Integrating analytic hierarchy process/analytic network process for seismic hazard assessment in block/panel caving assessment

Authors: Catalan, A; McKinnon, S Download Paper Open access courtesy of:

DOI https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_repo/2645_99

Cite As:
Catalan, A & McKinnon, S 2026, 'Integrating analytic hierarchy process/analytic network process for seismic hazard assessment in block/panel caving assessment', in A van As, D Cumming-Potvin & J Wesseloo (eds), Caving 2026: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Block and Sublevel Caving, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp. 1-17, https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_repo/2645_99



Abstract:
Currently, many block/panel and sublevel caving mines are operated in deep, high-stress and challenging geotechnical environments where mining-induced seismicity can compromise safety, infrastructure and production continuity. Evolving cave footprints alter hazards via stress redistribution, activation of geological structures and cave maturity. Decisions require a framework integrating operational demands with rock mass characteristics, modelling, monitoring and engineering judgement to manage risk. This paper outlines a novel approach that couples the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and the analytic network process (ANP) to turn heterogeneous evidence and factors into transparent, ratio scale priorities that directly support planning, re-entry and exposure management and seismicity hazard. AHP structures seismicity decisions into a hierarchy – goal, criteria, subcriteria and factors – offering disciplined expert knowledge capture. It ensures traceability and consistency by making technical-factor rankings explicit, enabling judgements to be audited and updated as new data arrives. When criteria are treated as independent across levels, AHP yields clear, consistent prioritisation, strengthening decisionmaking and maintaining methodological transparency throughout the process overall. ANP extends AHP for caving, modelling real-world interdependent clusters – planning and operations, monitoring and analysis, and controls and exposure – that influence one another. It uses a supermatrix of influence to capture mutual associations and avoid distortions from uniform cluster weighting. The outcome is long-run priorities that show how changes propagate across the system, helping to safely eliminate risks from plans before implementation. Embedded in the mine’s seismic hazard assessment plan, AHP/ANP aligns data collection, seismic response analysis, control measures and risk assessment into a single decision layer. It complements geomechanical workflows and modern microseismic systems by converting evidence and expert judgement input into actionoriented priorities, improving transparency of trade-offs and the robustness of planning, re-entry and exposure rules.

Keywords: block and panel caving; mining-induced seismicity; analytic hierarchy process; analytic network process; supermatrix; microseismic monitoring; geological characterisation; induced stress; seismicity hazard

References: