skip to main content
10.1145/3474963.3474982acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiccmsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Shallow-neural-network Optimization for Predicting Plasticity Index of Loess with Cone Penetration Test Data

Authors Info & Claims
Published:14 October 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Plasticity index is essential for engineering applications, obtaining which would be carried out from situ-fields to the laboratory costly and time-consuming. Cone penetration tests (CPTs), fast, low-cost, reliable and output near-continuous measurement, are widely used in geological and geotechnical engineering, and shallow neural networks can learn and build models of complex nonlinear relationships. This paper presents a methodology of predicting soil plasticity index by CPT using optimized artificial neural networks (SNNs) for reducing laboratory work that represents a significant saving of both time and money. Gathered from fields in Western Henan province in central China, 237 sets of laboratory results and CPT tests divided into 20 groups were used to train, test, and validate the optimization ANN models with single and double hidden layers. A criterion ensuring without underfitting or overfitting is set up by regression coefficient distribution. The optimization covers 12 train functions, four process functions, divide functions and divide models, 2 to 20 neurons selected for two hidden layers. Of the results with double hidden layers, the largest minimum and 2-norm regression coefficients and the least maximum and 2-norm mean square errors are 0.640, 1.318 and 0.775, 1.078 individually, which distinctly larger than the corresponding values in with a single layer, thus indicates improved performances. The influence on the regression values and MSEs is presented.

References

  1. Arama ZA, Yücel M, Akın MS, Nuray SE and Alten O. 2020. Prediction of Soil Plasticity Index with the Use of Regression Analysis and Artificial Neural Networks: A Specific Case for Bakırköy District. International Conference on Harmony Search Algorithm. Springer, Singapore, 281-293Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Ghaderi A, Abbaszadeh Shahri A and Larsson S. 2018. 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):4579-88.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Farhadi MS and Länsivaara T. 2021. Development of an integrated game theory-optimization subground stratification model using cone penetration test (CPT) measurements. Engineering with Computers. Jan (21):1-6Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Alshibli KA, Okeil AM, Alramahi B and Zhang Z. 2009. Statistical assessment of repeatability of CPT measurements. Contemporary Topics in In Situ Testing, Analysis, and Reliability of Foundations. 87-94.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Bong T and Stuedlein AW. 2018. Effect of Cone Penetration Conditioning on Random Field Model Parameters and Impact of Spatial Variability on Liquefaction-Induced Differential Settlements. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 144(5), 04018018–. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001863 Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. 2018;144(5):04018018.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Hird CC and Springman SM. 2006. Comparative performance of 5 cm2 and 10 cm2 piezocones in a lacustrine clay. Géotechnique.56(6):12Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. T L and P M. 2007. Stratigraphic delineation by three dimensional clustering of piezocone data. Georisk. 1(2):18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Robertson P. 2016. CPT-based Soil Behaviour Type (SBT) Classification System –an update Canadian Geotechnical Journal.53(12):18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Shahri AA. 2016. An optimized artificial neural network structure to predict clay sensitivity in a high landslide prone area using piezocone penetration test (CPTu) data: a case study in southwest of Sweden. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering. 34(2):745-58.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Kurup PU and Griffin EP. 2006. Prediction of soil composition from CPT data using general regression neural network. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering. 20(4):281-9.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Zhu A-X, Yang L, Li B, Qin C, Pei T and Liu B. 2010. Construction of membership functions for predictive soil mapping under fuzzy logic. Geoderma. 155(3-4):164-74.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Pásztor L, Laborczi A, Takács K, Szatmári G, Fodor N, Illés G, 2017. Compilation of functional soil maps for the support of spatial planning and land management in Hungary. Soil Mapping and Process Modeling for Sustainable Land Use Management: Elsevier. Jan (1):293-317.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Choobbasti A, Farrokhzad F, Rahim Mashaie S and Azar P. 2015. Mapping of soil layers using artificial neural network (case study of Babol, northern Iran). Journal of the South African Institution of Civil Engineering. 57(1):59-66.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Arel E. 2012. Predicting the spatial distribution of soil profile in Adapazari/Turkey by artificial neural networks using CPT data. Computers & Geosciences. 43:90-100.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. 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. 36:207-15.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. DO O. 2014. An intelligent system for soil classification using supervised learning approach. J Comput Eng Intell Syst. 5(11):12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. B B and DP S. 2006. Machine learning in soil classification. J Neural Netw. 29(2):10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Kanwar N, Goswami AK and Mishra S. 2019. Design Issues in Artificial Neural Network (ANN). 2019 4th International Conference on Internet of Things: Smart Innovation and Usages (IoT-SIU). IEEE. Apr (18):1-4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Robertson PK. 2009. Interpretation of cone penetration tests—a unified approach. Canadian geotechnical journal. 46(11):1337-55.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Robertson P. 1991. Soil classification using the cone penetration test: Reply. Canadian Geotechnical Journal. 28(1):176-8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  1. Shallow-neural-network Optimization for Predicting Plasticity Index of Loess with Cone Penetration Test Data

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      ICCMS '21: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Computer Modeling and Simulation
      June 2021
      276 pages
      ISBN:9781450389792
      DOI:10.1145/3474963

      Copyright © 2021 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 14 October 2021

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)14
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format