본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기
22대 대한민국 국회 국회정보길라잡이 국회의원검색
회원가입 로그인
HOME

정보검색

소장정보 검색

국회도서관 홈으로 정보검색 소장정보 검색

결과 내 검색

동의어 포함

고급검색

인명/단체명

저자정보 상세정보
인명/단체명을 입력하세요.

키워드

  • 대표어

  • 외국어

-

목차보기

목차

[표제지 등]=0,1,2

제출문=1,3,1

보고서 초록=2,4,1

요약문=3,5,4

Summary=7,9,6

Contents=13,15,1

목차=14,16,1

표목차=15,17,1

그림목차=16,18,5

제1장 연구개발과제의 개요=21,23,1

제1절 연구배경 및 필요성=21,23,1

제2절 연구 목표 및 내용=22,24,1

제2장 국내외 기술개발 현황=23,25,2

제3장 연구개발수행 내용 및 결과=25,27,1

제1절 산사태 분석 모델=25,27,22

제2절 한국 측 산사태 취약성도 분석 및 검증=47,49,76

제3절 CCOP 회원국측 산사태 취약성도 분석 및 검증=123,125,76

제4장 목표달성도 및 관련분야에의 기여도=199,201,1

제1절 연구 목표 달성도=199,201,2

제2절 관련분야에의 기여도=201,203,1

제5장 연구개발결과의 활용 계획=202,204,1

제6장 연구개발과정에서 수집된 해외과학기술정보=203,205,1

제7장 참고문헌=204,206,7

표목차

Table 3-1-1. Abbreviated Classification Of Landslide (Varnes, 1978)=26,28,1

Table 3-1-2. Landslide Susceptibility Analysis Technigue And Map Scales(Turner And Chuster, 1996)=29,31,1

Table 3-1-3. Available Input Data In Korea For Landslide Susceptibility Analysis Using GIS(Lee, 2000; Turner And Schuster, 1996)=30,32,1

Table 3-1-4. Contingency Table For Testing Conditional Independence=36,38,1

Table 3-2-1. Data Layer Of Study Area=51,53,1

Table 3-2-2. Contingency Table For Test Of Conditional Independence Between Binary Pattern Of Slope And Factors=62,64,1

Table 3-2-3. Logistic Multiple Regression Coefieicnets (Boeun Area)=69,71,1

Table 3-2-4. Determinated Weights Of Each Factor=74,76,1

Table 3-2-5. Sucess And Prediction Rate For Study Areas=77,79,1

Table 3-2-6. Data Layer Of Study Area=87,89,1

Table 3-2-7. Spatial Relationship Between Landslide And Related Factors In Sagimakri Area=97,99,1

Table 3-2-8. Spatial Relationship Between Landslide And Related Factors In Samkyori Area=98,100,1

Table 3-2-9. Determinated Weight For Sagimakri Area=106,108,1

Table 3-2-10. Determinated Weight For Samkyori Area=107,109,1

Table 3-2-11. Each Case Of Success Rate Curve Measure Percent=110,112,1

Table 3-2-12. Frequency Ratio Of Each Factor With Respect To Landslide Occurrences=119,121,1

Table 3-2-13. Relationship Between Landslide Susceptibility Index Rank And Landslides=122,124,1

Table 3-3-1. Frequency And Logistic Regression Value=128,130,1

Table 3-3-2. Frequency And Logistic Regression Value=135,137,1

Table 3-3-3. Frequency And Logistic Regression Value=141,143,1

Table 3-3-4. Frequency And Logistic Regression Value=146,148,1

Table 3-3-5. Frequency And Logistic Regression Value=162,164,1

Table 3-3-6. Frequency And Logistic Regression Value=169,171,1

Table 3-3-7. Frequency And Logistic Regression Value=176,178,1

Table 3-3-8. Frequency And Logistic Regression Value=188,190,1

Table 3-3-9. Frequency And Logistic Regression Value=195,197,1

그림목차

Fig. 3-1-1. Typcial Landslide In Cohesive Material(Varnes, 1978)=25,27,1

Fig. 3-1-2. Main Landslide Type (Wonyung 2000)=26,28,1

Fig. 3-1-3. Factors Of Landslide (Brornhead, 1992)=26,28,1

Fig. 3-1-4. Bayesian Amendment Process=31,33,1

Fig. 3-1-5. Venn Diagram To Illustrate Weights Of Evidence Calculations. T, Area; B, Binary Predictor Pattern Present; (B), Binary Predictor Pattern Absent; D, Mineral Occurrence Present; (D), Mineral Occurrence Absent(이미지참조)=32,34,1

Fig. 3-1-6. Internal Structure Of Network Processing Node=39,41,1

Fig. 3-1-7. The Sigmoid Activation Function NET=41,43,1

Fig. 3-1-8. Three Layer Backpropagation Neural Networks=43,45,1

Fig. 3-2-1. Landslide Location With Hillshaded Map=48,50,1

Fig. 3-2-2. Spatial DB Of Bouen Area=51,53,3

Fig. 3-2-3. Histogram Show The Number Of Landslide Events For Each Factor=54,56,4

Fig. 3-2-4. Predictive Model Map Of Landslide Based On Likelihood Ratio; Using All Ratings=64,66,1

Fig. 3-2-5. Predictive Model Map Of Landslide Based On Weights Of Evidence Analysis; Using All Contrasts=64,66,1

Fig. 3-2-6. Predictive Model Map Of Landslide Based On Weights Of Evidence Analysis; Using Slope, Wood Diameter, Curvature, Topography, Geology And Lineament After The Test Of Conditional Independence=65,67,1

Fig. 3-2-7. Illustration Of Cumulative Frequency Diagram Showing Landslide Susceptibility Index Rank(X-Axis) Occurring In Cumulative Percent Of Landslide Occurrence(Y-Axis)=65,67,1

Fig. 3-2-8. Landslide Susceptibility Map Of Boeun Based On Logistic Multiple Regression=67,69,1

Fig. 3-2-9. Landslide Susceptibility Map Of Yongin Based On Logistic Multiple Regressio=68,70,1

Fig. 3-2-10. Illustration Of Cumulative Freguency Diagram Showing Landslide Susceptibility Index Rank (X-Axis) Occurring In Cumulative Percent Of Landslide Occurrence (Y-Axis)=68,70,1

Fig. 3-2-11. Architecture Of An Artificial Neural Network=72,74,1

Fig. 3-2-12. Schematic Diagram Of Weight Determination For Landslide Factors Using A Neural Network=72,74,1

Fig. 3-2-13. Landslide Susceptibility Map Using Artificial Neural Network In Boeun Area=75,77,1

Fig. 3-2-14. Landslide Susceptibility Map Using Artificial Neural Network In Yongin Area=76,78,1

Fig. 3-2-15. Success Rate Curve For The Case Of Using 14, 8, 4 Factors In Boeun=78,80,1

Fig. 3-2-16. Prediction Rate Curve For The Case Of Using 14, 8, 4 Factors In Yongin Area=78,80,1

Fig. 3-2-17. Success And Prediction Rate Curve For The Case Of Using 14 Factors In Boeun And Yongin Area=78,80,1

Fig. 3-2-18. Success And Prediction Rate Curve For The Case Of Using 8 Factors In Boeun And Yongin Area=79,81,1

Fig. 3-2-19. Success And Prediction Rate Curve For The Case Ot Using 4 Factors In Boeun And Yongin Area=79,81,1

Fig. 3-2-20. The Study Areas And KOMSAT Images. (Above Image : Samkyori Landslide; Below Image : Sagimak Landslide)=83,85,1

Fig. 3-2-21. Detection Of Landslide=86,88,1

Fig. 3-2-22. Spatial DB Of Sagimakri Area=88,90,3

Fig. 3-2-23. Spatial DB Of Samkyori Area=91,93,2

Fig. 3-2-24. Landslide Susceptibility Map By Applying Frequency Ratio Of Sagimakri To Sagimakri=101,103,1

Fig. 3-2-25. Landslide Susceptibility Map By Applying Frequency Ratio Of Samkyori To Samkyori=101,103,1

Fig. 3-2-26. Landslide Susceptibility Map By Applying Frequency Ratio Of Samkyori To Samkyori=102,104,1

Fig. 3-2-27. Landslide Susceptibility Map By Applying Frequency Ratio Of Samkyori To Samkyori=102,104,1

Fig. 3-2-28. Sucess Rate Curve For Each Cases=103,105,1

Fig. 3-2-29. Weights For Each Factor In 6 Cases=108,110,1

Fig. 3-2-30. Landslide Susceptibility Map (Index Value X 1000)=111,113,2

Fig. 3-2-31. Success Rate Curve Of Cases=113,115,1

Fig. 3-2-32. Landslide Susceptibility Maps With 5m, I0m, 30m, 100m, And 200m Spatial Resolutions=121,123,1

Fig. 3-2-33. Success Rate Curve :Illustration Of Cumulative Frequency Diagram Showing Landslide Susceptibility Index Rank (Horizontal Axis) Occurring In Cumulative Percent Of Landslide Occurrence (Vertical Axis)=122,124,1

Fig. 3-3-1. Study Area=125,127,1

Fig. 3-3-2. Spatial DB=125,127,2

Fig. 3-3-3. Landslide Susceptibility Map Based On Frequency Ratio (A) And Logistic Regression (B)=130,132,1

Fig. 3-3-4. Illustration Of Cumulative Frequency Diagram=130,132,1

Fig. 3-3-5. Study Area=132,134,1

Fig. 3-3-6. Seatial DB=132,134,2

Fig. 3-3-7. Landslide Susceptibility Map Based On Frequency Ratio (A) And Logistic Regression (B)=137,139,1

Fig. 3-3-8. Illustration Of Cumulative Frequency Diagram=137,139,1

Fig. 3-3-9. Study Area=138,140,1

Fig. 3-3-10. Spatial DB=139,141,1

Fig. 3-3-11. Landslide Susceptibility Map Based On Frequency Ratio (A) And Logistic Regression (B)=143,145,1

Fig. 3-3-12. Illustration Of Cumulative Frequency Diagram=143,145,1

Fig. 3-3-13. Study Area=144,146,1

Fig. 3-3-14. Spatial DB=145,147,1

Fig. 3-3-15. Landslide Susceptibility Map Based On Frequency Ratio(A) And Logistic Regression(B)=148,150,1

Fig. 3-3-16. Illustration Of Cumulative Frequency Diagram=148,150,1

Fig. 3-3-17. Study Area=150,152,1

Fig. 3-3-18. Geology & Landslides Distribution In The Hanshin District Caused By The 1995 Kobe Earthquake=152,154,1

Fig. 3-3-19. Distribution Of Valley Fills In The Eastern Part Of The Hanshin District=152,154,1

Fig. 3-3-20. Schematic Model Of Landslides In The Hanshin District Caused By The 1995 Kobe Earthquake=153,155,1

Fig. 3-3-21. Changes Of Number Of Landslide Events In Southern Part Of Kanto Region(Include Yokohama District)=153,155,1

Fig. 3-3-22. The Effects Of Valley Shape In Damage Of Fills=154,156,1

Fig. 3-3-23. Results Of A Preliminary Seismic Response Analysis=155,157,1

Fig. 3-3-24. Distribution Of N Value In Valley Fills=155,157,1

Fig. 3-3-25. Process Of Analysis Using Multivariate Quantification Method=156,158,1

Fig. 3-3-26. Distribution Of Probability Of Major Damage In Valley Fills=157,159,1

Fig. 3-3-27. Hazard Map Of Fill-Slope Instability By Earthquake In Tokyo- Yokohama District=157,159,1

Fig. 3-3-28. Study Area=159,161,1

Fig. 3-3-29. Spatial DB=159,161,3

Fig. 3-3-30. Landslide Susceptibility Map Based On Frequcncy Ratio (A) And Logistic Regression (B)=164,166,1

Fig. 3-3-31. Illustration Of Cumulative Frequency Diagram=164,166,1

Fig. 3-3-32. Study Area=165,167,1

Fig. 3-3-33. Spatial DB=166,168,2

Fig. 3-3-34. Landslide Susceptibility Map Based On Frequency Ratio (A) And Logistic Regression (B)=171,173,1

Fig. 3-3-35. Illustration Of Cumulative Frequency Diagram=171,173,1

Fig. 3-3-36. Study Area=172,174,1

Fig. 3-3-37. Spatial DB=173,175,2

Fig. 3-3-38. Landslide Susceptibility Map Based On Frequency Ratio (A) And Logistic Regression (B)=178,180,1

Fig. 3-3-39. Illustration Of Cumulative Frequency Diagram=178,180,1

Fig. 3-3-40. Study Area=180,182,1

Fig. 3-3-41. Topography Map=180,182,1

Fig. 3-3-42. Geological Map=180,182,1

Fig. 3-3-43. Study Area=184,186,1

Fig. 3-3-44. Spatial DB=185,187,2

Fig. 3-3-45. Landslide Susceptibility Map Based On Frequency Ratio (A) And Logistic Regression (B)=190,192,1

Fig. 3-3-46. Illustration Of Cumulative Frequency Diagram=190,192,1

Fig. 3-3-47. Study Area=192,194,1

Fig. 3-3-48. Spatial DB=192,194,2

Fig. 3-3-49. Landslide Susceptibility Map Based On Frequency Ratio(A) And Logistic Regression(B)=197,199,1

Fig. 3-3-50. Illustration Of Cumulative Frequency Diagram=197,199,1

추천서가 (다양한 추천 자료를 만나보세요)

권호기사보기

권호기사 목록 테이블로 기사명, 저자명, 페이지, 원문, 기사목차 순으로 되어있습니다.
기사명 저자명 페이지 원문 기사목차

권호

기사명 원문보기 기사목차
닫기