Estimation of soil liquefaction using artificial intelligence techniques: an extended comparison between machine and deep learning approaches

IF 2.8 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental Earth Sciences Pub Date : 2025-02-21 DOI:10.1007/s12665-025-12116-4
Eyyüp Hakan Şehmusoğlu, Talas Fikret Kurnaz, Caner Erden
{"title":"Estimation of soil liquefaction using artificial intelligence techniques: an extended comparison between machine and deep learning approaches","authors":"Eyyüp Hakan Şehmusoğlu,&nbsp;Talas Fikret Kurnaz,&nbsp;Caner Erden","doi":"10.1007/s12665-025-12116-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study investigates the effectiveness of various deep learning (DL) algorithms in predicting soil liquefaction susceptibility. We explore a spectrum of algorithms, including machine learning models such as Support Vector Machines (SVMs), K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), and Logistic Regression (LR), alongside DL architectures like Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), Long Short-Term Memory networks (LSTMs), Bidirectional LSTMs (BiLSTMs), and Gated Recurrent Units (GRUs). The performance of these algorithms is assessed using comprehensive metrics, including accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, and area under the curve (AUC). Cross-entropy loss is employed as the loss function during model training to optimize the differentiation between liquefiable and non-liquefiable soil samples. Our findings reveal that the GRU model achieved the highest overall accuracy of 0.98, followed by the BiLSTM model with an accuracy of 0.95. Notably, the BiLSTM model excelled in precision for class 1, attaining a score of 0.96 on the test dataset. These results underscore the potential of both GRU and BiLSTM models in predicting soil liquefaction susceptibility, with the BiLSTM model’s simpler architecture proving particularly effective in certain metrics and datasets. The findings of this study could assist practitioners in seismic risk assessment by providing more accurate and reliable tools for evaluating soil liquefaction potential, thereby enhancing mitigation strategies and informing decision-making in earthquake-prone areas. This study contributes to developing robust tools for liquefaction hazard assessment, ultimately supporting improved seismic risk mitigation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":542,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Earth Sciences","volume":"84 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12665-025-12116-4.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Earth Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12665-025-12116-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study investigates the effectiveness of various deep learning (DL) algorithms in predicting soil liquefaction susceptibility. We explore a spectrum of algorithms, including machine learning models such as Support Vector Machines (SVMs), K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), and Logistic Regression (LR), alongside DL architectures like Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), Long Short-Term Memory networks (LSTMs), Bidirectional LSTMs (BiLSTMs), and Gated Recurrent Units (GRUs). The performance of these algorithms is assessed using comprehensive metrics, including accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, and area under the curve (AUC). Cross-entropy loss is employed as the loss function during model training to optimize the differentiation between liquefiable and non-liquefiable soil samples. Our findings reveal that the GRU model achieved the highest overall accuracy of 0.98, followed by the BiLSTM model with an accuracy of 0.95. Notably, the BiLSTM model excelled in precision for class 1, attaining a score of 0.96 on the test dataset. These results underscore the potential of both GRU and BiLSTM models in predicting soil liquefaction susceptibility, with the BiLSTM model’s simpler architecture proving particularly effective in certain metrics and datasets. The findings of this study could assist practitioners in seismic risk assessment by providing more accurate and reliable tools for evaluating soil liquefaction potential, thereby enhancing mitigation strategies and informing decision-making in earthquake-prone areas. This study contributes to developing robust tools for liquefaction hazard assessment, ultimately supporting improved seismic risk mitigation.

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
使用人工智能技术估计土壤液化:机器和深度学习方法之间的扩展比较
本文研究了各种深度学习(DL)算法在预测土壤液化敏感性方面的有效性。我们探索了一系列算法,包括机器学习模型,如支持向量机(svm)、k近邻(KNN)和逻辑回归(LR),以及深度学习架构,如卷积神经网络(cnn)、长短期记忆网络(LSTMs)、双向LSTMs (BiLSTMs)和门控循环单元(gru)。这些算法的性能使用综合指标进行评估,包括准确性、精密度、召回率、f1评分、受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析和曲线下面积(AUC)。在模型训练过程中,采用交叉熵损失作为损失函数,优化可液化与不可液化土壤样本的区分。研究结果表明,GRU模型的总体准确率最高,为0.98,BiLSTM模型次之,准确率为0.95。值得注意的是,BiLSTM模型在第1类的精度上表现出色,在测试数据集上获得了0.96的分数。这些结果强调了GRU和BiLSTM模型在预测土壤液化敏感性方面的潜力,BiLSTM模型结构更简单,在某些指标和数据集上特别有效。这项研究的结果可以通过提供更准确和可靠的评估土壤液化潜力的工具来协助从业者进行地震风险评估,从而加强减灾战略并为地震易发地区的决策提供信息。这项研究有助于开发强大的液化危害评估工具,最终支持改善地震风险缓解。
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
Environmental Earth Sciences
Environmental Earth Sciences 环境科学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.60%
发文量
494
审稿时长
8.3 months
期刊介绍: Environmental Earth Sciences is an international multidisciplinary journal concerned with all aspects of interaction between humans, natural resources, ecosystems, special climates or unique geographic zones, and the earth: Water and soil contamination caused by waste management and disposal practices Environmental problems associated with transportation by land, air, or water Geological processes that may impact biosystems or humans Man-made or naturally occurring geological or hydrological hazards Environmental problems associated with the recovery of materials from the earth Environmental problems caused by extraction of minerals, coal, and ores, as well as oil and gas, water and alternative energy sources Environmental impacts of exploration and recultivation – Environmental impacts of hazardous materials Management of environmental data and information in data banks and information systems Dissemination of knowledge on techniques, methods, approaches and experiences to improve and remediate the environment In pursuit of these topics, the geoscientific disciplines are invited to contribute their knowledge and experience. Major disciplines include: hydrogeology, hydrochemistry, geochemistry, geophysics, engineering geology, remediation science, natural resources management, environmental climatology and biota, environmental geography, soil science and geomicrobiology.
期刊最新文献
Mechanisms of coal ash release and transport into lakes with coal-fired power plants based on sediment records from the Southeastern USA Fanet: Landslide recognition in remote sensing images based on multi-source data Permeability evolution of claystones and other sealing materials for CO2 storage: role of confining stress and time A physics-based model of soil water adsorption in saline environments: integrating electric double-layer theory with NMR observations Fractionation and batch desorption experiments to understand the co-occurrence of arsenic and fluoride in Punjab, Pakistan
×
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:604180095
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