via ROM 402 and / or communication unit 409. When the computer program is loaded into RAM 403 and executed by the computing unit 401, one or more steps of the methods described above may be performed. Alternatively, in other embodiments, the computing unit 401 may be configured by any other suitable means (e.g., by means of firmware) to perform the aforementioned method for verifying relay protection drawings.

[0074] Various implementations of the systems and techniques described above herein can be implemented in digital electronic circuit systems, integrated circuit systems, FPGAs (Field Programmable Gate Arrays), ASICs (Application-Specific Integrated Circuits), ASSPs (Application-Specific Standard Products), SOCs (System-on-Chips), CPLDs (Complex Programmable Logic Devices), computer hardware, firmware, software, and / or combinations thereof. These various implementations may include implementations in one or more computer programs that can be executed and / or interpreted on a programmable system including at least one programmable processor, which may be a dedicated or general-purpose programmable processor, capable of receiving data and instructions from a storage system, at least one input device, and at least one output device, and transmitting data and instructions to the storage system, the at least one input device, and the at least one output device.

[0075] The program code used to implement the methods of this disclosure may be written in any combination of one or more programming languages. This program code may be provided to a processor or controller of a general-purpose computer, special-purpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus, such that when executed by the processor or controller, the program code causes the functions / operations specified in the flowcharts and / or block diagrams to be implemented. The program code may be executed entirely on a machine, partially on a machine, as a standalone software package partially on a machine and partially on a remote machine, or entirely on a remote machine or server.

[0076] In the context of this disclosure, a machine-readable medium can be a tangible medium that may contain or store a program for use by or in conjunction with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device. A machine-readable medium can be a machine-readable signal medium or a machine-readable storage medium. A machine-readable medium can be, but is not limited to, electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor systems, apparatus, or devices, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. More specific examples of machine-readable storage media include electrical connections based on one or more wires, portable computer disks, hard disks, RAM, ROM, EPROM (Electrically Programmable Read-Only Memory) or flash memory, optical fiber, CD-ROM (Compact Disc Read-Only Memory), optical storage devices, magnetic storage devices, or any suitable combination of the foregoing.

[0077] To provide interaction with a user, the systems and techniques described herein can be implemented on a computer having: a display device for displaying information to the user (e.g., a CRT (Cathode-Ray Tube) or LCD (Liquid Crystal Display) monitor); and a keyboard and pointing device (e.g., a mouse or trackball) through which the user provides input to the computer. Other types of devices can also be used to provide interaction with the user; for example, feedback provided to the user can be any form of sensory feedback (e.g., visual feedback, auditory feedback, or tactile feedback); and input from the user can be received in any form (including sound input, voice input, or tactile input).

[0078] The systems and technologies described herein can be implemented in computing systems that include backend components (e.g., as data servers), or computing systems that include middleware components (e.g., application servers), or computing systems that include frontend components (e.g., user computers with graphical user interfaces or web browsers through which users can interact with implementations of the systems and technologies described herein), or any combination of such backend, middleware, or frontend components. The components of the system can be interconnected via digital data communication of any form or medium (e.g., communication networks). Examples of communication networks include LANs (Local Area Networks), WANs (Wide Area Networks), the Internet, and blockchain networks.

[0079] Computer systems can include clients and servers. Clients and servers are generally geographically separated and typically interact via communication networks. The client-server relationship is created by computer programs running on the respective computers and having a client-server relationship with each other. A server can be a cloud server, also known as a cloud computing server or cloud host, a hosting product within the cloud computing service system that addresses the shortcomings of traditional physical hosts and VPS (Virtual Private Server) services, such as high management difficulty and weak business scalability. Servers can also be servers for distributed systems or servers incorporating blockchain technology.

[0080] It's important to note that artificial intelligence (AI) is the study of enabling computers to simulate certain human thought processes and intelligent behaviors (such as learning, reasoning, thinking, and planning). It encompasses both hardware and software technologies. AI hardware technologies generally include sensors, dedicated AI chips, cloud computing, distributed storage, and big data processing. AI software technologies primarily include computer vision, speech recognition, natural language processing, machine learning / deep learning, big data processing, and knowledge graph technologies.

[0081] It should be understood that the various forms of processes shown above can be used to rearrange, add, or delete steps. For example, the steps described in this disclosure can be executed in parallel, sequentially, or in different orders, as long as the desired result of the technical solution disclosed in this disclosure can be achieved, and this is not limited herein.

[0082] The specific embodiments described above do not constitute a limitation on the scope of protection of this disclosure. Those skilled in the art should understand that various modifications, combinations, sub-combinations, and substitutions can be made according to design requirements and other factors. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, and improvements made within the spirit and principles of this disclosure should be included within the scope of protection of this disclosure.

Claims

1. A method for verifying relay protection drawings, characterized in that, include: Obtain relay protection design information and device logic rules, parse and extract equipment topology relationships, terminal connection relationships and electrical logic constraints from the design information, and establish a standard feature database; Collect real-scene images of relay protection field equipment, identify terminal markings, cable connection status and device panel status in the real-scene images, and generate field feature data; The field feature data is compared with the standard feature database in multiple dimensions to verify the consistency between the field wiring relationship and the design drawings, as well as whether the actual state of the device conforms to the electrical logic constraints. Based on the comparison results, the location of the discrepancies and the violations are determined, the operational risk level caused by each discrepancy is assessed, and a verification result containing discrepancy markers and risk rating information is generated.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process of acquiring relay protection design information and device logic rules, parsing and extracting equipment topology relationships, terminal connection relationships, and electrical logic constraints from the design information, and establishing a standard feature database includes: By batch importing design files of various formats through a standardized interface, the design files are subjected to format unification and noise reduction processing to obtain standardized design data. The graphic symbols in the standardized design data are subjected to symbol recognition to extract component type, position coordinates and connection node information, and structured graph data containing equipment topology relationships are generated. Semantic analysis is performed on the structured graph data to extract terminal connection relationships and electrical logic constraints, and the device topology relationships, terminal connection relationships and electrical logic constraints are associated and stored in a standard feature database.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process involves acquiring real-world images of the relay protection field equipment, identifying terminal block markings, cable connection status, and device panel status within the images, and generating field feature data, including: Under preset acquisition conditions, panoramic and close-up images of the relay protection cabinet are acquired to obtain the original real-scene image; Image segmentation processing is performed on the original real-scene image to separate the terminal area, cable connection area and device panel area, resulting in multiple region of interest images. Character recognition and status classification are performed on each region of interest image to extract terminal numbers, cable connection relationships and routes, identify the on / off status of the pressure plate and the status of the panel indicator, and generate on-site feature data.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of comparing the field feature data with the standard feature database from multiple dimensions to verify the consistency between the field wiring relationship and the design drawings, and whether the actual state of the device conforms to the electrical logic constraints, includes: Based on the topology matching algorithm, the field terminal identification and cable connection status are mapped to the field topology diagram, and the terminal connection relationship in the standard feature database is mapped to the standard topology diagram. The difference metric between the two topology diagrams is calculated to verify the consistency between the field wiring and the design drawings. By using a logic rule verification mechanism, the status of the field device panel is matched with the electrical logic constraints in the standard feature database to determine whether the activation / deactivation status of the protection element and the status of the functional soft pressure plate meet the preset logic conditions. When a wiring inconsistency or logic violation is detected, the corresponding difference and violation type are recorded.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that, The logic rule verification mechanism matches the status of the field device panel with the electrical logic constraints in the standard feature database to determine whether the enabled / disabled status of the protection element and the status of the functional soft switch meet the preset logic conditions, including: Read a set of predefined rules for a specific protection device from the standard feature database. The set of rules includes the mapping relationship and mutual exclusion logic between the pressure plate state and the protection function activation state. Extract the position coordinates and visual status of the pressure plate on the device panel from the on-site feature data, and convert them into logical state variables; The logical state variables are substituted into the rule set for reasoning operations to identify whether there are logical anomalies that violate the protection outlet pressure plate status requirements or conflict with the functions of adjacent devices, and output the logical consistency verification result.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process of determining the location of discrepancies and violations based on the comparison results, assessing the operational risk level caused by each discrepancy, and generating verification results containing discrepancy markers and risk rating information includes: The discrepancies were summarized and compiled into a list of discrepancies, including discrepancies between the on-site wiring and the design drawings, as well as violations that did not conform to the wiring construction specifications. Based on the preset risk assessment model, the consequences of each difference in the difference list that may lead to protection malfunction, protection failure, or alarm of adjacent devices are analyzed, and the severity of the consequences is quantified into multiple preset risk levels. Based on the location information of the differences and the corresponding operational risk levels, a verification report is generated that includes difference point markers, risk rating descriptions, and rectification suggestions. The verification report is then pushed to a mobile terminal or production management system to form a rectification closed loop.

7. A device for verifying relay protection drawings, characterized in that, include: The acquisition unit is used to acquire relay protection design information and device logic rules, parse and extract the equipment topology relationship, terminal connection relationship and electrical logic constraint in the design information, and establish a standard feature database. The acquisition unit is used to acquire real-scene images of relay protection field equipment, identify terminal markings, cable connection status and device panel status in the real-scene images, and generate field feature data. The comparison unit is used to compare the field feature data with the standard feature database in multiple dimensions, and to verify the consistency between the field wiring relationship and the design drawings, as well as whether the actual state of the device conforms to the electrical logic constraints. The generation unit is used to determine the location of differences and violations based on the comparison results, assess the operational risk level caused by each difference, and generate verification results containing difference markers and risk rating information.

8. An electronic device, characterized in that, include: At least one processor; as well as A memory communicatively connected to the at least one processor; wherein, The memory stores instructions that can be executed by the at least one processor to enable the at least one processor to perform the method of any one of claims 1-6.

9. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing computer instructions, characterized in that, The computer instructions are used to cause the computer to perform the method according to any one of claims 1-6.

10. A computer program product, characterized in that, Includes a computer program that, when executed by a processor, implements the method according to any one of claims 1-6.

Images