Feasibility of Random-Forest Approach for Prediction of Ground Settlements Induced by the Construction of a Shield-Driven Tunnel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ground settlements above a tunnel as a result of tunnel construction can be predicted with the help of input variables that have direct physical significance. Several empirical and artificial intelligence methods for estimating ground settlements have been established by researchers. However, these methods have some limitations because the large number of influential factors involved makes tunnel–ground interaction complicated. In this work, a random forest (RF) was developed and employed to predict ground settlements above tunnels. To achieve this goal, tunnel geometry, geological properties, and construction parameters were investigated as input variables to utilize in the RF modeling, resulting in the maximum surface settlement value (Smax) and trough width (i) as the ground surface settlement index. To demonstrate the applicability of the RF model, two data sets associated with different features, which were obtained from a detailed investigation of different tunnel projects published in literature, were utilized for model development and were applied to check the performance capacity of the developed model. A fivefold cross-validation procedure was then applied to identify the optimal parameter values during modeling, and an external testing set was employed to validate the prediction performance of the model. Two performance measures, R2 and RMS error, were employed. The relative importance of different parameters in the prediction of ground settlements was also investigated. Findings demonstrate that the RF method provides promising results and offers an alternative means in predicting ground settlements induced by tunneling.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".