2022
DOI: 10.1007/s00603-021-02745-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Data-Intensive Numerical Modeling Method for Large-Scale Rock Strata and Its Application in Mining Subsidence Prediction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this study, 121 rockburst cases were included (Feng and Wang 1994, Gong and Li 2007, Gong et al 2010, Jin-Lin et al 2010, Lee, Tsui, Tham, Wang and Li 1998, Liu et al 2008, Ming-Zhou et al 2002, Ran et al 2019, Tang et al 2003, Wang et al 2009, Wang et al 2010, Zhang et al 2011, Zheng et al 2008, Zhou et al 2012, involving industries such as mining, hydropower, and transportation.…”
Section: Rockburst Casesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this study, 121 rockburst cases were included (Feng and Wang 1994, Gong and Li 2007, Gong et al 2010, Jin-Lin et al 2010, Lee, Tsui, Tham, Wang and Li 1998, Liu et al 2008, Ming-Zhou et al 2002, Ran et al 2019, Tang et al 2003, Wang et al 2009, Wang et al 2010, Zhang et al 2011, Zheng et al 2008, Zhou et al 2012, involving industries such as mining, hydropower, and transportation.…”
Section: Rockburst Casesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to Equation (26), when p = 1, sample 1 could be calculated using the distance discriminant method to predict rockburst class III, which belongs to the medium rockburst classification.…”
Section: Rockburst Intensity Class Predictionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The multi-factor rockburst prediction models are mainly divided into uncertainty evaluation models and intelligent optimization evaluation models. In the field of rockburst prediction uncertainty evaluation, there are several models available, including the distance discrimination method [26,27], the cloud model [28,29], extenics [30,31], the rough set theory [32], the efficacy coefficient method [33,34], set pair analysis [18,35], the attribute measure [36], the ideal point method [24,37], TOPSIS [38,39], fuzzy set theory [40,41], etc. All of these models consider a combination of rockburst indicators and their non-linear relationships with rockburst risk.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In terms of rockburst warning, scholars have proposed various empirical criteria and assessment methods for evaluating rockburst risk based on the factors affecting rockburst occurrences (Zhou et al, 2018;Li et al, 2019a;Gong et al, 2020;He et al, 2023). These include criteria such as Russense criteria (Russenes, 1974), Barton criteria (Barton et al, 1974), Hoek criteria (Hoek and Brown, 1980), strain energy storage index (Kidybinski, 1981), potential energy of elastic strain (Wang and Park, 2001), residual elastic energy index (Gong et al, 2021), rock brittleness index (Xu and Wang, 1999), brittle deformation coefficient (Zhang et al, 2017), distance discrimination method (Gong and Li, 2007), artificial neural network method (Wang et al, 2024), etc. These criteria and assessment methods have greatly guided the prevention and control of rockburst risks and have achieved good economic and social benefits.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%