Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Risk assessment indexes for deep foundation pit construction projects.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Grey semantic scale.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Weighted semantic scale.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 1.

The flow chart of deep foundation pit construction risk evaluation based on the Grey-DEMATEL-Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation method.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Excavation plan diagram.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Distribution of causality-centrality.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 4.

Direct impact matrix S.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Integrated impact matrix Z.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Centrality and causality of risk factors.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Table 7.

Evaluation table of risk factors for deep foundation pit construction.

More »

Table 7 Expand

Fig 4.

The weights of expert 1.

(A) Weight [0.0, 0.3]; (B) Weight [0.4, 0.7]; (C) Weight [0.5, 0.9]; (D) Weight [0.7, 1.0].

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

The weights of expert 2.

(A) Weight [0.0, 0.3]; (B) Weight [0.3,0.5]; (C) Weight [0.5,0.9]; (D) Weight [0.7,1.0].

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

The weights of expert 3.

(A) Weight [0.0, 0.3]; (B) Weight [0.3, 0.5]; (C) Weight [0.4, 0.7]; (D) Weight [0.5, 0.9].

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

The weights of expert 4.

(A) Weight [0.0, 0.3]; (B) Weight [0.3, 0.5]; (C) Weight [0.4, 0.7]; (D) Weight [0.7, 1.0].

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

The weights of expert 5.

(A) Weight [0.0, 0.3]; (B) Weight [0.3, 0.5]; (C) Weight [0.4, 0.7]; (D) Weight [0.7, 1.0].

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Fig 9.

The weights of expert 6.

(A) Weight [0.0, 0.3]; (B) Weight [0.3, 0.5]; (C) Weight [0.5, 0.9]; (D) Weight [0.7, 1.0].

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Table 8.

Calculation results of risk levels of accident types for different evaluation models.

More »

Table 8 Expand

Table 9.

Calculation of the overall risk level of the different evaluation models.

More »

Table 9 Expand