Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential Using Neural Networks Based on Adaptive Resonance Theory
Abstract
The incomprehensible loss of lives and extensive damages to transportation facilities caused by earthquakes emphasize the need for robust and reliable methods for evaluating the liquefaction potential of sites. Traditional methods for evaluating liquefaction potential are based on correlating data from the standard penetration test (blow count, N), cone penetration test (cone resistance, qc), or the shear wave velocity (Vs) with the cyclic stress ratio. These methods are unable to incorporate the complex influence of various soil and in situ state parameters. This problem encouraged the development of numerous nontraditional methods such as artificial neural networks that try to learn and account for the influence of various soil and in situ state properties. The possibility of using neural networks based on adaptive resonance theory (ART) for the prediction of liquefaction potential was explored. These networks have been shown to be far more efficient and reliable than the commonly used backpropagation artificial neural network and other multilayer perceptrons. Two Fuzzy ARTMAP (FAM) models were developed and tested with qc and Vs data obtained from past case histories. The qc-and Vs-based FAM models gave overall successful prediction rates of 98% and 97%, respectively. The promising results obtained by the FAM models exemplify the potential of nontraditional computing methods for evaluating liquefaction potential.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
1. Seed H. B., and Idriss I. M. Simplified Procedure for Evaluating Soil Liquefaction Potential. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, Vol. 97, No. SM9, 1971, pp. 1249–1273.
2. Youd T. L., and Idriss I. M. Proc., NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils. Salt Lake City, Utah, 1996, pp. 1–40.
3. Robertson P. K., and Wride C. E. Evaluating Cyclic Liquefaction Potential Using the Cone Penetration Test. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 35, No. 3, 1998, pp. 441–459.
4. Andrus R. D., and Stokoe K. H. A Liquefaction Evaluation Procedure Based on Shear Wave Velocity. Wind and Seismic Effects. Proc., U.S./Japan Natural Resources Development Program (UJNR), Joint Meeting 31st Technical Memorandum of PWRI 3653, Tsukuba, Japan, 1999, pp. 71–78.
5. Goh A. T. C. Seismic Liquefaction Potential Assessed by Neural Networks. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 120, No. 9, 1994, pp. 1467–1480.
6. Seed H. B., Tokimatsu K., Harder L. F., and Chung R. Influence of SPT Procedures in soil Liquefaction Resistance Evaluations. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Vol. 111, No. 12, 1985, pp. 861–878.
7. Goh A. T. C. Probabilistic Neural Network for Evaluation Seismic Liquefaction Potential. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 39, 1996, pp. 219–232.
8. Kurup P. U., and Dudani N. K. CPT Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential Using Neural Networks. Proc., 4th International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, San Diego, Calif., 2001, CD ID: 4.36. 9. Barai, S. V., and G. Agarwal. Studies on Instance Based Learning Models for Liquefaction Potential Assessment. Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Paper 0235, 2002, pp. 1–17.
10. Juang C. H., Jiang T., and Andrus R. D. Assessing Probability-Based Methods for Liquefaction Potential Evaluation. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironment Engineering, Vol. 128, No. 7, 2002, pp. 580–589.
11. Juang C. H., Chen C. J., and Jiang T. Probabilistic Framework for Liquefaction Potential by Shear Wave Velocity. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 127, No. 8, 2001, pp. 670–678.
12. Grossberg S. Adaptive Pattern Classification and Universal Recoding, I: Parallel Development and Coding of Neural Feature Detectors and II: Feedback, Expectation, Olfaction and Illusions. Biological Cybernetics, Vol. 23, 1976, pp. 121–134, 187–202.
13. Carpenter G. A., and Grossberg S. A Massively Parallel Architecture for a Self-Organizing Neural Pattern Recognition Machine. Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing, Vol. 37, No. 1, 1987, pp. 54–115.
14. Carpenter G. A., Grossberg S., and Rosen D. B. Fuzzy ART: Fast Stable Learning and Categorization of Analog Patterns by an Adaptive Resonance System. Neural Networks, Vol. 4, 1991, pp. 759–771.
15. Carpenter G. A., Grossberg S., and Reynolds J. H. ARTMAP: Supervised Real-Time Learning and Classification of Nonstationary Data by a Self-Organizing Neural Network. Neural Networks, Vol. 4, 1991, pp. 565–588.
16. Carpenter G. A., Grossberg S., Markuzon N., Reynolds J. H., and Rosen D. B. Fuzzy ARTMAP: A Neural Network Architecture for Incremental Supervised Learning of Analog Multidimensional Maps. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, Vol. 3, No. 5, 1992, pp. 698–713.
17. Javadpour R., and Knapp G. M. A Fuzzy Neural Network Approach to Machine Condition Monitoring. Computers and Industrial Engineering, Vol. 45, 2003, pp. 323–330.
18. Stark T. D., and Olsen S. M. Liquefaction Resistance Using CPT and Field Case Histories. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 121, No. 12, 1995, pp. 856–869.
19. Gotarredona T. S., Barranco B. N., and Andreou A. G. Adaptive Resonance Theory Microchips. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Mass., 1992.
20. Andrus R. D., Stokoe K. H., and Chung R. M. Draft Guidelines for Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance Using the Shear Wave Velocity Measurements and Simplified Procedures. NISTIR 6277. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Md., 1999, pp. 113–121.
21. Goh A. T. C. Neural Network Modeling of CPT Seismic Liquefaction Data. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 122, No. 1, 1996, pp. 70–73.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published: January 2005
Issue published: January 2005
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Journals metrics
This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.
VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICSArticle usage*
Total views and downloads: 12
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 0
Crossref: 2
- Why “AI” models for predicting soil liquefaction have been ignored, pl...
- Minimax Probability Machine
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Get access
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
loading institutional access options
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
