## 4 Results and Discussion
### Topological Analysis of Affected Nodes  
Based on the classification results in Section 2, 10 stations in high-risk areas were selected as high-risk ones as shown in Figure 6. The high-landslide-risk stations are pretty scattered, primarily along Lines 5, 1, and 9. Among them, Daping Station is a representative station for landslide disasters. Daping Station has the highest passenger flow and topological importance index, indicating its significance within the network.  
In contrast, the high-flood-risk stations are more concentrated, especially near the intersection of Lines 3 and 10, as well as along Lines 6 and 1. Bijin Station is a typical high-risk station, with a daily passenger flow of 607,000, and it has the highest topological importance index and service efficiency index, indicating that a failure at this station during flood disasters would significantly impact the service capacity of the entire metro network.  
By analyzing attributes of high-risk stations for landslide and flood disasters in Table 5, it can be observed that among the high-risk landslide stations, two are interchange nodes, which have a higher overall topological importance index. In contrast, most other nodes have a service efficiency index below 0.2, indicating that their failure would have a relatively limited impact on the overall network. In comparison, although the high-risk flood disaster stations are all non-interchange nodes, the majority are located on important metro lines with high traffic volumes, and they generally have higher service efficiency indexes. Some stations, such as Bijin Station, have a service efficiency index exceeding 0.3, highlighting their vulnerability during flood disasters and their critical impact on network service.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Network Parameters** & **Values** \\ \hline Nodes & 256 \\ Edges & 288 \\ Average node degree & 2.25 \\ Average shortest path length & 15.4 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: Characteristics of Chongqing metro network.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Disturbance Scenario** & **Station Name** & **Line(s)** & **Line Traffic (10,000 Passengers)** & **Topological Importance Index** & **Service Efficiency Index** & **Transfer Available** \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Landslide disaster} & Daping & Line 1, Line 2 & 87.7 & 0.564 & 0.245 & 1 \\  & Funha Road & Line 9, Line 18 & 30.9 & 0.453 & 0.245 & 1 \\  & Callanator & Line 9 & 25.6 & 0.422 & 0.165 & 0 \\  & Huanshan Park & Line 10 & 27.5 & 0.324 & 0.16 & 0 \\  & Huxia Street & Line 5 & 26.3 & 0.294 & 0.165 & 0 \\  & Cylikou & Line 1 & 51.9 & 0.284 & 0.107 & 0 \\  & Zhongling Mountain & Line 5 & 26.3 & 0.24 & 0.165 & 0 \\  & Gaopi Lake & Line 3 & 60.7 & 0.18 & 0.331 & 0 \\  & Sanbanai & Line 4 & 6.5 & 0.159 & 0.055 & 0 \\  & Yugang North Road & Line 5 & 26.3 & 0.0915 & 0.165 & 0 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Food disaster} & Bipin & Line 3 & 60.7 & 0.325 & 0.331 & 0 \\  & Bosheng Lake & Line 9 & 25.6 & 0.289 & 0.206 & 0 \\  & Luijaping & Line 6 & 60.7 & 0.282 & 0.181 & 0 \\  & Xingke Avenue & Line 9 & 25.6 & 0.271 & 0.206 & 0 \\  & Luxi & Line 4 & 6.5 & 0.255 & 0.055 & 0 \\  & Shuangglie & Line 1 & 51.9 & 0.236 & 0.107 & 0 \\  & Shuangfeng Bridge & Line 3 & 60.7 & 0.22 & 0.331 & 0 \\  & Lushan & Line 10 & 27.5 & 0.215 & 0.16 & 0 \\  & Xiangjiangang & Line 6 & 60.7 & 0.208 & 0.181 & 0 \\  & Jiangdongo & Line 1 & 51.9 & 0.141 & 0.107 & 0 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 5: Attributes of high-risk disaster-affected stations.