ArticleScientific reports2026
Optimization of ecological and efficient restoration technology for green mines based on hesitant fuzzy TOPSIS.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
The geological conditions of mines are complex and diverse, and existing restoration methods may not be sufficient to meet the requirements for all types of mine rehabilitation. A study on the optimization of ecological restoration technologies for green mines based on hesitant fuzzy TOPSIS has been proposed, offering a novel approach for selecting ecological restoration solutions for rock slopes in green mines. First, a remote 3D laser scanner is used to construct a digital terrain model (DTM) for the target mine. Then, based on characteristics such as geological lithology, slope aspect, and slope angle, the open-pit mine slopes are divided into zones. Finally, the rock mass quality of each slope zone is evaluated using eight indicators, including uniaxial saturated compressive strength, rock quality designation (RQD), structural plane condition, joint spacing, and integrity coefficient. The evaluation process specifically includes: constructing a hesitant fuzzy decision matrix based on the eight key indicators for each slope zone; objectively determining the weights of the indicators using the maximum deviation method to minimize subjectivity; calculating the weighted distance between each slope zone scheme and the defined hesitant fuzzy positive/negative ideal solutions; determining the relative closeness coefficient for each zone to classify the rock mass quality grade. Based on the grading results, the most suitable ecological restoration techniques are matched to each slope zone to achieve differentiated ecological restoration. Experimental results show that the mining slope is divided into seven zones using this approach. After ecological restoration, near-ground dust is effectively controlled. The vegetation restoration rate reaches up to 25%, whereas the rates of comparative methods are all below 15%. This indicates that the proposed method can help improve restoration efficiency and quality, promote sustainable development, better meet the requirements for efficient ecological restoration in mines, and possesses practical applicability.
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.