岩土力学 ›› 2024, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (9): 2741-2753.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2023.1596

• 岩土工程研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

基于卷积神经网络的液化预测模型及可解释性分析

龙潇1, 2,孙锐1, 2,郑桐1, 2   

  1. 1. 中国地震局工程力学研究所 地震工程与工程振动重点实验室,黑龙江 哈尔滨 150080; 2. 地震灾害防治应急管理部重点实验室,黑龙江 哈尔滨 150080
  • 收稿日期:2023-10-25 接受日期:2024-01-10 出版日期:2024-09-06 发布日期:2024-09-03
  • 通讯作者: 郑桐,男,1984年生,博士,助理研究员,主要从事边坡稳定性及抗震加固方面的研究工作。E-mail: zhengt0928@163.com
  • 作者简介:龙潇,男,1997年生,硕士研究生,主要从事岩土地震工程方面的研究。E-mail: iem_lx@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    中国地震局工程力学研究所基本科研业务费专项资助项目(No.2020C04);黑龙江省自然科学基金联合引导项目(No.LH2020E019)。

Convolutional neural network-based liquefaction prediction model and interpretability analysis

LONG Xiao1, 2, SUN Rui1, 2, ZHENG Tong1, 2   

  1. 1. Key Laboratory of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration, Harbin, Heilongjiang 150080, China; 2. Key Laboratory of Earthquake Disaster Mitigation, Ministry of Emergency Management, Harbin, Heilongjiang 150080, China)
  • Received:2023-10-25 Accepted:2024-01-10 Online:2024-09-06 Published:2024-09-03
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the Scientific Research Fund of Institute of Engineering Mechanics, China Earthquake Administration (2020C04) and the Heilongjiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation Joint Guidance Project of China (LH2020E019).

摘要: 常规液化判别方法通常是半经验方法,存在人为因素干扰,成功率及均衡性不佳。现有的机器学习方法缺乏足够的样本支撑,存在一定的局限性。通过整合液化数据集,选取修正标准贯击数、细粒含量、土层深度、地下水位深度、总上覆应力、有效上覆应力、门槛加速度、循环剪应力比、剪切波速、震级与地表峰值加速度11个液化特征建立卷积神经网络(convolutional neural network,简称CNN)模型。引入边界合成少数过采样技术消除不平衡数据集的影响。将CNN模型与随机森林模型、逻辑回归模型、支持向量机模型、极致梯度提升模型和规范方法进行对比,并结合沙普利加性解释(SHapley Additive exPlanations,简称SHAP)分析输入特征对预测结果的影响趋势。结果表明,CNN模型准确率达92.58%,各项指标均优于其他4种机器学习模型和规范方法。对SHAP结果分析可知,修正标贯击数小于15的土层液化概率较高,循环剪应力比CSR小于0.25的土层更不易液化。各因素的影响规律均符合现有认知,预测模型合理可靠。

关键词: 机器学习, 液化预测, 卷积神经网络, 边界合成少数过采样技术, 沙普利加性解释(SHAP)

Abstract: Conventional methods for liquefaction discrimination are often semi-empirical, prone to human factors, with low success rates and balance. Moreover, current machine learning approaches lack ample sample support and have specific limitations. Through the integration of liquefaction datasets, 11 features were chosen: corrected standard penetration test blow count, fine content, soil layer depth, groundwater table depth, total overburden stress, effective overburden stress, threshold acceleration, cyclic shear stress ratio, shear wave velocity, earthquake magnitude, and peak ground acceleration. A convolutional neural network (CNN) model was established. The Borderline SMOTE technique was introduced to address the issue of imbalanced datasets. The CNN model was compared against random forest, logistic regression, support vector machine, extreme gradient boosting models, and methods specified in Chinese codes. Furthermore, the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) algorithm was utilized to examine the influence trends of input features on the prediction outcomes. The results demonstrated that the CNN model attained an accuracy of 92.58%, outperforming all metrics of the four machine learning models and the method specified in Chinese codes. Examination of the SHAP results unveiled that soil layers with corrected standard penetration blow numbers below 15 exhibited a higher liquefaction probability, whereas layers with cyclic stress ratios under 0.25 were less prone to liquefaction. The influence patterns of each factor align with current understanding, indicating the prediction model’s credibility and reliability.

Key words: machine learning, liquefaction prediction, convolutional neural network, borderline synthesis minority oversampling technique (borderline SMOTE), SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP)

中图分类号: TU43
[1] 江晓童, 张西文, 吕颖慧, 李仁杰, 江浩, . 机器学习在岩土工程中的应用现状与未来展望[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(S1): 419-436.
[2] 蔡启航, 董学超, 郭明伟, 卢正, 徐安, 蒋凡, . 基于刃脚土压力的超大锚碇沉井基础下沉智能预测[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(S1): 377-388.
[3] 真嘉捷, 赖丰文, 黄明, 廖清香, 李爽, 段岳强. 基于时序聚类和在线学习的盾构掘进地层智能识别方法[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(11): 3615-3625.
[4] 贺隆平, 姚囝, 王其虎, 叶义成, 凌济锁, . 基于自动机器学习的岩爆烈度分级预测模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(9): 2839-2848.
[5] 杨洋, 魏怡童. 基于分类树的液化概率等级评估新方法[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(7): 2175-2186.
[6] 邓志兴, 谢康, 李泰灃, 王武斌, 郝哲睿, 李佳珅, . 基于粗颗粒嵌锁点高铁级配碎石振动压实质量控制新方法[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(6): 1835-1849.
[7] 潘秋景, 吴洪涛, 张子龙, 宋克志, . 基于多域物理信息神经网络的复合地层隧道掘进地表沉降预测[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(2): 539-551.
[8] 蒋明镜, 张卢丰, 韩亮, 姜朋明, . 基于符号回归算法的结构性砂土损伤规律研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(12): 3768-3778.
[9] 吴爽爽, 胡新丽, 孙少锐, 魏继红, . 间歇式滑坡变形力学机制与单体预警案例研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(S1): 593-602.
[10] 董学超, 郭明伟, 王水林, . 基于LightGBM的超大沉井下沉状态预测及传感器优化布置[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(6): 1789-1799.
[11] 仉文岗, 顾鑫, 刘汉龙, 张青, 王林, 王鲁琦, . 基于贝叶斯更新的非饱和土坡参数概率 反演及变形预测[J]. 岩土力学, 2022, 43(4): 1112-1122.
[12] 苏国韶,张克实,吕海波. 位移反分析的粒子群优化-高斯过程协同优化方法[J]. , 2011, 32(2): 510-515.
[13] 徐 冲,刘保国,刘开云,郭佳奇. 基于组合核函数的高斯过程边坡角智能设计[J]. , 2010, 31(3): 821-826.
[14] 苏国韶,宋咏春,燕柳斌. 高斯过程机器学习在边坡稳定性评价中的应用[J]. , 2009, 30(3): 675-679.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!