Regional landslide hazard assessment using the IV-RF coupling model and critical monthly average rainfall threshold：A case study from Fuling District, Chongqing
-
摘要:
提高降雨型滑坡易发性预测精度和构建合适的降雨阈值模型对区域滑坡危险性评价具有重要意义。以重庆市涪陵区为例，采用信息量模型、BP神经网络模型、随机森林模型、信息量-BP神经网络耦合模型和信息量-随机森林耦合模型进行区域滑坡易发性评价，对比不同模型下的接受者操作特征曲线、曲线下方面积和易发性分布规律。提出滑坡临界月平均降雨阈值模型，反演出不同时间概率下的临界月平均降雨阈值。将易发性结果与时间概率等级进行耦合得到区域滑坡危险性评价结果并随机选取30次滑坡事件与4次典型滑坡事件进一步验证了评价精度。研究结果表明：信息量和机器学习模型进行耦合，弥补了机器学习在前期数据输入和非样本选择的缺点，提升了单一机器学习模型的预测精度，其中信息量-随机森林耦合模型预测精度最高；随机选取的30例滑坡样本中，有20例滑坡（占67%）位于发生时间概率50%以上区域，验证了临界月平均降雨阈值模型的精度；随机选取的4例典型滑坡样本中，时间概率等级基本为P4或P5，且位置均位于高危险区与极高危险区中，与现场调查结果基本一致，说明基于信息量-随机森林耦合模型和临界月平均降雨阈值的区域滑坡危险性评价结果准确且可靠。
Abstract:Improving the accuracy of susceptibility prediction for rainfall-induced landslides and establishing suitable rainfall threshold models are of great significance for regional landslide hazard assessment. Taking Fuling District of Chongqing as a case study, the information value model, BP neural network model, random forest model, information value-BP neural network coupled model, and information value-random forest coupled model were used to evaluate regional landslide susceptibility. By comparing the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, area under the curve (AUC), and susceptibility distribution patterns of different models, a critical monthly average rainfall threshold model for landslides is proposed, and critical monthly average rainfall thresholds for different temporal probabilities were inferred. The susceptibility results were coupled with temporal probability levels to produce regional landslide hazard assessment results. The evaluation accuracy is further validated with 30 randomly selected landslide events and 4 typical landslide cases. The results show that coupling the Information Value and machine learning models compensates for the shortcomings of machine learning in early data input and non-sample selection, enhancing the predictive accuracy of single machine learning models. Among these, the information value-random forest coupled model exhibits the highest predictive accuracy; of the 30 randomly selected landslide samples, 20 cases (67%) occurred in areas with a temporal probability of over 50%, validating the accuracy of the critical monthly average rainfall threshold model. The 4 typical landslide samples selected randomly were primarily in the P4 or P5 temporal probability levels and were located in high to very high-risk areas, aligning well with field survey results. This indicates that the regional landslide hazard assessment based on the information value-random forest coupled model and the critical monthly average rainfall threshold is accurate and reliable.
-
-
![]()
图 4 研究区地理位置及雨量站分布情况
Figure 4. Geographical location and rainfall stations distribution of the study area
![]()
图 5 涪陵区滑坡相关评价因子图
Figure 5. Environmental assessment factors map of landslide in Fuling District
![]()
图 10 雨量站多年月平均降雨量统计图
Figure 10. Statistical map of multi-year average monthly cumulative rainfall at rainfall stations
![]()
图 11 斜坡单元月平均降雨量分布图
Figure 11. Distribution map of monthly average rainfall across slope units
![]()
图 12 月平均降雨量与滑坡频率
Figure 12. Relationship between monthly average rainfall and landslide frequency
![]()
图 13 滑坡累计占比曲线及月平均降雨量分级
Figure 13. Cumulative proportion curve of landslides and grading of monthly average rainfall
![]()
图 15 时间概率等级依次为P1−P5时的涪陵区滑坡危险性
Figure 15. Landslide hazard in Fuling District for temporal probability levels P1 to P5
表 1 基于易发性与时间概率等级的区域滑坡危险性评价表
Table 1 Regional landslide hazard assessment table based on susceptibility and temporal probability levels
时间等级 易发性 极低
易发性低
易发性中
易发性高
易发性极高
易发性P1(0<P(x)≤P1) 极低
危险性极低
危险性极低
危险性极低
危险性低
危险性P2(P1<P(x)≤P2) 极低
危险性极低
危险性低
危险性低
危险性中
危险性P3(P2<P(x)≤P3) 极低
危险性低
危险性中
危险性中
危险性高
危险性P4(P3<P(x)≤P4) 极低
危险性低
危险性中
危险性高
危险性极高
危险性P5(P4<P(x)≤1) 低
危险性中
危险性高
危险性极高
危险性极高
危险性
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 评价因子分级结果
Table 2 The grading results of assessment factors
评价
因子分级 分级面积/km2 Si/S
(×100)滑坡面积/km2 Ni/N
(×100)I 坡度/（°） 0～10 997.6 33.9 1.8 22.8 −0.4 10～20 996.8 33.9 3.7 46.8 0.3 20～30 629.7 21.4 2.0 25.3 0.2 30～40 246.3 8.4 0.4 5.1 −0.5 >40 71.8 2.4 0.0 0.0 −5.3 坡向/
（°）北(337.5～22.5) 168.2 5.7 0.3 3.8 −0.4 东北(22.5～67.5) 67.7 2.3 1.5 19.0 2.1 东(67.5～112.5) 320.3 10.9 1.0 12.7 0.2 东南(112.5～157.5) 337.5 11.5 0.8 10.1 −0.1 南(157.5～202.5) 294.5 10.0 0.8 10.1 0.0 西南(202.5～247.5) 313.1 10.6 0.8 10.1 0.0 西(247.5～292.5) 352.2 12.0 1.3 16.5 0.3 西北(292.5～337.5) 400.8 13.6 1.1 13.9 0.0 平面(−1) 687.7 23.4 0.3 3.8 −1.8 曲率 <−9 100.9 3.4 0.0 0.0 −5.6 −9～−6 172.7 5.9 0.1 1.3 −1.5 −6～−3 1201.1 40.8 3.4 43.0 0.1 −3～0 550.7 18.7 0.3 3.8 −1.6 0～3 550.7 18.7 4.1 51.9 1.0 3～6 176.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 −6.2 6～12 92.9 3.2 0.0 0.0 −5.5 >12 97.7 3.3 0.0 0.0 −5.6 高程/
m<200 129.4 4.4 1.9 24.1 1.7 200～300 377.1 12.8 2.6 32.9 0.9 300～400 449.6 15.3 1.6 20.3 0.3 400～500 417.2 14.2 0.7 8.9 −0.5 500～600 377.3 12.8 0.4 5.1 −0.9 600～700 435.3 14.8 0.4 5.1 −1.1 700～800 375.7 12.8 0.2 2.5 −1.6 800～900 124.1 4.2 0.1 1.3 −1.2 900～ 1000 72.7 2.5 0.0 0.0 −5.3 > 1000 184.1 6.3 0.0 0.0 −6.2 地形湿度指数 <10 558.1 19.0 0.9 11.4 −0.5 10～20 825.4 28.1 2.2 27.8 0.0 20～30 449.1 15.3 1.6 20.3 0.3 30～40 215.4 7.3 1.2 15.2 0.7 40～50 108.0 3.7 0.5 6.3 0.5 >50 786.5 26.7 1.5 19.0 −0.3 地表粗
糙度<1.1 2346.2 79.7 6.7 84.8 0.1 1.1～1.2 400.9 13.6 1.0 12.7 −0.1 1.2～1.3 120.8 4.1 0.2 2.5 −0.5 1.3～1.4 55.9 1.9 0.0 0.0 −5.0 1.4～1.5 15.8 0.5 0.0 0.0 −3.7 >1.5 2.7 0.1 0.0 0.0 −2.0 地层 梁山组+栖霞组+
茅口组并层26.1 0.9 0.0 0.1 −1.9 大冶组与嘉陵江
组并层533.8 18.1 0.3 3.8 −1.6 巴东组 212.6 7.2 1.0 12.7 0.6 地层 吴家坪组与长兴
组并层48.8 1.7 0.0 0.0 −4.9 韩家店组 9.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 −3.2 须家河组 137.7 4.7 0.4 5.1 0.1 珍珠冲组 122.2 4.2 0.7 8.9 0.8 自流井组 85.3 2.9 0.7 8.9 1.1 新田沟组 85.4 2.9 0.2 2.5 −0.1 沙溪庙组 841.7 28.6 2.4 30.4 0.1 龙马溪组与小河坝组并层 2.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 −1.8 蓬莱镇组 367.7 12.5 0.0 0.5 −3.2 遂宁组 469.8 16.0 2.2 27.8 0.6 岩层倾
角/（°）<10 632.0 21.5 1.8 22.8 0.1 10～20 1096.4 37.3 3.9 49.4 0.3 20～30 443.6 15.1 1.1 13.9 −0.1 30～40 364.9 12.4 0.6 7.6 −0.5 40～50 342.2 11.6 0.5 6.3 −0.6 50～60 58.2 2.0 0.0 0.0 −5.1 >60 5.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 −2.6 岩层倾
向/（°）北(337.5～22.5) 376.3 12.8 1.0 12.9 0.0 东北(22.5～67.5) 319.5 10.8 0.7 8.5 −0.2 东(67.5～112.5) 367.2 12.5 1.0 12.5 0.0 东南(112.5～157.5) 364.8 12.4 0.8 9.6 −0.3 南(157.5～202.5) 305.1 10.3 0.5 6.6 −0.4 西南(202.5～247.5) 313.5 10.6 1.5 18.4 0.6 西(247.5～292.5) 427.1 14.5 1.5 18.7 0.3 西北(292.5～337.5) 476.2 16.1 1.0 12.8 −0.2 距断层距离/km <1 101.2 3.4 0.5 6.3 0.6 1～2 111.9 3.8 0.6 7.6 0.7 2～3 128.4 4.4 0.2 2.5 −0.5 3～4 141.3 4.8 0.4 5.1 0.1 4～5 154.4 5.2 0.3 3.8 −0.3 >5 2305.2 78.3 5.9 74.7 0.0 距水系距离/m 0～200 173.6 5.9 2.6 32.4 1.7 200～400 102.1 3.5 1.2 14.9 1.5 400～600 104.7 3.6 0.2 2.5 −0.4 600～800 94.5 3.2 0.2 2.9 −0.1 800～ 1000 102.9 3.5 0.2 2.9 −0.2 1000 ～1200 84.8 2.9 0.1 0.9 −1.2 1200 ～1400 100.2 3.4 0.1 0.8 −1.4 1400 ～1600 90.9 3.1 0.7 8.9 1.1 > 1600 2087.6 71.0 2.7 33.9 −0.7 距道路距离/m 0～200 310.1 10.5 2.1 28.5 1.0 200～400 197.5 6.7 0.5 6.6 0.0 400～600 177.1 6.0 0.8 11.2 0.6 600～800 144.4 4.9 0.4 5.1 0.0 800～ 1000 140.5 4.8 0.2 2.2 −0.8 1000 ～1200 110.4 3.8 0.2 2.9 −0.3 1200 ～1400 122.2 4.2 0.3 4.0 0.0 > 1400 1739.1 59.1 3.4 44.9 −0.3 土层厚
度/m0～2.5 2503.5 85.1 4.0 50.6 −0.5 2.5～5 272.4 9.3 1.3 16.5 0.6 5～7.5 30.5 1.0 0.9 11.4 2.4 7.5～10 69.8 2.4 0.9 11.4 1.6 10～12.5 18.6 0.6 0.2 2.5 1.4 12.5～15 19.6 0.7 0.2 2.5 1.3 15～17.5 13.8 0.5 0.4 5.1 2.4 17.5～20 9.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 −3.2 >20 5.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 −2.6 归一化植被指数 <−0.1 53.1 1.8 0.6 7.6 1.4 −0.1～0 15.8 0.5 0.2 2.5 1.5 0～0.1 24.1 0.8 0.1 1.3 0.4 0.1～0.2 62.9 2.1 0.1 1.3 −0.5 0.2～0.3 135.6 4.6 0.5 6.3 0.3 0.3～0.4 720.1 24.5 1.7 21.5 −0.1 0.4～0.5 1624.4 55.2 3.7 46.8 −0.2 >0.5 306.1 10.4 1.0 12.7 0.2 土地利用类别 耕地 1452.9 49.4 5.3 67.5 0.3 林地 726.6 24.7 0.4 4.7 −1.7 草地 512.1 17.4 1.3 16.6 −0.1 灌木地 67.1 2.3 0.1 1.2 −0.7 湿地 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.1 水体 88.7 3.0 0.0 0.1 −3.1 人造地表 94.4 3.2 0.8 9.8 1.1
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 雨量站月平均降雨量
Table 3 Average monthly rainfall of rainfall stations
雨量站 月平均降雨量/mm 长寿 95.6 涪陵 91.4 丰都 91.6 凤来 106.4 雨台山 81.9 睦和 87.5 双河口 104.2 大木 117.6 河图 75.6 武陵山 89.3 龙潭 102.5
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 时间概率等级与月平均降雨量关系表
Table 4 Relationship between temporal probability levels and monthly average rainfall
时间概率等级 时间概率 月平均降雨量/mm P1 0<P(x)≤0.1 <78 P2 0.1<P(x)≤0.25 78～87 P3 0.25<P(x)≤0.5 87～96 P4 0.5<P(x)≤0.75 96～106 P5 0.75<P(x)≤1 >106
下载: 导出CSV
表 5 30次滑坡样本发生时间概率等级统计表
Table 5 Temporal probability levels of occurrence for 30 landslide samples
时间概率等级 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 样本数 2 2 6 12 8
下载: 导出CSV
表 6 4次典型滑坡信息
Table 6 Information on four typical landslides
滑坡事件 日期 月平均降雨量/mm 时间概率等级 滑坡1 2020-06-29 98.7 P4 滑坡2 2018-08-01 103.4 P4 滑坡3 2020-06-27 118.2 P5 滑坡4 2016-06-02 121.3 P5
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 谢家龙,李远耀,王宁涛,等. 考虑库水位及降雨联合作用的云阳县区域滑坡危险性评价[J]. 长江科学院院报,2021,38(12):72 − 81. [XIE Jialong,LI Yuanyao,WANG Ningtao,et al. Assessment of regional landslide hazard in Yunyang County considering the combined effect of reservoir water level and rainfall[J]. Journal of Yangtze River Scientific Research Institute,2021,38(12):72 − 81. (in Chinese with English abstract)] XIE Jialong, LI Yuanyao, WANG Ningtao, et al. Assessment of regional landslide hazard in Yunyang County considering the combined effect of reservoir water level and rainfall［J］. Journal of Yangtze River Scientific Research Institute, 2021, 38（12）: 72 − 81. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[2] LIN Qigen,LIMA P,STEGER S,et al. National-scale data-driven rainfall induced landslide susceptibility mapping for China by accounting for incomplete landslide data[J]. Geoscience Frontiers,2021,12(6):101248. DOI: 10.1016/j.gsf.2021.101248
[3] LI Langping,LAN Hengxing,GUO Changbao,et al. A modified frequency ratio method for landslide susceptibility assessment[J]. Landslides,2017,14(2):727 − 741. DOI: 10.1007/s10346-016-0771-x
[4] HUANG Faming,YIN Kunlong,HUANG Jinsong,et al. Landslide susceptibility mapping based on self-organizing-map network and extreme learning machine[J]. Engineering Geology,2017,223:11 − 22. DOI: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2017.04.013
[5] HUANG Faming,ZHANG Jing,ZHOU Chuangbing,et al. A deep learning algorithm using a fully connected sparse autoencoder neural network for landslide susceptibility prediction[J]. Landslides,2020,17(1):217 − 229. DOI: 10.1007/s10346-019-01274-9
[6] GUO Zizheng,YIN Kunlong,GUI Lei,et al. Regional rainfall warning system for landslides with creep deformation in Three Gorges using a statistical black box model[J]. Scientific Reports,2019,9:8962. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-45403-9
[7] NGUYEN B Q V,KIM Y T. Regional-scale landslide risk assessment on Mt. Umyeon using risk index estimation[J]. Landslides,2021,18(7):2547 − 2564. DOI: 10.1007/s10346-021-01622-8
[8] HUANG Faming,CAO Zhongshan,GUO Jianfei,et al. Comparisons of heuristic,general statistical and machine learning models for landslide susceptibility prediction and mapping[J]. Catena,2020,191:104580. DOI: 10.1016/j.catena.2020.104580
[9] HE Qian,JIANG Ziyu,WANG Ming,et al. Landslide and wildfire susceptibility assessment in southeast Asia using ensemble machine learning methods[J]. Remote Sensing,2021,13(8):1572. DOI: 10.3390/rs13081572
[10] WANG Zitao,LIU Qimeng,LIU Yu. Mapping landslide susceptibility using machine learning algorithms and GIS:A case study in Shexian County,Anhui Province,China[J]. Symmetry,2020,12(12):1954. DOI: 10.3390/sym12121954
[11] 周超,甘露露,王悦,等. 综合非滑坡样本选取指数与异质集成机器学习的区域滑坡易发性建模[J]. 地球信息科学学报,2023,25(8):1570 − 1585. [ZHOU Chao,GAN Lulu,WANG Yue,et al. Landslide susceptibility prediction based on non-landslide samples selection and heterogeneous ensemble machine learning[J]. Journal of Geo-Information Science,2023,25(8):1570 − 1585. (in Chinese with English abstract)] ZHOU Chao, GAN Lulu, WANG Yue, et al. Landslide susceptibility prediction based on non-landslide samples selection and heterogeneous ensemble machine learning［J］. Journal of Geo-Information Science, 2023, 25（8）: 1570 − 1585. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[12] 贾雨霏,魏文豪,陈稳,等. 基于SOM-I-SVM耦合模型的滑坡易发性评价[J]. 水文地质工程地质,2023,50(3):125 − 137. [JIA Yufei,WEI Wenhao,CHEN Wen,et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment based on the SOM-I-SVM model[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology,2023,50(3):125 − 137. (in Chinese with English abstract)] JIA Yufei, WEI Wenhao, CHEN Wen, et al. Landslide susceptibility assessment based on the SOM-I-SVM model［J］. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 2023, 50（3）: 125 − 137. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[13] 李国营,刘平,张凯,等. 量纲统一在滑坡易发性评价中的影响分析[J]. 水文地质工程地质,2024,51(3):118 − 129. [LI Guoying,LIU Ping,ZHANG Kai,et al. Analysis of the influence of dimensional unity in landslide susceptibility assessment[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology,2024,51(3):118 − 129. (in Chinese with English abstract)] LI Guoying, LIU Ping, ZHANG Kai, et al. Analysis of the influence of dimensional unity in landslide susceptibility assessment［J］. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 2024, 51（3）: 118 − 129. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[14] 易靖松,王峰,程英建,等. 高山峡谷区地质灾害危险性评价——以四川省阿坝县为例[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2022,33(3):134 − 142. [YI Jingsong,WANG Feng,CHENG Yingjian,et al. Study on the risk assessment of geological disasters in alpine valley area:A case study in Aba County,Sichuan Province[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2022,33(3):134 − 142. (in Chinese with English abstract)] YI Jingsong, WANG Feng, CHENG Yingjian, et al. Study on the risk assessment of geological disasters in alpine valley area: A case study in Aba County, Sichuan Province［J］. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2022, 33（3）: 134 − 142. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[15] 陈洪凯,魏来,谭玲. 降雨型滑坡经验性降雨阈值研究综述[J]. 重庆交通大学学报(自然科学版),2012,31(5):990 − 996. [CHEN Hongkai,WEI Lai,TAN Ling. Review of research on empirical rainfall threshold of rainfall-induced landslide[J]. Journal of Chongqing Jiaotong University (Natural Science),2012,31(5):990 − 996. (in Chinese with English abstract)] CHEN Hongkai, WEI Lai, TAN Ling. Review of research on empirical rainfall threshold of rainfall-induced landslide［J］. Journal of Chongqing Jiaotong University （Natural Science）, 2012, 31（5）: 990 − 996. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[16] 许强. 对滑坡监测预警相关问题的认识与思考[J]. 工程地质学报,2020,28(2):360 − 374. [XU Qiang. Understanding the landslide monitoring and early warning:Consideration to practical issues[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology,2020,28(2):360 − 374. (in Chinese with English abstract)] XU Qiang. Understanding the landslide monitoring and early warning: Consideration to practical issues［J］. Journal of Engineering Geology, 2020, 28（2）: 360 − 374. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[17] ROSI A,PETERNEL T,JEMEC-AUFLIČ M,et al. Rainfall thresholds for rainfall-induced landslides in Slovenia[J]. Landslides,2016,13(6):1571 − 1577. DOI: 10.1007/s10346-016-0733-3
[18] 赵伯驹,李宁,幸夫诚,等. 基于I-CF模型的四川德格县滑坡危险性评价与区划[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报,2023,34(5):32 − 42. [ZHAO Boju,LI Ning,XING Fucheng,et al. Landslide geological hazard assessment based on the I-CF model of Dege County in Sichuan Province[J]. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control,2023,34(5):32 − 42. (in Chinese with English abstract)] ZHAO Boju, LI Ning, XING Fucheng, et al. Landslide geological hazard assessment based on the I-CF model of Dege County in Sichuan Province［J］. The Chinese Journal of Geological Hazard and Control, 2023, 34（5）: 32 − 42. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[19] PRADHAN B,LEE S,BUCHROITHNER M F. A GIS-based back-propagation neural network model and its cross-application and validation for landslide susceptibility analyses[J]. Computers,Environment and Urban Systems,2010,34(3):216 − 235. DOI: 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2009.12.004
[20] L-B STATISTICS,BREIMAN L. Random forests[J]. Machine Learning,2001:5 − 32.
[21] 黄发明,曹中山,姚池,等. 基于决策树和有效降雨强度的滑坡危险性预警[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版),2021,55(3):472 − 482. [HUANG Faming,CAO Zhongshan,YAO Chi,et al. Landslides hazard warning based on decision tree and effective rainfall intensity[J]. Journal of Zhejiang University (Engineering Science),2021,55(3):472 − 482. (in Chinese with English abstract)] HUANG Faming, CAO Zhongshan, YAO Chi, et al. Landslides hazard warning based on decision tree and effective rainfall intensity［J］. Journal of Zhejiang University （Engineering Science）, 2021, 55（3）: 472 − 482. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[22] 谭玉敏,郭栋,白冰心,等. 基于信息量模型的涪陵区地质灾害易发性评价[J]. 地球信息科学学报,2015,17(12):1554 − 1562. [TAN Yumin,GUO Dong,BAI Bingxin,et al. Geological hazard risk assessment based on information quantity model in Fuling District,Chongqing City,China[J]. Journal of Geo-Information Science,2015,17(12):1554 − 1562. (in Chinese with English abstract)] TAN Yumin, GUO Dong, BAI Bingxin, et al. Geological hazard risk assessment based on information quantity model in Fuling District, Chongqing City, China［J］. Journal of Geo-Information Science, 2015, 17（12）: 1554 − 1562. （in Chinese with English abstract）
[23] 柳依莎,杨华. 基于信息量模型的地质灾害危险性评价研究——以重庆市涪陵区为例[J]. 重庆师范大学学报(自然科学版),2012,29(4):34 − 40. [LIU Yisha,YANG Hua. On the information content model of geological hazard assessment in the area of Fuling of Chongqing[J]. Journal of Chongqing Normal University (Natural Science),2012,29(4):34 − 40. (in Chinese with English abstract)] LIU Yisha, YANG Hua. On the information content model of geological hazard assessment in the area of Fuling of Chongqing［J］. Journal of Chongqing Normal University （Natural Science）, 2012, 29（4）: 34 − 40. （in Chinese with English abstract）
计量
- 文章访问数: 154
- HTML全文浏览量: 41
- PDF下载量: 49
邮件订阅
RSS