## 5 Results
### Lmg  
The LMG model evaluation results are shown in Figure 4. During the period from 2012 to 2015, the percentages of the relative importance of the N_SRTSP were 36.53%, 61.06%, 56.40%, and 40.72%, making it the most important evaluation variable. From 2013 to 2017, the percentage of the relative importance of NS_RIHE continued to increase from 10.19% to 21.39%, making it the evaluation variable with the third highest relative importance. In this study, the percentage of the relative importance of N_AP was stable, while the percentage of the relative importance of N_MP increased from 8.32% to 34.97%, making it the evaluation variable with the most relative importance.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}{*}{**Parameter**}} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Year**} \\ \cline{2-10}  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**2012**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**2013**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**2014**} \\ \cline{2-10}  & **Minimum** & **Median** & **Maximum** & **Minimum** & **Median** & **Maximum** & **Minimum** & **Median** & **Maximum** \\ \hline NS\_RIHE & \(-\)0.0534 & 0.0590 & 0.2996 & \(-\)0.3313 & 0.1086 & 0.7619 & \(-\)0.4790 & 0.2891 & 1.0804 \\ NS\_VSS & \(-\)0.0865 & 0.0175 & 0.4143 & \(-\)0.1451 & 0.1891 & 1.4468 & \(-\)1.5932 & 0.3442 & 2.2972 \\ NS\_RSS & \(-\)0.0691 & 0.0000 & 0.0381 & \(-\)0.6934 & \(-\)0.0346 & 0.0773 & \(-\)0.3086 & \(-\)0.0358 & 0.3547 \\ N\_AP & \(-\)1.4327 & \(-\)0.1626 & 0.3027 & \(-\)1.4829 & 0.0554 & 0.7481 & \(-\)15.3789 & \(-\)0.2368 & 4.1427 \\ N\_MP & \(-\)0.2118 & 0.0486 & 0.0982 & \(-\)0.7145 & 0.0654 & 0.2823 & \(-\)0.5402 & 0.1013 & 0.9138 \\ N\_CoP & \(-\)0.2213 & \(-\)0.0748 & 0.1868 & \(-\)0.5973 & \(-\)0.1281 & 0.4169 & \(-\)2.6522 & \(-\)0.1802 & 0.9690 \\ N\_CaP & \(-\)0.3638 & 0.3836 & 1.8698 & \(-\)0.4518 & 0.4568 & 9.4290 & \(-\)6.6530 & 1.0540 & 22.7483 \\ N\_SRTSP & \(-\)1.5938 & 0.3543 & 0.7444 & \(-\)2.0092 & 3.8208 & 5.6299 & \(-\)3.8175 & 4.6717 & 12.0225 \\ \(R^{2}\) & 0.9461 & & & 0.9889 & & & 0.9922 & & \\ Adjusted \(R^{2}\) & 0.9445 & & & 0.9886 & & & 0.9912 & & \\ \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}{*}{**Parameter**}} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Year**} \\ \cline{2-10}  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**2015**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**2016**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**2017**} \\ \cline{2-10}  & **Minimum** & **Median** & **Maximum** & **Minimum** & **Median** & **Maximum** & **Minimum** & **Median** & **Maximum** \\ \hline NS\_RIHE & \(-\)0.3152 & 0.5445 & 1.2636 & 0.0896 & 1.9032 & 3.8836 & 0.3003 & 2.5261 & 4.1655 \\ NS\_VSS & \(-\)1.2517 & 0.5969 & 2.5239 & \(-\)2.9009 & 1.4181 & 12.5000 & \(-\)2.5437 & \(-\)0.2303 & 3.4246 \\ NS\_RSS & \(-\)0.4550 & 0.0089 & 0.3407 & \(-\)0.7487 & 0.1393 & 0.8024 & \(-\)0.5726 & 0.1804 & 5.3610 \\ N\_AP & \(-\)4.5503 & \(-\)0.1929 & 4.1819 & \(-\)8.5390 & 0.2046 & 7.3217 & \(-\)12.1192 & \(-\)3.5699 & 5.7562 \\ N\_MP & \(-\)0.7607 & 0.2195 & 0.4717 & \(-\)1.7539 & 1.0533 & 2.5894 & \(-\)0.6121 & 2.4634 & 5.5698 \\ N\_CoP & \(-\)0.8515 & \(-\)0.0058 & 1.5422 & \(-\)3.3341 & \(-\)0.5601 & 4.6947 & \(-\)1.4113 & \(-\)0.7362 & 3.3315 \\ N\_CaP & \(-\)1.7343 & 0.0921 & 10.5292 & \(-\)5.4290 & \(-\)1.1750 & 16.8510 & \(-\)27.7872 & \(-\)5.1130 & 17.1259 \\ N\_SRTSP & \(-\)0.0005 & 4.8270 & 9.8378 & \(-\)21.0736 & 8.3524 & 27.5158 & \(-\)11.1621 & 11.2182 & 26.1573 \\ \(R^{2}\) & 0.9644 & & & 0.9551 & & & 0.7548 & & \\ Adjusted \(R^{2}\) & 0.9634 & & & 0.9538 & & & 0.7478 & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: The estimation results of the GWR model.