CPT-Based Soil Classification through Machine Learning Techniques
Publication: Geo-Congress 2023
ABSTRACT
Soil classification is a fundamental step prior to any design procedure in every geotechnical project. However, the soil testing required for classification purposes is expensive, time consuming, and resource-intensive; making it difficult to conduct accurate and enough testing on a routine basis. Engineers and researchers have carried out soil testing for many years, leading to the development of a huge dataset. Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) which have become more popular in the civil and geotechnical engineering fields in the past few years provide a great opportunity to use the collected data for the development of evolutionary prediction models. In this paper, machine learning algorithms are used to build a model which can classify the soil using Cone Penetration Testing (CPT) data, focusing on three regions in the US (southeastern, central, and western). Random Forest, Support Vector Machine, K Nearest Neighbors, and Extreme Gradient Boosting algorithms are the four ML approaches used in this study for the prediction of the Soil Behavior Type (SBT) zone classification which is widely used for classifying the soil behavior based on CPT results. The performance of the adopted models is compared using different accuracy metrics and the confusion matrix. In this study, the Random Forest classifier and Extreme Gradient Boosting models are found to perform better in terms of soil prediction and total model training.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this chapter.
REFERENCES
Alkroosh, I. S., Bahadori, M., Nikraz, H., and Bahadori, A. (2015). Regressive approach for predicting bearing capacity of bored piles from cone penetration test data. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 7(5), 584–592.
Amjad, M., Ahmad, I., Ahmad, M., Wróblewski, P., Kamiński, P., and Amjad, U. (2022). Prediction of pile bearing capacity using XGBoost algorithm: modeling and performance evaluation. Applied Sciences, 12(4), 2126.
Bharti, J. P., Mishra, P., Sathishkumar, V. E., Cho, Y., and Samui, P. (2021). Slope stability analysis using Rf, Gbm, Cart, Bt and Xgboost. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 39(5), 3741–3752.
Carvalho, L. O., and Ribeiro, D. B. (2019). Soil classification system from cone penetration test data applying distance-based machine learning algorithms. Soils and Rocks, 42(2), 167–178.
Chen, T., and Guestrin, C. (2016). Xgboost: A scalable tree boosting system. Proceedings of the 22nd Acm Sigkdd International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 785–794.
Cover, T., and Hart, P. (1967). Nearest neighbor pattern classification. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 13(1), 21–27.
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 Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 154, 107130.
Geologismiki, C. (n.d.). GeoLogismiki, CLiq User’s manual Avialable online : https://geologismiki.gr/Documents/CLiq/CLiq%20manual.pdf (Accesed on 5 June 2020).
Ghaderi, A., Abbaszadeh Shahri, A., and Larsson, S. (2019). An artificial neural network based model to predict spatial soil type distribution using piezocone penetration test data (CPTu). Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 78(6), 4579–4588.
Jefferies, M. G., and Davies, M. P. (1993). Use of CPTU to estimate equivalent SPT N 60. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 16(4), 458–468.
Kirts, S., Panagopoulos, O. P., Xanthopoulos, P., and Nam, B. H. (2018). Soil-compressibility prediction models using machine learning. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 32(1), 4017067.
Kohestani, V. R., Hassanlourad, M., and Ardakani, A. (2015). Evaluation of liquefaction potential based on CPT data using random forest. Natural Hazards, 79(2), 1079–1089.
Koopialipoor, M., Asteris, P. G., Mohammed, A. S., Alexakis, D. E., Mamou, A., and Armaghani, D. J. (2022). Introducing stacking machine learning approaches for the prediction of rock deformation. Transportation Geotechnics, 34, 100756.
Kordjazi, A., Nejad, F. P., and Jaksa, M. B. (2014). Prediction of ultimate axial load-carrying capacity of piles using a support vector machine based on CPT data. Computers and Geotechnics, 55, 91–102.
Kurup, P. U., and Griffin, E. P. (2006). Prediction of soil composition from CPT data using general regression neural network. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 20(4), 281–289.
Liu, C., and Macedo, J. (2022). Machine learning-based models for estimating seismically-induced slope displacements in subduction earthquake zones. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 160, 107323.
Macedo, J., Liu, C., and Soleimani, F. (2021). Machine-learning-based predictive models for estimating seismically-induced slope displacements. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 148, 106795.
Marjanovic, M., Bajat, B., and Kovacevic, M. (2009). Landslide susceptibility assessment with machine learning algorithms. 2009 International Conference on Intelligent Networking and Collaborative Systems, 273–278.
Nejad, A. S., Güler, E., and Özturan, M. (2018). Evaluation of liquefaction potential using random forest method and shear wave velocity results. 2018 International Conference on Applied Mathematics & Computational Science (ICAMCS. NET), 23–233.
Noble, W. S. (2006). What is a support vector machine? Nature Biotechnology, 24(12), 1565–1567.
Paraskevas, T., Constantinos, L., Dimitrios, R., and Ioanna, L. (2015). Landslide susceptibility assessments using the k-Nearest Neighbor algorithm and expert knowledge. Case study of the basin of Selinounda River, Achaia County, Greece.
SafeChania. (2015). The Knowledge Triangle in the Civil Protection Service Center of Mediterranean Architecture, Chania, Crete, Greece, 10–14.
Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., and Dubourg, V. (2011). Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825–2830.
Peterson, L. E. (2009). K-nearest neighbor. Scholarpedia, 4(2), 1883.
Pham, T. A., and Tran, V. Q. (2022). Developing random forest hybridization models for estimating the axial bearing capacity of pile. Plos One, 17(3), e0265747.
Raschka, S. (2015). Python machine learning. Packt publishing ltd.
Rauter, S., and Tschuchnigg, F. (2021). CPT Data Interpretation Employing Different Machine Learning Techniques. Geosciences, 11(7), 265.
Reale, C., Gavin, K., Librić, L., and Jurić-Kaćunić, D. (2018). Automatic classification of fine-grained soils using CPT measurements and Artificial Neural Networks. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 36, 207–215.
Refaeilzadeh, P., Tang, L., and Liu, H. (2009). Cross-validation. Encyclopedia of Database Systems, 5, 532–538.
Robertson, P. K. (1990). Soil classification using the cone penetration test. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 27(1), 151–158.
Robertson, P. K. (2009). Interpretation of cone penetration tests—a unified approach. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 46(11), 1337–1355.
Robertson, P. K. (2010). Soil behaviour type from the CPT: an update. 2nd International Symposium on Cone Penetration Testing, 2(56), 8.
Robertson, P. K., and Wride, C. E. (1998). Evaluating cyclic liquefaction potential using the cone penetration test. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 35(3), 442–459.
Robertson, P. K., Campanella, R. G., Gillespie, D., and Greig, J. (1986). Use of piezometer cone data. Use of in Situ Tests in Geotechnical Engineering, 1263–1280.
Seman, P., Shoop, S., McGrath, S. P., and Rolling, R. S. (2006). Soil Strength Prediction with k-Nearest Neighbor Method. Proceedings of the 59th Canadian Geotechnical Conference.
Shi, C., and Wang, Y. (2021). Development of subsurface geological cross-section from limited site-specific boreholes and prior geological knowledge using iterative convolution XGBoost. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 147(9), 4021082.
Tsiaousi, D., Travasarou, T., Drosos, V., Ugalde, J., and Chacko, J. (2018). Machine learning applications for site characterization based on CPT data. In Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics V: Slope Stability and Landslides, Laboratory Testing, and In Situ Testing (pp. 461–472). American Society of Civil Engineers Reston, VA.
USGS. (n.d.). Usgs. Map of CPT data. United States Geological Survey; 2021. https://earthquake. usgs.gov/research/cpt/data/. [Accessed June 2022].
Zhang, J.-Z., Zhang, D.-M., Huang, H.-W., Phoon, K. K., Tang, C., and Li, G. (2022). Hybrid machine learning model with random field and limited CPT data to quantify horizontal scale of fluctuation of soil spatial variability. Acta Geotechnica, 17(4), 1129–1145.
Zhang, W., Wu, C., Li, Y., Wang, L., and Samui, P. (2021). Assessment of pile drivability using random forest regression and multivariate adaptive regression splines. Georisk: Assessment and Management of Risk for Engineered Systems and Geohazards, 15(1), 27–40.
Zhang, W., Wu, C., Zhong, H., Li, Y., and Wang, L. (2021). Prediction of undrained shear strength using extreme gradient boosting and random forest based on Bayesian optimization. Geoscience Frontiers, 12(1), 469–477.
Zhao, Z., Duan, W., and Cai, G. (2021). A novel PSO-KELM based soil liquefaction potential evaluation system using CPT and Vs measurements. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 150, 106930.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Geo-Congress 2023
Pages: 277 - 292
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.