Estimation of Rock Shear Strength Parameters from Geophysical Indicators Using an Equilibrium-Optimized Multilayer Perceptron
Source abstract
Abstract
Accurate and scalable estimation of rock shear strength parameters is essential for remote-sensing-supported geological hazard assessment, slope stability evaluation, and engineering geological mapping. However, determining cohesion and internal friction angle requires multiple triaxial tests under different confining pressures, which are time-consuming, costly, and difficult to apply widely. To support remote-sensing-oriented geoscience and civil engineering applications, this study develops a hybrid machine learning framework for estimating cohesion and internal friction angle from geophysical and mechanical indicators. A cross-source database was compiled from published rock records collected from the Jinchuan mining area in China and the Luhri area in India. After completeness screening and unit harmonization, 213 mixed-lithology cases were retained for modeling, with P-wave velocity, density, uniaxial compressive strength, and tensile strength used as input variables. An Equilibrium Optimizer was coupled with a multilayer perceptron to optimize the network weights and biases, and model performance was evaluated using five-fold cross-validation, independent testing, repeated runs, and comparisons with conventional MLP and several typical machine learning models. The proposed EO–MLP model achieved high prediction accuracy, with test-set coefficient of determination values of 0.946 for internal friction angle and 0.983 for cohesion and corresponding RMSE values of 1.072 and 0.671, respectively. Robust scaler normalization produced the best performance among the three tested normalization strategies. SHapley Additive exPlanations analysis indicated that density was the dominant predictor of cohesion, whereas uniaxial compressive strength and P-wave velocity made the largest contributions to internal friction angle prediction. The proposed framework provides an indirect data-driven tool for estimating shear strength parameters and can complement engineering-geological investigation and rock engineering design.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Affiliations
School of Civil Architectural Engineering, Shaoyang University, Shaoyang 422000, China
Hunan Engineering Research Center of Bamboo Fiber Building Materials, Shaoyang 422000, China
School of Resources and Safety Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China
References (63)
Show source-provided references
1. Resistance of a soapstone waste rock to freeze-thaw and wet-dry cycles: Implications for use in a reclamation cover in the Canadian Arctic10.1007/s10064-020-01930-8 ↗
2. A new method to determine the crack closure stress based on stress difference10.1016/j.tafmec.2022.103337 ↗
3. Behavior of a rock mass in uplift field tests of rock anchors10.1007/s00603-023-03689-2 ↗
4. Xie, S., Li, J., Wang, S., and Li, X. (2026). Experimental study on dynamic shear properties of infilled joints under dynamic shearing: Insights from normal stress and shear rate. Rock Mech. Rock Eng.10.1007/s00603-025-05013-6 ↗
5. New shear constitutive model for rock discontinuities based on maximum entropy theory: Performance analysis and engineering application10.1007/s10064-025-04668-3 ↗
6. An analytical model for estimating rock strength parameters from small-scale drilling data10.1016/j.jrmge.2018.09.005 ↗
7. Factor of safety of strain-softening slopes10.1016/j.jrmge.2019.11.004 ↗
8. Stochastic response surface method for reliability analysis of rock slopes involving correlated non-normal variables10.1016/j.compgeo.2010.10.006 ↗
9. Influence of roughness on the apparent cohesion of rock joints at low normal stresses10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002200 ↗
10. Mobilization of cohesion and friction angle of intact rocks in the shearing process10.1007/s00603-023-03484-z ↗
11. An experimental investigation on the dynamic shear characteristics of wet joints10.1016/j.ijrmms.2025.106193 ↗
12. Experimental investigation on strength and failure behavior of carbonate rocks under multistage triaxial compression10.1016/j.ijrmms.2019.104099 ↗
13. Edimann, K., Somerville, J.M., Smart, B.G.D., Hamilton, S.A., and Crawford, B.R. (1998, January 8–10). Predicting rock mechanical properties from wireline porosities. Proceedings of the SPE/ISRM Rock Mechanics in Petroleum Engineering, Trondheim, Norway.10.2118/47344-MS ↗
14. Investigating statistical relationships among clay mineralogy, index engineering properties, and shear strength parameters of mudrocks10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.03.016 ↗
15. An alternative method for predicting internal friction angle of rock materials10.1007/s12665-024-11606-1 ↗
16. Patil, U.S., and Kene, S.D. (2026). Sustainable Concrete Incorporating Agro-Industrial Wastes (WHA-CHA-ASW): Experimental Investigation and Machine Learning-Based Modeling. J. Mater. Eng. Perform.10.1007/s11665-026-14388-8 ↗
17. Zhang, H., Xu, H.Q., Xie, Y.Q., Zhang, M.D., Li, R., and Li, G. (2026). High-Temperature Oxidation Behaviors of AlCoCrFeNi and CoCrFeNiNb Eutectic High-Entropy Alloys: A Machine Learning-Assisted Design and Mechanism Study. J. Mater. Eng. Perform.10.1007/s11665-026-14531-5 ↗
18. Physics-informed optimization for a data-driven approach in landslide susceptibility evaluation10.1016/j.jrmge.2023.11.039 ↗
19. Xie, S.J., Jiang, Z.Y., Lin, H., Ma, T.X., Peng, K., Liu, H.W., and Liu, B.H. (2024). A new integrated intelligent computing paradigm for predicting joints shear strength. Geosci. Front., 15.10.1016/j.gsf.2024.101884 ↗
20. Predicting the shear strength parameters of sandstone using genetic programming10.1007/s10064-017-1023-6 ↗
21. Shahani, N.M., Ullah, B., Shah, K.S., Hassan, F.U., Ali, R., Elkotb, M.A., Ghoneim, M.E., and Tag-Eldin, E.M. (2022). Predicting angle of internal friction and cohesion of rocks based on machine learning algorithms. Mathematics, 10.10.3390/math10203875 ↗
22. Prediction method of rock cohesion and internal friction angle based on ensemble tree algorithm
23. Rathor, A.P.S., Tabaroei, A., Dey, A., and Sharma, J.K. (2026). A Physics-Informed Machine Learning Framework for Strength Prediction, Uncertainty Quantification, and Optimization of Chemically Stabilized Soils. J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 1–24.10.1007/s11665-026-13922-y ↗
24. Reddy, S.P., Ammisetti, D.K., Juvvala, S.R., and Reddy, A.V.N. (2026). Experimental Investigation and Machine Learning Modeling on the Tribological Characteristics of Heat Treated AA7075/B4C/BN/SiC Hybrid Composites. J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 1–21.10.1007/s11665-026-14096-3 ↗
25. Prediction of strength parameters of himalayan rocks: A statistical and anfis approach10.1007/s10706-015-9899-z ↗
26. A hyper parameterized artificial neural network approach for prediction of the factor of safety against liquefaction10.1016/j.enggeo.2023.107109 ↗
27. Strain-dependent slope stability for earthquake loading10.1016/j.compgeo.2022.105048 ↗
28. The state of the art in integrating machine learning into visual analytics10.1111/cgf.13092 ↗
29. Mapping and interpretability of aftershock hazards using hybrid machine learning algorithms10.1016/j.jrmge.2024.09.015 ↗
30. Study the elastic properties and the anisotropy of rocks using different machine learning methods10.1111/1365-2478.13011 ↗
31. Machine learning approach to railway ballast degradation prognosis considering crumb rubber modification and parent rock strength10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.133985 ↗
32. Ahsan, M.M., Mahmud, M.A.P., Saha, P.K., Gupta, K.D., and Siddique, Z. (2021). Effect of data scaling methods on machine learning algorithms and model performance. Technologies, 9.10.3390/technologies9030052 ↗
33. Identifying different classes of geoacoustic events using machine learning10.1016/j.ijrmms.2025.106144 ↗
34. Prediction model for the compressive strength of rock based on stacking ensemble learning and shapley additive explanations10.1007/s10064-024-03896-3 ↗
35. Translating intersectionality to fair machine learning in health sciences10.1038/s42256-023-00651-3 ↗
36. A novel criterion for yield shear displacement of rock discontinuities based on renormalization group theory10.1016/j.enggeo.2023.107008 ↗
37. Advancing rock mass classification using machine learning approach10.1007/s10064-025-04585-5 ↗
38. Modeling description of interface shear deformation: A theoretical study on damage statistical distributions10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.132052 ↗
39. Prediction of roadheaders’ performance using artificial neural network approaches (MLP and KOSFM)10.1016/j.jrmge.2015.06.008 ↗
40. A deep learning-based approach with anti-noise ability for identification of rock microcracks using distributed fibre optic sensing data10.1016/j.ijrmms.2023.105525 ↗
41. Gurgenc, E., Altay, O., and Altay, E.V. (2024). AOSMA-MLP: A novel method for hybrid metaheuristics Artificial Neural Networks and a new approach for prediction of geothermal reservoir temperature. Appl. Sci., 14.10.3390/app14083534 ↗
42. Comparison of different classification and regression machine learning algorithms for the prediction of excavation damage zone depths10.1007/s00603-025-04639-w ↗
43. Equilibrium optimizer: A novel optimization algorithm10.1016/j.knosys.2019.105190 ↗
44. An efficient binary equilibrium optimizer algorithm for feature selection10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3013617 ↗
45. Intelligent modeling of blast-induced rock movement prediction using dimensional analysis and optimized artificial neural network technique10.1016/j.ijrmms.2021.104794 ↗
46. Inversion of surrounding rock mechanical parameters in a soft rock tunnel based on a hybrid model EO-LightGBM10.1007/s00603-023-03387-z ↗
47. Liu, H.Y., Ma, T.X., Lin, Y., Peng, K., and Hu, X.Q. (2024). Deep learning in rockburst intensity level prediction: Performance evaluation and comparison of the ngo-cnn-bigru-attention model. Appl. Sci., 14.10.3390/app14135719 ↗
48. Prediction of rock abrasivity and hardness from mineral composition10.1016/j.ijrmms.2021.104658 ↗
49. Investigation of electrical resistivity for fiber-reinforced coral aggregate concrete10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.135011 ↗
50. Physics-informed neural networks for capturing the true relationships between parameters to predict the dynamic triaxial strength of rocks in cold environments10.1016/j.measurement.2025.118900 ↗
51. Hybrid machine learning models to predict the shear strength of discontinuities with different joint wall compressive strength
52. Ground subsidence hazard evaluation in large reclaimed area using unsupervised machine learning with parameter estimation and spatial interpolation10.1016/j.enggeo.2025.108450 ↗
53. Statistical damage shear constitutive model of rock joints under seepage pressure10.3389/feart.2020.00232 ↗
54. A machine learning framework for predicting shear strength properties of rock materials10.1038/s41598-025-91436-8 ↗
55. Shear strength parameters prediction of rock materials using hybrid machine learning model
56. Splitting tensile strength of basalt fiber reinforced coral aggregate concrete: Optimized XGBoost models and experimental validation10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.135133 ↗
57. Evaluation and analysis of liquefaction potential of gravelly soils using explainable probabilistic machine learning model10.1016/j.compgeo.2023.106051 ↗
58. Elastic modulus prediction for high-temperature treated rock using multi-step hybrid ensemble model combined with coronavirus herd immunity optimizer10.1016/j.measurement.2024.115596 ↗
59. Pradhan, B., Lee, S., Dikshit, A., and Kim, H. (2023). Spatial flood susceptibility mapping using an explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) model. Geosci. Front., 14.10.1016/j.gsf.2023.101625 ↗
60. Explainable machine learning and deep learning for productive zone identification in tight sandstone reservoirs: Integrating PROMETHEE-II and class imbalance handling10.1016/j.geoen.2026.214436 ↗
61. Performance evaluation of hybrid fiber-reinforced concrete based on electrical resistivity: Experimental and data-driven method10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.137992 ↗
62. A novel triaxial strength criterion for rocks based on the ultimate strength and its application10.1016/j.geoen.2024.213590 ↗
63. Takaew, P., Xia Jianhong, C., and Doucet Luc, S. (2024). Machine learning and tectonic setting determination:Bridging the gap between Earth scientists and data scientists. Geosci. Front., 15.10.1016/j.gsf.2023.101726 ↗