巨野特大型煤田生态地质环境综合评价研究
|
摘要
巨野特大型煤田位于山东省菏泽市和济宁市境内,包括巨野煤田和梁宝寺煤田两部分,共划分为郓城、郭屯、赵楼、龙固、万福、梁宝寺和彭庄7个井田。该煤田发现于20世纪60年代,90年代进行大规模勘探,含煤面积1210km~2,探明煤炭总储量55.71亿t,扣除暂不能利用的储量后,现阶段规划总储量30.96亿t。由于该煤田范围大,矿区及周边区域人口密集,矿区的生态地质环境问题对该区域社会、经济等各方面都有着巨大的影响,因此开展巨野特大型煤田生态地质环境综合评价,对该区域乃至全省的经济可持续发展有着重要的现实意义。
论文通过对调查区的社会经济、自然地理、区域地质、水文地质条件、工程地质条件、土壤环境特征、土地资源与植被等各方面进行了详实的调查,得到了大量准确宝贵的基础数据。经过分析总结,对煤田开采可能造成的生态地质环境破坏问题及其效应进行了详细的论述和总结。针对该区域生态地质环境的多方面问题,分别采用了不同的评价方法,尤其是运用了非线性相关理论的评价方法,有效避免了传统经验评价方法中由于主观因素过重导致的偏差问题。论文通过运用模糊集相关理论,对该区域的地下水生态地质环境进行了综合评价;运用可拓学的物元理论,对矿区土壤生态地质环境质量做出了综合评价;运用基于粗糙集理论的评价方法,对矿区采空区地面塌陷问题进行了综合评价。研究表明:多种评价手段特别是基于模糊集、可拓学和粗糙集方法的评价方法是可行的、有效的,相比普通的经验评价更为可靠,预测结果可为巨野特大型煤田的综合开发及当地经济可持续发展提供科学依据。最后论文在大量评价研究的基础上,运用层次分析法,对该区域整体的生态地质环境进行了现状评价和预测评价。论文通过深入系统的研究,得出了如下结论:
1、本文从地壳稳定性、地面变形和地基稳定性三个方面分别作出了评价,在此基础上再分别对单项评价指标叠加,进行工程地质环境质量综合评价,将调查区划分为基本稳定(Ⅱ)和较不稳定(Ⅲ)两个工程地质环境质量区,较全面地反映出区内的工程地质环境质量状况。
2、地下水脆弱性DRASTIC评价方法由美国环境保护署(EPA)于1987年提出的,本文运用此方法对调查区的地下水脆弱性评价进行了评价,同时,采用传统的评价方法分别对地下水资源量、地下水环境质量进行了评价。在地下水生态地质环境评价的过程中,把地下水生态地质环境要素简洁归结为地下水资源量、地下水环境质量、地下水脆弱性三个关键方面,采用了模糊集的相关理论将三者统一考虑,建立了多指标多参数的非线性的评价体系,对地下水生态地质环境质量进行了综合的评价。由地下水生态地质环境质量分区图可以看出,该区域的地下水生态地质环境问题比较严峻,地下水生态地质环境质量较差区面积居多,约占72.5%,主要分布在中部及南半部地区;较好区面积约占19.0%,主要在中北部呈带状分布;良好区域面积约占8.5%,零星分布在郓城县城周边、郓城武安以西、巨野县太平集以西和嘉祥县梁宝寺附近。
3、本论文首先采用单项指标达标率法、综合指数法等传统方法对土壤环境质量作出了评价,然后采用可拓学理论中的物元分析方法,对土壤的生态地质环境质量问题进行预测研究。根据可拓学理论,建立了土壤生态地质环境评价的多指标参数评价模型,同时,在权重的处理上采用了客观权重与主观权重综合考虑的方式,组合赋值形成了最终的综合权重,提高了评价结果的可信度。最终以定量的数值表示评定结果,与传统的经验计算法所预测的结果相比,能更加完整的反映实际土壤生态环境质量的综合水平,更接近于客观实际。综合评价显示:区内大部分土壤未受到污染,清洁区约占11.3%,尚清洁区占50%,轻度污染区占38.7%。
4、通过对巨野特大型煤田的调查分析,本文认为矿区采空区地面塌陷问题是一个对该区域生态地质环境有着严重影响的重要因素,也是本次工作的难点和重点工作之一。而矿区采空区地面塌陷评价问题是一个高度非线性的问题,且由多种因素共同作用产生,传统的经验评价方法由于主观因素过重,导致评价结果与实际情况有时偏差较大,故本文运用粗糙集理论的相关知识,在研究过程中综合采用多种非线性方法,对获得更为客观合理的评价结果起到了很大的作用。
5、论文在分析了矿区采空区地面塌陷影响因素的基础上,运用了粗糙集相关理论,对影响采空区地面塌陷的相关因素进行了属性约简及权重计算。结果表明:在经过属性约简后,地面塌陷的主控影响因素可缩减为5个属性,既全面地反映了巨野特大型煤田采空区地面塌陷的具体情况,又为数据的采集工作节省了大量的人力物力资源,并为后续的地质生态环境非线性评价工作提供了评判指标集。
6、粗糙集理论中初始决策表的构建对最后的分析结果至关重要,而决策表的构建完全依赖于初始样本集合数据的获取情况。本文在确定地面塌陷影响因素的前提下,采用现场工程实地调查获取的数据,构建了地面塌陷危险性评价决策表。由于所获得的样本来自不同的井田且样本的分布具有“均匀分散,齐整可比”的特点,最大程度上保证了样本包含完整的样本集信息,并能够完全反映整个矿区的实际情况。理论计算形成的采空区地面塌陷预测图,与利用粗糙集理论综合权重进行的地面塌陷危险性分区图总体上趋于一致,说明此次采用的采空区地面塌陷预测方法是正确的。预测采空区塌陷性危险性绝大部分为较危险及以上等级,其中梁宝寺、郓城、郭屯、赵楼、龙固、万福矿区中部塌陷危险性系数最高,为严重危险;主采区塌陷区平均沉陷量约为4.66m,以理论沉陷值10mm点为影响的边界点,塌陷面积约570.6km~2,全煤田塌陷严重区--积水区(按枯水季节地下水埋深5.00m考虑)面积将达到182.6km~2。
7、论文运用层次分析法,对巨野特大型煤田的生态地质环境问题进行了综合性的评价。给出了综合评价的数学平台(AHP),建立了生态地质环境评价的数学模型,并计算出了该地区生态地质环境质量综合指数和生态地质环境脆弱性指数,对调查区生态地质环境现状和将来状况做出了评价。形成了各种因素影响下的该区域的生态地质环境评价成果:生态地质环境质量现状绝大部分区域处于较好程度,处于程度好的区域呈零星分布;预测本区的生态地质环境质量属于较好～较差程度,较好区面积比较差区稍大一些。生态地质环境脆弱性程度为中等,指出煤炭资源开发不合理将使本地区生态地质环境质量由较好为主转为较差为主。
8、论文采用的基于粗糙集理论、模糊集理论和可拓学理论的非线性生态地质环境评价方法,综合考虑影响生态地质环境的各方面因素和各因素之间的关系,有效避免了人为主观因素导致的权重问题。建立了相关的评价模型,并给出了评价结果,为今后生态地质环境评价工作提供了一个可行的新思路。
The Juye oversize coalfield is located in between Jining city and Heze city, Shandong province which were divided into Juye coalfield and Liangbaosi coalfield, including seven parts:Yucheng, Guotun, Zhaolou, Longgu, Wanfu, Liangbaosi and Pengzhuang coalfields. The coalfield was found in the 1960s, and a large-scale exploration began in the 1990s; The coal area is up to 1210 km~2, it is proved that the reserves of coal is no less than 5.571 billion tons, at this stage of planning the reserves of coal is 3.096 billion ton except some reserves that could not use temporarily, Because the coal mine area is big, thick of homestead, and circumjacent area is so dense that there are some problems in the eco-geological environment. And they have a large influence on the regional economic, communications, agriculture and other aspects, It is an important to estimate for an ecological and geological environment comprehensive evaluation on Juye oversize coalfield, and benefit for the sustainable development of the region and the Province.
The paper have a lot of been studied on the social economy, natural geography, regional geological, hydrogeological condition, engineering geological condition, soil environment characteristics, land resources and vegetation and so on, through the various aspects of the investigation, we have got a lot of valuable scientific accurate and detail data. Through analysis of these data, the paper discussed some problems that may be caused by the coal mining and some damages caused to the eco-geological environmental in details and summarized. And used different evaluation methods for the different problems in regional eco-geological environment in many aspects respectively, especially innovational used the related theory of nonlinear evaluation methods which can effectively avoid the excessive deviation problems caused by subjective factors that exist in the common experience evaluation methods. This paper used the fuzzy set theory to appraise the eco-geological conditions of groundwater in this area, used matter-element theory of extenics to appraise soil eco-geological environment quality in the mine area, used evaluation method based on rough set theory to appraise the ground subsidence situation in the mined-out area , studies show that various evaluation methods, especially creative evaluation methods such as fuzzy sets, the extenics and rough set an so on is feasible and effective, compared to common experiences it is more reliable. The evaluation results provide scientific references for comprehensive development of Juye coalfield and sustainable development of the Juye county. Finally, on the basis of so many researches and evaluations, the paper used Analytic Hierarchy Process to do some current situation evaluations and prediction evaluations for the overall regional eco-geological environment. This paper reached the following conclusion according to deeply and systematic researches:
1.This article made evaluation respectively from three aspects ,the earth crust stability, ground deformation and the foundation stability , and on the basis of the evaluation results ,we made engineering geological environment quality evaluation by stacking every evaluation index respectively, and in the end we divided the investigated region into two parts: basic stability (Ⅱ) and less stable (Ⅲ), it can reflect the engineering geological environment quality conditions on the whole.
2.The groundwater vulnerability evaluation method of DRASTIC was first raised by the U.S. environmental protection agency (EPA) in 1987, this paper did some beneficial exploration by using this method to appraise the groundwater vulnerability of mining area. At the same time, the paper used traditional methods to evaluate groundwater resources and the groundwater environmental quality .In the groundwater ecological environment quality evaluation process, this paper devided the factors into three key aspects: the groundwater resources, groundwater environment quality, and groundwater vulnerability. And innovatively using the fuzzy set theory to consider the related of combination, the paper established a nonlinear appraisal system, and have successfully done the groundwater environment comprehensive evaluation. From the groundwater ecological geological environment quality zoning map we can see that the regional groundwater ecological geological environment problems are severe, the majority area ,about 72.5%,is poor in groundwater ecological geological environment quality, mainly distributed in the central and south half of the area; A less worse area of about 19.0%, mainly distributed in the north-central part; Good area is only about 8.5%, scattered around Yucheng, the west of Wuan and Yucheng, the west of Taipingji of Juye ,and the area around of Liangbaosi.
3.This paper first used single parameter success rate method, the synthetic index method and other conventional methods to made evaluation of soil environmental quality. Then, the matter-element analysis method based on the theory of extenics was used to do the soil eco-geological environment quality research, it has built a evaluation model that contains several index parameters for soil eco-geological environment evaluation. And while the weight in this paper were combined both with objective weight which are formed by theoretical study and with subjective weight which is formed by the scientists determination. And through this method, the paper successfully improved the credibility of the evaluation result, And at last used the quantitative number as the evaluation result, which can relatively reflect the real comprehensive level of soil ecological environment quality. Comprehensive evaluation shows: the majority of the region were not affected by soil pollution, clean area accounts for about 11.3%, almost clean area accounts for 50%, light pollution area accounts for about 38.7%.
4.Through the investigation and analysis of the mining area of Juye coalfield, this paper considered that the ground collapse problem is one of the most important factors to the regional eco-geological environment. And the ground collapse of mining area evaluation is a highly nonlinear problem, and was formed by several factors, the traditional experience evaluation method often exist some problems because of overweight subjective factors and may not in according with the fact, so this paper used methods based on rough sets theory, comprehensively considered several nonlinear factors ,and has got more objective and reasonable results.
5.Based on the analyses of effective factors of surface collapse at goaf fields in mine area, the paper used rough sets theory to make attribute reduction operations on these factors. Research results showed that five attributes after reduction could comprehensively reflect effective factors of surface collapse at goaf fields in mine area of Juye coalfield, and this could offer relative excellent judging index sets for nonlinear predictions in the future.
6.Composition of the decision table in rough set theory had great influence on final analysis results. Based on the determined effective factors of surface collapse, this paper constructed decision table of risk assessment on surface collapse by field engineering survey on the spot. The obtained samples were come from different mine fields, with the distribution characteristics of these samples was“homogeneous dispersion, trimness comparability”. Due to these two reasons above, the samples obtained here could reflect the situation of the whole sample set and the final generated decision table could include informations of the whole sample set on the greatest degree. The prophetic risk of collapse in the mined-out area is most at dangerous level and above, the sunken risk factor is the highest in such areas below:Liangbaosi, Yuncheng, Guotun, Zhaolou, Longgu, Wanfu mining area , and the facts are serious dangerous; The average subsidence area of mining is about 4.66m, if calculating with theoretical subsidence value 10 mm point for influence boundary point, the area of collapse is about 570.6 km~2 ,the acreage of hydrops area and serious collapse area (considering groundwater depth 5.00m at dry season) will reach 182.6 km~2.
7.This paper made comprehensive assessments for ecologic environmental geologic problems of oversized type Juye coalfield by using AHP. We got mathematical platform of comprehensive assessments (AHP), established mathematical model of eco-geological environmental assessments and got comprehensive index as well as vulnerability index of eco-geological environmental quality. In the end we got geological environmental assessment achievements under all kinds of effective factors. The result shows: The ecological geological environment quality in most area is in good degree and sporadic distribution; Prediction shows that the acreage of good area is a little bigger than the poor area. The risk of ecological geological environmental vulnerability is medium fragile degree, and points out that the unreasonable developement of coal resources will make the ecological geological environment change from good quality mainly to poor quality.
8.This paper used methods that based on rough set theory, the fuzzy set theory and the theory of extenics and other such nonlinear methods to consider both the influences of the eco-geological environment factors and the relationships among the various factors. It effectively avoided the subjective factors problems in the weights choices. And the paper successfully established relevant evaluation models, and gave the evaluation results. It provided a feasible innovation idea for the future work on eco-geological environment evaluation.
论文通过对调查区的社会经济、自然地理、区域地质、水文地质条件、工程地质条件、土壤环境特征、土地资源与植被等各方面进行了详实的调查,得到了大量准确宝贵的基础数据。经过分析总结,对煤田开采可能造成的生态地质环境破坏问题及其效应进行了详细的论述和总结。针对该区域生态地质环境的多方面问题,分别采用了不同的评价方法,尤其是运用了非线性相关理论的评价方法,有效避免了传统经验评价方法中由于主观因素过重导致的偏差问题。论文通过运用模糊集相关理论,对该区域的地下水生态地质环境进行了综合评价;运用可拓学的物元理论,对矿区土壤生态地质环境质量做出了综合评价;运用基于粗糙集理论的评价方法,对矿区采空区地面塌陷问题进行了综合评价。研究表明:多种评价手段特别是基于模糊集、可拓学和粗糙集方法的评价方法是可行的、有效的,相比普通的经验评价更为可靠,预测结果可为巨野特大型煤田的综合开发及当地经济可持续发展提供科学依据。最后论文在大量评价研究的基础上,运用层次分析法,对该区域整体的生态地质环境进行了现状评价和预测评价。论文通过深入系统的研究,得出了如下结论:
1、本文从地壳稳定性、地面变形和地基稳定性三个方面分别作出了评价,在此基础上再分别对单项评价指标叠加,进行工程地质环境质量综合评价,将调查区划分为基本稳定(Ⅱ)和较不稳定(Ⅲ)两个工程地质环境质量区,较全面地反映出区内的工程地质环境质量状况。
2、地下水脆弱性DRASTIC评价方法由美国环境保护署(EPA)于1987年提出的,本文运用此方法对调查区的地下水脆弱性评价进行了评价,同时,采用传统的评价方法分别对地下水资源量、地下水环境质量进行了评价。在地下水生态地质环境评价的过程中,把地下水生态地质环境要素简洁归结为地下水资源量、地下水环境质量、地下水脆弱性三个关键方面,采用了模糊集的相关理论将三者统一考虑,建立了多指标多参数的非线性的评价体系,对地下水生态地质环境质量进行了综合的评价。由地下水生态地质环境质量分区图可以看出,该区域的地下水生态地质环境问题比较严峻,地下水生态地质环境质量较差区面积居多,约占72.5%,主要分布在中部及南半部地区;较好区面积约占19.0%,主要在中北部呈带状分布;良好区域面积约占8.5%,零星分布在郓城县城周边、郓城武安以西、巨野县太平集以西和嘉祥县梁宝寺附近。
3、本论文首先采用单项指标达标率法、综合指数法等传统方法对土壤环境质量作出了评价,然后采用可拓学理论中的物元分析方法,对土壤的生态地质环境质量问题进行预测研究。根据可拓学理论,建立了土壤生态地质环境评价的多指标参数评价模型,同时,在权重的处理上采用了客观权重与主观权重综合考虑的方式,组合赋值形成了最终的综合权重,提高了评价结果的可信度。最终以定量的数值表示评定结果,与传统的经验计算法所预测的结果相比,能更加完整的反映实际土壤生态环境质量的综合水平,更接近于客观实际。综合评价显示:区内大部分土壤未受到污染,清洁区约占11.3%,尚清洁区占50%,轻度污染区占38.7%。
4、通过对巨野特大型煤田的调查分析,本文认为矿区采空区地面塌陷问题是一个对该区域生态地质环境有着严重影响的重要因素,也是本次工作的难点和重点工作之一。而矿区采空区地面塌陷评价问题是一个高度非线性的问题,且由多种因素共同作用产生,传统的经验评价方法由于主观因素过重,导致评价结果与实际情况有时偏差较大,故本文运用粗糙集理论的相关知识,在研究过程中综合采用多种非线性方法,对获得更为客观合理的评价结果起到了很大的作用。
5、论文在分析了矿区采空区地面塌陷影响因素的基础上,运用了粗糙集相关理论,对影响采空区地面塌陷的相关因素进行了属性约简及权重计算。结果表明:在经过属性约简后,地面塌陷的主控影响因素可缩减为5个属性,既全面地反映了巨野特大型煤田采空区地面塌陷的具体情况,又为数据的采集工作节省了大量的人力物力资源,并为后续的地质生态环境非线性评价工作提供了评判指标集。
6、粗糙集理论中初始决策表的构建对最后的分析结果至关重要,而决策表的构建完全依赖于初始样本集合数据的获取情况。本文在确定地面塌陷影响因素的前提下,采用现场工程实地调查获取的数据,构建了地面塌陷危险性评价决策表。由于所获得的样本来自不同的井田且样本的分布具有“均匀分散,齐整可比”的特点,最大程度上保证了样本包含完整的样本集信息,并能够完全反映整个矿区的实际情况。理论计算形成的采空区地面塌陷预测图,与利用粗糙集理论综合权重进行的地面塌陷危险性分区图总体上趋于一致,说明此次采用的采空区地面塌陷预测方法是正确的。预测采空区塌陷性危险性绝大部分为较危险及以上等级,其中梁宝寺、郓城、郭屯、赵楼、龙固、万福矿区中部塌陷危险性系数最高,为严重危险;主采区塌陷区平均沉陷量约为4.66m,以理论沉陷值10mm点为影响的边界点,塌陷面积约570.6km~2,全煤田塌陷严重区--积水区(按枯水季节地下水埋深5.00m考虑)面积将达到182.6km~2。
7、论文运用层次分析法,对巨野特大型煤田的生态地质环境问题进行了综合性的评价。给出了综合评价的数学平台(AHP),建立了生态地质环境评价的数学模型,并计算出了该地区生态地质环境质量综合指数和生态地质环境脆弱性指数,对调查区生态地质环境现状和将来状况做出了评价。形成了各种因素影响下的该区域的生态地质环境评价成果:生态地质环境质量现状绝大部分区域处于较好程度,处于程度好的区域呈零星分布;预测本区的生态地质环境质量属于较好～较差程度,较好区面积比较差区稍大一些。生态地质环境脆弱性程度为中等,指出煤炭资源开发不合理将使本地区生态地质环境质量由较好为主转为较差为主。
8、论文采用的基于粗糙集理论、模糊集理论和可拓学理论的非线性生态地质环境评价方法,综合考虑影响生态地质环境的各方面因素和各因素之间的关系,有效避免了人为主观因素导致的权重问题。建立了相关的评价模型,并给出了评价结果,为今后生态地质环境评价工作提供了一个可行的新思路。
The Juye oversize coalfield is located in between Jining city and Heze city, Shandong province which were divided into Juye coalfield and Liangbaosi coalfield, including seven parts:Yucheng, Guotun, Zhaolou, Longgu, Wanfu, Liangbaosi and Pengzhuang coalfields. The coalfield was found in the 1960s, and a large-scale exploration began in the 1990s; The coal area is up to 1210 km~2, it is proved that the reserves of coal is no less than 5.571 billion tons, at this stage of planning the reserves of coal is 3.096 billion ton except some reserves that could not use temporarily, Because the coal mine area is big, thick of homestead, and circumjacent area is so dense that there are some problems in the eco-geological environment. And they have a large influence on the regional economic, communications, agriculture and other aspects, It is an important to estimate for an ecological and geological environment comprehensive evaluation on Juye oversize coalfield, and benefit for the sustainable development of the region and the Province.
The paper have a lot of been studied on the social economy, natural geography, regional geological, hydrogeological condition, engineering geological condition, soil environment characteristics, land resources and vegetation and so on, through the various aspects of the investigation, we have got a lot of valuable scientific accurate and detail data. Through analysis of these data, the paper discussed some problems that may be caused by the coal mining and some damages caused to the eco-geological environmental in details and summarized. And used different evaluation methods for the different problems in regional eco-geological environment in many aspects respectively, especially innovational used the related theory of nonlinear evaluation methods which can effectively avoid the excessive deviation problems caused by subjective factors that exist in the common experience evaluation methods. This paper used the fuzzy set theory to appraise the eco-geological conditions of groundwater in this area, used matter-element theory of extenics to appraise soil eco-geological environment quality in the mine area, used evaluation method based on rough set theory to appraise the ground subsidence situation in the mined-out area , studies show that various evaluation methods, especially creative evaluation methods such as fuzzy sets, the extenics and rough set an so on is feasible and effective, compared to common experiences it is more reliable. The evaluation results provide scientific references for comprehensive development of Juye coalfield and sustainable development of the Juye county. Finally, on the basis of so many researches and evaluations, the paper used Analytic Hierarchy Process to do some current situation evaluations and prediction evaluations for the overall regional eco-geological environment. This paper reached the following conclusion according to deeply and systematic researches:
1.This article made evaluation respectively from three aspects ,the earth crust stability, ground deformation and the foundation stability , and on the basis of the evaluation results ,we made engineering geological environment quality evaluation by stacking every evaluation index respectively, and in the end we divided the investigated region into two parts: basic stability (Ⅱ) and less stable (Ⅲ), it can reflect the engineering geological environment quality conditions on the whole.
2.The groundwater vulnerability evaluation method of DRASTIC was first raised by the U.S. environmental protection agency (EPA) in 1987, this paper did some beneficial exploration by using this method to appraise the groundwater vulnerability of mining area. At the same time, the paper used traditional methods to evaluate groundwater resources and the groundwater environmental quality .In the groundwater ecological environment quality evaluation process, this paper devided the factors into three key aspects: the groundwater resources, groundwater environment quality, and groundwater vulnerability. And innovatively using the fuzzy set theory to consider the related of combination, the paper established a nonlinear appraisal system, and have successfully done the groundwater environment comprehensive evaluation. From the groundwater ecological geological environment quality zoning map we can see that the regional groundwater ecological geological environment problems are severe, the majority area ,about 72.5%,is poor in groundwater ecological geological environment quality, mainly distributed in the central and south half of the area; A less worse area of about 19.0%, mainly distributed in the north-central part; Good area is only about 8.5%, scattered around Yucheng, the west of Wuan and Yucheng, the west of Taipingji of Juye ,and the area around of Liangbaosi.
3.This paper first used single parameter success rate method, the synthetic index method and other conventional methods to made evaluation of soil environmental quality. Then, the matter-element analysis method based on the theory of extenics was used to do the soil eco-geological environment quality research, it has built a evaluation model that contains several index parameters for soil eco-geological environment evaluation. And while the weight in this paper were combined both with objective weight which are formed by theoretical study and with subjective weight which is formed by the scientists determination. And through this method, the paper successfully improved the credibility of the evaluation result, And at last used the quantitative number as the evaluation result, which can relatively reflect the real comprehensive level of soil ecological environment quality. Comprehensive evaluation shows: the majority of the region were not affected by soil pollution, clean area accounts for about 11.3%, almost clean area accounts for 50%, light pollution area accounts for about 38.7%.
4.Through the investigation and analysis of the mining area of Juye coalfield, this paper considered that the ground collapse problem is one of the most important factors to the regional eco-geological environment. And the ground collapse of mining area evaluation is a highly nonlinear problem, and was formed by several factors, the traditional experience evaluation method often exist some problems because of overweight subjective factors and may not in according with the fact, so this paper used methods based on rough sets theory, comprehensively considered several nonlinear factors ,and has got more objective and reasonable results.
5.Based on the analyses of effective factors of surface collapse at goaf fields in mine area, the paper used rough sets theory to make attribute reduction operations on these factors. Research results showed that five attributes after reduction could comprehensively reflect effective factors of surface collapse at goaf fields in mine area of Juye coalfield, and this could offer relative excellent judging index sets for nonlinear predictions in the future.
6.Composition of the decision table in rough set theory had great influence on final analysis results. Based on the determined effective factors of surface collapse, this paper constructed decision table of risk assessment on surface collapse by field engineering survey on the spot. The obtained samples were come from different mine fields, with the distribution characteristics of these samples was“homogeneous dispersion, trimness comparability”. Due to these two reasons above, the samples obtained here could reflect the situation of the whole sample set and the final generated decision table could include informations of the whole sample set on the greatest degree. The prophetic risk of collapse in the mined-out area is most at dangerous level and above, the sunken risk factor is the highest in such areas below:Liangbaosi, Yuncheng, Guotun, Zhaolou, Longgu, Wanfu mining area , and the facts are serious dangerous; The average subsidence area of mining is about 4.66m, if calculating with theoretical subsidence value 10 mm point for influence boundary point, the area of collapse is about 570.6 km~2 ,the acreage of hydrops area and serious collapse area (considering groundwater depth 5.00m at dry season) will reach 182.6 km~2.
7.This paper made comprehensive assessments for ecologic environmental geologic problems of oversized type Juye coalfield by using AHP. We got mathematical platform of comprehensive assessments (AHP), established mathematical model of eco-geological environmental assessments and got comprehensive index as well as vulnerability index of eco-geological environmental quality. In the end we got geological environmental assessment achievements under all kinds of effective factors. The result shows: The ecological geological environment quality in most area is in good degree and sporadic distribution; Prediction shows that the acreage of good area is a little bigger than the poor area. The risk of ecological geological environmental vulnerability is medium fragile degree, and points out that the unreasonable developement of coal resources will make the ecological geological environment change from good quality mainly to poor quality.
8.This paper used methods that based on rough set theory, the fuzzy set theory and the theory of extenics and other such nonlinear methods to consider both the influences of the eco-geological environment factors and the relationships among the various factors. It effectively avoided the subjective factors problems in the weights choices. And the paper successfully established relevant evaluation models, and gave the evaluation results. It provided a feasible innovation idea for the future work on eco-geological environment evaluation.
引文
[1]陈毓川等主编.90年代地球科学的动向--第三十届国际地质大会学术报道[M].地质出版,1997.
[2]孙承兴.王世杰,周德全等.碳酸盐岩差异性风化成土特征及其对石漠化形成的影响[J].矿物学报,2002,22(4):308-314.
[3]张淦钰.我国环境地质研究进展[J].工程地质计算机应用,2010,2:21-23.
[4]蔡雄飞,智铎强,吴衣布,郑有业.当代人为地质作用的特效应及研究意义[J].海洋地质动态,2008,24(1):29-32.
[5]全国人大常委会.《中华人民共和国环境影响评价法》.北京:中国法制出版社2002.
[6]国务院常委会.《地质灾害防治条例》(国务院394号令).北京:中国大地出版社2004.
[7]党的十六届五中全会《建议》学习辅导百问编写组.党的十六届五中全会《建议》学习辅导百问[M].北京:党建读物出版社、学习出版社.2005,125-127.
[8]十七大报告学习辅导百问编写组.十七大报告学习辅导百问[M].北京:党建读物出版社、学习出版社.2007,69-71.
[9]丁桑岚.环境评价概论[M].北京:化学工业出版社,2001.
[10]哈承佑.环境地质学进展与展望[J].水文地质工程地质,1999(5):24-25.
[11]赵金平,焦述强.基于GIS的地质环境评价在国外的研究现状[J].南通工学院学报(自然科学版),2004,3(2):46-47.
[12]王思敬.论人类工程活动与地质环境的相互作用及其环境效应[J].地质灾害与环境保护,1997, 8(1):19-21.
[13]卢耀如.略论地质--生态环境与可持续发展--黄河断流与岩溶石山保障三峡工程问题的探讨[J]大自然探索,1999, 18(1) :17-23.
[14]何政伟,黄润秋,孙传敏,吴柏青,等.浅议“生态地质学”[J].国土资源科技管理,2003,3:69-72.
[15]黄润秋.生态环境地质的基本特点与技术支撑[J].中国地质, 2001,28(11): 20-24.
[16]杨澍.基于遥感技术的三江平原生态地质环境综合研究[D].吉林大学博士学位论文,2005.
[17] Ludwig J A and Tongway D J.Rehabilition of semiarid landscapes in Australia.Ⅱ.Restoring vegetation patches.Restoration Ecology.1996,4:398-406.
[18]王文俊.生态地质环境评价的基本原理及其应用--以长江上游安宁河流域为例[D].成都理工大学博士论文,2003.
[19]支兵发.试论区域生态地质环境质量评价的几个问题--以珠江三角洲经济区为例[J].灾害学,2008,23(2):59-64.
[20]葛佐.GIS与生态环境地质评价[J].呼伦贝尔学院学报,2008,16(5):64-67.
[21]郑长远,张启兴,贾君,等.层次分析法在长江源区生态地质环境质量(脆弱性)评价中的应用[J]西北地质,2010,43(1):137-145.
[22]王家文,周跃,李滨勇,柳德江.大河源区生态地质环境系统共轭管理初步研究[J].地域研究与开发,2009,28(6):86-90.
[23]王嘉学,肖波.河源区生态地质环境安全性评估[J].水文地质工程地质,2009,3:117-122.
[24]赵银兵,何政伟,倪忠云.基于生态地质环境的矿产资源开发模式研究[J].安徽农业科学,2009,37(1) :299-300.
[25]张雪峰,宋颖,薛东剑.遥感用于二滩库区生态地质环境监测与评价[J].地理信息空间,2010,8(2):73-75.
[26]游其军,赵玉祥.济南都市圈生态地质环境质量评价[J].山东国土资源,2009,25(10):41-43.
[27] Trofmov V T,Ziling D G. Geoecology, ecological geology and engineering geology; relationship of contents,subjects, objects, and problems. Geoekologiya: Inzireneruaya Geologiya. Gidrogeologiya. Geokriologiya. 1996(6) :43-54.
[28] Trofmov V T.Ecological geology-a novel branch of geological sciences[J].Earth Science Fronties,2001,8(1):27-35.
[29] Bisset R.Social impact assessment and its future.Mining Environmental Management,March 1996,9-11.
[30] Bisset R.social impact assessment and its future.Mining Environmental Management, March,1996,9-11.
[31]庞中英.广义安全、经济安全、安全合作—关于全球变化与安全问题的若干新思考[J].欧洲研究,1997(1):34-42.
[32]张桥英,何兴金,卿凤等.气候变暖对中国生态安全的影响[J].自然杂志,2002,24(4):212-215.
[33]陈浩,周金星,陆中臣.荒漠化地区生态安全评价—以首都圈怀来县为例[J].水土保持学报, 2003,17(1):58-62.
[34]池宏,佟凤勤,计雷.可持续发展的指标体系与发展规划优选模型的研究[J].中国管理科学,1996(1):812.
[35]刘星晨,吴波,王葆芳.荒漠化评价指标体系与动态评估研究进展和展望[J].林业科技管理, 1998(2):24-25,34.
[36]高尚武,王君厚.中国沙质荒漠化土地监测评价指标体系[J].林业科学,1998,34(2):1-10.
[37]刘玉平,慈龙骏.毛乌素沙地草场荒漠化评价的指标体系[J].中国沙漠,1998,18(4):366-371.
[38] Genovese G,Vignolles C,Negre T,etal.A methodology for a combined use of normalized difference vegetation index and CORINE land cover data for crop yield monitoring and forecasting.A case study on Spain.Agronomie,2001,91-111.
[39] Gupta R P,Joshi B C.Landslided hazard zoning using the GIS approach-a case study from the Ramganga Catchment,Himalalyas[J].Engineering geology,1990,28(Ⅰ-2):l19-135.
[40] Meijia M,Navarro M,Wahl E E.Geological hazard and risk evaluation using GIS[J].BuUentin of the Association of Engineering Geologists,1994,4:21-30.
[41] Mario Mejia-Navarro,Lwisa Garcia.Natural Lazard and risk assessment using decision support system,application:glenwood springs,colorado[J].Environment and Engineering Geoscience,1996,3(2) :299-324.
[42] Breunig M., Bode T., Cremers A.B. Implementation of Elementary Geometric Database Operations of A 3D-GIS", Advances in GIS Research: Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, 1994, 604-617.
[43]阿尔.戈尔(美) .数字地球--认识21世纪我们这颗星球,《文汇报》,1998-8-14.
[44]张宗枯,袁道先.我国跨世纪的重大地学问题—环境地学发展前景[J].地矿工作研究,1995, 414(10):1-l1.
[45]陈梦熊.自然(地质)灾害与环境系统研究的几个问题[J].中国地质,1994,(11):20-21.
[46]陈梦熊.环境地质科学的基本理论与发展前景[J].工程地质学报,1995,3(3):31-34.
[47]陈梦熊.论生态地质环境系统与综合性生态环境地质调查[J].水文地质工程地质,1999, 26(3):3-6,12.
[48]陈梦熊.沿海地区地质环境特征与地质环境系统—兼论“仁地系统”[J].中国地质灾害预防治学报,1998,9(增)(5):80-86.
[49] Tang Jie,Lin Nianfeng.Some problems of ecological environmental geology in arid and semiarid areas of China. Environmental Geology ,1995.26:44-67.
[50]陶于祥,孙玉华.生态环境地质学初探[J].江苏地质,1998,22(3):186-191.
[51]黄润秋,万新南,向喜琼等.生态环境地质调查与评价的技术方法(会议文集)[M].成都理工大学,2001.
[52]李正积.地质与农业[M].成都:四川科技出版社,1986.
[53]李正积.岩土植物大系统研究Ⅰ.果树大系统[M].北京:科学出版社,1996.
[54]程裕淇.中国区域地质概论[M].北京:地质出版杜,1994.
[55]朱裕生.基础地质调查的新任务:关于地质--生态环境调查新概念的探讨[J].中国区域地质,1999, 18(2):122-126.
[56]朱裕生.区域矿产资源潜力调查评价的目标任务[J].中国地质,2000,5:36-37.
[57]黄光寿.对地质环境监侧和管理工作的建议[J].中国地质,1994,(10):24.
[58]杨谦,戴俊成,张芳,姚维军.江苏垃圾填埋场生态地质环境安全性评价及工程治理[J].地质学刊,2010,34(2):214-219.
[59]蔡雄飞,张雄华,章择军等. l: 5万区域地质调查值得注意的两个问题[J].中国区域地质,1996, (4):379-381.
[60]蔡雄飞,王济,雷丽,张浩.中国西南喀斯特地区土壤退化研究进展[J].亚热带水水土保持, 2009,21(1):32-36.
[61]卢耀如,张凤娥,阎葆瑞,郭秀红.硫酸盐岩岩溶发育机理与有关地质环境效应[J].地球学报,2002,23(1):1-6.
[62]李家熙,黄怀曾,刘晓端.环境地球化学在农业和生命科学上的应用研究[J].第四纪研究,1995,3:224-230.
[63]任明强,张家德,卢正艳,罗明学,毕坤,陈蓉.贵州喀斯特与非喀斯特农业生态地质环境质量对比研究[J].中国岩溶,2009,28(4):397-401.
[64]汤洁,林年丰.农业生态地质环境质量综合评价:以吉林省乾安县为例[J].世界地质,1999, 18(2): 89-94.
[65]汤洁,林年丰.中国干早半干早区农业生态地质环境系统工程研究[J].长春地质学院学报,1996, 26(1) :54-58.
[66]刘彦随,倪绍样.陕南山地生态环境质量综合评价[J].山地研究。1997, 16(3),178-182.
[67]杨伟光,付怡.农业生态环境质量的指标体系与评价方法[J].中国环境管理,1999, 10:42-43.
[68]韩再生.生态环境地质调查与展望[J].地质通报,2003,22 (12) :977-983.
[69]成都理工大学.国土资源部国际合作与科技司课题研究报告--山区流域地质环境评价与地质灾害预测的GIS系统[M].2000.
[70]黄润秋,向喜琼.GIS技术在生态环境地质评价中的应用[J].地质通报,2002,21(2):98-101.
[71]胡宝清,刘顺生.长江流域地质生态环境的演化机制及综合自然灾害区划[J].自然灾害学报,2001(8) :13-19.
[72]宋跃华,左爱国,宋子萱.GIS和RS在生态地质环境调查中的应用--以松嫩平原水土流失调查为例[J].水利科技与经济,2007,13(7) :507-509.
[73]马雄德,王文科,杨择元,黄金廷.GIS在地质生态环境研究中的应用现状及发展趋势[J].地下水,2007,29(5):140-142.
[74]马雄德,王文科,杨择元等.基于GIS的秃尾河流域地质生态环境评价[J].人民黄河,2007,29(9) :1-2.
[75]许向宁,王文俊,黄润秋.基于GIS的安宁河流域生态环境地质质量评价[J].成都理工大学学报(自然科学版),2004,31(3):243-248.
[76]孙浩然,杨维,郭亚伟,李仁峰,高雅玲.基于GIS—BP神经网络的生态地质环境敏感性评价以千山景区及周边为例[J].地下水,2009,31(6):126-128.
[77]周爱国,孙自永,徐恒力,徐忠胜.地质环境生态适宜性评价指标体系研究[J].地质科技情报,2001,20(2):71-74.
[78]董锁成,周长进,王海英.“三江源”地区主要生态环境问题与对策[J].自然资源学报,2002,17(6):713-720.
[79]许向宁,黄润秋,秦举礼.生态环境地质调查与GIS技术应用-以川南安宁河流域生态环境地质调查为例[J].地质通报,2003,22(11-12):999-1005.
[80]颜世强.黄河三角洲生态地质环境综合研究[D].吉林大学博士论文,2005 .
[81]龚斌.基于遥感技术的黑水资源与生态环境研究[D].中国地质大学(北京)博士论文,2006.
[82]周爱国.中国西北干旱区额济纳盆地地质生态学研究[D].中国地质大学博士(武汉)论文,2004.
[83]中华人民共和国国家标准.中国地震动参数区划图(GB18306-2001).北京:中国标准出版社,2001.
[84]中华人民共和国国家标准.建筑抗震设计规范(GB50011-2001).北京:中国建筑工业出版社,2001.
[85]中华人民共和国国家标准.土壤环境质量标准(GB15618-1995).北京:中国标准出版社,1995.
[86]宋云力,甄习春,赵承勇.河南省矿山地质环境质量评价[J].信阳师范学院学报(自然科学版),2008,21(1) :93-96.
[87]程国霞,曹洪亮,陈为民,田立臣.辽宁梨树沟煤矿开发的主要地质环境问题[J].地质与资源,2007,16(3):213-214.
[88]耿殿明,姜福兴.我国煤炭矿区生态环境问题分析[J].煤矿环境保护,2002,16(6)5-9.
[89]刘星辉.湖南省矿区地质环境研究[D].中南大学博士论文,2006.
[90]吴晓华,叶进霞,夏春英,朱晓琳.兖州煤田矿山地质环境现状与治理对策[J].煤田地质与勘探,2008,26(1):53-57.
[91]王明山.菏泽地区巨野煤田开发和环境地质探讨[J].山东煤炭科技,2010,2:132-133.
[92]唐书平,赵目军,邓晓颖,王关杰等.黄河下游影响带(河南段)土壤盐渍化分析评价[J].人民黄河,2008,28(7) :74-75.
[93]蔺娟,地里拜尔·苏力坦.土壤盐渍化的研究进展[J].新疆大学学报(自然科学版),2007,24(3):318-324.
[94]余美,芮孝芳.防治土壤盐碱化地表水地下水联合管理模型[J].水资源保护,2007,23(4):6-10.
[95]齐春三,赵倩,董温荣,郑良勇.引黄灌溉对土壤盐碱化的影响与对策[J].水利规划与设计,2007,2:10-12.
[96]司双印,张运备,马敬杰,贺留兰,秦世昌.采煤塌陷区生态地质环境恢复治理与可持续发展问题的探讨[J].地质灾害与环境保护,2004,15(3):11-16.
[97]卜华,孙英波,叶进霞,陈洪年.初论山东巨野煤矿开发的主要环境地质问题及防治对策[J].中国地质灾害与防治学报,2007,18(2):140-144.
[98]徐军祥,石宝玉,程秀明.山东省主要生态环境地质问题与调查方法探讨[J].山东地质,2002, 18(3-4):95-99.
[99]杨询昌,石阳,冯守涛,王成明,柴建林.黄河下游(山东段)主要生态环境地质问题及对策[J].山东国土资源,2010,26(1):15-18.
[100]徐友宁,吴贤,陈华清.大柳塔煤矿地面塌陷区的生态地质环境效应分析[J].中国矿业,2008,17(3):38-41.
[101]张艳华.对中国城市生态环境问题的重新审视[J].科技科技情报开发与经济,2007,17(19):146-148.
[102]周挽黎,戈翠玲.浅谈矿区生态环境地质问题及对策[J].矿业工程,2004,2(6):41-46.
[103]侯新伟,张发旺,李向全,陈浩.神府东胜矿区主要地质生态环境问题及其效应[J].地球与环境, 2005,33(4):43-46.
[104]范英宏,陆兆华,程建龙,周忠轩,吴钢.中国煤矿区主要生态环境问题及生态重建技术[J].生态学报,2003,16(6):2144-2152.
[105]连峰,龚晓南,付飞营,罗勇,李阳.黄河下游冲积粉土地震液化机理及其判别[J].浙江大学学报(工学版),2007,41(9):1492-1498.
[106]任红梅,吕西林,李培振.饱和砂土液化研究进展[J].地震工程与工程振动,2007,26(6): 166-175.
[107]中华人民共和国国家标准.地表水环境质量标准(GB 3838-2002).北京:中国标准出版社,2002.
[108]乔光,林红娟.菏泽市城区深层地下水评价及分析[J].山东水利,2006:99-100.
[109]徐军祥,康凤新.山东省地下水资源可持续开发利用研究[M].北京:海洋出版社,2001:155-157.
[110]陈占成,魏加华,王金凯.济宁市地面沉降初步分析[J].中国地质灾害与防治学报,1998,9(2):167-172.
[111]周建伟,李菊凤,周爱国,文唐章,陈洪年.济宁市城区地面沉降的成因和规律性探讨[J].湖南科技大学学报(自然科学版),2005,20(1):6-9.
[112]姜明丽,林树杰,隋建红.济宁市区地面沉降及防冶措施研究[J].地质灾害与环境保护,2004, 15(4):19-22.
[113]刘国昌.区域稳定工程地质[M].长春:吉林大学出版社,1993.
[114]王思敬,黄鼎成.中国工程地质世纪成就[M].北京:地质出版社,2004.
[115]吴树仁,陈庆宣,孙叶.我国区域地壳稳定性研究的新进展[J].地质力学学报,1995,1(1):31-37.
[116]吴树仁,韩金良,石菊松,等.区域地壳稳定性研究现状和发展趋势[J].工程地质学报,2004,12 (增刊):26-30.
[117]胡海涛.广东核电站规划选址区域地壳稳定性分析与评价[M].北京:中国档案出版社,1988.
[118]李兴唐,许兵,黄鼎成,等.区域地壳稳定性研究理论与方法[M].北京:地质出版社,1987.
[119]陈庆宣.探索区域地壳稳定性评价途径[J].第四纪研究,1992,(4) :289-292.
[120]孙叶,谭成轩,李开善,等.区域地壳稳定性定量化评价[M].北京:地质出版社,1998.
[121]彭建兵,毛彦龙,范文等.区域稳定动力学研究[M].北京:科学出版社,2001.
[122]殷跃平,胡海涛,康宏达.重大工程选址区域地壳稳定性评价专家系统(CRUSTAB)[M].北京:地质出版社,1992.
[123]谭成轩,孙叶,吴树仁,等.“5.1 2"汶川Ms 8.O大地震后关于我国区域地壳稳定性评价的思考[J].地质力学学报,2009,15(2):142-150.
[124]孙叶,谭成轩,李开善,等.区域地壳稳定性定量化评价[M].北京:地质出版社,1998.
[125]杜建军,马寅生,谭成轩,等.京津地区区域地壳稳定性评价[J].地球学报,2008,29(4):502-509.
[126]王瑞田,赵宪超,毕桂香.1937年菏泽地震地裂缝追踪研究[J].西北地震学报,1994,16(6): 70-75.
[127]张俊福.应用模糊数学[M].北京:地质出版社,1991.
[128]王明格,李占芳,李昌存.河北平原地壳稳定性模糊数学综合评价[J].地震工程与工程振动,2006,26(3):37-40.
[129]谭成轩,胡道功,冯希杰.长江三峡工程库首区地壳稳定性模糊数学综合评价[J].工程地质学报,1997,5(3) :193-198.
[130] Aller I , Bennet T, Lehr J H , Petty R J . DRASTIC: A standaridized systemfor evaluating groundwater pollution potential using hydrogeologic settings[R] . U. S. EPA Report ,1987.
[131]孙才志,林山杉.地下水脆弱性概念的发展过程与评价现状及研究前景[J].吉林地质,2003, 19(1):30-36.
[132]雷静,张思聪.唐山市平原区地下水脆弱性评价研究[J].环境科学学报,2003,23(1):94-99.
[133]范建华.环滇池城区地质环境资源综合评价与规划[D].吉林大学博士论文,2008.
[134]姜桂华.地下水脆弱性研究进展[J].世界地质,2002,21(1) :33-38.
[135]张保祥,万力,JADE Julawong.DRASTIC地下水脆弱性评价方法及应用—以泰国清迈盆地为例[J].水资源保护, 2007,23(2):38-42.
[136]薛强,王慧芸,刘建军.采煤矿区地下水脆弱性评[J].辽宁工程技术大学学报,2005,24(1):8-11.
[137]李绍飞.区域水资源水环境综合评价方法研究[D].天津大学博士论文,2006.
[138]李绍飞,冯平,林超.地下水环境风险评价指标体系的探讨与用用[J].干旱区资源与环境,2007,21(1):38-43.
[139]严明疆.地下水系统脆弱性对人类活动影响研究[D].中国地质科学院博士论文,2006.
[140]范琦,王贵玲,蔺文静,陈浩.地下水脆弱性评价方法的探讨及实例[J].水利学报,2007,38(5):601-605.
[141]姚文锋,张思聪,唐莉华,罗云.海河流域平原区地下水脆弱性评价[J].水力发电学报,2009,28(1):113-118.
[142]龙文华,陈鸿汉,李志,潘洪捷.西辽河平原(内蒙古部分)地下水固有脆弱性评价[J].地质通报,2010,29(4):598-601.
[143]张立杰,巩中友,孙香太.地下水环境脆弱性的模糊综合评判[J].哈尔滨师范大学学报(自然科学版),2001,17(2):109-112.
[144]孙梅.青岛城区土壤重金属环境地球化学研究[D].山东理工大学硕士论文,2008.
[145]赵冬青.南京典型城郊菜地重金属的污染状况与防治对策[D].南京林业大学硕士论文,2007.
[146]邢润华,陈永宁.土壤污染评价中几种不同评价标准的比较—以合肥地区为例[J].安徽地质,2008,18(1):42-46.
[147]张裴.煤矿区环境地球化学基线研究及其应用[D].山东科技大学硕士论文,2007.
[148]中华人民共和国国家标准.土壤环境质量标准(GB 15618-1995).北京:中国标准出版社,1995.
[149]蔡文,杨春燕,林伟初.可拓工程方法[M].北京:科学技术出版社,1997:1-106.
[150]贾超,肖树芳,刘宁.可拓学理论在洞室岩体质量评价中的应用[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2003,22(5):751-756.
[151]原国红,陈剑平,马琳.可拓评判方法在岩体质量分类中的应用[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2005,24(9):1539-1545.
[152]阙金声,陈剑平,石丙飞,蒋剑.地质环境复杂程度可拓评判法[J].煤田地质与勘探,2007, 35(4):58-61.
[153]戴琳.可拓学在工程质量评定中应用的研究[J].南京师范大学学报(工程技术版),2002,2(3): 21-25.
[154]王锦国,周志芳,袁永生.可拓评价方法在环境质量综合评价中的应用[J].河海大学学报, 2002,30(1):15-18.
[155]Pawlak Z.Rough sets.International Journal of Information and Computer Science, 1982,(11):341-356
[156]王宗军,李红侠,邓晓岗.粗糙集理论研究的最新进展及发展趋势[J].政治理工大学学报-信息与管理工程版,2006,28(1):43-49.
[157]胡可云,陆玉昌,石纯一.粗糙集理论及其应用进展[J].清华大学学报(自然科学版),2001,41(1):64-68.
[158]邱道宏.括苍山高速公路隧道岩爆非线性预测研究[D].吉林大学博士论文,2008.
[159]王辉.珠三角花岗岩残积土边坡稳定性分析与非线性预测[D].吉林大学博士论文,2011.
[160]宋笑雪.粗糙集理论及其应用[J].咸阳师范学院学报,2005,20(2):29-31.
[161]王加阳.基于粗糙集理论的动态约简研究[D].中南大学硕士学位论文,2004.
[162]杨帆.粗糙集约简算法及其应用的研究[D].武汉科技大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[163]米据生,吴伟志,张文修.基于变精度粗糙集理论的知识约简方法[J].系统工程理论与实践,2004,24(1):76-82.
[164]张建军,张静波.一种新的基于粗糙集理念的决策表离散化算法[J].西安电子科技大学学报(自然科学版),2004,31(3):469-472.
[165]全桂光.矿山采空区地表塌陷范围预测探讨[J].有色矿冶,2008,24(5):11212.
[166]戚冉,黄建华,郭春颖.矿山地面塌陷预测方法研究[J].中国矿业,2008,17(6):39-42.
[167]代建华,李元香.粗集中属性约简的一种启发式遗传算法[J].西安交通大学学报,2002,36(12):1286-1290.
[168]和明,冯博琴,马兆丰,等.一种改进的Rough集属性约简启发式遗传算法[J].西安石油大学学报(自然科学版),2004,19(3):80-85.
[169]王晖,杨为民,王兵,等.基于GIS技术的煤矿采空区的地表塌陷危险性评判[J].煤炭工程, 2008(9):119-123.
[170]于大鹏,覃秋雅,马秉智,毛伟.矿山采空区地面塌陷危险性预测[J].工矿自动化,2010,3: 78-81.
[171]朱建军.层次分析法的若干问题研究及应用[D].东北大学博士论文,2005.
[172]李菘,邱微,赵庆良,刘正茂.层次分析法应用于黑龙江省生态环境质量评价研究[J].环境科学,2006,27(5):1031-1034.
[173]朱晓华,杨秀春.层次分析法在区域生态质量评价中的应用研究[J].国土资源科技管理,2001, (5):45-45.
[174]胡安焱,郭生练,刘燕,林凯荣.干旱区内陆河流流域生态环境质量模糊综合评价[J].地质灾害与环境保护,2006,17(2):69-73.
[175]周华坤,赵新全,周立,等.层次分析法在江河源区高寒草地退化研究中的应用[J].资源科学,2005,27(4):63-70.
[176]虞孝感.长江流域生态环境的意义及生态功能区段划分[J].长江流域资源与环境,2002,11(4):323-326.
[177]王亚军.河北涞源矿山地质环境影响程度重和评价[J].矿产勘查,2010,1(6):586-590.
[178]孙杰,贾建业,詹文欢.区域地质环境综合评价及应用研究[J].中国地质灾害与防治学报,2007,18(1):73-76.
[179]钟洛加,周衍龙,任津.基于层次分析法的武汉城市圈地质环境质量评价[J].环境科学与技术,2008,31(12):174-178.
[180]杨澍,初禹,杨湘奎,娄本君.层次分析法(AHP)在三江平原地质环境质量评价中的应用[J].地质通报,2005,24(5):485-490.
[2]孙承兴.王世杰,周德全等.碳酸盐岩差异性风化成土特征及其对石漠化形成的影响[J].矿物学报,2002,22(4):308-314.
[3]张淦钰.我国环境地质研究进展[J].工程地质计算机应用,2010,2:21-23.
[4]蔡雄飞,智铎强,吴衣布,郑有业.当代人为地质作用的特效应及研究意义[J].海洋地质动态,2008,24(1):29-32.
[5]全国人大常委会.《中华人民共和国环境影响评价法》.北京:中国法制出版社2002.
[6]国务院常委会.《地质灾害防治条例》(国务院394号令).北京:中国大地出版社2004.
[7]党的十六届五中全会《建议》学习辅导百问编写组.党的十六届五中全会《建议》学习辅导百问[M].北京:党建读物出版社、学习出版社.2005,125-127.
[8]十七大报告学习辅导百问编写组.十七大报告学习辅导百问[M].北京:党建读物出版社、学习出版社.2007,69-71.
[9]丁桑岚.环境评价概论[M].北京:化学工业出版社,2001.
[10]哈承佑.环境地质学进展与展望[J].水文地质工程地质,1999(5):24-25.
[11]赵金平,焦述强.基于GIS的地质环境评价在国外的研究现状[J].南通工学院学报(自然科学版),2004,3(2):46-47.
[12]王思敬.论人类工程活动与地质环境的相互作用及其环境效应[J].地质灾害与环境保护,1997, 8(1):19-21.
[13]卢耀如.略论地质--生态环境与可持续发展--黄河断流与岩溶石山保障三峡工程问题的探讨[J]大自然探索,1999, 18(1) :17-23.
[14]何政伟,黄润秋,孙传敏,吴柏青,等.浅议“生态地质学”[J].国土资源科技管理,2003,3:69-72.
[15]黄润秋.生态环境地质的基本特点与技术支撑[J].中国地质, 2001,28(11): 20-24.
[16]杨澍.基于遥感技术的三江平原生态地质环境综合研究[D].吉林大学博士学位论文,2005.
[17] Ludwig J A and Tongway D J.Rehabilition of semiarid landscapes in Australia.Ⅱ.Restoring vegetation patches.Restoration Ecology.1996,4:398-406.
[18]王文俊.生态地质环境评价的基本原理及其应用--以长江上游安宁河流域为例[D].成都理工大学博士论文,2003.
[19]支兵发.试论区域生态地质环境质量评价的几个问题--以珠江三角洲经济区为例[J].灾害学,2008,23(2):59-64.
[20]葛佐.GIS与生态环境地质评价[J].呼伦贝尔学院学报,2008,16(5):64-67.
[21]郑长远,张启兴,贾君,等.层次分析法在长江源区生态地质环境质量(脆弱性)评价中的应用[J]西北地质,2010,43(1):137-145.
[22]王家文,周跃,李滨勇,柳德江.大河源区生态地质环境系统共轭管理初步研究[J].地域研究与开发,2009,28(6):86-90.
[23]王嘉学,肖波.河源区生态地质环境安全性评估[J].水文地质工程地质,2009,3:117-122.
[24]赵银兵,何政伟,倪忠云.基于生态地质环境的矿产资源开发模式研究[J].安徽农业科学,2009,37(1) :299-300.
[25]张雪峰,宋颖,薛东剑.遥感用于二滩库区生态地质环境监测与评价[J].地理信息空间,2010,8(2):73-75.
[26]游其军,赵玉祥.济南都市圈生态地质环境质量评价[J].山东国土资源,2009,25(10):41-43.
[27] Trofmov V T,Ziling D G. Geoecology, ecological geology and engineering geology; relationship of contents,subjects, objects, and problems. Geoekologiya: Inzireneruaya Geologiya. Gidrogeologiya. Geokriologiya. 1996(6) :43-54.
[28] Trofmov V T.Ecological geology-a novel branch of geological sciences[J].Earth Science Fronties,2001,8(1):27-35.
[29] Bisset R.Social impact assessment and its future.Mining Environmental Management,March 1996,9-11.
[30] Bisset R.social impact assessment and its future.Mining Environmental Management, March,1996,9-11.
[31]庞中英.广义安全、经济安全、安全合作—关于全球变化与安全问题的若干新思考[J].欧洲研究,1997(1):34-42.
[32]张桥英,何兴金,卿凤等.气候变暖对中国生态安全的影响[J].自然杂志,2002,24(4):212-215.
[33]陈浩,周金星,陆中臣.荒漠化地区生态安全评价—以首都圈怀来县为例[J].水土保持学报, 2003,17(1):58-62.
[34]池宏,佟凤勤,计雷.可持续发展的指标体系与发展规划优选模型的研究[J].中国管理科学,1996(1):812.
[35]刘星晨,吴波,王葆芳.荒漠化评价指标体系与动态评估研究进展和展望[J].林业科技管理, 1998(2):24-25,34.
[36]高尚武,王君厚.中国沙质荒漠化土地监测评价指标体系[J].林业科学,1998,34(2):1-10.
[37]刘玉平,慈龙骏.毛乌素沙地草场荒漠化评价的指标体系[J].中国沙漠,1998,18(4):366-371.
[38] Genovese G,Vignolles C,Negre T,etal.A methodology for a combined use of normalized difference vegetation index and CORINE land cover data for crop yield monitoring and forecasting.A case study on Spain.Agronomie,2001,91-111.
[39] Gupta R P,Joshi B C.Landslided hazard zoning using the GIS approach-a case study from the Ramganga Catchment,Himalalyas[J].Engineering geology,1990,28(Ⅰ-2):l19-135.
[40] Meijia M,Navarro M,Wahl E E.Geological hazard and risk evaluation using GIS[J].BuUentin of the Association of Engineering Geologists,1994,4:21-30.
[41] Mario Mejia-Navarro,Lwisa Garcia.Natural Lazard and risk assessment using decision support system,application:glenwood springs,colorado[J].Environment and Engineering Geoscience,1996,3(2) :299-324.
[42] Breunig M., Bode T., Cremers A.B. Implementation of Elementary Geometric Database Operations of A 3D-GIS", Advances in GIS Research: Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, 1994, 604-617.
[43]阿尔.戈尔(美) .数字地球--认识21世纪我们这颗星球,《文汇报》,1998-8-14.
[44]张宗枯,袁道先.我国跨世纪的重大地学问题—环境地学发展前景[J].地矿工作研究,1995, 414(10):1-l1.
[45]陈梦熊.自然(地质)灾害与环境系统研究的几个问题[J].中国地质,1994,(11):20-21.
[46]陈梦熊.环境地质科学的基本理论与发展前景[J].工程地质学报,1995,3(3):31-34.
[47]陈梦熊.论生态地质环境系统与综合性生态环境地质调查[J].水文地质工程地质,1999, 26(3):3-6,12.
[48]陈梦熊.沿海地区地质环境特征与地质环境系统—兼论“仁地系统”[J].中国地质灾害预防治学报,1998,9(增)(5):80-86.
[49] Tang Jie,Lin Nianfeng.Some problems of ecological environmental geology in arid and semiarid areas of China. Environmental Geology ,1995.26:44-67.
[50]陶于祥,孙玉华.生态环境地质学初探[J].江苏地质,1998,22(3):186-191.
[51]黄润秋,万新南,向喜琼等.生态环境地质调查与评价的技术方法(会议文集)[M].成都理工大学,2001.
[52]李正积.地质与农业[M].成都:四川科技出版社,1986.
[53]李正积.岩土植物大系统研究Ⅰ.果树大系统[M].北京:科学出版社,1996.
[54]程裕淇.中国区域地质概论[M].北京:地质出版杜,1994.
[55]朱裕生.基础地质调查的新任务:关于地质--生态环境调查新概念的探讨[J].中国区域地质,1999, 18(2):122-126.
[56]朱裕生.区域矿产资源潜力调查评价的目标任务[J].中国地质,2000,5:36-37.
[57]黄光寿.对地质环境监侧和管理工作的建议[J].中国地质,1994,(10):24.
[58]杨谦,戴俊成,张芳,姚维军.江苏垃圾填埋场生态地质环境安全性评价及工程治理[J].地质学刊,2010,34(2):214-219.
[59]蔡雄飞,张雄华,章择军等. l: 5万区域地质调查值得注意的两个问题[J].中国区域地质,1996, (4):379-381.
[60]蔡雄飞,王济,雷丽,张浩.中国西南喀斯特地区土壤退化研究进展[J].亚热带水水土保持, 2009,21(1):32-36.
[61]卢耀如,张凤娥,阎葆瑞,郭秀红.硫酸盐岩岩溶发育机理与有关地质环境效应[J].地球学报,2002,23(1):1-6.
[62]李家熙,黄怀曾,刘晓端.环境地球化学在农业和生命科学上的应用研究[J].第四纪研究,1995,3:224-230.
[63]任明强,张家德,卢正艳,罗明学,毕坤,陈蓉.贵州喀斯特与非喀斯特农业生态地质环境质量对比研究[J].中国岩溶,2009,28(4):397-401.
[64]汤洁,林年丰.农业生态地质环境质量综合评价:以吉林省乾安县为例[J].世界地质,1999, 18(2): 89-94.
[65]汤洁,林年丰.中国干早半干早区农业生态地质环境系统工程研究[J].长春地质学院学报,1996, 26(1) :54-58.
[66]刘彦随,倪绍样.陕南山地生态环境质量综合评价[J].山地研究。1997, 16(3),178-182.
[67]杨伟光,付怡.农业生态环境质量的指标体系与评价方法[J].中国环境管理,1999, 10:42-43.
[68]韩再生.生态环境地质调查与展望[J].地质通报,2003,22 (12) :977-983.
[69]成都理工大学.国土资源部国际合作与科技司课题研究报告--山区流域地质环境评价与地质灾害预测的GIS系统[M].2000.
[70]黄润秋,向喜琼.GIS技术在生态环境地质评价中的应用[J].地质通报,2002,21(2):98-101.
[71]胡宝清,刘顺生.长江流域地质生态环境的演化机制及综合自然灾害区划[J].自然灾害学报,2001(8) :13-19.
[72]宋跃华,左爱国,宋子萱.GIS和RS在生态地质环境调查中的应用--以松嫩平原水土流失调查为例[J].水利科技与经济,2007,13(7) :507-509.
[73]马雄德,王文科,杨择元,黄金廷.GIS在地质生态环境研究中的应用现状及发展趋势[J].地下水,2007,29(5):140-142.
[74]马雄德,王文科,杨择元等.基于GIS的秃尾河流域地质生态环境评价[J].人民黄河,2007,29(9) :1-2.
[75]许向宁,王文俊,黄润秋.基于GIS的安宁河流域生态环境地质质量评价[J].成都理工大学学报(自然科学版),2004,31(3):243-248.
[76]孙浩然,杨维,郭亚伟,李仁峰,高雅玲.基于GIS—BP神经网络的生态地质环境敏感性评价以千山景区及周边为例[J].地下水,2009,31(6):126-128.
[77]周爱国,孙自永,徐恒力,徐忠胜.地质环境生态适宜性评价指标体系研究[J].地质科技情报,2001,20(2):71-74.
[78]董锁成,周长进,王海英.“三江源”地区主要生态环境问题与对策[J].自然资源学报,2002,17(6):713-720.
[79]许向宁,黄润秋,秦举礼.生态环境地质调查与GIS技术应用-以川南安宁河流域生态环境地质调查为例[J].地质通报,2003,22(11-12):999-1005.
[80]颜世强.黄河三角洲生态地质环境综合研究[D].吉林大学博士论文,2005 .
[81]龚斌.基于遥感技术的黑水资源与生态环境研究[D].中国地质大学(北京)博士论文,2006.
[82]周爱国.中国西北干旱区额济纳盆地地质生态学研究[D].中国地质大学博士(武汉)论文,2004.
[83]中华人民共和国国家标准.中国地震动参数区划图(GB18306-2001).北京:中国标准出版社,2001.
[84]中华人民共和国国家标准.建筑抗震设计规范(GB50011-2001).北京:中国建筑工业出版社,2001.
[85]中华人民共和国国家标准.土壤环境质量标准(GB15618-1995).北京:中国标准出版社,1995.
[86]宋云力,甄习春,赵承勇.河南省矿山地质环境质量评价[J].信阳师范学院学报(自然科学版),2008,21(1) :93-96.
[87]程国霞,曹洪亮,陈为民,田立臣.辽宁梨树沟煤矿开发的主要地质环境问题[J].地质与资源,2007,16(3):213-214.
[88]耿殿明,姜福兴.我国煤炭矿区生态环境问题分析[J].煤矿环境保护,2002,16(6)5-9.
[89]刘星辉.湖南省矿区地质环境研究[D].中南大学博士论文,2006.
[90]吴晓华,叶进霞,夏春英,朱晓琳.兖州煤田矿山地质环境现状与治理对策[J].煤田地质与勘探,2008,26(1):53-57.
[91]王明山.菏泽地区巨野煤田开发和环境地质探讨[J].山东煤炭科技,2010,2:132-133.
[92]唐书平,赵目军,邓晓颖,王关杰等.黄河下游影响带(河南段)土壤盐渍化分析评价[J].人民黄河,2008,28(7) :74-75.
[93]蔺娟,地里拜尔·苏力坦.土壤盐渍化的研究进展[J].新疆大学学报(自然科学版),2007,24(3):318-324.
[94]余美,芮孝芳.防治土壤盐碱化地表水地下水联合管理模型[J].水资源保护,2007,23(4):6-10.
[95]齐春三,赵倩,董温荣,郑良勇.引黄灌溉对土壤盐碱化的影响与对策[J].水利规划与设计,2007,2:10-12.
[96]司双印,张运备,马敬杰,贺留兰,秦世昌.采煤塌陷区生态地质环境恢复治理与可持续发展问题的探讨[J].地质灾害与环境保护,2004,15(3):11-16.
[97]卜华,孙英波,叶进霞,陈洪年.初论山东巨野煤矿开发的主要环境地质问题及防治对策[J].中国地质灾害与防治学报,2007,18(2):140-144.
[98]徐军祥,石宝玉,程秀明.山东省主要生态环境地质问题与调查方法探讨[J].山东地质,2002, 18(3-4):95-99.
[99]杨询昌,石阳,冯守涛,王成明,柴建林.黄河下游(山东段)主要生态环境地质问题及对策[J].山东国土资源,2010,26(1):15-18.
[100]徐友宁,吴贤,陈华清.大柳塔煤矿地面塌陷区的生态地质环境效应分析[J].中国矿业,2008,17(3):38-41.
[101]张艳华.对中国城市生态环境问题的重新审视[J].科技科技情报开发与经济,2007,17(19):146-148.
[102]周挽黎,戈翠玲.浅谈矿区生态环境地质问题及对策[J].矿业工程,2004,2(6):41-46.
[103]侯新伟,张发旺,李向全,陈浩.神府东胜矿区主要地质生态环境问题及其效应[J].地球与环境, 2005,33(4):43-46.
[104]范英宏,陆兆华,程建龙,周忠轩,吴钢.中国煤矿区主要生态环境问题及生态重建技术[J].生态学报,2003,16(6):2144-2152.
[105]连峰,龚晓南,付飞营,罗勇,李阳.黄河下游冲积粉土地震液化机理及其判别[J].浙江大学学报(工学版),2007,41(9):1492-1498.
[106]任红梅,吕西林,李培振.饱和砂土液化研究进展[J].地震工程与工程振动,2007,26(6): 166-175.
[107]中华人民共和国国家标准.地表水环境质量标准(GB 3838-2002).北京:中国标准出版社,2002.
[108]乔光,林红娟.菏泽市城区深层地下水评价及分析[J].山东水利,2006:99-100.
[109]徐军祥,康凤新.山东省地下水资源可持续开发利用研究[M].北京:海洋出版社,2001:155-157.
[110]陈占成,魏加华,王金凯.济宁市地面沉降初步分析[J].中国地质灾害与防治学报,1998,9(2):167-172.
[111]周建伟,李菊凤,周爱国,文唐章,陈洪年.济宁市城区地面沉降的成因和规律性探讨[J].湖南科技大学学报(自然科学版),2005,20(1):6-9.
[112]姜明丽,林树杰,隋建红.济宁市区地面沉降及防冶措施研究[J].地质灾害与环境保护,2004, 15(4):19-22.
[113]刘国昌.区域稳定工程地质[M].长春:吉林大学出版社,1993.
[114]王思敬,黄鼎成.中国工程地质世纪成就[M].北京:地质出版社,2004.
[115]吴树仁,陈庆宣,孙叶.我国区域地壳稳定性研究的新进展[J].地质力学学报,1995,1(1):31-37.
[116]吴树仁,韩金良,石菊松,等.区域地壳稳定性研究现状和发展趋势[J].工程地质学报,2004,12 (增刊):26-30.
[117]胡海涛.广东核电站规划选址区域地壳稳定性分析与评价[M].北京:中国档案出版社,1988.
[118]李兴唐,许兵,黄鼎成,等.区域地壳稳定性研究理论与方法[M].北京:地质出版社,1987.
[119]陈庆宣.探索区域地壳稳定性评价途径[J].第四纪研究,1992,(4) :289-292.
[120]孙叶,谭成轩,李开善,等.区域地壳稳定性定量化评价[M].北京:地质出版社,1998.
[121]彭建兵,毛彦龙,范文等.区域稳定动力学研究[M].北京:科学出版社,2001.
[122]殷跃平,胡海涛,康宏达.重大工程选址区域地壳稳定性评价专家系统(CRUSTAB)[M].北京:地质出版社,1992.
[123]谭成轩,孙叶,吴树仁,等.“5.1 2"汶川Ms 8.O大地震后关于我国区域地壳稳定性评价的思考[J].地质力学学报,2009,15(2):142-150.
[124]孙叶,谭成轩,李开善,等.区域地壳稳定性定量化评价[M].北京:地质出版社,1998.
[125]杜建军,马寅生,谭成轩,等.京津地区区域地壳稳定性评价[J].地球学报,2008,29(4):502-509.
[126]王瑞田,赵宪超,毕桂香.1937年菏泽地震地裂缝追踪研究[J].西北地震学报,1994,16(6): 70-75.
[127]张俊福.应用模糊数学[M].北京:地质出版社,1991.
[128]王明格,李占芳,李昌存.河北平原地壳稳定性模糊数学综合评价[J].地震工程与工程振动,2006,26(3):37-40.
[129]谭成轩,胡道功,冯希杰.长江三峡工程库首区地壳稳定性模糊数学综合评价[J].工程地质学报,1997,5(3) :193-198.
[130] Aller I , Bennet T, Lehr J H , Petty R J . DRASTIC: A standaridized systemfor evaluating groundwater pollution potential using hydrogeologic settings[R] . U. S. EPA Report ,1987.
[131]孙才志,林山杉.地下水脆弱性概念的发展过程与评价现状及研究前景[J].吉林地质,2003, 19(1):30-36.
[132]雷静,张思聪.唐山市平原区地下水脆弱性评价研究[J].环境科学学报,2003,23(1):94-99.
[133]范建华.环滇池城区地质环境资源综合评价与规划[D].吉林大学博士论文,2008.
[134]姜桂华.地下水脆弱性研究进展[J].世界地质,2002,21(1) :33-38.
[135]张保祥,万力,JADE Julawong.DRASTIC地下水脆弱性评价方法及应用—以泰国清迈盆地为例[J].水资源保护, 2007,23(2):38-42.
[136]薛强,王慧芸,刘建军.采煤矿区地下水脆弱性评[J].辽宁工程技术大学学报,2005,24(1):8-11.
[137]李绍飞.区域水资源水环境综合评价方法研究[D].天津大学博士论文,2006.
[138]李绍飞,冯平,林超.地下水环境风险评价指标体系的探讨与用用[J].干旱区资源与环境,2007,21(1):38-43.
[139]严明疆.地下水系统脆弱性对人类活动影响研究[D].中国地质科学院博士论文,2006.
[140]范琦,王贵玲,蔺文静,陈浩.地下水脆弱性评价方法的探讨及实例[J].水利学报,2007,38(5):601-605.
[141]姚文锋,张思聪,唐莉华,罗云.海河流域平原区地下水脆弱性评价[J].水力发电学报,2009,28(1):113-118.
[142]龙文华,陈鸿汉,李志,潘洪捷.西辽河平原(内蒙古部分)地下水固有脆弱性评价[J].地质通报,2010,29(4):598-601.
[143]张立杰,巩中友,孙香太.地下水环境脆弱性的模糊综合评判[J].哈尔滨师范大学学报(自然科学版),2001,17(2):109-112.
[144]孙梅.青岛城区土壤重金属环境地球化学研究[D].山东理工大学硕士论文,2008.
[145]赵冬青.南京典型城郊菜地重金属的污染状况与防治对策[D].南京林业大学硕士论文,2007.
[146]邢润华,陈永宁.土壤污染评价中几种不同评价标准的比较—以合肥地区为例[J].安徽地质,2008,18(1):42-46.
[147]张裴.煤矿区环境地球化学基线研究及其应用[D].山东科技大学硕士论文,2007.
[148]中华人民共和国国家标准.土壤环境质量标准(GB 15618-1995).北京:中国标准出版社,1995.
[149]蔡文,杨春燕,林伟初.可拓工程方法[M].北京:科学技术出版社,1997:1-106.
[150]贾超,肖树芳,刘宁.可拓学理论在洞室岩体质量评价中的应用[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2003,22(5):751-756.
[151]原国红,陈剑平,马琳.可拓评判方法在岩体质量分类中的应用[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2005,24(9):1539-1545.
[152]阙金声,陈剑平,石丙飞,蒋剑.地质环境复杂程度可拓评判法[J].煤田地质与勘探,2007, 35(4):58-61.
[153]戴琳.可拓学在工程质量评定中应用的研究[J].南京师范大学学报(工程技术版),2002,2(3): 21-25.
[154]王锦国,周志芳,袁永生.可拓评价方法在环境质量综合评价中的应用[J].河海大学学报, 2002,30(1):15-18.
[155]Pawlak Z.Rough sets.International Journal of Information and Computer Science, 1982,(11):341-356
[156]王宗军,李红侠,邓晓岗.粗糙集理论研究的最新进展及发展趋势[J].政治理工大学学报-信息与管理工程版,2006,28(1):43-49.
[157]胡可云,陆玉昌,石纯一.粗糙集理论及其应用进展[J].清华大学学报(自然科学版),2001,41(1):64-68.
[158]邱道宏.括苍山高速公路隧道岩爆非线性预测研究[D].吉林大学博士论文,2008.
[159]王辉.珠三角花岗岩残积土边坡稳定性分析与非线性预测[D].吉林大学博士论文,2011.
[160]宋笑雪.粗糙集理论及其应用[J].咸阳师范学院学报,2005,20(2):29-31.
[161]王加阳.基于粗糙集理论的动态约简研究[D].中南大学硕士学位论文,2004.
[162]杨帆.粗糙集约简算法及其应用的研究[D].武汉科技大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[163]米据生,吴伟志,张文修.基于变精度粗糙集理论的知识约简方法[J].系统工程理论与实践,2004,24(1):76-82.
[164]张建军,张静波.一种新的基于粗糙集理念的决策表离散化算法[J].西安电子科技大学学报(自然科学版),2004,31(3):469-472.
[165]全桂光.矿山采空区地表塌陷范围预测探讨[J].有色矿冶,2008,24(5):11212.
[166]戚冉,黄建华,郭春颖.矿山地面塌陷预测方法研究[J].中国矿业,2008,17(6):39-42.
[167]代建华,李元香.粗集中属性约简的一种启发式遗传算法[J].西安交通大学学报,2002,36(12):1286-1290.
[168]和明,冯博琴,马兆丰,等.一种改进的Rough集属性约简启发式遗传算法[J].西安石油大学学报(自然科学版),2004,19(3):80-85.
[169]王晖,杨为民,王兵,等.基于GIS技术的煤矿采空区的地表塌陷危险性评判[J].煤炭工程, 2008(9):119-123.
[170]于大鹏,覃秋雅,马秉智,毛伟.矿山采空区地面塌陷危险性预测[J].工矿自动化,2010,3: 78-81.
[171]朱建军.层次分析法的若干问题研究及应用[D].东北大学博士论文,2005.
[172]李菘,邱微,赵庆良,刘正茂.层次分析法应用于黑龙江省生态环境质量评价研究[J].环境科学,2006,27(5):1031-1034.
[173]朱晓华,杨秀春.层次分析法在区域生态质量评价中的应用研究[J].国土资源科技管理,2001, (5):45-45.
[174]胡安焱,郭生练,刘燕,林凯荣.干旱区内陆河流流域生态环境质量模糊综合评价[J].地质灾害与环境保护,2006,17(2):69-73.
[175]周华坤,赵新全,周立,等.层次分析法在江河源区高寒草地退化研究中的应用[J].资源科学,2005,27(4):63-70.
[176]虞孝感.长江流域生态环境的意义及生态功能区段划分[J].长江流域资源与环境,2002,11(4):323-326.
[177]王亚军.河北涞源矿山地质环境影响程度重和评价[J].矿产勘查,2010,1(6):586-590.
[178]孙杰,贾建业,詹文欢.区域地质环境综合评价及应用研究[J].中国地质灾害与防治学报,2007,18(1):73-76.
[179]钟洛加,周衍龙,任津.基于层次分析法的武汉城市圈地质环境质量评价[J].环境科学与技术,2008,31(12):174-178.
[180]杨澍,初禹,杨湘奎,娄本君.层次分析法(AHP)在三江平原地质环境质量评价中的应用[J].地质通报,2005,24(5):485-490.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |