基于组合赋权-可拓云的城市轨道交通线路运营安全评价

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.04.2513

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为解决城市轨道交通运营安全评价指标缺乏时效性和部分安全评价模型忽略评价等级的模糊界限等问题,重新构建城市轨道交通线路的运营安全评价指标体系,包括员工对传染性疾病防控措施的执行力度、相关单位的配合程度、防控设备的完备程度等新指标;其次运用基于离差最小化的最优最劣法(BWM)和反熵权法对各指标进行组合赋权;然后应用可拓云确定城市轨道交通线路运营安全评价等级;最后以上海地铁17号线为例进行实例分析。结果表明:上海地铁17号线运营安全评价各指标的各级云关联度低于0.5且置信度高于0.99,其中,人员因素、线路因素、管理因素的置信度均为1,仅设备因素的置信度为0.998;结合每个二级指标的灵敏度值分析,得出车站运营设备的可靠性对线路实际运营安全影响最大;在实际运营中,乘客对车站传染性疾病防控的配合程度越高,对综合评价的提升也越大;该评价指标体系和评价模型能够准确地反映城市轨道交通线路运营安全水平,且更加适用于目前城市轨道交通线路的运营情况。

关键词: 组合赋权, 可拓云, 城市轨道交通, 线路运营, 安全评价, 传染性疾病

Abstract:

In order to solve the problems of lack of timeliness in the evaluation indicators of urban rail transit operation safety and some safety evaluation models ignoring the fuzzy boundaries of evaluation levels, a new evaluation index system for the operation safety of urban rail transit lines was reconstructed, including new indicators such as the implementation of infectious disease prevention and control measures by employees, the degree of cooperation between relevant units, and the completeness of prevention and control equipment. Secondly, the combination weighting of various indicators was carried out using the Best Worst Method (BWM) based on the minimization of dispersion and the anti-entropy weighting method. Then, the extension cloud was applied to determine the safety evaluation level of urban rail transit line operation. Finally, take Shanghai Metro Line 17 as an example for analysis. The results indicate that the comprehensive cloud correlation degrees of various indicators for the operational safety assessment of Shanghai Metro Line 17 are below 0.5, with a confidence level exceeding 0.99, among which the confidence levels for personnel factors, line factors, and management factors are all 1. This suggests that the employed indicator system and evaluation model are closely aligned with the current operational conditions of urban rail transit, accurately reflecting the safety levels of urban rail transit operations. Further analysis of the sensitivity of indicator values reveals that the reliability of station operational equipment has the most significant impact on the actual operational safety of the line. In practical operations, the degree of passenger cooperation in preventing and controlling infectious diseases at stations has the greatest potential to improve the indicator. It can help subway companies establish a more scientific and effective safety evaluation system to ensure the safety of daily line operations.

Key words: combination weighting, extension cloud model, urban rail transit, line operation, safety evaluation, infectious diseases

中图分类号:

X951交通运输安全

潘寒川, 刘丹阳, 张煜睿, 刘志钢, 尚斌. 基于组合赋权-可拓云的城市轨道交通线路运营安全评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(4): 160-166.

PAN Hanchuan, LIU Danyang, ZHANG Yurui, LIU Zhigang, SHANG Bin. Urban rail transit line operation safety evaluation based on combined weighting-extension cloud method[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(4): 160-166.

图/表 7

图1

图2

表1

表2

表3

安全评价指标的权重值

一级指标	权重系数	二级指标	BWM法权重	反熵权法权重	综合权重
A₁	0.248	B₁	0.097	0.070	0.081
		B₂	0.024	0.048	0.038
		B₃	0.113	0.062	0.084
		B₄	0.027	0.058	0.045
A₂	0.364	B₅	0.038	0.055	0.048
		B₆	0.205	0.054	0.117
		B₇	0.087	0.066	0.075
		B₈	0.061	0.055	0.058
		B₉	0.087	0.050	0.066
A₃	0.184	B₁₀	0.010	0.083	0.052
		B₁₁	0.012	0.069	0.045
		B₁₂	0.022	0.050	0.038
		B₁₃	0.048	0.050	0.049
A₅	0.204	B₁₄	0.034	0.045	0.040
		B₁₅	0.016	0.066	0.045
		$B 1 6$	0.043	0.050	0.047
		B₁₇	0.076	0.069	0.072

表3

表4

图3

参考文献 10

[1]	苏旭明, 王艳辉, 祝凌曦. 改进的故障模式及影响分析在城市轨道交通运营安全评价中的应用[J]. 城市轨道交通研究, 2011, 14(5):65-69.
	SU Xuming, WANG Yanhui, ZHU Lingxi. Safety evaluation of urban rail transit operation based on improved fault model and effect analysis[J]. Urban Mass Transit, 2011, 14(5):65-69.
[2]	王艳辉, 黄雅坤, 李曼. 基于组合赋权方法的城轨线路运营安全评价[J]. 同济大学学报:自然科学版, 2013, 41(8):1243-1248.
	WANG Yanhui, HUANG Yakun, LI Man. Evaluation of urban rail transit line operational safety based on combination weighting method[J]. Journal of Tongji University:Natural Science, 2013, 41(8):1243-1248.
[3]	姜林林. 基于BP神经网络的城市轨道交通运营安全评价与设计[D]. 大连: 大连交通大学, 2014.
	JIANG Linlin. Urban rail transit operation safety evaluation and design based on BP neural network[D]. Dalian: Dalian Jiaotong University, 2014.
[4]	黎新华, 李俊辉. 基于DEMATEL和ISM融合的城市轨道交通车站运营安全评价方法研究[J]. 铁道运输与经济, 2018, 40(7):116-121.
	LI Xinhua, LI Junhui. A study on an assessment system on safe operation of urban rail stations based on DEMATEL and ISM[J]. Railway Transport and Economy, 2018, 40(7):116-121.
[5]	鹿颖. 基于风险矩阵法的城市轨道交通运营安全评价研究[D]. 长春: 吉林大学, 2019.
	LU Ying. Research on safety evaluation of urban rail transit operation based on risk matrix method[D]. Changchun: Jilin University, 2019.
[6]	任刚, 陈佳洁, 高瑾瑶, 等. 基于改进可拓物元法的地铁车站运营安全评价方法[J]. 城市轨道交通研究, 2020, 23(3):136-139.
	REN Gang, CHEN Jiajie, GAO Jinyao, et al. Safety assessment of metro station operation based on improved extension and matter element method[J]. Urban Mass Transit, 2020, 23(3):136-139.
[7]	WU Huawen, ZHEN Jin, ZHANG Jing. Urban rail transit operation safety evaluation based on an improved CRITIC method and cloud model[J]. Journal of Rail Transport Planning & Management, 2020, 16:1002-1006.
[8]	张渺. G1-EW组合赋权云模型下地铁运营安全风险评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(6):163-170. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.06.0947
	ZHANG Miao. Risk assessment of metro operation based on G1-EW combination weighting cloud model[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(6):163-170. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.06.0947
[9]	GB50157—2013,地铁设计规范[S].
	GB50157-2013, Code for design metro[S].
[10]	李国良, 王磊, 杨晓严, 等. 我国交通基础设施发展水平比较研究[J]. 公路交通科技, 2021, 38(11):97-105. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-0268.2021.11.012
	LI Guoliang, WANG Lei, YANG Xiaoyan, et al. Comparative study on development level of transport infrastructure in China[J]. Journal of Highway and Transportation Research and Development, 2021, 38(11):97-105.

评价指标	Ⅰ级	Ⅱ级	Ⅲ级	Ⅳ级	Ⅴ级
B₁	(0.40,1.133,0.05)	(1.20,1.133,0.05)	(2.00,1.133,0.05)	(2.80,1.133,0.05)	(3.60,1.133,0.05)
B₂	(30.00,10.000,0.05)	(65.00,1.167,0.05)	(75.00,1.167,0.05)	(85.00,1.167,0.05)	(95.00,1.167,0.05)
B₃	(0.40,1.133,0.05)	(1.20,1.133,0.05)	(2.00,1.133,0.05)	(2.80,1.133,0.05)	(3.60,1.133,0.05)
B₄	(0.40,1.133,0.05)	(1.20,1.133,0.05)	(2.00,1.133,0.05)	(2.80,1.133,0.05)	(3.60,1.133,0.05)
B₅	(0.40,1.133,0.05)	(1.20,1.133,0.05)	(2.00,1.133,0.05)	(2.80,1.133,0.05)	(3.60,1.133,0.05)
B₆	(40.00,13.333,0.05)	(82.50,0.833,0.05)	(87.50,0.833,0.05)	(92.50,0.833,0.05)	(97.50,0.833,0.05)
B₇	(40.00,13.333,0.05)	(82.50,0.833,0.05)	(87.50,0.833,0.05)	(92.50,0.833,0.05)	(97.50,0.833,0.05)
B₈	(40.00,13.333,0.05)	(82.50,0.833,0.05)	(87.50,0.833,0.05)	(92.50,0.833,0.05)	(97.50,0.833,0.05)
B₉	(40.00,13.333,0.05)	(82.50,0.833,0.05)	(87.50,0.833,0.05)	(92.50,0.833,0.05)	(97.50,0.833,0.05)
B₁₀	(1.50,0.033,0.05)	(1.35,0.017,0.05)	(1.25,0.017,0.05)	(1.15,0.017,0.05)	(1.05,0.017,0.05)
B₁₁	(10.00,0.667,0.05)	(6.50,0.500,0.05)	(4.00,0.333,0.05)	(2.00,0.333,0.05)	(0.50,0.167,0.05)
B₁₂	(30.00,10.000,0.05)	(65.00,1.167,0.05)	(75.00,1.167,0.05)	(85.00,1.167,0.05)	(95.00,1.167,0.05)
B₁₃	(0.40,1.133,0.05)	(1.20,1.133,0.05)	(2.00,1.133,0.05)	(2.80,1.133,0.05)	(3.60,1.133,0.05)
B₁₄	(10.00,3.333,0.05)	(30.00,3.333,0.05)	(50.00,3.333,0.05)	(70.00,3.333,0.05)	(90.00,3.333,0.05)
B₁₅	(0.40,1.133,0.05)	(1.20,1.133,0.05)	(2.00,1.133,0.05)	(2.80,1.133,0.05)	(3.60,1.133,0.05)
B₁₆	(0.40,1.133,0.05)	(1.20,1.133,0.05)	(2.00,1.133,0.05)	(2.80,1.133,0.05)	(3.60,1.133,0.05)
B₁₇	(0.40,1.133,0.05)	(1.20,1.133,0.05)	(2.00,1.133,0.05)	(2.80,1.133,0.05)	(3.60,1.133,0.05)

评价指标	Ⅰ级	Ⅲ级	Ⅳ级	Ⅴ级	置信度 θ
A₁	0	0.002 1	0.427 8	0	1
A₂	0.000 2	0.074 9	0.091 4	0.109 5	0.998
A₃	0	0.002 8	0.139 2	0.007 5	1
A₄	0	0.035 1	0.279 3	0.000 1	1
综合评价	0.000 1	0.035 1	0.218 0	0.041 2	1

[1]	王丹, 高雯雯. 基于组合赋权-偏序集的应急供应链可靠性评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(5): 231-237.
[2]	陈娜, 胡毅彤, 袁英峰, 秦向南, 刘军. 基于博弈论组合赋权-云模型的消防员训练损伤风险评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(4): 232-238.
[3]	胡甚平, 刘玲玲, 席永涛, 张欣欣. 基于模糊Petri网的引航员作业舒适度评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(4): 67-76.
[4]	祁云, 薛凯隆, 汪伟, 崔欣超, 王宏祥, 齐庆杰. 矿井煤与瓦斯突出事故应急救援能力评估模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(2): 225-230.
[5]	周海怡, 鲍全贵, 叶茂, 朱圣文, 林颖典. 基于组合赋权法的城市桥梁可靠性模糊综合评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(S1): 156-161.
[6]	史洪恺, 祁云, 张国恩, 姜晓宇, 何向, 孙远航. 组合赋权-灰色聚类的煤与瓦斯突出危险评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(S1): 52-57.
[7]	张任栋, 张礼敬, 陶刚. 模糊推理-组合赋权的化工工艺本质安全度研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(8): 149-155.
[8]	何明卫, 钱佳, 刘杰, 殷勇, 占曙光. 考虑列车折返的城市轨道交通网络脆弱性评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(8): 84-92.
[9]	周慧娟, 瓮冬阳, 李蓓, 吴文祥, 张蜇. 城市轨道交通运营中断下客流分配方法[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(6): 144-151.
[10]	张雯婕, 胡军红, 闻成维, 汤瑞. 考虑网络韧性的城市轨道交通故障恢复研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(4): 179-186.
[11]	刘光前, 辜晓波. 基于改进FAHP-Entropy法的危险品仓储安全评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(3): 147-152.
[12]	刘欣, 李书玉, 王海宁. 基于Kraljic矩阵的化工园区应急物资分类与储备策略[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(11): 221-230.
[13]	卞斌彬, 黄玉庆, 刘志坚, 田宪民, 张凯. 基于双重预防机制的安全评价指标体系构建[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(S1): 45-50.
[14]	陈然, 吴首蓉, 路超. 疫情下城市轨道交通车底运用计划编制[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(S1): 51-56.
[15]	杨景峰, 朱大鹏, 赵瑞琳. 城轨网络站点重要度评估与级联失效抗毁性分析*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(8): 161-167.