Chapter
Mar 17, 2022

An AI-Driven, Mechanistically Grounded Framework for Geospatial Modelling of Soil Liquefaction

Publication: Geo-Congress 2022

ABSTRACT

Regional-scale predictions of soil liquefaction are useful, both prior to an event for policy and planning, and immediately after for response and recovery. Such predictions could ideally be made: (1) rapidly, (2) at high resolution, and (3) over the regional scope of cities and transportation networks. Given the growth of community geotechnical data, remote sensing, and algorithmic learning, the existence of such a model is conceivable. Towards that end, interest in “geospatial” models has recently grown. In lieu of directly measuring below-ground traits, as is traditionally done by liquefaction models, geospatial models infer them from above-ground parameters. Field tests of such models have demonstrated both their provocative potential and significant room for improvement. Informed by these tests, this paper develops a geospatial modelling framework driven by algorithmic learning (benefiting from machine- and deep-learning insights, or ML/DL) but pinned to a physical framework (benefiting from mechanics and the knowledge of regression modelers). In effect, subsurface geotechnical test data are predicted remotely and then input to a well-known mechanistic framework for probabilistically predicting ground failure. This has three advantages: (1) a mechanistic underpinning; (2) a significantly larger training set, with the model trained on in situ test data, rather than on ground failures; and (3) insights from ML/DL, with greater potential for geospatial data to be exploited. While liquefaction is a physical phenomenon best predicted by mechanics, subsurface traits lack theoretical links to above-ground parameters, but surely correlate in complex, interconnected ways—a prime problem for ML/DL. To demonstrate, a preliminary model is developed from a modest dataset, is tested on recent earthquakes, and is shown to provide efficient predictions. Ultimately, this approach could be used to develop national and global geospatial models that provide improved regional-scale predictions of liquefaction.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this chapter.

REFERENCES

Boulanger, R. W., and Idriss, I. M. (2014). “CPT and SPT based liquefaction triggering procedures.”, Center for Geotech. Modelling, Civil & Environmental Eng., UC Davis, CA.
Fan, Y., Li, H., and Miguez-Macho, G. (2013). “Global patterns of groundwater table depth.” Science 339 (6122): 940–943, doi:https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1229881.
Fan, Y., Li, H., and Miguez-Macho, G. (2020). “Updated dataset for global patterns of groundwater table depth.” http://thredds-gfnl.usc.es/thredds/catalog/GLOBALWTDFTP/catalog.html.
Fawcett, T. (2006). “An introduction to ROC analysis.” Pattern Rec. Letters 27(8): 861–874.
FEMA. (2013). Earthquake Model HAZUS-MH 2.1 Technical Manual, Washington, D.C.
Fick, S. E., and Hijmans, R. J. (2017). WorldClim 2: new 1‐km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. International Journal of Climatology 37(12): 4302–4315.
Geyin, M., and Maurer, B. W. (2020a). Fragility Functions for Liquefaction-Induced Ground Failure. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 146(12), 04020142.
Geyin, M., and Maurer, B. W. (2020b). “Horizon: CPT-based liquefaction risk assessment and decision software.” DesignSafe-CI, doi: https://doi.org/10.17603/ds2-2fky-tm46.
Geyin, M., and Maurer, B. (2021a). “CPT-Based Liquefaction Case Histories from Global Earthquakes: A Digital Dataset.” DesignSafe-CI. https://doi.org/10.17603/ds2-wftt-mv37.
Geyin, M., and Maurer, B. (2021b). “RapidLiq: Geospatial software for prediction of soil liquefaction in near-real time.” DesignSafe-CI. https://doi.org/TBD.
Geyin, M., Baird, A. J., and Maurer, B. W. (2020). “Field assessment of liquefaction prediction models based on geotechnical versus geospatial data, with lessons for each.” Earthquake Spectra, 36(3): 1386–1411.
Geyin, M., Maurer, B. W., Bradley, B. A., Green, R. A., and van Ballegooy, S. (2021). “CPT-based liquefaction case histories compiled from three earthquakes in Canterbury, New Zealand.” Earthquake Spectra, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/8755293021996367.
Green, R. A., Bommer, J. J., Rodriguez-Marek, A., Maurer, B. W., Stafford, P. J., Edwards, B., Kruiver, P. P., De Lange, G., and Van Elk, J. (2019). “Addressing limitations in existing ‘simplified’ liquefaction triggering evaluation procedures: application to induced seismicity in the Groningen gas field.” Bulletin of Earthquake Eng. 17(8): 4539–4557.
Heath, D. C., Wald, D. J., Worden, C. B., Thompson, E. M., and Smoczyk, G. M. (2020). “A global hybrid VS 30 map with a topographic slope–based default and regional map insets.” Earthquake Spectra, 36(3): 1570–1584.
Horton, J. D., San Juan, C. A., and Stoeser, D. B. (2017). “The State Geologic Map Compilation (SGMC) geodatabase of the conterminous United States (ver. 1.1).”, 46 p.
Idriss, I. M., and Boulanger, R. W. (2008). “Soil liquefaction during earthquakes.” ; Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, CA, 261 pp.
Iwasaki, T., Tatsuoka, F., Tokida, K., and Yasuda, S. A. (1978). “Practical method for assessing soil liquefaction potential based on case studies at various sites in Japan.” Proc., 2nd Int. Conf. on Microzonation, San Francisco, USA.
Kramer, S. L. (2008). “Evaluation of Liquefaction Hazards in Washington State.”, Washington State Transportation Center, Seattle, Washington.
Lehner, B., Verdin, K., and Jarvis, A. (2006). HydroSHEDS Technical Documentation. World Wildlife Fund US, Washington, D.C.
Maurer, B. W., Green, R. A., and Taylor, O. D. S. (2015). “Moving towards an improved index for assessing liquefaction hazard: lessons from historical data.” Soils and Foundations 55(4): 778–787.
Rashidian, V., and Baise, L. G. (2020). “Regional efficacy of a global geospatial liquefaction model.” Engineering Geology, 105644.
Shangguan, W., Hengl, T., de Jesus, J. M., Yuan, H., and Dai, Y. (2017). “Mapping the global depth to bedrock for land surface modeling.” Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 9(1): 65–88.
Wald, D. J., and Allen, T. I. (2007). “Topographic slope as a proxy for seismic site conditions and amplification.” BSSA 97, 1379–1395.
Wald, L. A., Wald, D. J., Schwarz, S., Presgrave, B., Earle, P. S., Martinez, E., and Oppenheimer, D. (2008). “The USGS earthquake notification service (ENS): Customizable, automatic notifications of earthquakes around the globe.” Seismol. Res. Lett. 79: 23–30.
Zhu, J., Baise, L. G., and Thompson, E. M. (2017). “An updated geospatial liquefaction model for global application. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 107(3): 1365–1385.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Geo-Congress 2022
Geo-Congress 2022
Pages: 455 - 464

History

Published online: Mar 17, 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Mertcan Geyin, S.M.ASCE [email protected]
1Graduate Research Assistant, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA. Email: [email protected]
Brett W. Maurer, M.ASCE [email protected]
2Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA. Email: [email protected]

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Paper
$35.00
Add to cart
Buy E-book
$140.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Paper
$35.00
Add to cart
Buy E-book
$140.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share