MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Feasibility of Stochastic Gradient Boosting Approach for Evaluating Seismic Liquefaction Potential Based on SPT and CPT Case Histories

2019· article· en· W2915329514 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Performance of Constructed Facilities · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
Canadian institutionsCentre for Excellence in Mining Innovation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCone penetration testLiquefactionSoil liquefactionPenetration testGeotechnical engineeringBinary classificationClassifier (UML)Hyperparameter optimizationTest dataComputer scienceEngineeringData miningMachine learningArtificial intelligenceSupport vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Earthquakes have always attracted civil and geotechnical engineers’ attention, especially when it comes to the liquefaction potential of soil. This paper investigates the feasibility of classifier based on stochastic gradient boosting (SGB) to explore the liquefaction potential from actual cone penetration test (CPT) and standard penetration test (SPT) field data. SGB is composed of many classification and regression trees which meet the mechanism of ensemble learning and show strong predictive power compared with conventional statistical learning models in several engineering applications. The binary classifier was built by the database gathered from CPT and SPT filed data for predicting the non-liquefaction or liquefaction of soil, the SGB hyperparameters are optimized by grid search method with tenfolds cross validation methods. Three performance metric, namely Cohen’s Kappa coefficient, classification accuracy rate and receiver operating characteristic curve, are used to evaluate the predictive performance of SGB approaches. With CPT and SPT test sets, highest classification accuracy rate of 88.62% and 95.45%, respectively, are achieved with SGB. It is confirmed that the SGB can be applied to characterize the complex relationship between the liquefaction potential and different soil and seismic parameters with great efficiency. Further, relative importance of influencing variables for each model are investigated and demonstrated that the SGB predictor is more sensitive to the indicators of initial soil friction angle for SPT data whereas cone tip resistance for CPT data.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it