Comparative Evaluation of Empirical Approaches and Artificial Intelligence Techniques for Predicting Uniaxial Compressive Strength of Rock

IF 2.4 Q2 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Geosciences (Switzerland) Pub Date : 2023-09-28 DOI:10.3390/geosciences13100294
Chuanqi Li, Jian Zhou, Daniel Dias, Kun Du, Manoj Khandelwal
{"title":"Comparative Evaluation of Empirical Approaches and Artificial Intelligence Techniques for Predicting Uniaxial Compressive Strength of Rock","authors":"Chuanqi Li, Jian Zhou, Daniel Dias, Kun Du, Manoj Khandelwal","doi":"10.3390/geosciences13100294","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) of rocks is one of the key parameters for evaluating the safety and stability of civil and mining structures. In this study, 386 rock samples containing four properties named the load strength (PLS), the porosity (Pn), the P-wave velocity (Vp), and the Schmidt hardness rebound number (SHR) are utilized to predict the UCS using several typical empirical equations (EA) and artificial intelligence (AI) methods, i.e., 16 single regression (SR) equations, 2 multiple regression (MR) equations, and the random forest (RF) models optimized by grey wolf optimization (GWO), moth flame optimization (MFO), lion swarm optimization (LSO), and sparrow search algorithm (SSA). The root mean square error (RMSE), determination coefficient (R2), Willmott’s index (WI), and variance accounted for (VAF) are used to evaluate the predictive performance of all developed models. The evaluation results show that the overall performance of AI models is superior to empirical approaches, especially the LSO-RF model. In addition, the most important input variable is the Pn for predicting the UCS. Therefore, AI techniques are considered as more efficient and accurate approaches to replace the empirical equations for predicting the UCS of these collected rock samples, which provides a reliable and effective idea to predict the rock UCS in the filed site.","PeriodicalId":38189,"journal":{"name":"Geosciences (Switzerland)","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geosciences (Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences13100294","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) of rocks is one of the key parameters for evaluating the safety and stability of civil and mining structures. In this study, 386 rock samples containing four properties named the load strength (PLS), the porosity (Pn), the P-wave velocity (Vp), and the Schmidt hardness rebound number (SHR) are utilized to predict the UCS using several typical empirical equations (EA) and artificial intelligence (AI) methods, i.e., 16 single regression (SR) equations, 2 multiple regression (MR) equations, and the random forest (RF) models optimized by grey wolf optimization (GWO), moth flame optimization (MFO), lion swarm optimization (LSO), and sparrow search algorithm (SSA). The root mean square error (RMSE), determination coefficient (R2), Willmott’s index (WI), and variance accounted for (VAF) are used to evaluate the predictive performance of all developed models. The evaluation results show that the overall performance of AI models is superior to empirical approaches, especially the LSO-RF model. In addition, the most important input variable is the Pn for predicting the UCS. Therefore, AI techniques are considered as more efficient and accurate approaches to replace the empirical equations for predicting the UCS of these collected rock samples, which provides a reliable and effective idea to predict the rock UCS in the filed site.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
岩石单轴抗压强度预测的经验方法与人工智能技术对比评价
岩石单轴抗压强度(UCS)是评价土矿结构安全稳定的关键参数之一。本文以386个岩石样品为研究对象,利用荷载强度(PLS)、孔隙度(Pn)、纵波速度(Vp)和Schmidt硬度回弹数(SHR) 4种特性,采用典型的经验方程(EA)和人工智能(AI)方法,即16个单回归(SR)方程、2个多元回归(MR)方程,以及由灰狼优化(GWO)、蛾火焰优化(MFO)、狮子群优化算法(LSO)和麻雀搜索算法(SSA)。使用均方根误差(RMSE)、决定系数(R2)、Willmott指数(WI)和方差占比(VAF)来评估所有模型的预测性能。评价结果表明,人工智能模型的整体性能优于经验方法,尤其是LSO-RF模型。此外,最重要的输入变量是用于预测UCS的Pn。因此,人工智能技术被认为是一种更有效、更准确的方法,可以代替经验方程来预测这些采集的岩石样品的单抗强度,为现场岩石单抗强度的预测提供了一种可靠、有效的思路。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Geosciences (Switzerland)
Geosciences (Switzerland) Earth and Planetary Sciences-Earth and Planetary Sciences (all)
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
7.40%
发文量
395
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Comparison of Rating Systems for Alberta Rock Slopes, and Assessment of Applicability for Geotechnical Asset Management Thermal Conductivity of Frozen and Unfrozen Gas-Saturated Soils Heterogeneities in the Cohesion of the Deposits of the 2021 Tajogaite Eruption of La Palma (Canary Islands, Spain) Understanding the Deep Structure of the Essaouira Basin Using Gravity Data: Hydrogeological Inferences for a Semiarid Region in Central-Western Morocco Using Electrical Resistivity Tomography Method to Determine the Inner 3D Geometry and the Main Runoff Directions of the Large Active Landslide of Pie de Cuesta in the Vítor Valley (Peru)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1