基于证据推理的流域水质综合评价法——以湘江水质评价为例

doi:10.18402/resci.2019.11.06

资源科学 ›› 2019, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (11): 2020-2031.doi: 10.18402/resci.2019.11.06

基于证据推理的流域水质综合评价法——以湘江水质评价为例

胡东滨^1,³, 蔡洪鹏¹(), 陈晓红^1,³, 孟凡永¹, 罗岳平^2,³, 潘海婷^2,³

^1. 中南大学商学院,长沙 410083
^2. 湖南省环境监测中心站,长沙 410014
^3. 湖南省两型社会与生态文明协同创新中心,长沙 410083

收稿日期:2017-01-05 修回日期:2019-08-05 出版日期:2019-11-25 发布日期:2019-12-03
通讯作者: 蔡洪鹏
作者简介:胡东滨,男,湖南长沙人,教授,博士,主要从事环境大数据研究。E-mail：hdbin@163.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(71431006);国家自然科学基金项目(91846301)

Comprehensive assessment of water quality based on evidential reasoning： Taking the Xiangjiang River as an example

HU Dongbin^1,³, CAI Hongpeng¹(), CHEN Xiaohong^1,³, MENG Fanyong¹, LUO Yueping^2,³, PAN Haiting^2,³

^1. Business school, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China
^2. Hunan Environmental Monitoring Center, Changsha 410014, China
^3. Resource-Conserving & Environment-Friendly Society and Ecological Civilization Collaborative Innovation Center of Hunan Province, Changsha 410083, China;

Received:2017-01-05 Revised:2019-08-05 Online:2019-11-25 Published:2019-12-03
Contact: CAI Hongpeng

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

水质综合评价是水环境综合整治的重要基础性工作,通过科学准确的评价,才能对水质治理做出科学的治理规划和有效的治理措施。本文基于证据推理理论,提出了一种水质综合评价方法。通过建立水质综合评估模型和信度分布函数,将水质指标的监测值转化为各评估等级的置信度;结合证据推理的合成规则和算法,将隶属于同一评估等级的指标进行证据递归合成,计算出各评估等级的概率分布;并引入效用理论,实现水质的相互比较。本文以湘江为例,对其2011—2017年水质进行综合评估。同时,将本方法与水质评价中应用较为广泛的模糊综合评价法、灰色聚类法进行比较,结果显示,基于证据推理的水质综合评价法更加科学准确,能有效地反映水质的实际情况。本文对流域内不同空间、时间点水质的多指标数据融合和不确定性数据处理具有参考价值,也为湘江流域的水质精准治理和环境管理决策提供支持。

关键词: 水质综合评价, 水环境不确定性, 置信度评估, 证据组合规则, 证据推理, 效用理论, 湘江流域

Abstract:

Comprehensive evaluation of water quality is an important basic work in the integrated improvement of water environment. Reliable and accurate assessment facilitates the development of scientific management plan and effective control measures for water quality. This article proposes a comprehensive assessment method of water quality based on evidential reasoning. Through establishing a water quality comprehensive evaluation model and belief distribution function, the observed values of water quality indicators can be transformed into the confidence degree of each evaluation grade. Combining the synthesis rules and algorithms of evidential reasoning, the probability distribution of each evaluation grade is calculated by synthesizing recursively the indicators that belong to the same evaluation grade. Then the comparison of water quality is realized by introducing the utility theory. Finally, this article takes the Xiangjiang River as an example to comprehensively evaluate its water quality from 2011 to 2017, and compares this method with the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method and grey clustering method, which have been widely used in water quality assessment. The results show that the comprehensive assessment method based on evidential reasoning is more accurate, and can effectively reflect the actual situation of water quality. This study is important in the multi-index data fusion and uncertainty data processing of water quality in different space and time, and also provides support for managing water quality precisely and for environmental management policy and decision making in the Xiangjiang River Basin.

Key words: comprehensive assessment of water quality, uncertainty of water environment, confidence degree assessment, combination rule of evidence, evidential reasoning, utility theory, Xiangjiang River Basin

胡东滨, 蔡洪鹏, 陈晓红, 孟凡永, 罗岳平, 潘海婷. 基于证据推理的流域水质综合评价法——以湘江水质评价为例[J]. 资源科学, 2019, 41(11): 2020-2031.

HU Dongbin, CAI Hongpeng, CHEN Xiaohong, MENG Fanyong, LUO Yueping, PAN Haiting. Comprehensive assessment of water quality based on evidential reasoning： Taking the Xiangjiang River as an example[J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(11): 2020-2031.

图/表 9

图1

表1

地表水水质类别的质量标准"

评价指标		标准值
评价指标		Ⅰ类水质	Ⅱ类水质	Ⅲ类水质	Ⅳ类水质	Ⅴ类水质
pH(无量纲)		7	7.5或6.5	8或6	8.5或5.5	9或5
DO	≥	7.5	6.0	5.0	3.0	2.0
PI	≤	2	4	6	10	15
$N H 4 + - N$	≤	0.15	0.50	1.00	1.50	2.00
Pb	≤	0.01	0.01	0.05	0.05	0.10
TP	≤	0.02	0.10	0.20	0.30	0.40
As	≤	0.05	0.05	0.05	0.10	0.10
Cd	≤	0.001	0.005	0.005	0.005	0.010

表1

图2

表2

2015年湘江各指标等级置信度评估"

置信度( $β$ )		评估等级
置信度( $β$ )		H₁	H₂	H₃	H₄	H₅
水质评价指标	e₁			0.41	0.59
	e₂				0.12	0.88
	e₃					1.00
	e₄				0.31	0.69
	e₅					1.00
	e₆				0.48	0.52
	e₇					1.00
	e₈					1.00

表2

图3

表3

表4

2015年湘江绿埠头断面月份监测数据"

监测时间	水质指标浓度/(mg/L)								单因子评价结果
监测时间	pH	DO	PI	$N H 4 + - N$	Pb	TP	As	Cd	单因子评价结果
2015/1/5	7.82	7.65	1.52	0.132	0.0005	0.076	0.00025	0.00005	Ⅱ类
2015/2/3	8.03	9.23	1.41	0.086	0.0005	0.046	0.00100	0.00005	Ⅱ类
2015/3/3	7.91	8.71	1.48	0.113	0.0005	0.010	0.00100	0.00005	Ⅰ类
2015/4/8	7.56	7.93	1.43	0.127	0.0005	0.008	0.00025	0.00005	Ⅰ类
2015/5/5	7.45	6.56	1.88	0.072	0.0005	0.065	0.00025	0.00005	Ⅱ类
2015/6/4	7.86	5.42	1.55	0.074	0.0005	0.085	0.00025	0.00005	Ⅲ类
2015/7/2	7.93	6.71	1.48	0.073	0.0005	0.020	0.00200	0.00005	Ⅱ类
2015/8/4	8.01	5.91	1.63	0.020	0.0005	0.025	0.00070	0.00005	Ⅲ类
2015/9/1	7.76	6.38	1.43	0.068	0.0005	0.030	0.00025	0.00005	Ⅱ类
2015/10/9	7.41	6.58	1.32	0.057	0.0005	0.130	0.00025	0.00005	Ⅲ类
2015/11/4	7.93	6.39	1.24	0.085	0.0005	0.090	0.00025	0.00005	Ⅱ类
2015/12/2	7.52	6.98	1.34	0.042	0.0005	0.035	0.00025	0.00005	Ⅱ类

表4

图4

图5

参考文献 30

[1]	Grafton Q, Wyrwoll P, White C , et al. Global Water Issues and Insights[M]. Canberra: ANU Press, 2014.
[2]	Yadav S S, Kumar R . Monitoring water quality of Kosi River in Rampur District, Uttar Pradesh, India[J]. Advances in Applied Science Research, 2011,2(2):197-201.
[3]	Oyerinde G T, Oluwasemire K O, Oshunsanya S O . Effects of water pollution on soil physical and hydrological properties of a valley bottom in University of Ibadan, Nigeria[J]. International Journal of Science and Research, 2013,2(2):294-299.
[4]	Zinia N J, Kroeze C . Future trends in urbanization and coastal water pollution in the Bay of Bengal: The lived experience[J]. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 2015,17(3):531-546.
[5]	Miao X, Tang Y, Wong C W Y , et al. The latent causal chain of industrial water pollution in China[J]. Environmental Pollution, 2015,196:473-477.
[6]	McMillan S . Water Pollution: A Global Concern[M]. New York: Callisto Reference, 2015.
[7]	Li C C, Sun L, Jia J X , et al. Risk assessment of water pollution sources based on an integrated K-means clustering and set pair analysis method in the region of Shiyan China[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2016, 557-558:307-316.
[8]	Lu Y L, Song S, Wang R S , et al. Impacts of soil and water pollution on food safety and health risks in China[J]. Environment International, 2015,77(1):5-15.
[9]	Tan Q, Huang G H, Cai Y P . Multi-source multi-sector sustainable water supply under multiple uncertainties: An inexact fuzzy-stochastic quadratic programming approach[J]. Water Resources Management, 2013,27(2):451-473.
[10]	尹海龙, 徐祖信 . 我国单因子水质评价方法改进探讨[J]. 净水技术, 2008,27(2):1-3.
	[ Yin H L, Xu Z X . Discussion on China’s single-factor water quality assessment method[J]. Water Purification Technology, 2008,27(2):1-3.]
[11]	Li B, Yang G S, Wan R R , et al. Dynamic water quality evaluation based on fuzzy matter-element model and functional data analysis: A case study in Poyang Lake[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2017,24(23):19138-19148.
[12]	Wu J H, Xue C Y, Rui T , et al. Lake water quality assessment: A case study of Shahu Lake in the semiarid loess area of northwest China[J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2017, DOI: 10.1007/s12665-017-6516-x.
[13]	Zhang Q, Murphy R R, Tian R , et al. Chesapeake Bay’s water quality condition has been recovering: Insights from a multimetric indicator assessment of thirty years of tidal monitoring data[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2018, 637-638:1617-1625.
[14]	Miao S, Liu C, Qian B J , et al. Remote sensing-based water quality assessment for urban rivers: A study in Linyi development area[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2019, ( 2):1-10.
[15]	Zhang Y N, Chu C L, Li T , et al. A water quality management strategy for regionally protected water through health risk assessment and spatial distribution of heavy metal pollution in 3 marine reserves[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2017, 599-600:721-731.
[16]	Singh S, Ghosh N C, Krishan G , et al. Development of indices for surface and ground water quality assessment and characterization for Indian conditions[J]. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2019, DOI: 10.1007/s10661-019-7276-8.
[17]	Singh K R, Dutta R, Kalamdhad A S , et al. Risk characterization and surface water quality assessment of Manas River, Assam (India) with an emphasis on the TOPSIS method of multi-objective decision making[J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2018, DOI: 10.1007/s12665-018-7970-9.
[18]	周密, 马振 . 改进的综合水质标识指数法及其应用[J]. 水力发电, 2017,43(3):4-7.
	[ Zhou M, Ma Z . Improved comprehensive water quality identification index method and its application[J]. Water Power, 2017,43(3):4-7.]
[19]	李国华, 李畅游, 史小红 , 等. 基于主成分分析及水质标识指数法的黄河托克托段水质评价[J]. 水土保持通报, 2018,38(6):316-320.
	[ Li G H, Li C Y, Shi X H , et al. Evaluation of water quality of Tokto Section in Yellow River based on principal component analysis and water quality identification index[J]. Bulletin Soil and Water Conservation, 2018,38(6):316-320.]
[20]	Li B, Yang G S, Wan R R , et al. Using fuzzy theory and variable weights for water quality evaluation in Poyang Lake, China[J]. Chinese Geographical Science, 2017,27(1):39-51.
[21]	Dempster A P . A generalization of Bayesian inference[J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 1968,30(2):205-247.
[22]	Hui W, Guo L L, Zheng D , et al. A new method of cognitive signal recognition based on hybrid information entropy and D-S Evidence theory[J]. Mobile Networks & Applications, 2018,23(4):677-685.
[23]	Chen N, Yin S W, Yu D J , et al. An efficient epistemic uncertainty analysis method for structural-acoustic problem based on evidence theory[J]. Noise Control Engineering Journal, 2018,66(2):117-130.
[24]	Huang Z L, Jiang C, Zhang Z , et al. A decoupling approach for evidence-theory-based reliability design optimization[J]. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2017,56(1):647-661.
[25]	Zhang W, Zhao W, Jin T , et al. Fault diagnosis method of transformer based on multi-neural network and evidence theory[J]. High Voltage Apparatus, 2018,54(8):207-211.
[26]	Titkanloo H N, Keramati A, Fekri R . Data aggregation in multi-source assessment model based on evidence theory[J]. Applied Soft Computing, 2018,69:443-452.
[27]	Yang J B, Singh M G . An evidential reasoning approach for multiple-attribute decision making with uncertainty[J]. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 1994,24(1):1-18.
[28]	Yang J B, Xu D L . Evidential reasoning rule for evidence combination[J]. Artificial Intelligence, 2013,205:1-29.
[29]	潘爱民, 刘友金 . 湘江流域人口城镇化与土地城镇化失调程度及特征研究[J]. 经济地理, 2014,34(5):65-70.
	[ Pan A M, Liu Y J . The degree of imbalance between population urbanization and land urbanization of Xiangjiang River Basin[J]. Economic Geography, 2014,34(5):65-70.]
[30]	徐祖信, 尹海龙 . 城市水环境管理中的综合水质分析与评价[M]. 北京: 中国水利水电出版社, 2012.
	[ Xu Z X, Yin H L. Comprehensive Analysis and Evaluation of Water Quality in Urban Water Environment Management[M]. Beijing: China Water & Power Press, 2012.]

市区	湘江断面
永州市	绿埠头、港子口、归阳镇
衡阳市	松柏、黄茶岭、熬洲、朱亭镇
株洲市	枫溪、白石、霞湾、马家河
湘潭市	易家湾、五星、昭山
长沙市	猴子石、三叉矶、乔口、樟树港

基于证据推理的流域水质综合评价法——以湘江水质评价为例

Comprehensive assessment of water quality based on evidential reasoning： Taking the Xiangjiang River as an example

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 30

相关文章 2

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	曾黎, 杨庆媛, 廖俊儒, 陈展图, 陈伊多, 杨人豪. 基于农户受偿意愿的休耕补偿标准探讨——以河北样本户为例[J]. 资源科学, 2018, 40(7): 1375-1386.
[2]	宫俊霞, 邹滨, 刘兴权. 1990-2010年湘江流域城镇化过程时空分异特征[J]. 资源科学, 2016, 38(9): 1723-1732.