An Improved Unascertained Measure-Set Pair Analysis Model Based on Fuzzy AHP and Entropy for Landslide Susceptibility Zonation Mapping

Abstract

Landslides are one of the most destructive and common geological disasters in the Tonglvshan mining area, which seriously threatens the safety of surrounding residents and the Tonglvshan ancient copper mine site. Therefore, to effectively reduce the landslide risk and protect the safety of the Tonglvshan ancient copper mine site, it is necessary to carry out a systematic assessment of the landslide susceptibility in the study area. Combining the unascertained measure (UM) theory, the dynamic comprehensive weighting (DCW) method based on the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP)-entropy weight method and the set pair analysis (SPA) theory, an improved UM-SPA coupling model for landslide susceptibility assessment is proposed in this study. First, a hierarchical evaluation index system including 10 landslide conditioning factors is constructed. Then, the dynamic comprehensive weighting method based on the fuzzy AHP-entropy weight method is used to assign independent comprehensive weights to each evaluation unit. Finally, we optimize the credible degree recognition criteria of UM theory by introducing SPA theory to quantitatively determine the landslide susceptibility level. The results show that the improved UM-SPA model can produce landslide susceptibility zoning maps with high reliability. The whole study area is divided into five susceptibility levels. 5.8% and 10.16% of the Tonglvshan mining area are divided into extremely high susceptibility areas and high susceptibility areas, respectively. The low and extremely low susceptibility areas account for 30.87% and 34.14% of the total area of the study area, respectively. Comparison with the AHP and Entropy-FAHP models indicates that the improved UM-SPA model (AUC = 0.777) shows a better performance than the Entropy-FAHP models (AUC = 0.764) and the conventional AHP (AUC = 0.698). Therefore, these results can provide reference for emergency planning, disaster reduction and prevention decision-making in the Tonglvshan mining area.

Comparison between AHP and FAHP for the best Selection of Renewable Energies in Colombia, a country with diversity in its geographical regions: Optimization and Sustainability

“…It has been used in investment project selection, natural resource management, decision-making in strategic planning, choice of technologies, and most recently in artificial intelligence and machine learning applications [29]. Over the decades, Saaty and other researchers have continued to develop and refine the AHP, introducing variants and extensions of the methodology to address specific issues and improve its applicability in real-world situations [45].…”

“…Saaty formulated the mathematical foundations of the AHP, which are based on matrix theory and mathematical logic [28]. The core idea of the AHP is to decompose a decision-making problem into a hierarchical structure of criteria and sub-criteria, and then use a comparison matrix to capture the preferences and relationships between these elements [45]. In 1980, Thomas L. Saaty published the book entitled "The Analytical Hierarchy Process" (AHP), in which he comprehensively presented the AHP methodology and its applications in decision-making.…”

“…Figure 1 shows the 5 main steps that are required to be done for the implementation of some metaheuristic method, the first step consists in the selection of criteria and subcriteria that will serve for the evaluation of the expert group, these criteria and subcriteria must be selected very carefully, for this the consultation of the specialized literature is required, consultation with personnel of domain of the research topic, as a second step is the choice of the group of energy alternatives that, these energy alternatives must be according to the existing potential in the area of implementation of the research, as a third step is the elaboration of a survey where they are allowed to compare according to the Thomas L scale. Saaty [45], alternatives, criteria and sub-criteria, the survey is sent to the group of experts where they from their experience and knowledge will give their opinion, when the survey of the experts is available, each response matrix is evaluated and determined from the radius and consistency index in order to determine the validity of the answers given by each consulted expert, if these values are among those allowed according to the size of each matrix, the implementation step of the selected metaheuristic method that in this research were the AHP and FAHP, finally, the results of the implemented methods will be obtained and the weighting and hierarchization of criteria, sub-criteria and evaluated alternatives will be carried out [26].…”

“…. 𝑢 𝑛 } [44] Therefore, extended analysis values of m can be obtained with the following notation [45]:…”

Laboratory Risk Assessment Based on SHELL-HACCP-Cloud Model

“…Among them, AHP is a classic multi-objective decision-making method, which is widely used in the evaluation of flood disasters [13], hazardous materials transportation [20], the cement industry [21], and other aspects of evaluation, which illustrate the effectiveness of this method. FCEM is a comprehensive evaluation method based on fuzzy mathematics theory, which has been widely used in seawater desalination projects [22], oil tanker truck driving risk assessments [23], low carbon operation risk assessments of distribution grids [24], landslide sensitivity assessments [25] and so on. However, the AHP often relies on the results of experts' scoring, which is subjective and inaccurate for decision-making on certain issues.…”