ArticlePloS one2021
Cloud model-based evaluation of landslide dam development feasibility.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As natural backwater structures, landslide dams both threaten downstream human settlement or infrastructure and contain abundant hydro-energy and tourism resources, so research on their development feasibility is of great significance for permanently remedying them and effectively turning disasters into benefits. Through an analysis of the factors influencing landslide dam development and utilization, an index system (consisting of target, rule, and index layers) for evaluating development feasibility was constructed in this paper. Considering uncertainty and randomness in development feasibility evaluation, a cloud model-improved evaluation method was proposed to determine membership and score clouds based on the uncertainty reasoning of cloud model, and a cloud model-improved analytic hierarchy process (AHP-Cloud Model) was introduced to obtain weights. Final evaluation results were obtained using a hierarchical weighted summary. The improved method was applied to evaluate the Hongshiyan and Tangjiashan landslide dams and the results were compared with the maximum membership principle results. The results showed that the cloud model depicted the fuzziness and uncertainty in the evaluation process. The improved method proposed in this paper overcame the loss of fuzziness in the maximum membership principle evaluation results, and was capable of more directly presenting evaluation results. The development feasibility of the Hongshiyan landslide dam was relatively high, while that of the Tangjiashan landslide dam was relatively low. As suggested by these results, the evaluation model proposed in this paper has great significance for preparing a long-term management scheme for landslide dams.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.