基于GIS的分形理论和信息量法的区域滑坡易发性评价

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.01.0480

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为减少滑坡灾害带来的损失,以湖南省常德市为例,基于野外调查和历史滑坡数据,将分形理论和信息量法应用于区域滑坡易发性评价。利用分形理论定量研究影响因子的敏感性,再进一步利用信息量法得到各二级影响因子的信息量值,通过综合分维值和信息量值得到综合信息量值,以此值对研究区进行易发性分区。结果表明: 影响因子中的坡度、工程地质岩组、高程及植被等与滑坡呈二阶累计和分形分布,而其他影响因子与滑坡呈一阶累计和分形分布,通过其分维值,确定影响因子与滑坡之间的定量关系。极低、低、中、高、极高易发性区面积占比分别为5.24%、8.84%、35.06%、39.21%、11.65%,其中,年降雨量大于1 600 mm、坡度20~30°和高程900~1 100 m等影响因子为重要影响因子。

关键词: 地理信息系统(GIS), 信息量法, 区域滑坡易发性评价, 分形理论, 地质灾害

Abstract:

In order to reduce the losses caused by landslide disasters, taking Changde city of Hunan province as an example, the fractal theory and information method were applied to evaluate the regional landslide susceptibility based on field investigation and historical landslide data. The sensitivity of influence factors was quantitatively studied by fractal theory. The information values of each secondary impact factor were obtained by using the information method, and the comprehensive information values were obtained by combining the fractal dimension value and the information value. Based on the values, the susceptibility zoning of the study area was carried out. The results show that the slope, engineering geological rock group, elevation and vegetation are the influencing factors that have a second-order cumulative and fractal distribution with the landslide, while other influencing factors have a first-order cumulative and fractal distribution with the landslide. The areas of very low, low, medium, high and very high susceptibility areas respectively account for 5.24%, 8.84%, 35.06%, 39.21% and 11.65% respectively. Annual rainfall greater than 1 600 mm, slope of 20-30° and elevation of 900-1100m are important factors.

Key words: geographic information system (GIS), information amount method, assessment of regional landslide susceptibility, fractal theory, geological hazard

中图分类号:

X915.5

曹洪洋, 任晓莹, 李志强. 基于GIS的分形理论和信息量法的区域滑坡易发性评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(1): 178-185.

CAO Hongyang, REN Xiaoying, LI Zhiqiang. Assessment of regional landslide susceptibility based on fractal theory and information amount method of GIS[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(1): 178-185.

图/表 10

表1

图1

图2

图3

表2

表3

图4

图5

表4

图6

参考文献 26

[1]	DOBROVOLNY E. Landslide susceptibility in and near Anchorage as interpreted from topographic and geologic maps[J]. The Great Alaska Earthquake, 1964, 55(8): 735-745.
[2]	郭飞, 赖鹏, 黄发明, 等. 基于知识图谱的滑坡易发性评价文献综述及研究进展[J]. 地球科学, 2024, 49 (5): 1584-1606.
	GUO Fei, LAI Peng, HUANG Faming, et al. Literature review and research progress of landslide susceptibility mapping based on knowledge graph[J]. Earth Science, 2024, 49(5): 1584-1606.
[3]	NILSEN T, BRABB E. Slope-stability studies in the San Francisco Bay region, California[J]. Reviews in Engineering Geology, 1977, 3: 235-243.
[4]	WOOTEN R, LATHAM R, WITT A, et al. Landslide hazards and landslide hazard mapping in North Carolina[J]. Geological Society of America, 2007, 38(3): 458-471.
[5]	张若琳, 孟晖, 连建发, 等. 基于GIS的概率比率模型的滑坡易发性评价[J]. 地学前缘, 2010, 17(6):291-297.
	ZHANG Ruolin, MENG Hui, LIAN Jianfa, et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment by probability ratio model based on GIS[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2010, 17(6): 291-297.
[6]	李益敏, 袁静, 蒋德明, 等. 基于GIS的西南高山峡谷区滑坡风险性评价:以怒江州泸水市为例[J]. 西北师范大学学报:自然科学版, 2021, 57 (6): 94-102.
	LI Yimin, YUAN Jing, JIANG Deming, et al. GIS-based landslide risk assessment in the alpine and canyon areas of Southwest China: taking Lushui city, Nujiang prefecture as an example[J]. Journal of Northwest Normal University: Natural Science, 2021, 57(6): 94-102.
[7]	申怀飞, 董雨, 杨梅, 等. 基于AHP与信息量法的甘肃省滑坡易发性评估[J]. 水土保持研究, 2021, 28 (6): 412-419.
	SHEN Huaifei, DONG Yu, YANG Mei, et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment in Gansu province based on AHP and information method[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2021, 28(6): 412-419.
[8]	丁茜, 赵晓东, 吴鑫俊, 等. 基于RBF核的多分类SVM滑塌易发性评价模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(3):194-200. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.03.026
	DING Qian, ZHAO Xiaodong, WU Xinjun, et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment model based on multi-class SVM with RBF kerel[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(3): 194-200. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.03.026
[9]	MANDELBROT B. Multi fractal measures, especially for the geophysicist[J]. Puer and Applied Geophysics, 1989, 131(1/2): 5-12.
[10]	易顺民, 唐辉明. 西藏樟木滑坡群的分形特征及其意义[J]. 长春地质学院学报, 1996, 26(4):33-38.
	YI Shunmin, TANG Huiming. The fractal feature of Zhang Mu landslides group in Tibet and its significance[J]. Journal of Chang Chun University of Earth Sciences, 1996, 26(4): 33-38.
[11]	吴树仁, 石玲, 谭成轩, 等. 长江三峡黄腊石和黄土坡滑坡分形分维分析[J]. 地球科学, 2000, 25(1):61-65.
	WU Shuren, SHI Ling, TAN Chengxuan, et al. Fractal analysis of Huang Lashi and Huang Tupo landslides in Three Gorges, Changjiang River, China[J]. Earth Science, 2000, 25(1): 61-65.
[12]	ROUAI M, JAAIDI E B. Scaling properties of landslides in the Rif mountains of Morocco[J]. Engineering Geology, 2003, 68(3): 353-359.
[13]	李长江, 麻土华, 孙乐玲, 等. 基于分形的滑坡易发程度区划方法[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报, 2010, 21(2):17-24.
	LI Changjiang, MA Tuhua, SUN Leling, et al. Fractal-based landslide susceptibility mapping[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2010, 21(2): 17-24.
[14]	GUI Lei, YIN Kunlong, GLADE T. Landslide displacement analysis based on fractal theory, in Wanzhou District, Three Gorges Reservoir, China[J]. Geomatics Natural Hazards and Risk, 2016, 7(5): 1707-1725.
[15]	史兴旺, 管新邦, 边筠. 云南省滑坡灾害分形特征研究与分形评价模型探讨[J]. 自然灾害学报, 2021, 30 (3): 209-216.
	SHI Xingwang, GUAN Xinbang, BIAN Yun. Research on fractal characteristics of landslide disaster in Yunnan Province and discussion on fractal evaluation model[J]. Journal of Natural Disasters, 2021, 30(3): 209-216.
[16]	SHANNON C E. A mathematical theory of communication[J]. Bell Systems Technical Journal, 1948, 27(4): 623-656.
[17]	晏同珍, 伍法权, 殷坤龙. 滑坡系统静动态规律及斜坡不稳定性空时定量预测[J]. 地球科学, 1989, 14(2):117-133.
	YAN Tongzhen, WU Faquan, YIN Kunlong. Static and dynamic regularity of landslides and space-time prognosis of slope instability[J]. Earth Science, 1989, 14(2): 117-133.
[18]	曹洪洋, 郝东恒, 白聚波. 区域滑坡灾害地形地貌因子敏感性分析研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2011, 21(11):3-7.
	CAO Hongyang, HAO Dongheng, BAI Jubo. Sensitivity analysis of topography and geomorphology factor of region landslides[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2011, 21(11): 3-7.
[19]	熊俊楠, 朱吉龙, 苏鹏程, 等. 基于GIS与信息量模型的溪洛渡库区滑坡危险性评价[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2019, 28(3): 700-711.
	XIONG Junnan, ZHU Jilong, SU Pengcheng, et al. Landslide risk assessment in Xiluodu reservoir area based on GIS and information model[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2019, 28(3): 700-711.
[20]	凌晓, 刘甲美, 王涛, 等. 基于致灾因子对称法分级的信息量模型在地震滑坡危险性评价中的应用[J]. 国土资源遥感, 2021, 33 (2): 172-181.
	LING Xiao, LIU Jiamei, WANG Tao, et al. Application of information model based on symmetric classification of hazardous factors in earthquake landslide risk assessment[J]. Remote Sensing of Land and Resources, 2021, 33(2): 172-181.
[21]	孔嘉旭, 庄建琦, 彭建兵, 等. 基于信息量和卷积神经网络的黄土高原滑坡易发性评价[J]. 地球科学, 2023, 48(5):1711-1729.
	KONG Jiaxu, ZHUANG Jianqi, PENG Jianbing, et al. Evaluation of landslide susceptibility in Chinese Loess Plateau based on IV-RF and IV-CNN coupling models[J]. Earth Science, 2023, 48(5): 1711-1729.
[22]	文洪. 四川省南溪区滑坡灾害分布规律与分形特征研究[D]. 西安: 西安科技大学, 2013.
	WEN Hong. Study on distribution law and fractal features of landslides of Nanxi Area Sichuan province[D]. Xi'an: Xi'an University of Science and Technology, 2013.
[23]	付昱华. 变换形成的分形与海洋环境数据分析预测[J]. 海洋通报, 2000, 19(1):79-88.
	FU Yuhua. Transform-formed fractals and analyses and forecast of marine environment data[J]. Marine Science Bulletin, 2000, 19(1): 79-88.
[24]	林荣福, 刘纪平, 徐胜华, 等. 随机森林赋权信息量的滑坡易发性评价方法[J]. 测绘科学, 2020, 45 (12): 131-138.
	LIN Rongfu, LIU Jiping, XU Shenghua, et al. Evaluation method of landslide susceptibility based on random forest weighted information[J]. Science of Surveying and Mapping, 2020, 45(12): 131-138.
[25]	王佳佳. 三峡库区万州区滑坡灾害风险评估研究[D]. 北京: 中国地质大学, 2015.
	WANG Jiajia. Landslide risk assessment in Wanzhou county, Three Gorges reservoir[D]. Beijing: China University of Geosciences, 2015.
[26]	任晓莹. 基于GIS的石门县滑坡地质灾害风险性评价[D]. 石家庄: 河北地质大学, 2017.
	REN Xiaoying. Risk assessment of landslide in Shimen county based on GIS[D]. Shijiazhuang: Hebei GEO University, 2017.

坡度/ (°)	区间划分	坡度段编号r'	滑坡分布面积N'/km²
	[10,20)	1	2.771
	[20,30)	2	2.034
	[0,10)	3	1.303
	[30,40)	4	0.724
	[40,60)	5	0.205
	[60,90)	6	0.005

评价指标	划分区间	r'	N'/km²	分维值	评价指标	划分区间	r'	N'/km²	分维值
坡向/(°)	[90,135)	1	1.69	0.689	断层缓冲距离/m	≥2 000	1	4.936	0.253
	[315,360)	2	1.231			[0,500)	2	0.915
	[135,180)	3	1.051			[500,1 000)	3	0.602
	[270,315)	4	0.82			[1 000,2 000)	4	0.581
	[225,270)	5	0.683		河流缓冲距离/m	[0,200)	1	2.238	0.649
	[0,45)	6	0.607			[200-400)	2	1.583
	[45,90)	7	0.591			≥1 000	3	1.376
	[180,225)	8	0.417			[400,600)	4	0.827
高程/m	[100,300)	1	2.602	1.383		[600,800)	5	0.604
	[700,900)	2	1.207			[800,1 000)	6	0.404
	[300,500)	3	1.177		年均降雨量/mm	[1 200,1 300)	1	2.223	0.847
	[900,1 100)	4	0.916			[1 300,1 600)	2	2.204
	[500,700)	5	0.749			>1 600	3	1.647
	[1 100,1 300)	6	0.328			[1 000,1 200)	4	0.97
	[0,100)	7	0.061		NDVI	[0.40,0.49)	1	2.577	1.478
	[1 300,1 500)	8	0.003			[0.49,0.68)	2	1.871
岩组类型	碎屑岩类	1	5.024	1.193		[0.29,0.40)	3	1.844
	碳酸盐岩类	2	1.991			[0.11,0.29)	4	0.635
	松散堆积岩类	3	0.041			<0.11	5	0.09
	浅变质岩类	4	0.003		与道路距离/m	省道100、县道50外	1	6.938	0.011
断层缓冲距离/m	≥2000	1	4.936	0.253		县道50	2	0.053
	[0,500)	2	0.915			县道25	3	0.043
	[500,1 000)	3	0.602			省道100	4	0.014
	[1 000,2 000)	4	0.581			省道50	5	0.009

评价指标	分类	综合信息量值	评价指标	分类	综合信息量值
高程/m	[0,100)	-3.518 33	岩组	浅变质岩类	-3.978 57
	[100,300)	0.489 64		碳酸盐岩类	-0.474 93
	[300,500)	-0.373 60		碎屑岩类	0.385 92
	[500,700)	-0.701 92		松散堆积岩类	-2.679 14
	[700,900)	0.776 53	断层缓冲区/m	[0,500)	0.156 04
	[900,1 100)	1.050 29		[500,1 000)	0.050 35
	[1 100,1 300)	0.086 81		[1 000,2 000)	-0.113 36
	[1 300,1 500)	-5.419 56		[2 000,4 000]	-0.010 10
	[1 500,2 100]	—	水系缓冲区/m	[0,200)	0.086 02
坡度/(°)	[0,10)	-0.875 19		[200,400)	0.049 36
	[10,20)	0.340 89		[400,600)	-0.183 78
	[20,30)	0.424 54		[600,1 000]	-0.032 67
	[30,40)	0.070 33	年均降雨量/mm	[1 600,5 000]	1.663 92
	[40,60)	-0.250 26		[1 300,1 600)	-0.087 18
	[60,90]	-0.203 21		[1 000,1 300)	-0.265 81
坡向	平面	-0.405 81	NDVI	[-0.3,0.11)	-0.757 01
	北	0.046 59		[0.11,0.29)	-0.166 04
	东北	-0.271 84		[0.29,0.40)	0.313 35
	东南	0.164 58		[0.40,0.49)	0.218 74
	南	0.283 96		[0.49,0.68]	-0.393 69
	东	-0.372 15	路/m	县道25	-0.001 42
	西	-0.500 52		县道50	0.000 88
	西北	0.059 51		省道50	-0.013 50
	西南	0.187 85		省道100	-0.008 26
	西南	0.187 85		省道、县道外	0.000 06

分区	极低危险区	低危险区	中危险区	高危险区	极高危险区
信息量值	[-11.774,5.912 6]	(5.912 6,2.952 2]	(2.952 2,0.820 7]	(0.820 7,0.422 7]	(0.422 7,3.323 9]
滑坡面积/km²	0.001 4	0.029 4	0.552 3	3.819 7	2.648 0
面积比/%	5.24	8.84	35.06	39.21	11.65
特征	地形起伏小,构造较简单,区内年均降雨量低,人类工程活动一般	地形坡度较小,构造较简单,岩体风化中等,人类工程活动一般	地形坡度较陡,冲沟较发育,泥质砂岩和页岩风化较强烈	地势陡,海拔高,受断裂构造影响较大	岩体风化严重,构造复杂,地形较陡