Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A constrained neural network model for soil liquefaction assessment with global applicability

  • Transdisciplinary Insight
  • Published:
Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A constrained back propagation neural network (C-BPNN) model for standard penetration test based soil liquefaction assessment with global applicability is developed, incorporating existing knowledge for liquefaction triggering mechanism and empirical relationships. For its development and validation, a comprehensive liquefaction data set is compiled, covering more than 600 liquefaction sites from 36 earthquakes in 10 countries over 50 years with 13 complete information entries. The C-BPNN model design procedure for liquefaction assessment is established by considering appropriate constraints, input data selection, and computation and calibration procedures. Existing empirical relationships for overburden correction and fines content adjustment are shown to be able to improve the prediction success rate of the neural network model, and are thus adopted as constraints for the C-BPNN model. The effectiveness of the C-BPNN method is validated using the liquefaction data set and compared with that of several liquefaction assessment methods currently adopted in engineering practice. The C-BPNN liquefaction model is shown to have improved prediction accuracy and high global adaptability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Elgamal A W, Zeghal M, Parra E. Liquefaction of reclaimed island in Kobe. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 1996, 122(1): 39–49

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bardet J P, Mace N, Tobita T. Liquefaction-Induced Ground Deformation and Failure. Report to PEER/PG&E. 1999

  3. Sasaki Y, Towhata I, Miyamoto K, Shirato M, Narita A, Sasaki T, Sako S. Reconnaissance report on damage in and around river levees caused by the 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku earthquake. Soil and Foundation, 2012, 52(5): 1016–1032

    Google Scholar 

  4. Li Z Y, Yuan X M. Seismic damage summarization of site effect and soil liquefaction in 2016 Kaohsiung earthquake. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Dynamics, 2016, 3: 1–7

    Google Scholar 

  5. Robertson P K, Campanella R G. Liquefaction potential of sands using the CPT. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1985, 111(3): 384–403

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lees J J, Ballagh R H, Orense R P, van Ballegooy S. CPT-based analysis of liquefaction and re-liquefaction following the Canterbury earthquake sequence. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2015, 79: 304–314

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bray J D, Frost D. Geo-Engineering Reconnaissance of the February 27, 2010 Maule, Chile Earthquake. GEER Association Report No. GEER-022. 2010

  8. Chang M, Kuo C, Shau S, Hsu R. Comparison of SPT-N-based analysis methods in evaluation of liquefaction potential during the 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake in Taiwan. Computers and Geotechnics, 2011, 38(3): 393–106

    Google Scholar 

  9. Seed H B. Simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations, 1971, 97(SM9): 1249–1273

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bolton Seed H, Tokimatsu K, Harder L F, Chung R M. Influence of SPT procedures in soil liquefaction resistance evaluations. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1985, 111(12): 1425–1445

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ishihara K. Simplified method of analysis for liquefaction of sand deposits during earthquake. Soil and Foundation, 1977, 17(3): 1–17

    Google Scholar 

  12. Tatsuoka F, Iwasaki T, Tokida K I, Yasuda S, Hirose M, Imai T, Kon-no M. Standard penetration tests and soil liquefaction potential evaluation. Soil and Foundation, 1980, 20(4): 95–111

    Google Scholar 

  13. Japan Road Association. Specifications for Highway Bridges, Part V-Seismic Design. Tokyo: Japan Road Association, 2012

    Google Scholar 

  14. State Infrastructure Commission. Code for Seismic Design of Industrial and Civil Buildings, TJ 11-74. Beijing: China Building Industry Press, 1974 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  15. State Infrastructure Commission. Code for Seismic Design of Industrial and Civil Buildings, TJ 11-78. Beijing: China Building Industry Press, 1978 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Juang C H, Chen C J, Jiang T, Andrus R D. Risk-based liquefaction potential evaluation using standard penetration tests. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2000, 37(6): 1195–1208

    Google Scholar 

  17. Zhang W G, Goh A T C. Assessment of soil liquefaction based on capacity energy concept and back-propagation neural networks. In: Samui P, Kim D, Ghosh C, eds. Integrating Disaster Science and Management, Global Case Studies in Mitigation and Recovery. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2018: 41–51

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gandomi H A, Fridline M M, Roke A D. Decision tree approach for soil liquefaction assessment. The Scientific World Journal, 2013, 2013: 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  19. Goh A T C, Goh S H. Support vector machines: Their use in geotechnical engineering as illustrated using seismic liquefaction data. Computers and Geotechnics, 2007, 34(5): 410–421

    Google Scholar 

  20. Samui P. Least square support vector machine and relevance vector machine for evaluating seismic liquefaction potential suing SPT. Natural Hazards, 2011, 59(2): 811–822

    Google Scholar 

  21. Liao S S C, Veneziano D, Whitman R V. Regression models for evaluating liquefaction probability. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1988, 114(4): 389–411

    Google Scholar 

  22. Zhang W G, Goh A T C. Evaluating seismic liquefaction potential using multivariate adaptive regression splines and logistic regression. Geomechanics and Engineering, 2016, 10(3): 269–284

    Google Scholar 

  23. Zhang J, Zhang L M, Huang H W. Evaluation of generalized linear models for soil liquefaction probability prediction. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2013, 68(7): 1925–1933

    Google Scholar 

  24. Cetin K O, Seed R B, Moss R E S, Der Kiureghian A K, Tokimatsu K, Harder L F, Kayen R E. Field Performance Case Histories for SPT-Based Evaluation of Soil Liquefaction Triggering Hazard. Geotechnical Engineering Research Report No. UCB/GT-2000/09. 2000

  25. Idriss I M, Boulanger R W. Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes. Oakland, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  26. National Academy of Sciences. State of the Art and Practice in the Assessment of Earthquake-Induced Soil Liquefaction and Its Consequences. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2016

    Google Scholar 

  27. Brandenberg S J, Kwak D Y, Zimmaro P, Bozorgnia Y, Kramer S L, Stewart J P. Next-Generation Liquefaction (NGL) Case History Database Structure. Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics V, 2018, 290: 426–433

    Google Scholar 

  28. Stewart J P, Kramer S L, Kwak D Y, Greenfield M W, Kayen R E, Tokimatsu K, Bray J D, Beyzaei C Z, Cubrinovski M, Sekiguchi T, Nakai S, Bozorgnia Y. PEER-NGL project: Open source global database and model development for the next-generation of liquefaction assessment procedures. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2016, 91(SI): 317–328

    Google Scholar 

  29. ISSMGE. 304dB TC304 databases. Extracted from the website of TC304 Engineering Practice of Risk Assessment & Management. 2019

  30. Rumelhart D E, Hinton G E, Williams R J. Learning Internal Representations by Error Propagation. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986, 319–362

    Google Scholar 

  31. Alsmadi M K S, Omar K B, Noah S A. Back propagation algorithm: The best algorithm among the multi-layer perceptron algorithm. International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, 2009, 9(4): 378–383

    Google Scholar 

  32. Nicoletti G M. An analysis of neural networks as simulators and emulators. Cybernetics and Systems, 2000, 31(3): 253–282

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Hanna M A, Ural D, Saygili G. Neural network model for liquefaction potential in soil deposits using Turkey and Taiwan earthquake data. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2007, 27(6): 521–540

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kumar V, Venkatesh K, Tiwari R P, Kumar Y. Application of ANN to predict liquefaction potential. International Journal of Computational Engineering Research, 2012, 2(2): 379–389

    Google Scholar 

  35. Penumadu D, Goh A T C. Seismic liquefaction potential assessed by neural networks. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1996, 122(4): 323–326

    Google Scholar 

  36. Tresp V, Hollatz J, Ahmad S. Network structuring and training using rule-based knowledge. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. San Francisco, CA: Morgan-Kaufmann, 1993, 871–878

    Google Scholar 

  37. Thompson M L, Kramer M A. Modeling chemical processes using prior knowledge and neural networks. AICHE Journal. American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 1994, 40(8): 1328–1340

    Google Scholar 

  38. Wang F, Zhang Q J. Knowledge-based neural models for microwave design. IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, 1997, 45(12): 2333–2343

    Google Scholar 

  39. Nagarajan H P N, Mokhtarian H, Jafarian H, Dimassi S, Bakrani-Balani S, Hamedi A, Coatanéa E, Gary Wang G, Haapala K R. Knowledge-based design of artificial neural network topology for additive manufacturing process modeling: A new approach and casestudy for fused deposition modeling. Journal of Mechanical Design, 2019, 141(2): 021705

    Google Scholar 

  40. Han F, Huang D S. A new constrained learning algorithm for function approximation by encoding a priori information into feedforward neural networks. Neural Computing & Applications, 2008, 17(5–6): 433–439

    Google Scholar 

  41. Boulanger R W, Idriss I M. CPT and SPT Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures. Report No. UCD/CGM-14/01. Sacramento, CA: University of California, Davis, 2014

    Google Scholar 

  42. Xie J F. Some opinions on modification of soil liquefaction evaluation method in seismic code. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 1984, 4(2): 95–109 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Juang C H. Soil Liquefaction in the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan, Earthquake. Extracted from the website of Soil Liquefaction in the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan, Earthquake. 2002

  44. Cetin K O, Youd T L, Seed R B, Bray J D, Stewart J P, Durgunoglu H T, Lettis W, Yilmaz M T. Liquefaction induced lateral spreading at Izmit Bay during the Kocaeli (Izmit)-Turkey Earthquake. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2004, 130(12): 1300–1313

    Google Scholar 

  45. Sonmez B, Ulusay R, Sonmez H. A study on the identification of liquefaction-induced failures on ground surface based on the data from the 1999 Kocaeli and Chi-Chi earthquakes. Engineering Geology, 2008, 97(3–4): 112–125

    Google Scholar 

  46. Li Z Y. Research on the liquefaction evaluation method based on field investigations in the Bachu earthquake. Harbin: Institution of Engineering Mechanics, 2012 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Li Z Y, Wang Y Z, Yuan X M. New CPT-based prediction method for soil liquefaction applicable to Bachu region of Xinjiang. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2013, 35(1): 140–145 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Cox B R, Bachhuber J, Rathje E, Wood C M, Dulberg R, Kottke A, Green R A, Olson S M. Shear wave velocity- and geology-based seismic microzonation of Port-au-Prince, Haiti. Earthquake Spectra, 2011, 27(1_suppl1): 67–92

    Google Scholar 

  49. Green R A, Olson S M, Cox B R, Rix G J, Rathje E, Bachhuber J, French J, Lasley S, Martin N. Geotechnical aspects of failures at port-au-prince seaport during the 12 January 2010 Haiti earthquake. Earthquake Spectra, 2011, 27(1_suppl1): 43–65

    Google Scholar 

  50. Olson S M, Green R A, Lasley S, Martin N, Cox B R, Rathje E, Bachhuber J, French J. Documenting liquefaction and lateral spreading triggered by the 12 january 2010 Haiti earthquake. Earthquake Spectra, 2011, 27(1_suppl1): 93–116

    Google Scholar 

  51. Kato K, Gonzalez D, Ledezma C, Ashford S. Analysis of pile foundations affected by liquefaction and lateral spreading with pinning effect during the 2010 Maule Chile earthquake. In: Proceedings of the 100th National Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Anchorage: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, 2014

    Google Scholar 

  52. Kramer S L, Astaneh Asl B, Ozener P, Sideras S S. Perspectives on earthquake geotechnical engineering. Geotechnical Geological and Earthquake Engineering, 2015, 37: 285–309

    Google Scholar 

  53. Verdugo R, González J. Liquefaction-induced ground damages during the 2010 Chile earthquake. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2015, 79: 280–295

    Google Scholar 

  54. Bhattacharya S, Hyodo M, Goda K, Tazoh T, Taylor C A. Liquefaction of soil in the Tokyo Bay area from the 2011 Tohoku (Japan) earthquake. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2011, 31(11): 1618–1628

    Google Scholar 

  55. Ishihara K, Araki K, Bradley B. Characteristics of liquefaction-induced damage in the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake. Christchurch: University of Canterbury, 2011

    Google Scholar 

  56. Sasaki Y, Towhata I, Miyamoto K, Shirato M, Narita A, Sasaki T, Sako S. Reconnaissance report on damage in and around river levees caused by the 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku earthquake. Soil and Foundation, 2012, 52(5): 1016–1032

    Google Scholar 

  57. Ho T K. Random decision forests. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition. Montreal: QC, 1995, 14–16

    Google Scholar 

  58. Zhang W G, Goh A T C. Multivariate adaptive regression splines for analysis of geotechnical engineering systems. Computers and Geotechnics, 2013, 48: 82–95

    Google Scholar 

  59. Ishibuchi H, Murata T. A multi-objective genetic local search algorithm and its application to flowshop scheduling. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. Part C, Applications and Reviews, 1998, 28(3): 392–403

    Google Scholar 

  60. Li J, Cheng J, Shi J, Huang F. Brief Introduction of Back Propagation (BP) Neural Network Algorithm and Its Improvement. In: Proceedings of Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing. Berlin: Springer, 2012

    Google Scholar 

  61. Silva F M, Almeida L B. Acceleration techniques for the back propagation algorithm. In: Neural Networks. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin: Springer, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  62. Chen G X. Research on reliability of liquefaction manifestation prediction. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 1991, 11(2): 85–96

    Google Scholar 

  63. Suliman A, Zhang Y. A review on back-propagation neural network in the application of remote sensing image classification. Journal of Earth Science and Engineering, 2015, 5: 52–65

    Google Scholar 

  64. Nawi N M, Atomi W H, Rehman M Z. The effect of data preprocessing on optimized training of artificial neural networks. Procedia Technology, 2013, 11: 32–39

    Google Scholar 

  65. Idriss I M, Boulanger R W. SPT-Based Liquefaction Triggering Procedures. Report No.UCD/CGM-10-02. Sacramento, CA: University of California, Davis, 2010

    Google Scholar 

  66. Seed H B, Idriss I M, Makdisi F, Banerjee N. Representation of irregular Stress Time Histories by Equivalent Uniform Stress Series in Liquefaction Analyses. No. EERC 75-29. Berkeley, SF: University of California, Berkeley, 1975

    Google Scholar 

  67. Idriss I M. An update to the Seed-Idriss simplified procedure for evaluating liquefaction potential. In: Proceedings of TRB Workshop on New Approaches to Liquefaction. Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board, 1999

    Google Scholar 

  68. Cetin K O, Seed R B, Der Kiureghian A K, Tokimatsu K, Harder J L F Jr, Kayen R E, Moss R E S. Standard penetration test-based probabilistic and deterministic assessment of seismic soil liquefaction potential. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2004, 130(12): 1314–1340

    Google Scholar 

  69. Boulanger R W. High overburden stress effects in liquefaction analyses. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2003, 129(12): 1071–1082

    Google Scholar 

  70. Liao S S C, Whitman R V. Overburden correction factors for SPT in sand. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 1986, 112(3): 373–377

    Google Scholar 

  71. Skempton A W. Standard penetration test procedures and the effects in sands of overburden pressure, relative density, particle size, aging and over consolidation. Geotechnique, 1986, 36(3): 425–447

    Google Scholar 

  72. Zhang J, Chen F Y, Juang C H, Chen Q. Developing joint distribution of amax and Mw of seismic loading for performance-based assessment of liquefaction induced structural damage. Engineering Geology, 2018, 232: 1–11

    Google Scholar 

  73. Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China. Code for Seismic Design of Buildings, GB50011-2001. Beijing: China Building Industry Press, 2001 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  74. Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China. Code for Seismic Design of Buildings, GB50011-2010. Beijing: China Building Industry Press, 2016 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  75. Tokimatsu K, Yoshimi Y. Empirical correlation of soil liquefaction based on SPT-N values and fines content. Soil and Foundation, 1983, 23(4): 56–74

    Google Scholar 

  76. Youd T L, Idriss IM, Andrus R D, Arango I, Castro G, Christian J T, Dobry R, Finn W D L, Harder J L F Jr, Hynes M E, Ishihara K, Koester J P, Liao S C C, Marcuson W F III, Martin G R, Mitchell J K, Moriwaki Y, Power M S, Robertson P K, Seed R B, Stokoe K H II. Liquefaction resistance of soils: Summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF workshops on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 2001, 127(10): 817–833

    Google Scholar 

  77. Hu J L, Tang X W, Qiu J N. Assessment of seismic liquefaction potential based on Bayesian network constructed from domain knowledge and history data. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 2016, 89: 49–60

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 51678346 and 51879141) and Tsinghua University Initiative Scientific Research Program (2019Z08-QCX01) for funding this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Hydraulic Engineering, State Key Laboratory of Hydroscience and Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, China

    Yifan Zhang, Rui Wang, Jian-Min Zhang & Jianhong Zhang

Authors
  1. Yifan Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rui Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jian-Min Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jianhong Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rui Wang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, Y., Wang, R., Zhang, JM. et al. A constrained neural network model for soil liquefaction assessment with global applicability. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng. 14, 1066–1082 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-020-0651-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-020-0651-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation