Machine Learning Applications in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering: Progress, Gaps, and Opportunities
Publication: Geo-Congress 2023
ABSTRACT
The rise of data capture and storage capabilities have led to greater data granularity and sharing of data sets in geotechnical earthquake engineering. This broader shift to big data requires ways to process and extract value from it and is aided by the progress in methodologies from the computer science domain and advancements in computer hardware capabilities. General machine learning (ML) models typically receive a set of input parameters and run them through an algorithm to gain outputs with no constraints on the parameters or algorithm process. Three topic areas of ML applications in geotechnical earthquake engineering are reviewed and summarized in this paper: seismic response, liquefaction triggering analysis, and performance-based assessments (lateral displacements and settlement analysis). The current progress of ML is summarized, while the challenges and potential in adopting such approaches are addressed.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this chapter.
REFERENCES
Baziar, M. H., and Ghorbani, A. (2005). Evaluation of lateral spreading using artificial neural networks. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 25(1), 1–9.
Bellagamba, X., Lee, R., and Bradley, B. A. (2019). A neural network for automated quality screening of ground motion records from small magnitude earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra, 35(4).
Bickel, P. J., and Levina, E. (2008). Regularized estimation of large covariance matrices. The Annals of Statistics, 36(1).
Chiru-Danzer, M., Juang, C. H., Christopher, R. A., and Suber, J. (2001). Estimation of liquefaction-induced horizontal displacements using artificial neural networks. Canadian Geot J, 38(1).
Cho, Y., Khosravikia, F., and Rathje, E. M. (2022). A comparison of artificial neural network and classical regression models for earthquake-induced slope displacements. Soil Dyn & Earthq Eng, 152.
DiGGS (Data Interchange for Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists). (n.d.) https://www.geoinstitute.org/special-projects/diggs.
Demir, S., and Sahin, E. K. (2022). Comparison of tree-based machine learning algorithms for predicting liquefaction potential using canonical correlation forest, rotation forest, and random forest based on CPT data. Soil Dyn & Earthq Eng, 154, 107130.
Duan, W., Congress, S. S. C., Cai, G., Liu, S., Dong, X., Chen, R., and Liu, X. (2021). A hybrid GMDH neural network and logistic regression framework for state parameter–based liquefaction evaluation. Canadian Geotechnical J, 58(12), 1801–1811.
Durante, M. G., and Rathje, E. M. (2021). An exploration of the use of machine learning to predict lateral spreading. Earthquake Spectra, 875529302110046.
Eldin Ali, H., and Najjar, Y. M. (1998). Neuronet-based approach for assessing liquefaction potential of soils. Transportation Research Record, 1633(1), 3–8.
Fayaz, J., and Galasso, C. (2022). A deep neural network framework for real-time on-site estimation of acceleration response spectra of seismic ground motions. Computer-Aided Civil & Infrastructure Eng, 1–17.
García, S. R., Romo, M. P., and Botero, E. (2008). A neurofuzzy system to analyze liquefaction-induced lateral spread. Soil Dyn & Earthq Eng, 28(3), 169–180.
Geyin, M., Maurer, B. W., and Christofferson, K. (2022). An AI driven, mechanistically grounded geospatial liquefaction model for rapid response and scenario planning. Soil Dyn & Earthq Eng, 159, 107348.
Goh, A. T. (2002). Probabilistic neural network for evaluating seismic liquefaction potential. Canadian Geotechnical J, 39(1), 219–232.
Goh, A. T. C., and Goh, S. H. (2007). Support vector machines: Their use in geotechnical engineering as illustrated using seismic liquefaction data. Computers and Geotechnics, 34(5).
Goh, A. T. C. (1994). Seismic liquefaction potential assessed by neural networks. J Geot Eng, 120(9).
Goh, A. T. C. (1996). Neural-network modeling of CPT seismic liquefaction data. J Geot Eng, 122(1).
Greenfield, M. W., and Grant, A. (2020). Probabilistic regional-scale liquefaction triggering modeling using 3D Gaussian processes. Soil Dyn & Earthq Eng, 134, 106159.
Groholski, D. R., Hashash, Y. M. A., and Matasovic, N. (2014). Learning of pore pressure response and dynamic soil behavior from downhole array measurements. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng, 61–62.
Hanna, A. M., Ural, D., and Saygili, G. (2007). Neural network model for liquefaction potential in soil deposits using Turkey and Taiwan earthquake data. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng, 27(6).
Hoang, N.-D., and Bui, D. T. (2018). Predicting earthquake-induced soil liquefaction based on a hybridization of kernel Fisher discriminant analysis and a least squares support vector machine: A multi-dataset study. Bulletin of Eng Geology & Env, 77(1), 191–204.
Hu, J., and Liu, H. (2020). Comparison of data-driven methods for evaluating earthquake-induced liquefaction potential. In A. G. Correia, J. Tinoco, P. Cortez, & L. Lamas (Eds.), Information Technology in Geo-Engineering. Springer International Publishing.
Huang, H. W., Zhang, J., and Zhang, L. M. (2012). Bayesian network for characterizing model uncertainty of liquefaction potential evaluation models. KSCE J of Civil Engineering, 16(5).
Hwang, Y.-W., Bullock, Z., Dashti, S., and Liel, A. (2022). A probabilistic predictive model for foundation settlement on liquefiable soils improved with ground densification. J Geot Geoenv Eng, 148(5).
Javadi, A. A., Rezania, M., and Nezhad, M. M. (2006). Evaluation of liquefaction induced lateral displacements using genetic programming. Computers and Geotechnics, 33(4–5), 222–233.
Juang, C. H., and Chen, C. J. (1999). CPT-based liquefaction evaluation using artificial neural networks. Computer-Aided Civil Infrastructure Eng, 14(3), 221–229.
Juang, C. H., Chen, C. J., Rosowsky, D. V., and Tang, W. H. (2000). CPT-based liquefaction analysis, Part 2: Reliability for design. Géotechnique, 50(5), 593–599.
Juang, C. H., Yuan, H., Lee, D.-H., and Lin, P.-S. (2003). Simplified Cone Penetration Test-based method for evaluating liquefaction resistance of soils. J Geot Geoenv Eng, 129(1).
Kamura, A., Kurihara, G., Mori, T., Kazama, M., Kwon, Y., Kim, J., and Han, J.-T. (2021). Exploring the possibility of assessing the damage degree of liquefaction based only on seismic records by artificial neural networks. Soils and Foundations, 61(3), 658–674.
Kaya, Z. (2016). Predicting liquefaction-induced lateral spreading by using neural network and neuro-fuzzy techniques. International Journal of Geomechanics, 16(4), 04015095.
Kutter, B. L., et al. (2018). Twenty-Four Centrifuge Tests to Quantify Sensitivity of Lateral Spreading to Dr and PGA. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics V, 383–393.
Liu, Z., and Tesfamariam, S. (2012). Prediction of lateral spread displacement: Data-driven approaches. Bulletin of Earthquake Eng, 10(5), 1431–1454.
Lopez-Caballero, F. (2018). Numerical evaluation of fragility curves for earthquake liquefaction induced settlements of a levee using Gaussian Processes. In Numerical Methods in Geotechnical Engineering IX (1st ed). CRC Press, pp. 515–521.
Lopez-Caballero, F. (2021). Probabilistic seismic analysis for liquefiable embankment through multi-fidelity codes approach. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng, 149, 106849.
Macedo, J., Liu, C., and Soleimani, F. (2021). Machine-learning-based predictive models for estimating seismically-induced slope displacements. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng, 148, 106795.
Mercado, V., Ochoa-Cornejo, F., Astroza, R., El-Sekelly, W., Abdoun, T., Pastén, C., and Hernández, F. (2019). Uncertainty quantification and propagation in the modeling of liquefiable sands. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng, 123, 217–229.
Oommen, T., and Baise, L. G. (2008). A new approach to liquefaction potential mapping using satellite remote sensing and support vector machine algorithm. IGARSS 2008-2008 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, III-51–III–54.
Oommen, T., and Baise, L. G. (2010). Model development and validation for intelligent data collection for lateral spread displacements. J of Computing in Civil Eng, 24(6), 467–477.
Pal, M. (2006). Support vector machines-based modelling of seismic liquefaction potential. Int Journal for Num and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 30(10), 983–996.
Pirhadi, N., Tang, X., Yang, Q., and Kang, F. (2018). A new equation to evaluate liquefaction triggering using the response surface method and parametric sensitivity analysis. Sustainability, 11(1), 112.
Ramakrishnan, D., Singh, T. N., Purwar, N., Barde, K. S., Gulati, A., and Gupta, S. (2008). Artificial neural network and liquefaction susceptibility assessment: A case study using the 2001 Bhuj earthquake data, Gujarat, India. Computational Geosciences, 12(4), 491–501.
Rezania, M., Faramarzi, A., and Javadi, A. A. (2011). An evolutionary based approach for assessment of earthquake-induced soil liquefaction and lateral displacement. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 24(1), 142–153.
Rezania, M., Javadi, A. A., and Giustolisi, O. (2010). Evaluation of liquefaction potential based on CPT results using evolutionary polynomial regression. Computers and Geotechnics, 37(1–2).
Roberts, J. N., and Engin, H. K. (2019). Evaluation of liquefaction triggering potential using the case-based reasoning method with CPT field data. Earthquake Geot Eng for Protection & Development of Environment & Constructions – Silvestri & Moraci (Eds), pp. 4720–4727.
Samui, P., and Karthikeyan, J. (2013). Determination of liquefaction susceptibility of soil: A least square support vector machine approach. International Journal of Geotechnics and Environment (IJGE), 3(1), 75–84
Seed, H. B., Tokimatsu, K., Harder, L. F., and Chung, R. M. (1985). Influence of SPT Procedures in Soil Liquefaction Resistance Evaluations. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 111(12), 1425–1445.
Somala, S. N., Chanda, S., Karthikeyan, K., and Mangalathu, S. (2021). Explainable machine learning on New Zealand strong motion for PGV and PGA. Structures, 34, 4977–4985.
Tombari, A., and Stefanini, L. (2019). Hybrid fuzzy – stochastic 1D site response analysis accounting for soil uncertainties. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 132, 102–121.
Tsai, C.-C., and Hashash, Y. M. A. (2008). A novel framework integrating downhole array data and site response analysis to extract dynamic soil behavior. Soil Dyn & Earthq Eng, 28(3).
Ueda, K. (2022). Hierarchical Bayesian Approach to Estimating Variability of Liquefaction Resistance of Sandy Soils Considering Individual Differences in Laboratory Tests. J Geotech Geoenv Eng, 148(2), 04021188.
Vadyala, S. R., Betgeri, S. N., Matthews, J. C., and Matthews, E. (2022). A review of physics-based machine learning in civil engineering. Results in Engineering, 13, 100316.
Wang, J., and Rahman, M. S. (1999). A neural network model for liquefaction-induced horizontal ground displacement. Soil Dyn & Earthq Eng, 18(8), 555–568.
Wang, M.-X., Huang, D., Wang, G., and Li, D.-Q. (2020). SS-XGBoost: A machine learning framework for predicting Newmark sliding displacements of slopes. J Geot Geoenv Eng, 146(9), 04020074.
Wang, Y., Fu, C., and Huang, K. (2017). Probabilistic assessment of liquefiable soil thickness considering spatial variability and model and parameter uncertainties. Géotechnique, 67(3).
Woldesellasse, H., and Tesfamariam, S. (2022). Prediction of lateral spreading displacement using conditional Generative Adversarial Network (cGAN). Soil Dyn & Earthq Eng, 156, 107214.
Young-Su, K., and Byung-Tak, K. (2006). Use of artificial neural networks in the prediction of liquefaction resistance of sands. J Geotech Geoenv Eng, 132(11), 1502–1504.
Zhang, J., Zhang, L. M., and Huang, H. W. (2013). Evaluation of generalized linear models for soil liquefaction probability prediction. Environmental Earth Sciences, 68(7), 1925–1933.
Zhang, Y., Wang, R., Zhang, J.-M., and Zhang, J. (2020). A constrained neural network model for soil liquefaction assessment with global applicability. Front. Str. Civ. Eng.
Zhao, Z., Duan, W., and Cai, G. (2021). A novel PSO-KELM based soil liquefaction potential evaluation system using CPT and Vs measurements. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng, 150, 106930.
Zhou, J., Li, E., Wang, M., Chen, X., Shi, X., and Jiang, L. (2019). Feasibility of stochastic gradient boosting approach for evaluating seismic liquefaction potential based on SPT and CPT case histories. J Performance of Constructed Facilities, 33(3).
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Geo-Congress 2023
Pages: 493 - 505
History
Published online: Mar 23, 2023
Authors
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.