地下水质量评价中两种确定指标权重方法的比较  

Comparison of Two Methods of Determining Index Weight During Groundwater Quality Assessment

作　　者：吴东杰[1] 王金生[1] 丁爱中[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京师范大学水科学研究院水沙科学教育部重点实验室,北京100875

出　　处：《工程勘察》2006年第7期17-22,34,31,共8页Geotechnical Investigation & Surveying

基　　金：国家自然科学基金委员会;水利部黄河水利委员会黄河联合资助项目(50239010);国家重点基础研究发展规划(G1999043606)

摘　　要：目前,用于地下水质量评价的常用理论方法有模糊数学和灰色系统理论等。同一种理论方法中,如果指标权重的确定方法不同,其相应的评价结果也存在差异。本文针对确定指标权重的首尾比率法和聚类权法进行了比较研究,并以超标法和地下水质量标准(GB/T 14848-93)推荐方法进行验证。研究中以山西省运城地区的31个地下水质量样本为例,选择pH值、NH4+、Fe3+、Cl-、SO42-、NO3-、NO2-、F-、PO4-、总硬度、矿化度共11个指标,采用多属性模糊综合评价法进行了水质评价,其中指标权重的确定分别采用了首尾比率法和聚类权法。通过对评价结果的比较分析,认为:在地下水水质评价中,用首尾比率法确定指标权重的做法在原理和结果上存在重大缺陷;而用聚类权法计算指标权重在地下水质量评价中合理可行。The general methods of assessing groundwater quality are fuzzy theory and gray system theory. With the same theory, however, the assessment results would be different from each other if different methods of determining the index weight are adopted during the assessment. Aiming at comparing the end-begin ratio method with the clustering weight method, this paper adopts the two methods to determine the index weight during the groundwater quality assessment by the comprehensive fuzzy assessment theory. Moreover, the exceeding-standard method and the standard method recommended by GB/T 14848 - 93 ＂The Quality Standard of Groundwater＂ has also been adopted as verification. Thirty-one groundwater samples within Yuncheng, Shanxi province are used as the examples, and eleven indices （pH, NH4^＋. Fe^3＋, Cl^-, SO4^2-, NO3^-, NO2^-, F^-, PO4^-, total hardness, degree of mineralization） are chosen and used to assess the quality of the groundwater samples. Based on the analysis and comparision of the assessment results, it can be concluded that the end-begin ratio method is not reliable for the groundwater quality assessment, however, the clustering weight method is relatively reasonable to assess the groundwater quality.

关 键 词：地下水质量评价 指标权重 首尾比率法 聚类权法 

分 类 号：P641.69[天文地球—地质矿产勘探]