journal article·2025-06-12Open access

Improved Liquefaction Hazard Assessment via Deep Feature Extraction and Stacked Ensemble Learning on Microtremor Data

Oussama Arab, Soufiana Mekouar, Mohamed Mastere, Roberto Cabieces, David Rodríguez Collantes

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 12

Abstract

The reduction in disaster risk in urban regions due to natural hazards (e.g., earthquakes, landslides, floods, and tropical cyclones) is primarily a development matter that must be treated within the scope of a broader urban development framework. Natural hazard assessment is one of the turning points in mitigating disaster risk, which typically contributes to stronger urban resilience and more sustainable urban development. Regarding this challenge, our research proposes a new approach in the signal processing chain and feature extraction from microtremor data that focuses mainly on the Horizontal-to-Vertical Spectral Ratio (HVSR) so as to assess liquefaction potential as a natural hazard using AI. The key raw seismic features of site amplification and resonance are extracted from the data via bandpass filtering, Fourier Transformation (FT), the calculation of the HVSR, and smoothing through the use of moving averages. The main novelty is the integration of machine learning, particularly stacked ensemble learning, for liquefaction potential classification from imbalanced seismic datasets. For this approach, several models are used to consider class imbalance, enhancing classification performance and offering better insight into liquefaction risk based on microtremor data. Then, the paper proposes a liquefaction detection method based on deep learning with an autoencoder and stacked classifiers. The autoencoder compresses data into the latent space, underlining the liquefaction features classified by the multi-layer perceptron (MLP) classifier and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) classifier, and the meta-model combines these outputs to put special emphasis on rare liquefaction events. This proposed methodology improved the detection of an imbalanced dataset, although challenges remain in both interpretability and computational complexity. We created a synthetic dataset of 1000 samples using realistic feature ranges that mimic the Rif data region to test model performance and conduct sensitivity analysis. Key seismic and geotechnical variables were included, confirming the amplification factor (Af) and seismic vulnerability index (Kg) as dominant predictors and supporting model generalizability in data-scarce regions. Our proposed method for liquefaction potential classification achieves 100% classification accuracy, 100% precision, and 100% recall, providing a new baseline. Compared to existing models such as XGB and MLP, the proposed model performs better in all metrics. This new approach could become a critical component in assessing liquefaction hazard, contributing to disaster mitigation and urban planning.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Geotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures · Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics · Geotechnical Engineering and Analysis

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

Affiliations

Scientific Institute, Mohammed V University in Rabat, Ibn Batouta Avenue, Rabat 10000, Morocco

School of Public Management, Governance and Public Policy, College of Business & Economics, University of Johannesburg, Auckland Park Kingsway Campus, Johannesburg 2029, South Africa

Department of Geophysics, Royal Institute and Observatory of the Spanish Navy (ROA), Plaza de las Tres Marinas S/N, San Fernando, 11100 Cádiz, Spain

Department of Mathematics and Science Data, University San Pablo CEU, Julián Romea 23, 28003 Madrid, Spain

References (48)

Show source-provided references
1. Marten Caceres, R., Abrassart, T., and Boano, C. (2019). Urban Planning and Natural Hazard Governance, Oxford University Press.10.1093/acrefore/9780199389407.013.347 ↗
2. Earthquake losses due to ground failure10.1016/j.enggeo.2004.05.006 ↗
3. Liquefaction mitigation by induced partial saturation: A comprehensive review
4. Liquefaction-induced damage to bridges
5. Turner, B., Brandenberg, S.J., and Stewart, J.P. (2013, January 1–2). Evaluation of collapse and non-collapse of parallel bridges affected by liquefaction and lateral spreading. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Urban Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo, Japan.
6. Shafapourtehrany, M., Batur, M., Shabani, F., Pradhan, B., Kalantar, B., and Özener, H. (2023). A comprehensive review of geospatial technology applications in earthquake preparedness, emergency management, and damage assessment. Remote Sens., 15.10.3390/rs15071939 ↗
7. Learning from past earthquake disasters: The need for knowledge management system to enhance infrastructure resilience in indonesia10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102424 ↗
8. Advances in earthquake and cascading disasters10.1016/j.nhres.2025.01.010 ↗
9. Liquefaction evaluation procedure10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1985)111:6(772) ↗
10. Mapping liquefaction-induced ground failure potential10.1061/AJGEB6.0000612 ↗
11. Why “AI” models for predicting soil liquefaction have been ignored, plus some that shouldn’t be10.1177/87552930231173711 ↗
12. Probabilistic framework for regional loss assessment due to earthquake-induced liquefaction including epistemic uncertainty10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106493 ↗
13. Soil liquefaction in seismic events: Pioneering predictive models using machine learning and advanced regression techniques10.1007/s12665-024-11480-x ↗
14. Geospatial data-driven assessment of earthquake-induced liquefaction impact mapping using classifier and cluster ensembles10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110266 ↗
15. Challenges in data-driven site characterization10.1080/17499518.2021.1896005 ↗
16. Wang, C., Chen, Q., and Arduino, P. (2024). Data-centric seismic soil liquefaction assessment: Approaches, data, and tools. Databases for Data-Centric Geotechnics, CRC Press.10.1201/9781003441946-14 ↗
17. Dieck, R.H. (2007). Measurement Uncertainty: Methods and Applications, ISA.
18. Prediction of probability of liquefaction using hybrid ann with optimization techniques10.1007/s12517-022-10855-3 ↗
19. Revealing the nature of soil liquefaction using machine learning10.1007/s12145-024-01688-7 ↗
20. Continuous-discrete hybrid bayesian network models for predicting earthquake-induced liquefaction based on the vs database10.1016/j.cageo.2022.105231 ↗
21. Liquefaction potential assessment of soils using machine learning techniques: A state-of-the-art review from 1994–202110.1061/IJGNAI.GMENG-7788 ↗
22. A hyper parameterized artificial neural network approach for prediction of the factor of safety against liquefaction10.1016/j.enggeo.2023.107109 ↗
23. Hameed, M.M., Masood, A., Srivastava, A., Abd Rahman, N., Razalid, S.F.M., Salem, A., and Elbeltagi, A. (2024). Investigating a hybrid extreme learning machine coupled with dingo optimization algorithm for modeling liquefaction triggering in sand-silt mixtures. Sci. Rep., 14.10.1038/s41598-024-61059-6 ↗
24. Alobaidi, M.H., Meguid, M.A., and Chebana, F. (2019). Predicting seismic-induced liquefaction through ensemble learning frameworks. Sci. Rep., 9.10.1038/s41598-019-48044-0 ↗
25. Cone penetration test-based assessment of liquefaction potential using machine and hybrid learning approaches10.1007/s41939-024-00447-x ↗
26. Probabilistic capacity energy-based machine learning models for soil liquefaction reliability analysis10.1016/j.enggeo.2024.107613 ↗
27. Reliability analysis for liquefaction risk assessment for the city of patna, india using hybrid computational modeling10.1007/s12594-022-2187-7 ↗
28. A comprehensive survey on design and application of autoencoder in deep learning10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110176 ↗
29. Riedmiller, M., and Lernen, A. (2014). Multi layer perceptron. Machine Learning Lab Special Lecture, University of Freiburg.
30. Xgboost: Extreme Gradient Boosting
31. From hazard to natural risk: Tangier-tetouan region example (Rif, Morocco)
32. Estimation of the liquefaction potential in the region of Rif, Northern Morocco10.1007/s12517-021-08407-2 ↗
33. A review of the microtremor horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio (MHVSR) method10.1007/s10950-021-10062-9 ↗
34. Oweiss, K.G. (2010). Statistical Signal Processing for Neuroscience and Neurotechnology, Academic Press.10.1155/2009/105086 ↗
35. The horizontal-to-vertical spectral ratio and its applications10.1186/s13634-021-00765-z ↗
36. SESAME (2004). Guidelines for the Implementation of the H/V Spectral Ratio Technique on Ambient Vibrations: Measurements, Processing and Interpretation, Springer. Technical Report, SESAME European Research Project WP12.
37. Smoothing and differentiation of data by simplified least squares procedures10.1021/ac60214a047 ↗
38. Automatic selection of optimal savitzky- golay smoothing10.1021/ac0600196 ↗
39. Gomez, B., and Kadri, U. (2021). Earthquake source characterization by machine learning algorithms applied to acoustic signals. Sci. Rep., 11.10.1038/s41598-021-02483-w ↗
40. Earthquake induced liquefaction hazard analysis for chittagong city using machine learning10.1080/19475705.2025.2451126 ↗
41. Deep learning for geological hazards analysis: Data, models, applications, and opportunities10.1016/j.earscirev.2021.103858 ↗
42. Data-driven and machine learning identification of seismic reference stations in europe10.1093/gji/ggaa199 ↗
43. Topo-iberia project: Cgps crustal velocity field in the Iberian Peninsula and Morocco10.1007/s10291-014-0387-3 ↗
44. Liu, R., and Misra, S. (2022). Machine learning assisted recovery of subsurface energy: A review. Authorea Prepr., 16.
45. Ioffe, S. (2015). Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. arXiv.
46. 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 ↗
47. Seismic site response estimation for microzonation studies promoting the resilience of urban centers10.1016/j.enggeo.2021.106031 ↗
48. Sokolova, M., Japkowicz, N., and Szpakowicz, S. (2006). Beyond accuracy, f-score and roc: A family of discriminant measures for performance evaluation. Australasian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Springer.10.1007/11941439_114 ↗