## 4 Discussion  
### Analysis of Indicator Weights  
The entropy weight method was used to determine each indicator weight in the UI resilience evaluation system, as shown in Figure 2a. According to the results of our weight analysis, the proportion of the state layer was the largest at 38.73%, and the response layer and pressure layer accounted for 31.36% and 29.91%, respectively. These results showed that the objective risk caused by the pressure from external was inevitable; meanwhile, the keys to enhancing infrastructure resilience were to improve the stiffness under pressure, recovery and adaptability in the system. In the pressure layer, it can be seen that the potential risk caused by human pressure (with a weight of 17.82%) was far beyond the stimulation of the natural environment (12.09%). Under human pressure, the fan-shaped area angle corresponding to total sewage discharge and urbanization rate is significantly larger than other indicators, demonstrating that both are more dangerous factors from human activities to UI. Therefore, the impact of chronic stress caused by human activities on infrastructure should be paid full attention. In the natural environment, once the disaster caused by the earthquake occurs, the destruction to UI is also severe, embodied by the relative importance of the urban near-source earthquake with 6.83%.  
At the state stage, the weight of the resource environmental (14.52%) and economic benefits (13.98%) far exceeded the social benefits (10.23%) in infrastructures, shown in Figure 2b. It suggested that strengthening UI's economic and resource environmental benefits is the best approach to improve resilience at the state stage. in resource environmental benefits of UI, water resources per capita was the most significant, accounting for 7.23%. Meanwhile, the length of highway and density of drainpipe density in the built-up area were obtained with the central angle in the economic benefits (shown in Figure 2b), with weights of 5.83% and 5.69%, respectively. However, the social benefits of infrastructure only accounted for 10.23%. Among them, the per capita area of paved roads and the number of public vehicles per 10,000 persons were prominent, with the weights adding up to 7.79%, while the relative importance of other indicators was low. It was primarily since water supply, and gas coverage has almost achieved complete coverage in most cities, well  
Figure 2: Weight proportions of function layer and criterion layer in the evaluation system. (**a**) Weight of pressure layer index; (**b**) Weight of state layer index; (**c**) Weight of response layer index.  
verified by the original data, that is, water supply coverage and gas coverage have reached 100%. Therefore, it mainly starts with im-proving the road environment to enhance social benefits in UI, such as the per capita area of paved roads, the number of public vehicles per 10,000 persons.  
As for the response layer, recovery adaptability accounted for about 17.05%, with maximum impact on infrastructure's ability to resist risks. Located in the same function layer, the learning ability accounted for only 14.31%, indicating it was more vital to improve infrastructure's disaster adaptability than the ability of disaster relief artificially. From a single indicator, the top weights of indicators were newly added civil air defence engineering area with 5.57%, indicating that disaster avoidance was the essential factor for improving urban infrastructure's ability to respond to risks. Moreover, the ratio of intramural expenditure on R&D and GDP weighted with 4.39%, and R&D personnel weighted with 3.69%. It indicated that government investment in innovation and the existing innovation is also a critical factor in improving response-ability.