## 1 Introduction
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Method** & **Advantage** & **Disadvantage** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Limit equilibrium method} & The physical meaning of parameters and structures is very clear, the formula is simple and easy to understand intuitively. & Without considering the relationship between material stress and material strain, the obtained safety factor is only the average safety degree on the assumed sliding surface. \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Probability analysis method} & The reliability analysis method can objectively and quantitatively reflect the safety of a slope to a certain extent. & The probability model of each factor and its numerical characteristics cannot be reasonably selected, and the calculation process is relatively complex. \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Fuzzy mathematical method} & It is convenient to obtain objective and fair evaluation conclusions with strong uncertain information processing ability. & There is strong subjectivity when determining attribute weight. The problem of information overlap between evaluation reference levels cannot be solved. The calculation process is complicated. \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Neural network method} & It has obvious advantages in solving nonlinear problems and excellent performance in modeling nonlinear multivariate problems. & It shows excessive reliance on a large number of data samples, and the computer performance requirements are relatively high, which can easily lead to precision damage. \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Grey analysis theory} & The calculated workload is relatively small. Samples do not need to be distributed regularly. & The mechanism of monotative mechanics is unclear and there is no clear quantitative description. \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Normal finite element reduction method} & The stability factor can be calculated. The instability mechanism can be analyzed. & The calculation is time consuming and expensive. Failure mode has been determined before calculation. \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Finite element reduction method of unified strength criterion} & The stability factor can be calculated. The instability mechanism can be analyzed. & The calculation is time consuming and expensive. \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Finite element reduction method of unified strength criterion} & The stability factor can be calculated. The instability mechanism can be analyzed. & \\ \cline{1-1}  & Failure mode can be determined through calculation. & The calculation is time consuming and expensive. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Method for analysis of slope stability. ods. [PERSON] et al. [26] discounted the material strength of two-dimensional soil-rock mixed slopes according to the strength reduction method and studied the entire process of large deformation and the failure characteristics after slope instability. [PERSON] et al. [27] analyzed the stability of an actual strength reduction method (SRM) slope, developed a digital image processing technology suitable for the SRM slope, and used the strength reduction numerical manifold method to evaluate the stability of the SRM slope. [PERSON] et al. [28] used Flac\({}^{\text{3D}}\) software to study the stability of slops under different slope heights using the [PERSON] method, [PERSON] method, and reduced strength method, respectively. The results showed that the safety factor of the slope decreased with the increase in the slope height, and the relative error of each scheme was less than 2%. However, the above method was developed based on a two-dimensional model without considering the 3D characteristics. [PERSON] et al. [29] adopted the PLAXIS three-dimensional finite element method and the built-in strength reduction method to longitudinally extend the two-dimensional slope model and establish a three-dimensional slope model, and three-dimensional slope stability has been studied.