## 5 Conclusions  
Bedrock fault dislocation is a crucial structural factor influencing the movement of landslides. Accurately predicting the location and scale of rupture zones within slopes is essential for effective slope construction design and risk mitigation. In this study, microseismic sensors, surface deformation monitoring, and soil pressure sensors were deployed on slopes and their overlying soil layers affected by bedrock fault dislocation for a micro-level analysis of the soil rupture. This was combined with a macro-level analysis of field slope rupture to predict landslide acceleration and potential catastrophic events. This approach can help researchers identify active slopes with ongoing soil rupture and damage pro  
Figure 16: Geological profile of Lianhuasi ancient landslide. cesses due to bedrock dislocation, gain a better understanding of the mechanical properties of landslides, and provide a scientific basis for landslide risk management and disaster mitigation. The following are our conclusions:  
(1) Based on the characteristics of cross-fault landslides/slope seismic damage, this study summarizes the current research status and advantages and disadvantages of cross-fault slope model tests conducted by scholars. A large-scale gravity bedrock dislocation device was developed, creatively enabling physical model tests simulating the relative movement of the two bedrock blocks causing cross-fault slope failure. This provides scientific evidence for the stability assessment of cross-fault slopes and the reinforcement design to prevent landslide disasters. (2) The causative mechanism of the instability of a sandy soil slope, due to the dislocation of a normal fault crossing the bedrock, can be divided into three stages in its evolutionary process: crack damage stage (Stage I), crack expansion and penetration stage (Stage II), and slope instability stage (Stage III). Ultimately, the failure and instability of the soil body manifested as either tensile-collapse or tensile-compressive shear failure. The instability mechanism and evolution process obtained from this model test correspond to the field seismic damage of cross-fault slopes. (3) A comparative analysis of the results of the soil body rupture tests at the slope crest and slope toe indicated that, under intense fault dislocation, the rupture mode of the soil body at the slope crest had a greater impact on the soil slope. Under specific bedrock dislocation conditions, when the soil body at the slope crest ruptured, a wide plastic zone was formed in the overlying layer, resulting in a distinct MRZ-S1 at this location, as verified by microseismic monitoring signals. Moreover, a significant plastic zone was observed within the slope body, and MRZ-S2 at this location also produced clear microseismic signals. With an increase in the bedrock dislocation, the plastic zone in the overlying layer continued to undergo significant changes when the soil body at the slope crest ruptured. This indicated that the main rupture zone at this location was still enlarging and extending upward. At different stages, mitigation measures such as early warning, stability safety calculations, and subsequent disaster experiments and simulation analyses can be applied. A monitoring system for cross-fault slopes should be established, and preventive measures should fully consider the impact of the sliding surface and its geometric characteristics on slope stability. These measures can significantly enhance slope stability and reduce the risk of instability. (3) Model tests and field seismic damage cases showed that the positions of the main rupture zones on the slope surface were projected directly below the locations ofoseismic dislocations of the bedrock fault. Therefore, when investigating landslide seismic damage caused by fault dislocation, the position of the bedrock fault can be determined by identifying the main rupture zones on the slope surface. This provides critical evidence for identifying seismogenic structures (faults) during field seismic surveys.