journal article·2022-02-18Open access

Prediction of Pile Bearing Capacity Using XGBoost Algorithm: Modeling and Performance Evaluation

Maaz Amjad, Irshad Ahmad, Mahmood Ahmad, Piotr Wróblewski, Paweł Kamiński, Uzair Amjad

Applied Sciences· Volume 12· Issue 4

Abstract

The major criteria that control pile foundation design is pile bearing capacity (Pu). The load bearing capacity of piles is affected by the various characteristics of soils and the involvement of multiple parameters related to both soil and foundation. In this study, a new model for predicting bearing capacity is developed using an extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) algorithm. A total of 200 driven piles static load test-based case histories were used to construct and verify the model. The developed XGBoost model results were compared to a number of commonly used algorithms—Adaptive Boosting (AdaBoost), Random Forest (RF), Decision Tree (DT) and Support Vector Machine (SVM) using various performance measure metrics such as coefficient of determination, mean absolute error, root mean square error, mean absolute relative error, Nash–Sutcliffe model efficiency coefficient and relative strength ratio. Furthermore, sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the effect of input parameters on Pu. The results show that all of the developed models were capable of making accurate predictions however the XGBoost algorithm surpasses others, followed by AdaBoost, RF, DT, and SVM. The sensitivity analysis result shows that the SPT blow count along the pile shaft has the greatest effect on the Pu.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics · Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization · Geotechnical Engineering and Analysis

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology, Peshawar 25120, Pakistan

Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, International Islamic University Malaysia, Jalan Gombak, Selangor 50728, Malaysia

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar (Bannu Campus), Bannu 28100, Pakistan

Faculty of Engineering, University of Technology and Economics H. Chodkowska in Warsaw, Jutrzenki 135, 02-231 Warsaw, Poland

Faculty of Mechatronics, Armament and Aerospace of the Military University of Technology, Sylwestra Kaliskiego 2, 00-908 Warsaw, Poland

Faculty of Civil Engineering and Resource Management, AGH University of Science and Technology, 30-059 Kraków, Poland

References (74)

Show source-provided references
1. Application of artificial neural network for predicting shaft and tip resistances of concrete piles10.15446/esrj.v19n1.38712 ↗
2. Contribution to Estimating Bearing Capacity of Pile in Clayey Soils10.1515/cee-2016-0018 ↗
3. Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Pile Foundations10.1061/AJGEB6.0000243 ↗
4. Prediction of the axial bearing capacity of piles by SPT-based and numerical design methods
5. Laboratory model tests on consolidation performance of soil column with drained-timber rod10.1155/2021/6698894 ↗
6. ASTM (2008). American Society for Testing and Materials—ASTM D4945-08 Standard Test Method for High-Strain Dynamic Testing of Deep Foundations, ASTM.
7. Schmertmann, J. (1978). Guidelines for Cone Penetration Test: Performance and Design.
8. Bearing capacity of pile foundations embedded in clays and sands layer predicted using PDA test and static load test10.1016/j.proeng.2015.11.101 ↗
9. Methods for Estimating the Load Bearing Capacity of Pile Foundation Using the Results of Penetration Tests—Case Study of Road Viaduct Foundation10.1016/j.proeng.2016.08.839 ↗
10. Birid, K.C. (2018). Evaluation of Ultimate Pile Compression Capacity from Static Pile Load Test Results. International Congress and Exhibition “Sustainable Civil Infrastructures: Innovative Infrastructure Geotechnology”, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-61642-1_1 ↗
11. Pile-Soil Stress Ratio and Settlement of Composite Foundation Bidirectionally Reinforced by Piles and Geosynthetics under Embankment Load10.1155/2021/5575878 ↗
12. Tang, Y., Huang, S., and Tao, J. (2020). Geo-Congress 2020, ASCE. GSP 320 121.
13. Design Criterion of Reinforcement on Thick Soft Clay Foundations of Traditional Construction Method in Indonesia10.1051/matecconf/201925803010 ↗
14. Comparative study on prediction of axial bearing capacity of driven piles in granular materials
15. Lopes, F.R., and Laprovitera, H. (1988, January 7–10). Prediction of the Bearing Capacity of Bored Piles from Dynamic Penetration Tests. Proceedings of the 1st International Geoteclmical Seminar on Deep Foundations on Bored and Auger Piles, Ghent, Belgium.
16. Decourt, L. (, 1995). Prediction of load-settlement relationships for foundations on the basis of the SPT. Proceedings of the Ciclo de Conferencias Internationale, Leonardo Zeevaert, UNAM, Mexico City, Mexico.
17. Pham, T.A., Ly, H.-B., Tran, V.Q., Van Giap, L., Vu, H.-L.T., and Duong, H.-A.T. (2020). Prediction of Pile Axial Bearing Capacity Using Artificial Neural Network and Random Forest. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app10051871 ↗
18. Probabilistic evaluation of CPT-based seismic soil liquefaction potential: Towards the integration of interpretive structural modeling and bayesian belief network10.3934/mbe.2021454 ↗
19. Ahmad, M., Tang, X.-W., Ahmad, F., and Jamal, A. (2018). Assessment of Soil Liquefaction Potential in Kamra, Pakistan. Sustainability, 10.10.3390/su10114223 ↗
20. Ahmad, M., Al-Shayea, N.A., Tang, X.-W., Jamal, A., Al-Ahmadi, H.M., and Ahmad, F. (2020). Predicting the Pillar Stability of Underground Mines with Random Trees and C4.5 Decision Trees. Appl. Sci., 10.10.3390/app10186486 ↗
21. Liu, Q., Cao, Y., and Wang, C. (2019, January 15–17). Prediction of Ultimate Axial Load-Carrying Capacity for Driven Piles Using Machine Learning Methods. Proceedings of the 3rd Information Technology, Networking, Electronic and Automation Control Conference, Chengdu, China.10.1109/ITNEC.2019.8729429 ↗
22. Ahmad, M., Ahmad, F., Wróblewski, P., Al-Mansob, R.A., Olczak, P., Kamiński, P., Safdar, M., and Rai, P. (2021). Prediction of Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations on Cohesionless Soils: A Gaussian Process Regression Approach. Appl. Sci., 11.10.3390/app112110317 ↗
23. Liang, W., Luo, S., Zhao, G., and Wu, H. (2020). Predicting hard rock pillar stability using GBDT, XGBoost, and LightGBM algorithms. Mathematics, 8.10.3390/math8050765 ↗
24. Development of artificial intelligence models for the prediction of Compression Coefficient of soil: An application of Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.061 ↗
25. Ahmad, M., Tang, X.-W., Qiu, J.-N., and Ahmad, F. (2019). Evaluating Seismic Soil Liquefaction Potential Using Bayesian Belief Network and C4.5 Decision Tree Approaches. Appl. Sci., 9.10.3390/app9204226 ↗
26. Ahmad, M., Kamiński, P., Olczak, P., Alam, M., Iqbal, M., Ahmad, F., Sasui, S., and Khan, B. (2021). Development of Prediction Models for Shear Strength of Rockfill Material Using Machine Learning Techniques. Appl. Sci., 11.10.3390/app11136167 ↗
27. Ahmad, M., Hu, J.-L., Hadzima-Nyarko, M., Ahmad, F., Tang, X.-W., Rahman, Z., Nawaz, A., and Abrar, M. (2021). Rockburst Hazard Prediction in Underground Projects Using Two Intelligent Classification Techniques: A Comparative Study. Symmetry, 13.10.3390/sym13040632 ↗
28. Ahmad, M., Hu, J.-L., Ahmad, F., Tang, X.-W., Amjad, M., Iqbal, M., Asim, M., and Farooq, A. (2021). Supervised Learning Methods for Modeling Concrete Compressive Strength Prediction at High Temperature. Materials, 14.10.3390/ma14081983 ↗
29. Bayesian Neural Network Analysis of Undrained Side Resistance of Drilled Shafts10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2005)131:1(84) ↗
30. Back-propagation neural networks for modeling complex systems10.1016/0954-1810(94)00011-S ↗
31. Neural network prediction of pullout capacity of marquee ground anchors10.1016/j.compgeo.2005.02.003 ↗
32. Intelligent computing for modeling axial capacity of pile foundations10.1139/T09-094 ↗
33. Load–settlement modeling of axially loaded steel driven piles using CPT-based recurrent neural networks10.1016/j.sandf.2014.04.015 ↗
34. State-of-the-art review of some artificial intelligence applications in pile foundations10.1016/j.gsf.2014.10.002 ↗
35. Artificial intelligence techniques for the design and analysis of deep foundations
36. Prediction of pile bearing capacity using a hybrid genetic algorithm-based ANN10.1016/j.measurement.2014.08.007 ↗
37. Prediction of ultimate axial load-carrying capacity of piles using a support vector machine based on CPT data10.1016/j.compgeo.2013.08.001 ↗
38. Pham, T.A., Tran, V.Q., Vu, H.L.T., and Ly, H.B. (2020). Design deep neural network architecture using a genetic algorithm for estimation of pile bearing capacity. PLoS ONE, 15.10.1371/journal.pone.0243030 ↗
39. An in-depth experimental study of anomaly detection using gradient boosted machine10.1007/s00521-017-3128-z ↗
40. A gradient boosting decision tree based GPS signal reception classification algorithm10.1016/j.asoc.2019.105942 ↗
41. Binary logistic regression versus stochastic gradient boosted decision trees in assessing landslide susceptibility for multiple-occurring landslide events: Application to the 2009 storm event in Messina (Sicily, southern Italy)10.1007/s11069-015-1915-3 ↗
42. GIS-based evolutionary optimized Gradient Boosted Decision Trees for forest fire susceptibility mapping10.1007/s11069-018-3256-5 ↗
43. Decision trees: A recent overview10.1007/s10462-011-9272-4 ↗
44. Chen, T., and Guestrin, C. (2016, January 13–17). XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Francisco, CA, USA.10.1145/2939672.2939785 ↗
45. Ke, G., Meng, Q., Finley, T., Wang, T., Chen, W., Ma, W., Ye, Q., and Liu, T.-Y. (2017, January 4–9). LightGBM: A Highly Efficient Gradient Boosting Decision Tree. Proceedings of the 31st Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, Long Beach, CA, USA.
46. Evaluation of liquefaction induced lateral displacements using genetic programming10.1016/j.compgeo.2006.05.001 ↗
47. Modeling of transport demand—Analyzing, calculating, and forecasting transport demand
48. Susceptibility assessment of earthquake-induced landslides using Bayesian network: A case study in Beichuan, China10.1016/j.cageo.2011.09.011 ↗
49. Kaggle (2021, December 02). Your Machine Learning and Data Science Community. Available online: https://www.kaggle.com/.
50. Random Forests10.1023/A:1010933404324 ↗
51. Trees vs Neurons: Comparison between random forest and ANN for high-resolution prediction of building energy consumption10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.04.038 ↗
52. Freund, Y., and Schapire, R.E. (1996, January 3–6). Experiments with a New Boosting Algorithm. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on International Conference on Machine Learning, Bari, Italy.
53. Schölkopf, B., Luo, Z., and Vovk, V. (2013). Explaining AdaBoost. Empirical Inference, Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-41136-6 ↗
54. Seo, D.K., Kim, Y.H., Eo, Y.D., Park, W.Y., and Park, H.C. (2017). Generation of Radiometric, Phenological Normalized Image Based on Random Forest Regression for Change Detection. Remote Sens., 9.10.3390/rs9111163 ↗
55. Support-vector networks10.1007/BF00994018 ↗
56. Hsu, C.W., Chang, C.C., and Lin, C.J. (2003). A Practical Guide to Support Vector Classification, National Taiwan University. Available online: http//www.csie.ntu.edu.tw/~cjlin.
57. A sociological analysis of the satanic verses affair10.1177/02632760022050997 ↗
58. Rule extraction from support vector machines: A review10.1016/j.neucom.2010.02.016 ↗
59. Rule extraction from support vector machines: An overview of issues and application in credit scoring10.1007/978-3-540-75390-2_2 ↗
60. Uslan, V., and Seker, H. (2013, January 3–7). Support Vector-Based Takagi-Sugeno Fuzzy System for the Prediction of Binding Affinity of Peptides. Proceedings of the 35th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, Osaka, Japan.10.1109/EMBC.2013.6610437 ↗
61. Decision Tree Approach for Soil Liquefaction Assessment10.1155/2013/346285 ↗
62. Amirkiyaei, V., and Ghasemi, E. (2020). Stability assessment of slopes subjected to circular-type failure using tree-based models. Int. J. Geotech. Eng., 1862538.10.1080/19386362.2020.1862538 ↗
63. Predicting intact rock strength for mechanical excavation using multivariate statistics, artificial neural networks, and regression trees10.1016/j.enggeo.2008.02.003 ↗
64. Forecasting blast-induced ground vibration developing a CART model10.1007/s00366-016-0475-9 ↗
65. Quantifying hourly suspended sediment load using data mining models: Case study of a glacierized Andean catchment in Chile10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.10.015 ↗
66. Summarizing multiple aspects of model performance in a single diagram10.1029/2000JD900719 ↗
67. A hierarchical analysis for rock engineering using artificial neural networks10.1007/BF01045717 ↗
68. Prediction of ground vibration due to quarry blasting based on gene expression programming: A new model for peak particle velocity prediction10.1007/s13762-016-0979-2 ↗
69. A new design of evolutionary hybrid optimization of SVR model in predicting the blast-induced ground vibration10.1007/s00366-019-00895-x ↗
70. Prediction of Flyrock in Mine Blasting: A New Computational Intelligence Approach10.1007/s11053-019-09464-x ↗
71. Prediction of bearing capacity of thin-walled foundation: A simulation approach10.1007/s00366-017-0542-x ↗
72. Gaussian Process Regression Technique to Estimate the Pile Bearing Capacity10.1007/s13369-020-04683-4 ↗
73. Prediction of Interpreted Failure Loads of Rock-Socketed Piles in Mumbai Region using Hybrid Artificial Neural Networks with Genetic Algorithm
74. Developing a hybrid PSO–ANN model for estimating the ultimate bearing capacity of rock-socketed piles10.1007/s00521-015-2072-z ↗