Corridor area value evaluation-based mountainous construction environment intelligent grading method

Abstract

The application discloses a mountainous construction environment intelligent grading method based on corridor area value evaluation, comprising the following steps: constructing a mountainous construction corridor area and dividing the corridor area into evaluation units; constructing evaluation indexes, including terrain suitability, road accessibility, disaster risk constraint, ecological sensitivity, construction organization convenience and operation and maintenance support value indexes; standardizing and calculating the evaluation value of the criterion layer; obtaining the initial comprehensive construction value of the first corridor evaluation unit by weighted fusion; correcting the initial comprehensive construction value by using the comprehensive construction value of adjacent units; grading the mountainous construction environment according to the corrected comprehensive construction value; updating parameters according to construction feedback; and outputting the grading result.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of mountain construction environment assessment and classification technology, and particularly relates to an intelligent classification method for mountain construction environment based on corridor area value assessment. Background Technology

[0002] When linear projects such as power transmission lines, highways and pipelines are continuously carried out along mountainous terrain, measures such as construction access roads, material storage, machinery operation and safety avoidance need to be planned and arranged in a unified manner based on the conditions along the route. Existing technologies generally plan and arrange based on individual slopes, construction sites or road nodes. The planning results cannot accurately reflect the continuous relationship between different sections of the corridor, nor is it convenient to organize and carry out construction along the route.

[0003] The existing environmental assessment index system for mountain construction mainly focuses on slope stability, construction difficulty, project cost, and ecological protection scheme comparison, but it does not adequately consider construction needs such as road accessibility, work surface conditions, material transportation, temporary facility layout, and subsequent maintenance. Therefore, the assessment results usually only indicate the advantages and disadvantages of local conditions and cannot directly represent the construction utilization value of the corridor section.

[0004] Furthermore, some evaluation indicators rely on expert scoring or on-site experience, and the evaluation results are easily affected by the evaluators, the completeness of the data, and the project conditions. At the same time, factors such as rainfall, construction disturbance, landslides, and debris flows can change the road traffic and risk status, and it is difficult to reflect changes in the construction environment in a timely manner if only a one-time static evaluation is used.

[0005] During the assessment process, the required data sources, such as remote sensing images, digital elevation models (DEMs), roads, meteorology, geological hazards, and construction status, are different and have different dimensions. Existing technologies lack unified data processing and data fusion. Furthermore, the evaluation results are mostly expressed as comprehensive scores or scheme rankings, which means that construction units still need to make separate judgments on priority construction, restricted construction, or avoidance sections.

[0006] In addition, the slope, terrain undulation, vegetation cover, road conditions and disaster risks along the route will change continuously. If each evaluation unit is processed independently, local outliers are likely to cause frequent changes in the level, and the resulting classification results will be difficult to meet the requirements of continuous passage, continuous operation and segmented control. Summary of the Invention

[0007] The technical problem to be solved by this invention is to provide an intelligent classification method for mountain construction environment based on corridor area value assessment, so as to solve the technical problems of existing technologies such as localization of evaluation objects, insufficient connection between indicators and construction organization needs, difficulty in uniformly processing data from different sources, inability to directly convert evaluation results into construction grades, and poor spatial continuity of classification results.

[0008] The technical solution of this invention is as follows:

[0009] A smart classification method for mountain construction environments based on corridor area value assessment includes:

[0010] Step 1: Construct a mountain construction corridor area, dividing the mountain construction corridor area into... One evaluation unit;

[0011] Step 2: Construct evaluation indicators according to evaluation units, including terrain suitability indicators, road accessibility indicators, disaster risk constraint indicators, ecological sensitivity indicators, construction organization convenience indicators, and operation and maintenance support value indicators;

[0012] Step 3: Standardize the indicators;

[0013] Step 4: The evaluation system includes the target layer, the criterion layer, and the indicator layer. Calculate the evaluation value of the criterion layer.

[0014] Step 5: Use weighted fusion to obtain the first... The initial comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit;

[0015] Step 6: Adjust the initial comprehensive construction value by utilizing the comprehensive construction value of adjacent units;

[0016] Step 7: Classify the mountain construction environment according to the revised comprehensive construction value;

[0017] Step 8: Update parameters based on construction feedback;

[0018] Step 9: Output the grading results.

[0019] Construct a mountain construction corridor area and divide the mountain construction corridor area into: The method for evaluating each unit is as follows: the centerline of the corridor is taken as the centerline of the proposed project route, construction access road, tower site connection line, or pipeline centerline. The buffer radius is determined based on the operating radius of construction machinery, the impact range of material transportation, the impact range of terrain, and the safety control boundary, thus generating a mountain construction corridor area. ;

[0020] ;

[0021] This indicates a construction corridor area in the mountainous region; Indicates a point in space; Indicates the center line of the corridor; Indicates location point To the center line of the corridor The shortest distance; Indicates the buffer radius of the corridor area;

[0022] The mountain construction corridor area is defined by fixed distances, abrupt terrain changes, road junctions, tower site intervals, or natural valley boundaries. Divided into Each evaluation unit is denoted as . ; Indicates the first One corridor evaluation unit; Indicates the evaluation unit number; This indicates the total number of evaluation units in the corridor; the evaluation units are either regular grids or strip segments set along the corridor direction.

[0023] The terrain suitability indicators include altitude, slope, aspect, surface relief, and terrain roughness.

[0024] The road accessibility indicators include distance from existing roads, road grade, road gradient, passable width, and difficulty of machinery access;

[0025] The disaster risk constraint indicators include landslides, collapses, debris flows, mining subsidence areas, weak strata, and risks induced by heavy rainfall;

[0026] The ecological sensitivity indicators include vegetation coverage, water source protection areas, basic farmland, nature reserves, ecological red lines, and soil and water loss sensitivity.

[0027] The indicators of ease of construction organization include material storage conditions, temporary facility layout conditions, openness of the work area, and conditions for the relocation of construction machinery;

[0028] The operation and maintenance support value indicators include accessibility for later maintenance, convenience of emergency repairs, and long-term channel retention value.

[0029] No. The original index vector of each corridor evaluation unit is represented as follows:

[0030] ;

[0031] in, Indicates the first The original index vector of each corridor evaluation unit; Indicates the first The corridor evaluation unit in the first Original feature values ​​under each evaluation index; Indicates the evaluation unit number; Indicates the evaluation indicator number; This indicates the total number of evaluation indicators.

[0032] Indicator standardization methods include:

[0033] For positive indicators, standardization is performed using the following formula:

[0034] ;

[0035] For negative inverse indicators, the following standardization formula is used:

[0036] ;

[0037] In the above two formulas Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Standardized values ​​of each evaluation indicator; Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit The original characteristic values ​​of each evaluation indicator; Indicates the first The maximum value of each evaluation indicator across all evaluation units; Indicates the first The minimum value of each evaluation indicator across all evaluation units; This represents a very small positive number set to prevent the denominator from being zero.

[0038] Methods for calculating the evaluation value of the criterion layer include:

[0039] The target layer is the first Initial comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit

[0040] The criteria layer includes terrain suitability, transportation accessibility, risk and safety, ecological constraints, construction convenience, and operation and maintenance support.

[0041] The indicator layer consists of various quantifiable indicators, the first... The first evaluation unit Each criterion-level evaluation value is denoted as ;

[0042] When the criterion layer contains When there are several standardized indicators that can compensate for each other, mean aggregation is used:

[0043] ;

[0044] Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Each criterion-level evaluation value; Indicates the first The number of standardized indicators contained in each criteria layer; Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Standardized values ​​of each evaluation indicator; Indicates the evaluation unit number; Indicates the evaluation indicator number; Indicates the criterion level number; This represents the summation operation;

[0045] When indicators within the same criterion layer fall under the constraints of disaster risk, ecological red lines, or irreparable road interruptions, the weakest link constraint is applied:

[0046] ;

[0047] in, This represents the standardized value of each evaluation indicator contained in this criterion layer; Indicates the first The number of standardized indicators contained in each criteria layer; Indicates the evaluation unit number; Indicates the criterion level number;

[0048] When a criterion level contains four control variables When all control variables compensate for each other, the evaluation value of the criterion layer is:

[0049] ;

[0050] When the four control variables are non-compensable constraint indicators, the evaluation value of the criterion layer is:

[0051] ;

[0052] In the above two formulas, Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Each criterion-level evaluation value; These represent control variables. The normalized value; Indicates the evaluation unit number; Indicates the criterion level number; This indicates the minimum value operation.

[0053] No. The calculation method for the initial comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit includes:

[0054] ;

[0055] Each weight satisfies:

[0056] ;

[0057] Indicates the number of criterion layers; Indicates the first The weights of each criterion layer; Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Each criterion-level evaluation value; Indicates the criterion level number; This indicates a summation operation.

[0058] The method for correcting the initial comprehensive construction value by utilizing the comprehensive construction value of adjacent units is as follows:

[0059] No. The revised comprehensive construction value of each evaluation unit is expressed as follows:

[0060] ;

[0061] Indicates the first The revised comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit; Indicates the first The initial comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit; This represents the spatial correction factor, with a value range of [value range missing]. ; Indicates the relationship with the first A set of evaluation units that are adjacent or spatially connected; Represents a set The number of evaluation units in the evaluation; Indicates the sequence number of adjacent evaluation units; Indicates the first The initial comprehensive construction value of each adjacent evaluation unit; This indicates a summation operation.

[0062] The method for classifying mountain construction environments into different levels is as follows:

[0063] The mountainous construction environment is divided into five levels: Level 1 Priority Construction Zone, Level 2 Suitable Construction Zone, Level 3 General Control Zone, Level 4 Restricted Construction Zone, and Level 5 High-Risk Avoidance Zone. The determination method is as follows:

[0064] ;

[0065] Indicates the first The construction environment level of each corridor evaluation unit; the level values ​​1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 represent Level 1 priority construction area, Level 2 suitable construction area, Level 3 general control area, Level 4 restricted construction area and Level 5 high-risk avoidance area, respectively. Indicates the first The revised comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit; This represents four tiered thresholds set from high to low, satisfying the following conditions:

[0066] .

[0067] The method for updating parameters based on construction feedback is as follows: The revised comprehensive construction value... The correction error is expressed as follows: (Compared with the actual construction feedback value)

[0068] ;

[0069] in, Indicates the first Correction error for each corridor evaluation unit; This represents the actual evaluation value or experience-based quantitative value obtained based on feedback from actual construction. Indicates the first The revised comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit; Indicates the evaluation unit number;

[0070] according to Adjusting indicator weights, tiered thresholds, or spatial correction coefficients, when using adaptive weight updates, is represented as follows:

[0071] ;

[0072] Indicates the first During the nth iteration The weights of each criterion layer; Indicates the first During the nth iteration The weights of each criterion layer; Indicates the model update iteration number; This indicates that the learning rate is updated based on the weights. Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Each criterion layer evaluation value; after the weights are updated, non-negativity constraints and normalization are applied so that the updated weights still satisfy the constraints.

[0073] Strong constraints such as ecological red lines, major geological disaster hazards, debris flow channels, and prohibited construction zones are determined separately. When strong constraints are triggered, they are directly identified as restricted construction zones or high-risk avoidance zones and do not participate in spatial smoothing correction. When participating in correction, only the level can be reduced and the level cannot be upgraded.

[0074] Beneficial effects of this invention:

[0075] This invention constructs a continuous corridor based on the proposed line, construction access road, tower location connection line or pipeline centerline and divides it into calculable evaluation units, so that the evaluation object corresponds to the construction organization scope of the linear project.

[0076] The present invention constructs evaluation indicators including terrain suitability indicators, road accessibility indicators, disaster risk constraint indicators, ecological sensitivity indicators, construction organization convenience indicators, and operation and maintenance support value indicators, in order to solve the defects such as localization of evaluation objects and insufficient connection between indicators and construction organization needs.

[0077] Standardize indicators such as topography, roads, disasters, ecology, construction organization, and operation and maintenance support in the same direction to eliminate differences in dimensions and value ranges, making it easier to compare the construction conditions of different corridor units.

[0078] This invention employs complementary aggregation and short-board constraint processing to address both compensable and non-compensable indicators, thereby preventing local favorable conditions from masking adverse factors such as major disaster risks, ecological constraints, or road interruptions.

[0079] This invention utilizes adjacent evaluation units to perform spatial continuous correction of the comprehensive construction value in order to reduce frequent level jumps caused by single-point anomalies; this invention converts the comprehensive construction value into a construction environment level and configures corresponding construction organization and safety control measures for different levels.

[0080] This invention iteratively updates the index weights, grading thresholds, or spatial correction coefficients using historical construction data, avoiding deviations caused by long-term use of fixed empirical parameters.

[0081] This invention solves the technical problems of existing technologies, such as the localization of evaluation objects, insufficient connection between indicators and construction organization requirements, difficulty in uniformly processing data from different sources, inability to directly convert evaluation results into construction grades, and poor spatial continuity of grading results. Attached Figure Description

[0082] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the process of the present invention;

[0083] Figure 2 This diagram illustrates the graded consistency rate of the three methods under different mountain construction corridor complexities, as part of a specific embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0084] A smart classification method for mountain construction environments based on corridor area value assessment, such as Figure 1 As shown, it includes corridor construction, evaluation unit division, indicator processing, value calculation, spatial correction, grade determination and result output.

[0085] S1. Construct the construction corridor area:

[0086] This invention uses the proposed project route, construction access road, tower site connection line, or pipeline centerline as the corridor centerline. The buffer radius is determined based on the operating radius of construction machinery, the impact range of material transportation, the impact range of terrain, and the safety control boundary, thus generating a mountain construction corridor area. The expression is:

[0087] ;

[0088] in, This indicates a construction corridor area in the mountainous region; Indicates a point in space; Indicates the center line of the corridor; Indicates location point To the center line of the corridor The shortest distance; Indicates the buffer radius of the corridor area.

[0089] This invention defines mountain construction corridor areas based on fixed distances, abrupt terrain changes, road nodes, tower site intervals, or natural valley boundaries. Divided into Each evaluation unit is denoted as . .in Indicates the first One corridor evaluation unit; Indicates the evaluation unit number; This indicates the total number of evaluation units in the corridor. Evaluation units can be either regular grids or strip-shaped segments set along the corridor direction.

[0090] S2. Construct evaluation indicators: including terrain suitability indicators, road accessibility indicators, disaster risk constraint indicators, ecological sensitivity indicators, construction organization convenience indicators, and operation and maintenance support value indicators.

[0091] The terrain suitability indicators include altitude, slope, aspect, surface relief, and terrain roughness.

[0092] The road accessibility indicators include distance from existing roads, road grade, road gradient, passable width, and difficulty of machinery access.

[0093] The disaster risk constraint indicators include landslides, collapses, debris flows, mining subsidence areas, weak strata, and risks induced by heavy rainfall.

[0094] The ecological sensitivity indicators include vegetation coverage, water source protection areas, basic farmland, nature reserves, ecological red lines, and soil and water loss sensitivity.

[0095] The indicators of ease of construction organization include material storage conditions, temporary facility layout conditions, openness of the work area, and conditions for the relocation of construction machinery.

[0096] The operation and maintenance support value indicators include accessibility for later maintenance, convenience of emergency repairs, and long-term channel retention value.

[0097] No. The original index vector of each corridor evaluation unit is represented as follows:

[0098] ;

[0099] in, Indicates the first The original index vector of each corridor evaluation unit; Indicates the first The corridor evaluation unit in the first Original feature values ​​under each evaluation index; Indicates the evaluation unit number; Indicates the evaluation indicator number; This indicates the total number of evaluation indicators.

[0100] S3, Indicator Standardization:

[0101] Because different evaluation indicators have different dimensions and value ranges, they can be divided into positive indicators and negative indicators.

[0102] For positive indicators where higher values ​​are more beneficial for construction, such as road accessibility, work area openness, and ease of maintenance, the following formula is used:

[0103] ;

[0104] For inverse indicators where higher values ​​are less favorable for construction, such as slope, terrain roughness, disaster risk, ecological sensitivity, and distance from the road, the following formula is used:

[0105] ;

[0106] In the above two formulas Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Standardized values ​​of each evaluation indicator; Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit The original characteristic values ​​of each evaluation indicator; Indicates the first The maximum value of each evaluation indicator across all evaluation units; Indicates the first The minimum value of each evaluation indicator across all evaluation units; This represents a very small positive number used to prevent the denominator from being zero. After standardization, The range of values ​​is The larger the value, the more favorable the construction conditions corresponding to that indicator.

[0107] S4. Calculate the evaluation value of the criterion layer:

[0108] The evaluation system of this invention includes a target layer, a criterion layer, and an indicator layer.

[0109] The target layer is the first Initial comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit ;

[0110] The criteria layer includes factors such as terrain suitability, transportation accessibility, risk and safety, ecological constraints, construction convenience, and operation and maintenance support.

[0111] The indicator layer consists of various quantifiable indicators, the first... The first evaluation unit Each criterion-level evaluation value is denoted as When the criterion layer contains When there are several standardized indicators that can compensate for each other, mean aggregation is used:

[0112] ;

[0113] in, Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Each criterion-level evaluation value; Indicates the first The number of standardized indicators contained in each criteria layer; Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Standardized values ​​of each evaluation indicator; Indicates the evaluation unit number; Indicates the evaluation indicator number; Indicates the criterion level number; This indicates a summation operation.

[0114] When indicators within the same criterion layer are non-compensable constraints such as disaster risk, ecological red line, or road interruption, the weakest link constraint is adopted:

[0115] ;

[0116] in, Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Each criterion-level evaluation value; This represents the standardized value of each evaluation indicator contained in this criterion layer; Indicates the first The number of standardized indicators contained in each criteria layer; Indicates the evaluation unit number; Indicates the criterion level number; This indicates the minimum value operation.

[0117] When it is necessary to represent the nonlinear effect between indicators, this invention employs mutation series normalization. This includes two control variables. and Taking the cusp mutation model as an example, its normalized value is:

[0118] ;

[0119] in, This represents the original value of the first control variable; This represents the original value of the second control variable; Represents control variables The normalized value; Represents control variables The normalized value; This represents absolute value operations.

[0120] When a criterion level contains four control variables When all control variables can compensate for each other, the evaluation value of the criterion layer is:

[0121] ;

[0122] When the above four control variables are non-compensable constraint indicators, their criterion-level evaluation values ​​are:

[0123] ;

[0124] In the above two formulas, Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Each criterion-level evaluation value; These represent the original values ​​of the first, second, third, and fourth control variables, respectively. These represent control variables. The normalized value; Indicates the evaluation unit number; Indicates the criterion level number; This indicates the minimum value calculation. When the criterion layer contains only two or three control variables, the mean or minimum value is calculated based on the actual number of control variables.

[0125] The aggregation method of the criterion layer is determined based on the indicator attributes. The indicator weights can be initially determined by expert experience or the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), and then corrected using the entropy weight method or historical construction samples. When there are sufficient historical samples, the weights can be determined directly based on the samples. For evaluation units located in high landslide risk areas or ecologically constrained areas, even if the terrain is relatively flat and the road distance is relatively short, the corresponding criterion layer evaluation values ​​are reduced according to the principle of non-compensation.

[0126] S5. Calculate the comprehensive construction value. After completing the evaluation of each criterion level, a weighted fusion is used to obtain the final value. Initial comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit :

[0127] ;

[0128] in, Indicates the first The initial comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit; Indicates the number of criterion layers; Indicates the first The weights of each criterion layer; Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Each criterion-level evaluation value; Indicates the criterion level number; This represents a summation operation. The weights satisfy:

[0129] ;

[0130] In the formula, Indicates the first The weights of each criterion layer This indicates the number of criterion layers. Weights can be determined using expert experience, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), entropy weighting, or historical construction samples. The range of values ​​is The larger the value, the more favorable the construction conditions and the weaker the risks and ecological constraints of the evaluation unit; the smaller the value, the more appropriate it is to adopt measures to restrict construction or avoid the evaluation unit.

[0131] S6. Perform spatial continuity correction;

[0132] Since there are access and operational connections between adjacent evaluation units, this invention utilizes the comprehensive construction value of adjacent units to... Make corrections. The revised comprehensive construction value of each evaluation unit is expressed as follows:

[0133]

[0134] in, Indicates the first The revised comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit; Indicates the first The initial comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit; This represents the spatial correction factor, with a value range of [value range missing]. ; Indicates the relationship with the first A set of evaluation units that are adjacent or spatially connected; Represents a set The number of evaluation units in the evaluation; Indicates the sequence number of adjacent evaluation units; Indicates the first The initial comprehensive construction value of each adjacent evaluation unit; This indicates a summation operation. The larger the value, the more the correction result focuses on the current unit; The smaller the value, the more the correction result emphasizes the spatial continuity of the corridor.

[0135] S7. Determine the construction environment level. Based on the revised comprehensive construction value. The mountainous construction environment is divided into five levels: Level 1 Priority Construction Zone, Level 2 Suitable Construction Zone, Level 3 General Control Zone, Level 4 Restricted Construction Zone, and Level 5 High-Risk Avoidance Zone. The determination methods include:

[0136]

[0137] in, Indicates the first The construction environment level of each corridor evaluation unit; the level values ​​1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 represent Level 1 priority construction area, Level 2 suitable construction area, Level 3 general control area, Level 4 restricted construction area and Level 5 high-risk avoidance area, respectively. Indicates the first The revised comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit; This represents four tiered thresholds set from high to low, satisfying the following conditions:

[0138]

[0139] in, The meaning is the same as the previous formula. Areas with high comprehensive value, good road accessibility, gentle terrain slope, low disaster risk and weak ecological constraints are identified as priority construction areas; areas that can be constructed after engineering measures are identified as suitable construction areas or general control areas; areas with steep slopes, inaccessible roads, obvious disaster hazards or high ecological sensitivity are identified as restricted construction areas; areas with significant landslide risks, debris flow channels, strong ecological red line constraints or inaccessible machinery are identified as high-risk avoidance areas.

[0140] S8. Update parameters based on construction feedback. When historical construction data is available, use information such as the actual construction difficulty of the constructed section, machinery travel time, material transportation costs, slope disturbance, disaster records, safety accident records, and construction efficiency to calibrate the evaluation model. The revised comprehensive construction value will then be used. The model correction error is expressed as follows, compared with the actual construction feedback value:

[0141]

[0142] in, Indicates the first Model correction error for each corridor evaluation unit; This represents the actual evaluation value or experience-based quantitative value obtained based on feedback from actual construction. Indicates the first The revised comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit; Indicates the evaluation unit number.

[0143] according to Adjusting indicator weights, tiered thresholds, or spatial correction coefficients, when using adaptive weight updates, is represented as follows:

[0144] ;

[0145] in, Indicates the first During the nth iteration The weights of each criterion layer; Indicates the first During the nth iteration The weights of each criterion layer; Indicates the model update iteration number; This indicates that the learning rate is updated based on the weights. Indicates the first Model correction error for each corridor evaluation unit; Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Each criterion layer evaluation value. After the weights are updated, non-negativity constraints and normalization are applied to ensure that the updated weights still satisfy the aforementioned constraints.

[0146] This invention makes separate judgments on strong constraints such as ecological red lines, major geological disaster hazards, debris flow channels, and prohibited construction zones. When strong constraints are triggered, they are directly judged as restricted construction zones or high-risk avoidance zones, and do not participate in ordinary spatial smoothing correction; when participating in correction, only the level is allowed to be reduced and the level is not allowed to be increased.

[0147] S9. Output the classification results.

[0148] This invention forms a complete hierarchical processing procedure by outputting the comprehensive construction value, construction environment level, main influencing factors, limiting indicators and recommended control measures of each corridor evaluation unit, through environmental data input, corridor value calculation, spatial continuous correction, construction level determination and control measures output.

Claims

1. A method for intelligent classification of mountain construction environments based on corridor area value assessment, characterized in that: The method includes: Step 1: Construct a mountain construction corridor area, dividing the mountain construction corridor area into... One evaluation unit; Step 2: Construct evaluation indicators according to evaluation units, including terrain suitability indicators, road accessibility indicators, disaster risk constraint indicators, ecological sensitivity indicators, construction organization convenience indicators, and operation and maintenance support value indicators; Step 3: Standardize the indicators; Step 4: The evaluation system includes the target layer, the criterion layer, and the indicator layer. Calculate the evaluation value of the criterion layer. Step 5: Use weighted fusion to obtain the first... The initial comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit; Step 6: Adjust the initial comprehensive construction value by utilizing the comprehensive construction value of adjacent units; Step 7: Classify the mountain construction environment according to the revised comprehensive construction value; Step 8: Update parameters based on construction feedback; Step 9: Output the grading results.

2. The intelligent classification method for mountain construction environment based on corridor area value assessment as described in claim 1, characterized in that: Construct a mountain construction corridor area and divide the mountain construction corridor area into: The method for evaluating each unit is as follows: the centerline of the corridor is taken as the centerline of the proposed project route, construction access road, tower site connection line, or pipeline centerline. The buffer radius is determined based on the operating radius of construction machinery, the impact range of material transportation, the impact range of terrain, and the safety control boundary, thus generating a mountain construction corridor area. ; ； This indicates a construction corridor area in the mountainous region; Indicates a point in space; Indicates the center line of the corridor; Indicates location point To the center line of the corridor The shortest distance; Indicates the buffer radius of the corridor area; The mountain construction corridor area is defined by fixed distances, abrupt terrain changes, road junctions, tower site intervals, or natural valley boundaries. Divided into Each evaluation unit is denoted as . ; Indicates the first One corridor evaluation unit; Indicates the evaluation unit number; This indicates the total number of evaluation units in the corridor; the evaluation units are either regular grids or strip segments set along the corridor direction.

3. The intelligent classification method for mountain construction environment based on corridor area value assessment according to claim 1, characterized in that: The terrain suitability indicators include altitude, slope, aspect, surface relief, and terrain roughness. The road accessibility indicators include distance from existing roads, road grade, road gradient, passable width, and difficulty of machinery access; The disaster risk constraint indicators include landslides, collapses, debris flows, mining subsidence areas, weak strata, and risks induced by heavy rainfall; The ecological sensitivity indicators include vegetation coverage, water source protection areas, basic farmland, nature reserves, ecological red lines, and soil and water loss sensitivity. The indicators of ease of construction organization include material storage conditions, temporary facility layout conditions, openness of the work area, and conditions for the relocation of construction machinery; The operation and maintenance support value indicators include accessibility for later maintenance, convenience of emergency repairs, and long-term channel retention value. No. The original index vector of each corridor evaluation unit is represented as follows: ； in, Indicates the first The original index vector of each corridor evaluation unit; Indicates the first The corridor evaluation unit in the first Original feature values ​​under each evaluation index; Indicates the evaluation unit number; Indicates the evaluation indicator number; This indicates the total number of evaluation indicators.

4. The intelligent classification method for mountain construction environment based on corridor area value assessment according to claim 1, characterized in that: Indicator standardization methods include: For positive indicators, standardization is performed using the following formula: ； For negative inverse indicators, the following standardization formula is used: ； In the above two formulas Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Standardized values ​​of each evaluation indicator; Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit The original characteristic values ​​of each evaluation indicator; Indicates the first The maximum value of each evaluation indicator across all evaluation units; Indicates the first The minimum value of each evaluation indicator across all evaluation units; This represents a very small positive number set to prevent the denominator from being zero.

5. The intelligent classification method for mountain construction environment based on corridor area value assessment according to claim 1, characterized in that: Methods for calculating the evaluation value of the criterion layer include: The target layer is the first Initial comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit ; The criteria layer includes terrain suitability, transportation accessibility, risk and safety, ecological constraints, construction convenience, and operation and maintenance support. The indicator layer consists of various quantifiable indicators, the first... The first evaluation unit Each criterion-level evaluation value is denoted as ; When the criterion layer contains When there are several standardized indicators that can compensate for each other, mean aggregation is used: ； Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Each criterion-level evaluation value; Indicates the first The number of standardized indicators contained in each criteria layer; Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Standardized values ​​of each evaluation indicator; Indicates the evaluation unit number; Indicates the evaluation indicator number; Indicates the criterion level number; This represents the summation operation; When indicators within the same criterion layer fall under the constraints of disaster risk, ecological red lines, or irreparable road interruptions, the weakest link constraint is applied: ； in, This represents the standardized value of each evaluation indicator contained in this criterion layer; Indicates the first The number of standardized indicators contained in each criteria layer; Indicates the evaluation unit number; Indicates the criterion level number; When a criterion level contains four control variables When all control variables compensate for each other, the evaluation value of the criterion layer is: ； When the four control variables are non-compensable constraint indicators, the evaluation value of the criterion layer is: ； In the above two formulas, Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Each criterion-level evaluation value; These represent control variables. The normalized value; Indicates the evaluation unit number; Indicates the criterion level number; This indicates the minimum value operation.

6. The intelligent classification method for mountain construction environment based on corridor area value assessment according to claim 1, characterized in that: No. The calculation method for the initial comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit includes: ； Each weight satisfies: ； Indicates the number of criterion layers; Indicates the first The weights of each criterion layer; Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Each criterion-level evaluation value; Indicates the criterion level number; This indicates a summation operation.

7. The intelligent classification method for mountain construction environment based on corridor area value assessment according to claim 1, characterized in that: The method for correcting the initial comprehensive construction value by utilizing the comprehensive construction value of adjacent units is as follows: No. The revised comprehensive construction value of each evaluation unit is expressed as follows: ； Indicates the first The revised comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit; Indicates the first The initial comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit; This represents the spatial correction factor, with a value range of [value range missing]. ; Indicates the relationship with the first A set of evaluation units that are adjacent or spatially connected; Represents a set The number of evaluation units in the evaluation; Indicates the sequence number of adjacent evaluation units; Indicates the first The initial comprehensive construction value of each adjacent evaluation unit; This indicates a summation operation.

8. The intelligent classification method for mountain construction environment based on corridor area value assessment according to claim 1, characterized in that: The method for classifying mountain construction environments into different levels is as follows: The mountainous construction environment is divided into five levels: Level 1 Priority Construction Zone, Level 2 Suitable Construction Zone, Level 3 General Control Zone, Level 4 Restricted Construction Zone, and Level 5 High-Risk Avoidance Zone. The determination method is as follows: ； Indicates the first The construction environment level of each corridor evaluation unit; the level values ​​1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 represent Level 1 priority construction area, Level 2 suitable construction area, Level 3 general control area, Level 4 restricted construction area and Level 5 high-risk avoidance area, respectively. Indicates the first The revised comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit; This represents four tiered thresholds set from high to low, satisfying the following conditions: 。 9. The intelligent classification method for mountain construction environment based on corridor area value assessment according to claim 1, characterized in that: The method for updating parameters based on construction feedback is as follows: The revised comprehensive construction value... The correction error is expressed as follows: (Compared with the actual construction feedback value) ； in, Indicates the first Correction error for each corridor evaluation unit; This represents the actual evaluation value or experience-based quantitative value obtained based on feedback from actual construction. Indicates the first The revised comprehensive construction value of each corridor evaluation unit; Indicates the evaluation unit number; according to Adjusting indicator weights, tiered thresholds, or spatial correction coefficients, when using adaptive weight updates, is represented as follows: ； Indicates the first During the nth iteration The weights of each criterion layer; Indicates the first During the nth iteration The weights of each criterion layer; Indicates the model update iteration number; This indicates that the learning rate is updated based on the weights. Indicates the first The first corridor evaluation unit Each criterion layer evaluation value; after the weights are updated, non-negativity constraints and normalization are applied so that the updated weights still satisfy the constraints. Strong constraints such as ecological red lines, major geological disaster hazards, debris flow channels, and prohibited construction zones are determined separately. When strong constraints are triggered, they are directly identified as restricted construction zones or high-risk avoidance zones and do not participate in spatial smoothing correction. When participating in correction, only the level can be reduced and the level cannot be upgraded.

Images