Optimizing Faulting Prediction for Rigid Pavements Using a Hybrid SHAP-TPE-CatBoost Model
Source abstract
Abstract
Faulting refers to the common and significant distress in Jointed Plain Concrete Pavement (JPCP), which has an adverse impact on the pavement roughness. Nevertheless, the existing fault prediction models continue to heavily rely on conventional linear regression techniques or basic machine learning approaches, which leaves room for improvement in training efficiency and interpretability. To enhance training efficiency and accuracy, this study developed five novel faulting prediction models. These models are based on five basic machine learning algorithms: Random Forest (RF), Additive Boosting (AdaBoost), Gradient Boosting Decision Tree (GBDT), Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM), and Categorical Boost (CatBoost), combined with the tree-structured Parzen estimator (TPE). The five models are TPE-RF, TPE-AdaBoost, TPE-GBDT, TPE-LightGBM, and TPE-CatBoost. In addition to selecting the best-performing model, this study incorporated the Shapley Additive Explanation (SHAP) technique and developed TPE-SHAP-CatBoost to improve the interpretability of the model’s predictions. The process involved extracting historical data on pavement performance, including 17 variables, from the Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) database for 160 instances of observation. Firstly, the Boruta method was used to identify the final set of input variables. Secondly, the TPE technique, which is a Bayesian optimization method, was applied to automatically select the optimal hyperparameters for the base models. Finally, SHAP was used to provide both global and local explanations of the model’s outputs. The results indicate that the TPE-CatBoost model achieves the highest accuracy with an R2 value of 0.906. Furthermore, the TPE-SHAP-CatBoost model identified the primary factors influencing faulting by incorporating SHAP and provided explanations of the model’s results at both the global and local levels. These research findings highlight the ability of the proposed model to accurately predict faulting, providing precise and interpretable guidance for pavement maintenance while reducing workload for pavement engineers in data collection and management.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring · Asphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation · Imbalanced Data Classification Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Anhui University of Science and Technology, Huainan 232001, China
References (34)
Show source-provided references
1. Sustainable Pavement Maintenance and Rehabilitation Planning Using Differential Evolutionary Programming and Coyote Optimisation Algorithm10.1080/10298436.2021.1873331 ↗
2. Planning Urban Pavement Maintenance by a New Interactive Multiobjective Optimization Approach10.1186/s12544-019-0353-9 ↗
3. Mao, Z. (2012). Life-Cycle Assessment of Highway Pavement Alternatives in Aspects of Economic, Environmental, and Social Performance. [Ph.D. Thesis, Texas A & M University].
4. Artificial Neural Network Modelling to Predict International Roughness Index of Rigid Pavements10.1007/s42947-020-0178-x ↗
5. Evaluating Early-Age Stresses in Jointed Plain Concrete Pavement Repair Slabs
6. Developing an Improved Extreme Gradient Boosting Model for Predicting the International Roughness Index of Rigid Pavement10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.133523 ↗
7. Simpson, A.L., National Research Council, Jordahl, P.R., and Owusu-Antwi, E. (1994). Sensitivity Analyses for Selected Pavement Distresses, National Research Council. Strategic Highway Research Program, SHRP-P.
8. Yu, H.T., Smith, K.D., Darter, M.I., and Jiang, J. (1998). Performance of Concrete Pavements, Volume III: Improving Concrete Pavement Performance (No. FHWA-RD-95-111), Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration.
9. Development of Faulting Prediction Models for Rigid Pavements Using LTPP Database
10. Artificial neural networks and regression analysis for predicting faulting in jointed concrete pavements considering base condition
11. Back-Propagation Network Modeling for Concrete Pavement Faulting Using LTPP Data
12. Ehsani, M., Moghadas Nejad, F., and Hajikarimi, P. (2022). Developing an Optimized Faulting Prediction Model in Jointed Plain Concrete Pavement Using Artificial Neural Networks and Random Forest Methods. Int. J. Pavement Eng., 1–16.10.1080/10298436.2022.2057975 ↗
13. Optimized Prediction Models for Faulting Failure of Jointed Plain Concrete Pavement Using the Metaheuristic Optimization Algorithms10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.129948 ↗
14. Feature Selection with the Boruta Package10.18637/jss.v036.i11 ↗
15. Jia, D., Yang, L., Gao, X., and Li, K. (2023). Assessment of a New Solar Radiation Nowcasting Method Based on FY-4A Satellite Imagery, the McClear Model and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). Remote Sens., 15.10.3390/rs15092245 ↗
16. Adaptive Estimation of Multi-Regional Soil Salinization Using Extreme Gradient Boosting with Bayesian TPE Optimization10.1080/01431161.2021.2009589 ↗
17. Advanced Hyperparameter Optimization for Improved Spatial Prediction of Shallow Landslides Using Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost)10.1007/s10064-022-02708-w ↗
18. TPE-CatBoost: An Adaptive Model for Soil Moisture Spatial Estimation in the Main Maize-Producing Areas of China with Multiple Environment Covariates10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.128465 ↗
19. Behkamal, B., Entezami, A., De Michele, C., and Arslan, A.N. (2023). Investigation of Temperature Effects into Long-Span Bridges via Hybrid Sensing and Supervised Regression Models. Remote Sens., 15.10.3390/rs15143503 ↗
20. What Do We Gain from Simplicity versus Complexity in Species Distribution Models?10.1111/ecog.00845 ↗
21. Machine Learning Methods for Microbial Source Tracking10.1016/j.envsoft.2007.09.013 ↗
22. Establishment of Icing Prediction Model of Asphalt Pavement Based on Support Vector Regression Algorithm and Bayesian Optimization10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.128955 ↗
23. Why Do Tree-Based Models Still Outperform Deep Learning on Typical Tabular Data?
24. CatBoost for Big Data: An Interdisciplinary Review10.1186/s40537-020-00369-8 ↗
25. Prokhorenkova, L., Gusev, G., Vorobev, A., Dorogush, A.V., and Gulin, A. (2018). CatBoost: Unbiased Boosting with Categorical Features. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., 31.
26. Lundberg, S.M., and Lee, S.-I. (2017). A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., 30.
27. From Local Explanations to Global Understanding with Explainable AI for Trees10.1038/s42256-019-0138-9 ↗
28. Explainable Machine Learning Can Outperform Cox Regression Predictions and Provide Insights in Breast Cancer Survival10.1038/s41598-021-86327-7 ↗
29. Multiple Predicting K-Fold Cross-Validation for Model Selection10.1080/10485252.2017.1404598 ↗
30. Random Search for Hyper-Parameter Optimization
31. On the Tractability of SHAP Explanations10.1613/jair.1.13283 ↗
32. Lin, N., Zhang, D., Feng, S., Ding, K., Tan, L., Wang, B., Chen, T., Li, W., Dai, X., and Pan, J. (2023). Rapid Landslide Extraction from High-Resolution Remote Sensing Images Using SHAP-OPT-XGBoost. Remote Sens., 15.10.3390/rs15153901 ↗
33. Development of a New Faulting Model in Jointed Concrete Pavement Using LTPP Data10.1177/0361198119838988 ↗
34. Exploratory Analysis of LTPP Faulting Data Using Statistical Techniques10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125025 ↗