## 3 Results
### Values of Inclinations Calculated Using [PERSON]'s Model
* a tangent of the \(\beta\) angle of a range of main influences: \(tan\beta=2.167\);
* The \(A_{1}\) parameter of the mining margin: \(A_{1}=0.117\);
* The \(B\) Awierszyn's proportionality coefficient: \(B=0.32r\) [m];
* The \(k\) coefficient of the impact deviation (due to the slope of the hard coal seam): \(k=0.7\);
* The \(A_{rel}\) relaxion coefficient: \(A_{rel}=0.4\);
* The \(T_{rel}\) relaxion time: \(T_{rel}=1.0\);
* The \(C_{1}\) coefficient of the subsidence velocity, calculated with Formula (12), as follows: \[C_{1}=\frac{140}{r\Big{(}0.175-\frac{A_{1}}{tan\beta}\Big{)}}=\frac{140}{240.8 86\ [\text{m}]\Big{(}0.175-\frac{0.117}{2.167}\Big{)}}=4.803\bigg{[}\frac{1}{ \text{m}}\bigg{]},\] (12)
* The \(C_{2}\) coefficient of the subsidence velocity, calculated by Formula (13), as follows: \[C_{2}=\frac{0.6}{0.175-\frac{A_{1}}{tan\beta}}=\frac{0.6}{0.175-\frac{0.117}{ 2.167}}=4.958.\] (13)  
Table 7 juxtaposes the values of the \(T_{j}\) inclinations calculated by [PERSON]'s model and the EDBJ1 program at the 1-33 points constituting the middles of the measurement sections, and the \(S\) biased and \(\hat{\sigma}\) unbiased estimators of the standard deviation, calculated according to Formulas (10) and (11). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Building**} & \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **Point** \\ \(j\) \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**17 August 2019**} \\ \cline{3-4}  & & \(\frac{T_{j}}{\text{m}}\) & **Category of Mining Area** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{B1} & 3 & 1.8 & 1 st \\  & 4 & 1.8 & 1 st \\  & 2 & 1.9 & 1 st \\  & 1 & 1.8 & 1 st \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{B2} & 5 & 1.3 & 1 st \\  & 6 & 1.2 & 1 st \\  & 7 & 1.2 & 1 st \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{B3} & 8 & 0.9 & 1 st \\  & 9 & 0.9 & 1 st \\  & 11 & 0.8 & 1 st \\  & 10 & 0.8 & 1 st \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{G} & 12 & 0.7 & 1 st \\  & 13 & 0.7 & 1 st \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{B4} & 16 & 1.3 & 1 st \\  & 17 & 1.2 & 1 st \\  & 18 & 1.2 & 1 st \\  & 19 & 1.1 & 1 st \\  & 15 & 1.4 & 1 st \\  & 14 & 1.4 & 1 st \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{B5} & 20 & 0.8 & 1 st \\  & 21 & 0.7 & 1 st \\  & 23 & 0.7 & 1 st \\  & 22 & 0.7 & 1 st \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{B6} & 24 & 0.6 & 1 st \\  & 25 & 0.5 & 0 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{B7} & 28 & 0.9 & 1 st \\  & 29 & 0.8 & 1 st \\  & 27 & 0.9 & 1 st \\  & 26 & 1.0 & 1 st \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{B8} & 30 & 0.6 & 1 st \\  & 31 & 0.5 & 0 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 32 & 0.5 & 0 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 33 & 0.5 & 0 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{B9} & \(S=\) & 0.41 \\ \cline{1-1}  & \(\hat{\sigma}=\) & 0.41 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: The values of the \(T_{j}\) inclinations calculated for the middles of the sections by [PERSON]’s model and the EDBJ1 program in the period of March–August 2019 (source: own study). The model inclinations did not have large values, and their maximum value did not exceed 2 \(\frac{\mathrm{mm}}{\mathrm{m}}\) (points 1, 2, 3, and 4 near the B1 building). The highest inclinations values occurred in the area located closest to the edge of the exploitation (Figure 9). The \(\hat{\sigma}\) unbiased estimator of the standard deviation was 0.41 \(\frac{\mathrm{mm}}{\mathrm{m}}\). Each calculated value of the \(T_{j}\) inclination (Table 7) was assigned an appropriate category of the mining area presented in Table 5, and then quantitative descriptions of the obtained categories were created, as shown in Table 8.  
The data contained in Table 8 show that the mining area under consideration, according to the results of the theoretical calculations carried out using [PERSON]'s model, should be included in the 1 st category of mining area (87.9% of all calculated values of inclinations are values included in the 1 st category). [PERSON]'s model did not indicate increased inclination values in any region, in particular in the region of the discontinuous linear deformations, where, according to the geodetic measurements, the 4 th category of mining area occurred.