Digital Technology Promotes Innovation in Landscape Architecture Design Concepts and Practices
und
29. Sept. 2025
Über diesen Artikel
Online veröffentlicht: 29. Sept. 2025
Eingereicht: 06. Jan. 2025
Akzeptiert: 19. Apr. 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/amns-2025-1092
Schlüsselwörter
© 2025 Ye Sun and Mingming Chen, published by Sciendo.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
Figure 8.
Figure 9.
Figure 10.
Landscape evaluation weight table of Mountain Ecological Park
| Target layer (A) | Standard layer (B) | Weight | Factor layer © | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Landscape evaluation of mountain ecological park | B1 | 0.344 | C1 | 0.051 |
| C2 | 0.084 | |||
| C3 | 0.037 | |||
| C4 | 0.056 | |||
| C5 | 0.081 | |||
| C6 | 0.035 | |||
| B2 | 0.197 | C7 | 0.047 | |
| C8 | 0.039 | |||
| C9 | 0.028 | |||
| C10 | 0.024 | |||
| C11 | 0.017 | |||
| C12 | 0.014 | |||
| C13 | 0.014 | |||
| C14 | 0.014 | |||
| B3 | 0.257 | C15 | 0.016 | |
| C16 | 0.051 | |||
| C17 | 0.044 | |||
| C18 | 0.041 | |||
| C19 | 0.032 | |||
| C20 | 0.013 | |||
| C21 | 0.025 | |||
| C22 | 0.021 | |||
| C23 | 0.014 | |||
| B4 | 0.202 | C24 | 0.013 | |
| C25 | 0.044 | |||
| C26 | 0.022 | |||
| C27 | 0.039 | |||
| C28 | 0.051 | |||
| C29 | 0.033 |
Comparison of route planning effects among algorithms
| Algorithm type | Path length/m | |
|---|---|---|
| GA | 572.85 | 196 |
| Dijkstra | 529.21 | 202 |
| This model | 275.37 | 81 |
Evaluation system of landscape quality and recreation service capacity
| Natural landscape quality | Ecological benefit | Greening | Species richness |
| Green coverage product | |||
| Species diversity | |||
| Landscape ecology | Ecological factor completeness | ||
| Landscape ecological sustainability | |||
| Water area | |||
| Aesthetic experience | Landscape visual attraction | Landscape level and color change | |
| Ornamental diversity | |||
| Landscape beauty | Landform richness | ||
| Terrain space coordination/utilization | |||
| The environment coordination of the surrounding landscape/park | |||
| Plants and hard landscape harmony | |||
| Landscape experience | Hydrophilic water | ||
| The landscape elements are rich in coordination | |||
| Human landscape quality | Behavior feeling | Accessibility | Road density |
| Scenic accessibility | |||
| Reach of water | |||
| Landscape comfort | Landscape space security/privacy | ||
| Landscape dimension comfort | |||
| The activity surface product ratio | |||
| Per capita area | |||
| Interactivity | People and landscape interactivity | ||
| Accessibility | Completeness of scenic spot | ||
| Social function | Service function | Recreational facilities | |
| Service lounge | |||
| Leisure service space layout | |||
| Consumability of infrastructure | |||
| Education function | Cultural education publicity facilities | ||
| Emergency escape function | Disaster prevention |
Landscape score statistics of Mountain Ecological Park
| Total score:7.36 | Ecological benefit | 2.58 | C1 | 7.95 |
| C2 | 8.06 | |||
| C3 | 6.83 | |||
| C4 | 6.43 | |||
| C5 | 7.88 | |||
| C6 | 7.16 | |||
| Aesthetic experience | 1.42 | C7 | 6.29 | |
| C8 | 8.35 | |||
| C9 | 7.05 | |||
| C10 | 7.9 | |||
| C11 | 5.95 | |||
| C12 | 7.53 | |||
| C13 | 6.02 | |||
| C14 | 8.34 | |||
| Behavior feeling | 2.01 | C15 | 7.37 | |
| C16 | 8.65 | |||
| C17 | 8.04 | |||
| C18 | 8.15 | |||
| C19 | 7.33 | |||
| C20 | 7.94 | |||
| C21 | 7.94 | |||
| C22 | 6.74 | |||
| C23 | 5.96 | |||
| Social function | 1.35 | C24 | 5.09 | |
| C25 | 5.51 | |||
| C26 | 6.95 | |||
| C27 | 6.34 | |||
| C28 | 8.09 | |||
| C29 | 6.84 |