• 中国出版政府奖提名奖

    中国百强科技报刊

    湖北出版政府奖

    中国高校百佳科技期刊

    中国最美期刊

    留言板

    尊敬的读者、作者、审稿人, 关于本刊的投稿、审稿、编辑和出版的任何问题, 您可以本页添加留言。我们将尽快给您答复。谢谢您的支持!

    姓名
    邮箱
    手机号码
    标题
    留言内容
    验证码

    加权证据权模型的应用与对比

    张道军 成秋明 左仁广 王书旺

    张道军, 成秋明, 左仁广, 王书旺, 2012. 加权证据权模型的应用与对比. 地球科学, 37(6): 1160-1168. doi: 10.3799/dqkx.2012.123
    引用本文: 张道军, 成秋明, 左仁广, 王书旺, 2012. 加权证据权模型的应用与对比. 地球科学, 37(6): 1160-1168. doi: 10.3799/dqkx.2012.123
    ZHANG Dao-jun, CHENG Qiu-ming, ZUO Ren-guang, WANG Shu-wang, 2012. Application and Comparison of Weighted Weights of Evidence Models. Earth Science, 37(6): 1160-1168. doi: 10.3799/dqkx.2012.123
    Citation: ZHANG Dao-jun, CHENG Qiu-ming, ZUO Ren-guang, WANG Shu-wang, 2012. Application and Comparison of Weighted Weights of Evidence Models. Earth Science, 37(6): 1160-1168. doi: 10.3799/dqkx.2012.123

    加权证据权模型的应用与对比

    doi: 10.3799/dqkx.2012.123
    基金项目: 

    “覆盖区矿产综合预测”计划项目 1212011085468

    “覆盖区矿产综合预测”计划项目 1212011085466

    国家自然科学基金 41002118

    中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金 CUG120116

    中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金 CUG120501

    国土资源部公益性行业科研专项 201211022

    地质过程与矿产资源国家重点实验室科技部专项经费资助 MSFGPMR201203

    详细信息
      作者简介:

      张道军(1985-),男,博士研究生,主要研究方向为数学地质及国土资源信息化.E-mail: cugzdj@gmail.com

    • 中图分类号: P628

    Application and Comparison of Weighted Weights of Evidence Models

    • 摘要: 证据权方法是目前最常用的信息综合方法之一,广泛应用于矿产资源定量预测与评价.然而,它要求变量间相互独立,地质上很难满足这一条件.如何削弱条件不独立对证据权预测结果的影响,已成为当前数学地球科学研究的热点.解决该问题的途径之一是对传统证据权模型进行校正,比如采取加权的方法对原证据权模型计算的证据权重进行修正,以便消除非条件独立性的影响.对近期提出的多种加权证据权模型进行了系统的对比研究,基于同样的应用实例和实验方案,对不同方法的应用效果进行了比较,结果表明,各种加权证据权模型均可不同程度地削弱证据图层条件不独立性的影响,其中,基于逻辑回归的加权证据权模型优于其他加权方法.

       

    • 图  1  各证据权模型预测效果比较

      Fig.  1.  Plot of the number of events versus the area

      表  1  实验数据(据Agterberg et al., 1993)

      Table  1.   Test data

      编号 年龄 高程 接触距离 岩石类型 裂隙距离 通道数 面积
      1 0 0 0 0 1 0 10 052
      2 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 363
      3 0 0 0 1 1 0 3 268
      4 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 074
      5 0 1 0 0 1 0 5 455
      6 0 1 0 0 0 0 25
      7 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 482
      8 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 518
      9 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 474
      10 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 371
      11 1 0 0 0 1 0 5
      12 1 0 0 0 0 0 705
      13 0 0 1 1 1 0 5
      14 0 0 1 1 0 0 744
      15 1 0 0 1 1 0 422
      16 1 0 0 1 0 0 58
      17 0 1 1 0 1 0 12
      18 0 1 1 0 0 0 179
      19 1 1 0 0 1 2 1 766
      20 1 1 0 0 0 0 119
      21 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 055
      22 0 1 1 1 0 0 33
      23 1 0 1 0 1 0 10
      24 1 1 0 1 1 0 146
      25 1 0 1 0 0 1 623
      26 1 1 0 1 0 0 145
      27 1 0 1 1 1 2 504
      28 1 0 1 1 0 0 1
      29 1 1 1 0 1 2 317
      30 1 1 1 0 0 1 277
      31 1 1 1 1 1 3 348
      32 1 1 1 1 0 0 295
      下载: 导出CSV

      表  2  各加权证据权模型加权系数

      Table  2.   Weighted coefficients of different kinds of weighted WofE model

      证据图层 S-K加权 秩相关系数加权 逻辑回归加权 *Deng加权W+ *Deng加权W-
      年龄 0.44 0.76 0.84 0.82 0.80
      高程 0.14 0.82 0.53 0.67 0.76
      接触距离 0.27 0.94 0.84 0.90 0.93
      岩石类型 0.21 0.91 0.00 0.71 0.45
      裂隙距离 0.05 1.11 5.07 6.67 2.61
      注:*Deng的加权方案下,W+W-加权系数不同.
      下载: 导出CSV

      表  3  各种证据权模型的权重

      Table  3.   Weights of different kinds of WofE model

      图层 原始权重 S-K加权 秩相关系数加权 逻辑回归加权 Deng加权
      W+ W- W+ W- W+ W- W+ W- W+ W-
      年龄 1.77 -1.72 0.78 -0.76 1.34 -1.30 1.49 -1.44 1.45 -1.37
      高程 0.67 -0.74 0.09 -0.10 0.55 -0.61 0.36 -0.39 0.45 -0.56
      接触距离 1.19 -1.20 0.33 -0.33 1.11 -1.12 1.00 -1.01 1.07 -1.12
      岩石类型 0.43 -0.26 0.09 -0.05 0.39 -0.24 0.00 0.00 0.30 -0.12
      裂隙距离 0.04 -0.13 0.00 -0.01 0.05 -0.15 0.22 -0.67 0.29 -0.34
      下载: 导出CSV

      表  4  各证据权模型预测后验概率

      Table  4.   Posterior probabilities using different kinds of WofE model

      编号 普通证据权 S-K加权 秩相关系数加权 Deng加权 逻辑回归加权
      1 7.00E-06 9.40E-05 1.31E-05 1.83E-05 2.36E-05
      2 1.30E-05 1.09E-04 2.45E-05 2.79E-05 2.36E-05
      3 1.10E-05 1.08E-04 2.02E-05 1.49E-05 9.76E-06
      4 2.80E-05 1.15E-04 4.17E-05 5.04E-05 5.01E-05
      5 2.30E-05 1.14E-04 3.44E-05 2.69E-05 2.07E-05
      6 7.30E-05 1.82E-04 1.22E-04 1.63E-04 1.77E-04
      7 5.60E-05 1.33E-04 7.80E-05 7.67E-05 5.01E-05
      8 6.20E-05 1.80E-04 1.00E-04 8.68E-05 7.30E-05
      9 4.70E-05 1.32E-04 6.43E-05 4.09E-05 2.07E-05
      10 2.21E-04 4.38E-04 1.82E-04 3.08E-04 4.40E-04
      11 1.86E-04 4.35E-04 1.51E-04 1.64E-04 1.82E-04
      12 1.46E-04 2.10E-04 2.28E-04 2.48E-04 1.77E-04
      13 1.23E-04 2.08E-04 1.88E-04 1.32E-04 7.29E-05
      14 4.41E-04 5.06E-04 3.42E-04 4.68E-04 4.39E-04
      15 3.70E-04 5.02E-04 2.82E-04 2.49E-04 1.82E-04
      16 3.03E-04 2.21E-04 3.89E-04 4.48E-04 3.74E-04
      17 2.55E-04 2.19E-04 3.20E-04 2.39E-04 1.55E-04
      18 7.67E-04 5.29E-04 4.80E-04 4.51E-04 3.85E-04
      19 5.07E-04 2.53E-04 6.00E-04 3.63E-04 1.55E-04
      20 2.40E-03 8.44E-04 1.70E-03 2.73E-03 3.28E-03
      21 1.82E-03 6.15E-04 1.09E-03 1.29E-03 9.31E-04
      22 1.53E-03 6.10E-04 8.99E-04 6.86E-04 3.85E-04
      23 4.01E-03 9.66E-04 2.62E-03 2.21E-03 1.36E-03
      24 1.64E-02 1.17E-03 8.32E-03 6.07E-03 2.87E-03
      25 6.00E-06 9.40E-05 1.08E-05 9.76E-06 9.77E-06
      26 6.04E-04 2.55E-04 7.27E-04 6.82E-04 3.74E-04
      27 2.02E-03 8.37E-04 1.40E-03 1.46E-03 1.36E-03
      28 8.27E-03 1.02E-03 4.46E-03 3.99E-03 2.87E-03
      29 9.12E-04 5.33E-04 5.82E-04 8.46E-04 9.31E-04
      30 4.77E-03 9.73E-04 3.18E-03 4.15E-03 3.28E-03
      31 9.83E-03 1.03E-03 5.40E-03 7.47E-03 6.92E-03
      32 1.94E-02 1.18E-03 1.01E-02 1.13E-02 6.92E-03
      下载: 导出CSV

      表  5  各证据权模型预测后验概率排序

      Table  5.   The rank of posterior probabilities using different kinds of WofE model

      编号 普通证据权 S-K加权 秩相关系数加权 Deng加权 逻辑回归加权
      1 31 31 31 30 27
      2 29 29 29 28 28
      3 30 30 30 31 32
      4 27 27 27 26 25
      5 28 28 28 29 29
      6 23 23 23 22 19
      7 25 25 25 25 26
      8 24 24 24 24 23
      9 26 26 26 27 30
      10 19 15 21 17 11
      11 20 16 22 21 17
      12 21 21 19 19 20
      13 22 22 20 23 24
      14 15 13 16 13 12
      15 16 14 18 18 18
      16 17 19 15 15 15
      17 18 20 17 20 21
      18 12 12 14 14 13
      19 14 18 12 16 22
      20 7 7 7 6 3
      21 9 9 9 9 10
      22 10 10 10 11 14
      23 6 6 6 7 8
      24 2 2 2 3 6
      25 32 31 32 32 31
      26 13 17 11 12 16
      27 8 8 8 8 7
      28 4 4 4 5 5
      29 11 11 13 10 9
      30 5 5 5 4 4
      31 3 3 3 2 1
      32 1 1 1 1 2
      下载: 导出CSV

      表  6  各证据权模型之间秩相关系数

      Table  6.   Rank correlation coefficients between posterior probabilities obtained from different WofE models

      普通证据权 S-K加权 秩相关系数加权 Deng加权 逻辑回归加权
      不加权 1.00
      S-K加权 0.99 1.00
      秩相关系数加权 0.99 0.96 1.00
      Deng加权 0.99 0.98 0.98 1.00
      逻辑回归加权 0.94 0.96 0.92 0.97 1.00
      下载: 导出CSV
    • Agterberg, F.P., 1989. Computer programs for mineral exploration. Science, 245(4913): 76-81. doi: 10.1126/science.245.4913.76
      Agterberg, F.P., 1992. Combining indicator patterns in weights of evidence modeling for resource evaluation. Nonrenewal Resources, 1(1): 39-50. doi: 10.1007/BF01782111
      Agterberg, F.P., 2011. A modified weights-of-evidence method for regional mineral resource estimation. Natural Resources Research, 20(2): 95-101. doi: 10.1007/s11053-011-9138-0
      Agterberg, F.P., Cheng, Q.M., 2002. Conditional independence test for weights-of-evidence modeling. Natural Resources Research, 11(4): 249-55. doi: 10.1023/A:1021193827501
      Agterberg, F.P., Bonham-Carter, G.F., Cheng, Q.M., et al., 1993. Weights of evidence modeling and weighted logistic regression for mineral potential mapping. In: Davis, J.C., Herzfeld, U.C., eds., Computers in geology—25 years of progress. Oxford University Press, New York, 13-32.
      Agterberg, F.P., Bonham-Carter, G.F., Wright, D.F., 1990. Statistical pattern integration for mineral exploration. In: Gaál, G., Merriam, D.F., eds., Computer applications in resource estimation prediction and assessment of metals and Petroleum. Pergamon Press, New York, 1-12.
      Bonham-Carter, G.F., 1994, Geographic information systems for geoscientists: modeling with GIS. Oxford, Pergamon, 398.
      Bonham-Carter, G.F., Agterberg, F.P., Wright, D.F., 1988. Integration of geological datasets for gold exploration in Nova Scotia. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing, 54(11): 1585-1592. doi: 10.1029/SC010p0015/pdf
      Bonham-Carter, G.F., Agterberg, F.P., Wright, D.F., 1989. Weights of evidence modelling: a new approach to mapping mineral potential. In: Agterberg, F.P., Bonham-Carter, G.F., eds., Statistical applications in the earth sciences. Canadian Government Publishing Centre, Ottawa, 171-183.
      Cervi, F., Berti, M., Borgatti, L., et al., 2010. Comparing predictive capability of statistical and deterministic methods for landslide susceptibility mapping: a case study in the northern Apennines (Reggio Emilia Province, Italy). Landslides, 7(4): 433-444. doi: 10.1007/s10346-010-0207-y
      Cheng, Q.M., 2008. Non-linear theory and power-law models for information integration and mineral resources quantitative assessments. Mathematical Geosciences, 40(5): 503-532. doi: 10.1007/s11004-008-9172-6
      Cheng, Q.M., 2011. Integration of AdaBoost and weights of evidence model for mineral potential probabilistic mapping. Session MG3 "Geo-process Modeling" at IAMG 2011 Annual Conference, Salzburg, Austria.
      Cheng, Q.M., 2012. Application of a newly developed boost weights of evidence model (BoostWofE) for mineral resources quantitative assessments. Journal of Jilin University: Earth Science Edition (in press). http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-CCDZ201206046.htm
      Cho, S.H., Poudyal, N.C., Roberts, R.K., 2008. Spatial analysis of the amenity value of green open space. Ecological Economics, 66(2-3): 403-416. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.10.012
      Deng, M.F., 2009, A conditional dependence adjusted weights of evidence model. Natural Resources Research, 18(4): 249-258. doi: 10.1007/s11053-009-9101-5
      Gorney, R.M., Ferris, D.R., Ward, A.D., et al., 2011. Assessing channel-forming characteristics of an impacted headwater stream in Ohio, USA. Ecological Engineering, 37(3): 418-430. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2010.11.013
      Journel, A.G., 2002. Combining knowledge from diverse sources: an alternative to traditional conditional independence hypotheses. Mathematical Geosciences, 34(5): 573-596. doi: 10.1023/A:1016047012594
      Krishnan, S., Boucher, A., Journel, A.G., 2005. Evaluating information redundancy through the Tau model. Quantitative Geology and geostatistics, 14(5): 1037-1046. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-3610-1_108
      Netra, R., Regmi, N.R., Giardino, J.R., et al., 2010. Modeling susceptibility to landslides using the weight of evidence approach: western Colorado, USA. Geomorphology, 115(1-2): 172-187. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.10.002
      Neuh user, B., Terhorst, B., 2007. Landslide susceptibility assessment using "weights-of-evidence" applied to a study area at the Jurassic escarpment (SW-Germany). Geomorphology, 86(1-2): 12-24. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.08.002
      Polyakova, E.I., Journel, A.G., 2007. The Nu expression for probabilistic data integration. Mathematical Geology, 39(8): 715-733. doi: 10.1007/s11004-007-9117-5
      Romero-Calcerrada, R., Barrio-Parra, F., Millington, J.D.A., et al., 2010. Spatial modelling of socioeconomic data to understand patterns of human-caused wildfire ignition risk in the SW of Madrid (central Spain). Ecological Modelling, 221(1) : 34-45. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.08.008
      Romero-Calcerrada, R., Luque, S., 2006. Habitat quality assessment using weights-of-evidence based GIS modelling: the case of picoides tridactylus as species indicator of the biodiversity value of the finnish forest. Ecological Modelling, 196(1-2): 62-76. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.02.017
      Schaeben, H., 2012. Comparison of mathematical methods of potential modeling. Mathematical Geosciences, 44(1): 101-129. doi: 10.1007/s11004-011-9373-2
      Schaeben, H., Boogart, K.G.V.D., 2011. Comment on "a conditional dependence adjusted weights of evidence model" by Minfeng Deng in natural resources research 18(2009), 249-258. Natural Resources Research, 20(4): 401-406. doi: 10.1007/s11053-011-9146-0
      Spiegelhalter, D.J., Knill-Jones, R.P., 1984. Statistical and knowledge-based approaches to clinical decision-support systems, with an application in gastroenterology. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society(Ser. A), 147(1): 35-77. doi: 10.2307/2981737
      Wang, Z.W., Li, D.Y., Wang, X.G., 2007. Zonation of landslide hazards based on weights of evidence model. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 29(8): 1268-1273 (in Chinese with English abstract). http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-YTGC200708028.htm
      Zhang, S.Y., Cheng, Q.M., Zhang, S.P., et al., 2009. Weighted weights of evidence and stepwise weights of evidence and their application in Sn-Cu mineral potential mapping in Gejiu, Yunnan Province, China. Earth Science—Journal of China University of Geosciences, 34(2): 281-286(in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.3799/dqkx.2009.028
      Zhang, S.Y., Wu, Q., Cheng, Q.M., et al., 2006. Weights of evidence method based on fuzzy training layer and its application in desertification assessment. Earth Science—Journal of China University of Geosciences, 31(3): 389-393(in Chinese with English abstract). http://www.researchgate.net/publication/286656642_Weights_of_evidence_method_based_on_fuzzy_training_layer_and_its_application_in_desertification_assessment
      成秋明, 2012. 增强证据权(BoostWofE)新方法在矿产资源定量评价中的应用. 吉林大学学报: 地球科学版(待刊). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-CCDZ201206046.htm
      王志旺, 李端有, 王湘桂, 2007. 证据权法在滑坡危险度区划研究中的应用. 岩土工程学报, 29(8): 1268-1273. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-4548.2007.08.026
      张生元, 成秋明, 张素萍, 等, 2009. 加权证据权模型和逐步证据权模型及其在个旧锡铜矿产资源预测中的应用. 地球科学——中国地质大学学报, 34(2): 281-286. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQKX200902008.htm
      张生元, 武强, 成秋明, 等, 2006. 基于模糊预测对象的证据权方法及其在土地沙漠化评价中的应用. 地球科学——中国地质大学学报, 31(3): 389-393. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQKX200603016.htm
    • 加载中
    图(1) / 表(6)
    计量
    • 文章访问数:  525
    • HTML全文浏览量:  430
    • PDF下载量:  13
    • 被引次数: 0
    出版历程
    • 收稿日期:  2012-07-10
    • 网络出版日期:  2021-11-09
    • 刊出日期:  2012-06-15

    目录

      /

      返回文章
      返回