Abstract
Artificial neural networks (ANN), machine learning (ML), deep learning (DL), and ensemble learning (EL) are four outstanding approaches that enable algorithms to extract information from data and make predictions or decisions autonomously without the need for direct instructions. ANN, ML, DL, and EL models have found extensive application in predicting geotechnical and geoenvironmental parameters. This research aims to provide a comprehensive assessment of the applications of ANN, ML, DL, and EL in addressing forecasting within the field related to geotechnical engineering, including soil mechanics, foundation engineering, rock mechanics, environmental geotechnics, and transportation geotechnics. Previous studies have not collectively examined all four algorithms—ANN, ML, DL, and EL—and have not explored their advantages and disadvantages in the field of geotechnical engineering. This research aims to categorize and address this gap in the existing literature systematically. An extensive dataset of relevant research studies was gathered from the Web of Science and subjected to an analysis based on their approach, primary focus and objectives, year of publication, geographical distribution, and results. Additionally, this study included a co-occurrence keyword analysis that covered ANN, ML, DL, and EL techniques, systematic reviews, geotechnical engineering, and review articles that the data, sourced from the Scopus database through the Elsevier Journal, were then visualized using VOS Viewer for further examination. The results demonstrated that ANN is widely utilized despite the proven potential of ML, DL, and EL methods in geotechnical engineering due to the need for real-world laboratory data that civil and geotechnical engineers often encounter. However, when it comes to predicting behavior in geotechnical scenarios, EL techniques outperform all three other methods. Additionally, the techniques discussed here assist geotechnical engineering in understanding the benefits and disadvantages of ANN, ML, DL, and EL within the geo techniques area. This understanding enables geotechnical practitioners to select the most suitable techniques for creating a certainty and resilient ecosystem.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Geotechnical engineering involves investigating and utilizing naturally occurring materials, including soil, rock, and intermediate geomaterials, such as coal [1, 2]. Among these materials, soil is distinguished due to its complex physical, mechanical, and chemical properties in engineering materials [3, 4]. These materials exhibit inherent anisotropic and heterogeneous characteristics resulting from various origins and formation mechanisms, presenting difficulties in understanding and forecasting [5, 6]. Traditionally, geotechnical engineers employ two primary approaches for investigating material behaviors: (1) laboratory and field tests and (2) numerical and analytical methods [7, 8]. While laboratory and field tests offer descriptive insights, they often entail substantial costs and time commitments [7, 9]. Conversely, numerical methods, like finite elements [10,11,12] or discrete analyses [12, 13], provide cost-effective virtual assessments of geotechnical material behavior [7, 14].
Computational intelligence and soft computing analyses have gained recognition due to the complex challenges encountered in various engineering applications. These approaches have gradually replaced the need for complex calculations [15,16,17]. There are numerous advantages to employing AI techniques in geotechnical engineering [18], including:
-
1.
AI can model intricate and nonlinear processes without presuming initial input–output relationships [19, 20].
-
2.
AI demonstrates its effectiveness in forecasting, surveillance, choice-making, recognition, and classification in various situations [21].
-
3.
AI has the capability to provide precise predictions even when there are no established physical parameter relationships available [22].
-
4.
AI has the ability to process extensive datasets, identify patterns, and occasionally generate missing data [23, 24].
Artificial neural networks (ANNs) can evaluate all feasible alternatives for a given project outcome using complex mathematical models and advanced software tools [25, 26]. The integration of ANNs with optimization algorithms is essential to mitigate error rates, particularly in complex scenarios like compressed sensing [27, 28]. ANN provides essential tools for geotechnical engineers in prominent consulting firms, enabling them to make quick and informed decisions, thereby improving performance and mitigating risks [29].
Geotechnical challenges are full of uncertainties and include different factors that avoid direct determination by engineers, leading to the quick adoption of machine learning (ML) techniques [30,31,32]. ML techniques can recognize potential correlations in data without any prior presumptions [33,34,35,36]. Additionally, deep learning (DL), a subfield of ML, aims to enhance the learning algorithms' capability to comprehend complex data. This is achieved using ANNs with multiple layers of interconnected nodes [37]. While DL has exhibited success in tackling learning challenges, its performance is influenced by various factors, and optimizing DL remains an ongoing focus of research in the field of AI [38, 39]. Furthermore, as computational efficiency advances, ongoing investigations into AI and DL are taking place [40, 41].
The primary objectives of this research are to comprehensively assess the applications of ANN, ML, DL, and EL in geotechnology forecasting and to establish a systematic categorization framework. Through the analysis of an extensive dataset, this study aims to provide insights into utilizing these techniques in addressing geotechnical challenges, enabling informed decision-making in this field. Table 1, which serves as an abbreviation table, provides crucial references to assist readers in understanding the fundamental ideas presented in the paper. Figure 1 illustrates various sections covered in this review paper.
2 Literature review
Geotechnical engineering is a multidisciplinary field that encompasses various sub-disciplines within engineering and geology [1, 8]. It involves the study of soil and rock behavior to ensure the stability, safety, and longevity of infrastructure and construction projects [8,9,10]. In structural engineering, it addresses foundation design and soil–structure interaction [42, 43]. Construction engineering involves ground structures, excavation, soil improvement, and earthwork [8, 44]. Environmental engineering focuses on geoenvironmental concerns, while earthquake engineering deals with seismic geotechnics and ground motions [8, 9, 45].
Mechanical engineering aspects include rock mechanics, soil mechanics, and ice mechanics [9, 46]. Geology plays a role in geological engineering, geomaterials analysis, and geohazard assessment [8, 9]. Hydraulic engineering covers earth dams, scouring, groundwater drainage, and marine geotechnics [8, 47], while transportation engineering includes tunneling and road engineering [8, 9]. Figure 2 illustrates these diverse sub-disciplines within the field of geotechnical engineering. Geotechnical engineers apply their expertise across these domains, ensuring the proper utilization of soil and rock properties in diverse construction and environmental contexts.
AI consists of a sophisticated collection of programming techniques [48, 49]. Many of these techniques are founded on the idea that knowledge gaining, organization, access, and modification, in both humans and machines, form the basis for 'intelligent' decision-making [50,51,52,53,54]. AI techniques find application in a wide array of geographical issues, including modeling individual and collective decision-making and developing expert and 'intelligent' geographical information systems [55]. Geotechnical engineers employ various AI techniques to solve diverse challenges [56]. Adopting AI applications in geotechnical engineering has revolutionized the resources available to industry experts, providing them with advanced tools for in-depth data analysis and intricate modeling [57, 58] decision-making [59]. Recent instances of GeoAI endeavors involve the identification of terrain features [60, 61], the detection of densely distributed building footprints [62,63,64], the extraction of information from scanned historical maps [65,66,67], and semantic classification, such as with LiDAR point clouds [68,69,70], novel methods for spatial interpolation [71], and advances in traffic forecasting [72,73,74]. Integrating AI applications in this field enhances the analytical capabilities of industry professionals and fundamentally alters their decision-making processes [75,76,77,78,79]. Through precise data analysis and the application of dynamic modeling, AI enables professionals to optimize site selection, fine-tune design specifications, and adeptly anticipate and manage risks, ultimately leading to the successful and sustainable execution of geotechnical projects [80]. AI plays a pivotal role in advancing sustainable construction and infrastructure projects by efficiently allocating resources, reducing environmental impacts, and optimizing material usage, energy consumption, and waste management techniques in geotechnical engineering [81,82,83]. It is a powerful tool in sustainable construction, effectively managing resources to minimize environmental impacts [84,85,86,87]. By optimizing material distribution and utilization, reducing energy consumption, and limiting waste, AI not only results in cost savings but also significantly diminishes the ecological footprint in construction [88,89,90]. Furthermore, AI can also be utilized to enhance other critical factors, such as mechanical strength and bearing capacity [91, 92]. This comprehensive approach utilizes AI’s capabilities to address a broader spectrum of considerations in construction, resulting in improved sustainability and performance. Nevertheless, the integration of AI in geotechnical engineering faces challenges, mainly due to the necessity for comprehensive and reliable data, particularly in specialized or remote projects [18, 93,94,95]. Ensuring data quality is essential, emphasizing the significance of a balanced approach in developing and validating AI models [96,97,98]. Table 2 discusses some review articles by researchers using AI in geotechnical engineering from 2017 onwards. Also, these reviews have concentrated on one or two AI techniques. In contrast, this review article offers a comprehensive exploration of all four AI techniques (ANN, DL, ML, and EL) within the field of geotechnical engineering. The study showed a co-occurrence keyword analysis encompassing AI techniques (ANN, DL, ML, and EL), systematic review, geotechnical engineering, and review; the data were gathered from the Scopus database and then visualized utilizing VOS Viewer. The dimensions and annotations of each circle represent the importance of the corresponding keyword. Lines connecting them represent connections between these keywords. Various colors signify separate clusters, each associated with its own specialized domain of knowledge. Figure 3 visually represents the research trend observed from 2020 to 2023.
3 AI techniques and algorithms overview
The advent of big data, cloud computing, artificial neural networks, and machine learning has empowered engineers to develop machines capable of emulating human intelligence [107, 108]. Expanding on these advancements, this research designates machines capable of perceiving, recognizing, learning, reacting, and problem-solving as AI [109,110,111]. This inevitably signifies a transformative influence on future workplaces, as AI has the potential to enhance human performance to higher standards [112,113,114]. Consequently, it is poised to emerge as the next groundbreaking innovation [115]. AI is classified into four distinct approaches, including artificial neural networks (ANN), machine learning (ML), deep learning (DL), and ensemble learning (EL). The categorization of these methods is depicted in Fig. 4. Furthermore, for clarity, Table 3 offers a comprehensive comparison of these techniques across various dimensions. As demonstrated in Table 3, the assessment of complexity, data requirements, and interpretability can vary depending on the specific architecture and algorithm. These characteristics can be influenced by factors such as data quality and domain expertise.
3.1 Artificial neural network (ANN) and its application in geotechnical engineering field
The development of the ANN appeared as a solution for tackling challenges involving complex patterns and predictions [120, 121]. Inspired by the information processing mechanisms of the human brain, studies have defined the complex, multi-layered structure of ANN [122, 123]. These neural networks consist of three essential layers: the input, hidden, and output [124]. Neurons are distributed across these layers in a multilayer ANN, each neuron serving as a crucial processing unit. The initial level, represented by the input layer, acquires information to reduce errors and enhance computations [125, 126]. Consequently, the logical determination of the number of neurons is crucial. The input signal can move to subsequent layers due to the interconnectivity among neurons. Neuron weight signifies their capacity to communicate with one another; moreover, the weight and neuron count in preceding layers determine the number of neurons in each layer [127, 128]. It is worth noting that the discretion of the number of hidden layers and neurons is possible. Like other networks, ANNs serve as an exceptional modeling tool for analysis. They excel in defining nonlinear network function evaluation, pattern recognition, data classification, simulation, clustering, and optimization, all essential features of AI [129]. ANN can be categorized into six distinct network types, which include:
-
Feed Forward Neural Network (FFNN) FFNN is a foundational framework within supervised ANNs, demonstrating notable proficiency in recognizing patterns [130]. It systematically handles information through input, hidden, and output layers linearly, devoid of feedback connections [131]. It is skilled at complex pattern learning, although it requires precise adjustment of hyperparameters to achieve the best results.
-
Back Propagation Neural Network (BPNN) The Backpropagation Neural Network (BPNN) is a widespread ANN used in supervised learning tasks. It demonstrates proficiency in comprehending complex relationships [132]. Functioning through interlinked layers, it refines weights using backpropagation to reduce output differences [133].
-
Radial Basis Function Neural Network (RBFNN) The RBFNN is a neural network model designed for various ANN applications [134,135,136]. It utilizes radial basis functions. This architecture enables it to excel in both pattern recognition and regression tasks [137]. By employing radial basis functions, it efficiently processes data and adjusts parameters dynamically, ensuring accurate and reliable results [138, 139].
-
Bayesian Regression Neural Network (BRNN) The BRNN combines neural networks with Bayesian regression to represent complex models [140, 141]. It utilizes neural networks to manage nonlinear patterns and employs Bayesian methods to measure uncertainty, making it advantageous for various applications [142].
-
Generalized Regression Neural Network (GRNN) The GRNN is a sophisticated model proficient in making predictions by estimating functions through a radial basis function strategy [143, 144]. This feature makes it especially apt for efficient training and approximating smooth functions [145,146,147]. The GRNN, based on in radial basis functions (RBFs), is recognized for its effectiveness in regression assignments.
-
Differentiated Evolution Neural Network (DENN) DENN is a type of ANN that uses the differential evolution algorithm to optimize its network structure and parameters. The DENN integrates advanced evolution strategies in neural network training to accelerate convergence speed, improve solution quality, and enhance generalization capabilities for complex optimization tasks [148, 149].
ANN can be employed for a range of tasks in geoengineering, including Soil Classification [93, 150, 151] and Property Estimation [93, 152, 153], Settlement and Settlement Prediction [93, 154,155,156], Slope Stability Analysis [157,158,159], Seismic Hazard Assessment [160, 161], Groundwater Flow Modeling [162, 163], Tunneling and Excavation [164,165,166], Site Characterization [95, 167], Risk Assessment [168, 169], Material Behavior Modeling [170, 171], and Optimization [172, 173].
Different types of ANNs, including GRNN, DENN, BRNN, RBFNN, and FFNN, may be chosen based on the specific problem, data availability, and the desired level of complexity. For example, RBFNNs may be used for data interpolation and function approximation, while FFNNs are suitable for general regression and classification tasks. DENN, if applicable to geotechnical problems, may offer specific advantages in terms of optimization and adaptation [174].
Table 4 displays the employment of ANN techniques in geotechnical engineering.
From the information provided, it is clear that a diverse array of advanced AI techniques, including various types of neural networks and hybrid models, have been successfully utilized in research within the field of geotechnical engineering [104, 192]. These approaches have addressed various geotechnical challenges, from soil property prediction to estimating material strengths and evaluating geotechnical structure performance. The outcomes substantiate the efficacy of AI-based models in providing accurate and dependable forecasts across different facets of geotechnical engineering. Furthermore, these models offer the potential to improve computational efficiency and make valuable contributions to advancing more sustainable practices in soil stabilization and subgrade construction. [8, 100, 104, 176].
The study performed a keyword analysis, giving particular attention to the application of ANN techniques in the field of Geotechnical Engineering. The data were gathered from the Scopus database and then visualized utilizing VOS Viewer. Over the period from 2016 to 2023, a total of 1254 manuscripts were cumulatively published. The size and label of each circle correspond to the significance of the respective keyword. Connecting lines indicate relationships between the keywords. Different colors denote distinct clusters based on their specific areas of expertise, which is presented in Fig. 5. Furthermore, based on data from the WOS database, a geographic analysis demonstrates the utilization of ANN techniques in geotechnical engineering between 2016 and 2023, as depicted in Fig. 6.
3.2 Machine learning (ML) and its application in geotechnical engineering field
ML represents a vital advancement in AI [121]. ML is achieved through iterative algorithms that learn from relevant data specific to a particular training task. This enables computers to recognize complex patterns and bring to light insights without the need for direct programming [193]. ML aims to automate analytical modeling, especially for tasks involving high-dimensional data, such as classification, regression, and clustering [121]. Different varieties of ML models contain:
Reinforcement learning: reinforcement learning involves training an agent to interact with its environment using feedback signals, aiming to develop a strategy that maximizes anticipated rewards. As indicated by [194,195,196,197,198,199,200,201,202,203,204,205,206,207,208], this type of ML can be classified into four methods.
-
1.
Value-based methods focus on acquiring value functions (e.g., Q-values or state values) to guide action selection based on these estimates.
-
2.
Policy-based methods directly learn policies to choose actions that lead to maximum expected rewards.
-
3.
Actor-critic methods combine estimating value functions with policy optimization.
-
4.
Model-based methods entail learning a model of the environment to plan and make decisions.
Unsupervised learning: unsupervised learning involves identifying patterns or structures in data without prior knowledge of the desired outcome. It is trained on data that lack labels, aiming to learn a representation that captures the inherent structure of the dataset [194,195,196,197,198]. This learning includes a variety of techniques, such as clustering, dimensionality reduction, density estimation, and anomaly detection [209,210,211]. Clustering groups similar data points based on specific features or similarities [196, 212, 213]. Dimensionality reduction methods aim to reduce the number of features while retaining important information [214,215,216,217]. Density estimation focuses on estimating the probability density function of a dataset [218,219,220]. Anomaly detection identifies data points that deviate significantly from expected or normal behavior [210, 221, 222]. Some well-known and commonly used techniques in Unsupervised Learning, such as Principal Component Analysis (PCA) [223,224,225], K-Means Clustering [226,227,228], Hierarchical Clustering [229, 230], Gaussian Mixture Models (GMM) [231,232,233], are mentioned here.
Supervised learning: supervised learning trains an algorithm using labeled data, where each input corresponds to a known output. The algorithm learns to link input features with desired outcomes through these labeled examples. This learning process is divided into two main types: classification, which categorizes data into predefined classes, and regression, which predicts continuous numerical values. Classification yields distinct class labels, while regression deals with a range of continuous outputs [194,195,196,197,198,199, 234, 235]. Some widely recognized and commonly used techniques in supervised learning are mentioned here, including Linear Regression [236], Logistic Regression (LR) [237, 238], Bayesian Linear regression (BLR) [239, 240], Random Forest [241, 242], Support Vector Machines (SVM) [243, 244].
ML techniques, including supervised, unsupervised, and reinforcement learning, have a wide range of applications in geoengineering [245, 246]. These techniques can enhance decision-making, optimize processes, and gain geotechnical and geographical data insights [247]. Supervised learning can be applied in slope stability analysis, foundation design, and material classification [248,249,250], while clustering for site characterization and dimensionality reduction uses unsupervised learning [251, 252]. Additionally, reinforcement learning is applied for optimal excavation tunneling and resource management [253, 254]. The successful application of ML in geoengineering depends on the availability of high-quality data, domain expertise, and careful model selection and validation. Table 5 is dedicated to ML methodologies designed to tackle specific challenges in geotechnical engineering.
Table 4 offers a summary of recent studies exploring the utilization of ML in geotechnical engineering. These investigations contain various subjects, ranging from soil classification and spatial interpolation to slope stability and rock mass categorization. Also it contains predictions for unconfined compressive strength (UCS), evaluations of soil layering, projections for shear strength of fiber-reinforced soil (FRS), estimations of cation exchange capacity (CEC), and assessments of gully erosion susceptibility. The results of these inquiries demonstrate the effectiveness of ML algorithms in dealing with various challenges within geotechnical engineering. ML models have demonstrated notable accuracy in tasks like soil classification, spatial property variability prediction, slope stability assessment, rock mass categorization, UCS prediction, identification of soil layers, FRS shear strength prediction, CEC estimation, and gully erosion susceptibility mapping [106, 192, 269]. Furthermore, the research emphasizes the significance of factors such as the quality and representativeness of the training dataset, model complexity, and the specific application context when deploying ML algorithms in geotechnical engineering. Additionally, further validation of ML models using new databases is often necessary to evaluate their broader applicability. According to a search of the Scopus database for Elsevier journal papers, researchers published 1,401 research papers on ML in geotechnical engineering between 2016 and 2023. Figure 7 shows these data, along with keywords related to Machine learning techniques in geotechnical engineering, extracted from the most relevant articles. Moreover, as indicated by the WOS database, a geographical data analysis demonstrates the application of ML techniques in geotechnical engineering between 2016 and 2023, as shown in Fig. 8.
3.3 Deep learning (DL) and its application in geotechnical engineering field
Recently, DL has demonstrated remarkable advancements and achievements across a wide range of fields [270]. DL, a subset of ML, aims to develop algorithms that can gradually comprehend complex data representations. This is accomplished by employing neural networks consisting of interconnected layers of nodes. DL algorithms typically use extensive datasets during training, enabling them to identify complex patterns and attain highly accurate predictions [271]. DL algorithms possess the unique capability to autonomously identify features, circumventing the need for ML algorithms, which accelerates data classification processes [121]. Additionally, DL demonstrates exceptional efficiency in handling substantial volumes of information within tight timeframes. Notably, one of the most noteworthy characteristics of DL is its capacity to enhance its intelligence over time continually [270]. Table 5 provides an overview of DL methods. Other DL approaches often integrate and complement the methods outlined in Table 6 to enhance overall efficiency and effectiveness. Also, Table 7 is specifically dedicated to the application of DL techniques in the field of geotechnical engineering.
DL techniques have found applications in various aspects of geoengineering due to their ability to process and analyze complex data patterns, including geological feature detection [93, 105, 286], landslide prediction[169, 287, 288], seismic data analysis [105, 289], groundwater modeling [290], infrastructure monitoring [93, 291], soil classification[292, 293], geospatial data analysis [105, 290], mining and resource management [294, 295], environmental impact assessment [105, 296]. To implement DL in geoengineering, access to relevant datasets, machine learning and deep learning expertise, and computing resources for model training will be required [297, 298].
The research conducted a keyword analysis with a specific emphasis on the utilization of Deep Learning techniques in Geotechnical Engineering. It was found that researchers published 1,040 research papers on deep learning in this field between 2016 and 2023. The data were collected from the Scopus database and visualized using VOS Viewer, as illustrated in Fig. 9; this graphical representation captures the evolving research trends spanning from 2019 to 2023. Moreover, as indicated by the WOS database, a geographical data analysis demonstrates the application of DL techniques in geotechnical engineering between 2016 and 2023, as shown in Fig. 10.
3.4 Ensemble learning (EL) its application in geotechnical engineering field
EL, a method in ML, combines the forecasts of multiple models to enhance overall performance [299, 300]. EL aims to improve predictive performance, accuracy, and generalization on various tasks [301, 302]. Ensemble methods work best when the base models are diverse, meaning they make errors on different subsets of the data or have different approaches to solving the problem [303, 304]. This diversity helps in reducing the overall error [305, 306]. Several widely recognized EL techniques include:
Bagging (Bootstrap Aggregating): This ensemble method involves training multiple models on different subsets of the data, and their predictions are aggregated [307,308,309]. Random Forest [310, 311] and Bagged Decision Trees [312,313,314] are the well-known methods in this category.
Boosting: Boosting enhances predictive performance by training weak models sequentially. Each model corrects the mistakes made by its predecessor, resulting in a strong learner within the ensemble [315, 316]. AdaBoost (Adaptive Boosting) [317,318,319], Gradient Boosting Machines (GBM) [320,321,322], XGBoost (Extreme Gradient Boosting) [323,324,325], LightGBM (Light Gradient Boosting Machine) [326, 327], and CatBoost (Categorical Boosting) [328, 329] are widely recognized techniques within this classification.
Stacking Ensembles (SE): In this approach, a meta-model is trained to learn how to best combine predictions from the base models [330, 331]. Stacking Classifier [332,333,334] and Stacking Regressor [335, 336] are recognized techniques within the SE category.
Voting Ensembles (VE): Models in this ensemble provide predictions, and a majority vote determines the final output [337, 338]. Hard Voting [339,340,341] and Soft Voting [342,343,344] are established methods within the VE classification.
In geotechnical engineering, EL technique is frequently employed to heighten the precision of soil and rock behavior predictions [345]. In geotechnical engineering, stacking is a frequently used EL method [346, 347]. This involves training multiple ML models on the same dataset and combining their predictions to generate a conclusive forecast, which can be executed through techniques like weighted averaging or voting [348]. Another common technique utilized in geotechnical engineering is Bagging [349,350,351]. Multiple ML approaches are trained on distinct subsets of the dataset, and their predictions are aggregated to form a final prediction. This helps mitigate the overfitting of the models to the training data [352,353,354].
It is important to note that the choice of EL method and the specific application will depend on the nature of the geoengineering problem, the available data, and the goals of the analysis [93, 286, 355, 356]. EL can significantly enhance the predictive capabilities and robustness of models in geoengineering, ultimately leading to safer and more effective engineering solutions [357,358,359]. EL is a developing field ready to have a revolutionary impact on geotechnical engineering. Table 8 provides a collection of recent studies that have successfully utilized EL to address a range of challenges in the field of geotechnical engineering. These include forecasting soil liquefaction susceptibility, categorizing rock mass quality, approximating lateral wall deflection in braced excavations, projecting soil properties through raw soil spectra data, and anticipating landslide susceptibility. These efforts emphasize the potential of EL in increasing the accuracy, efficiency, and reliability of geotechnical analyses and designs [357, 363].
The data, sourced from the Scopus database, were subsequently visualized using VOS Viewer. Over the period from 2016 to 2023, researchers published 609 research papers on ensemble learning in geotechnical engineering. The size and label of each circle in the visualization indicate the significance of the respective keyword, while connecting lines signify relationships between them. Figure 11 presents these data along with keywords associated with Ensemble Learning (EL) approaches in geotechnical engineering, extracted from the most pertinent articles. Furthermore, according to the WOS database, the application of EL techniques in geotechnical engineering is demonstrated through geographical data analysis, as depicted in Fig. 12, which visually depicts the research pattern observed from 2020 to 2023.
To gain insight into the performance of various EL-based models in the geotechnical field, Kardani et al. [293] examined the effectiveness of different EL techniques in predicting the resilient modulus of subgrade soils. They found that the bagging ensemble model outperformed other models tested, including the voting ensemble, voting ensemble with random forest, and stacking ensemble. Their conclusion was that the bagging ensemble outperformed other methods, making it suitable for estimating the resilient modulus with superior performance and an acceptable degree of accuracy. This model not only demonstrated higher prediction accuracy and generalization ability, but also exhibited several advantages such as stability, reduced noise, and ease of use. On the other hand, learning the art of ensemble modeling can be challenging, and making incorrect selections may lead to reduced prediction precision. Additionally, ensemble modeling can be costly in terms of both time and space. However, additional research using various datasets should be conducted to predict different geotechnical parameters, ensuring the performance of the bagging ensemble methods and other EL-based methods. Therefore, it is strongly recommended to utilize EL-based methods in the geotechnical field for predicting mechanical, physical, and chemical properties of soils. Further research is necessary to make reliable decisions about their performance in the geotechnical area.
4 Discussions and challenges linked with AI in geotechnical engineering
ANN models are adaptable and capable of capturing complex patterns in data. However, these models require precise adjustment of hyperparameters to achieve peak performance [116]. The performance of ANN depends on factors such as architecture, data quality, and data quantity [124, 365, 366]. Therefore, ANN is able to be the best choice for small datasets or when interpretability is crucial.
Various techniques are included in ML models, such as supervised learning, unsupervised learning, or reinforcement learning, which are well suited for different tasks. The performance of ML models varies according to the algorithm and the data being utilized. In comparison to DL models, ML models are frequently found to be more interpretable [367, 368]. They are considered a favorable option when there are limited data or the need for transparent models [117].
DL models, such as CNNs and RNNs, manage extensive, high-dimensional datasets proficiently. They can automatically acquire hierarchical features [369, 370]. DL demands significant computational power, sizable datasets, and precise parameter optimization. Additionally, DL models may not always offer interpretability, which can present limitations in certain use cases [118].
EL combines multiple models to enhance predictive performance, often surpassing the performance of individual models. It achieves this by reducing overfitting and increasing robustness, making it suitable for diverse datasets and applications [119]. Furthermore, EL demonstrates a reduced susceptibility to noise and outliers [371].
Assessing ANN, ML, DL, and EL for geoengineering in terms of accuracy and performance can be a complex task, given that the efficacy of each method relies on diverse variables, such as the particular problem, dataset characteristics, and model setup. These approaches rely on geoengineering problems, the data, computational resources, and interpretability needs. Both ML and ANN demonstrate a moderate level of complexity and are mainly applied in the field of geotechnics. Notably, ML has attracted substantial attention from researchers due to its high interpretability and optimal performance, even with small data. This interest is substantiated by data from WOS covering the period from 2019 to 2023, which reveals that a significant number of articles published in Springer Nature, Elsevier, and IEEE journals within the geotechnical domain underscore the prevalent preference for employing ML among researchers in this field as shown in Fig. 13.
Figure 13 illustrates the number of research papers published in reputable journals, such as those from Springer, Elsevier, and IEEE, focusing on the areas of ANN, ML, DL, and in the field of Geotechnical Engineering. These data have been sourced from WOS.
Based on data from the WOS database, ANN is frequently employed in geotechnical engineering, even though ML, DL, and EL methods have demonstrated substantial potential as illustrated in Fig. 14. This preference for using ANN in geotechnical engineering may be attributed to the common requirement for real-world laboratory data frequently encountered by civil and geotechnical engineers or the potential limitation in expertise for effectively employing ML, DL, and EL methods in data-driven prediction. However, EL techniques consistently outperform the other three methods in the context of predicting geotechnical behaviors.
According to the data obtained from the WOS database, Fig. 14 provides an overview of the utilization of ANN, ML, DL, and EL approaches in geotechnical engineering from 2019 to 2023. The data clearly show that ANN has maintained its status as a consistently preferred technique within this field. Additionally, it is noteworthy that ML has exhibited a steady and upward trend over the years. In 2022 and 2023, researchers demonstrated a nearly equal preference for both ANN and ML techniques within the field of geotechnical engineering.
As depicted in Fig. 14, it is evident that the EL methods have been consistently popular over the years. Notably, the utilization of EL in the field of geotechnical engineering experienced a substantial increase from 2021 to 2022, reaching its peak adoption rate during this period. DL methods have not been widely adopted in recent years, but they started gaining recognition in geotechnical engineering in 2020. However, their popularity among geotechnical engineers remains limited due to the substantial amount of data required for accurate forecasting using this learning approach.
A widespread trend toward the utilization of artificial intelligence techniques, including ANN, ML, DL, and EL, in the field of geotechnical engineering is observed globally. This analysis, spanning from 2016 to 2023, involves the classification of data using WOS enabling thorough examination of transformations on a continental scale (refer to Fig. 15). This comparison reveals that this subject matter is actively embraced across all continents.
5 Future research directions and opportunities linked with AI application in geotechnical engineering
Future research in the field of geotechnical engineering and artificial intelligence (AI) should prioritize interdisciplinary collaboration, bringing together geotechnical engineering expertise and AI proficiency. This synergy has the potential to yield innovative solutions and provide a deeper understanding of how AI can effectively address the multifaceted challenges within geotechnical engineering. Furthermore, researchers should investigate geographical variations in the utilization of AI techniques in geotechnical engineering, examining how these methods are applied differently in various regions and identifying the factors influencing these variations. Additionally, the integration of AI for real-time monitoring and decision-making during geotechnical construction and operations should be explored, focusing on the development of adaptive AI-driven systems that can enhance safety and operational efficiency. Finally, researchers should delve into the concept of human–machine collaboration, examining how AI can assist geotechnical practitioners in decision-making, risk assessment, and project design. These research directions, aligned with the standards of scholarly articles, aim to foster innovation and provide practical solutions for the geotechnical engineering community. Figure 16 offers a visual depiction of the critical future research direction in the application of AI within the realm of geotechnical engineering.
From a geotechnical engineering perspective, there are numerous topics that can still be studied and addressed in future research. One potential area of research is the application of various AI methods to predict the dynamic response of different soils, contingent on the availability of adequate datasets. In addition, a simple review of Tables 4, 5, 7, and 8 and available papers in the field of geotechnical engineering confirms that soil improvement, as a hot topic in general, has received less attention from the AI approach. It is well known that soil properties, including soil gradation, consistency, compaction parameters, consolidation, dispersivity, collapsibility, swelling potential, durability, strength, elasticity, stress–strain curves, peck strain energy, resilient modulus, dynamic response, erodibility, chemical compositions, hydraulic conductivity, electrical conductivity, and liquefaction potential, can be altered through stabilization with traditional materials like lime and cement, or through the use of waste by-products such as lignosulfonate, travertine waste, red mud, sewage sludge, water treatment sludge, fly ash, various types of slags, as well as soil reinforcement using different materials like fibers and geosynthetic materials, or alternative soil improvement techniques such as electroosmosis [46, 372,373,374,375,376,377,378,379,380,381,382,383,384,385]. However, it is evident that AI-based prediction of soil parameters after stabilization or reinforcement with various techniques and materials deserves more attention, especially considering the substantial number of experimental papers in this field and the availability of sufficient datasets. Therefore, future research studies can focus on the prediction of stabilized and reinforced soil parameters.
6 Conclusions
ANN, ML, DL, and EL are pivotal approaches for extracting valuable insights and making autonomous predictions in various fields, including geotechnology. This study aimed to comprehensively assess the applications of these techniques in geoengineering, filling a critical gap in the existing literature.
Evaluation of a vast dataset extracted from the Web of Science and Scopus databases revealed significant insights. ANN remains a widely used technique in geotechnical engineering, often due to the necessity for real-world laboratory data frequently encountered by civil and geotechnical engineers. Additionally, the expertise gap in effectively applying ML, DL, and EL methods for data-driven predictions may influence the preference for ANN. However, when it comes to predicting geotechnical behaviors, EL techniques consistently outperform the other three methods, showcasing their effectiveness in this domain.
Each of these techniques possesses its unique strengths and limitations. ANN models are adaptable and excel at capturing complex data patterns, but they require meticulous hyperparameter tuning and are suitable for scenarios with limited data or where interpretability is crucial. ML models encompass various techniques suitable for diverse tasks, offering interpretable solutions and being favored when data are limited. DL models handle high-dimensional data effectively but demand substantial computational resources and careful parameter optimization. Conversely, EL combines multiple models to enhance predictive performance, exhibiting robustness and reduced sensitivity to noise and outliers. The integration of ANN, ML, DL, and EL techniques has significantly contributed to advancing the field of geotechnology. Researchers and practitioners in this domain should continue to explore and harness the potential of these methodologies to address the evolving challenges in geotechnical engineering effectively.
Data availability
The datasets generated during and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
References
Sun J, Huang Y (2022) Modeling the simultaneous effects of particle size and porosity in simulating geo-materials. Materials 15(4):1576
Abuel-Naga HM, Bouazza A (2014) Numerical experiment-artificial intelligence approach to develop empirical equations for predicting leakage rates through GM/GCL composite liners. Geotext Geomembr 42(3):236–245
Xiong Z, Zhong L, Wang H, Li X (2021) Structural defects, mechanical behaviors, and properties of two-dimensional materials. Materials 14(5):1192
Razeghi HR, Ghadir P, Javadi AA (2022) Mechanical strength of saline sandy soils stabilized with alkali-activated cements. Sustainability 14(20):13669
Yu M, Hu Z, Zhou J, Lu Y, Guo W, Zhang Z (2023) Retrieving grain boundaries in 2D materials. Small 19(7):2205593
Kang DW, Choi KH, Lee SJ, Park BJ (2019) Mapping anisotropic and heterogeneous colloidal interactions via optical laser tweezers. J Phys Chem Lett 10(8):1691–1697
Wallace M, Ng K (2016) Development and application of underground space use in Hong Kong. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 55:257–279
Baghbani A, Choudhury T, Costa S, Reiner J (2022) Application of artificial intelligence in geotechnical engineering: a state-of-the-art review. Earth Sci Rev 228:103991
Beiranvand B, Rajaee T (2022) Application of artificial intelligence-based single and hybrid models in predicting seepage and pore water pressure of dams: a state-of-the-art review. Adv Eng Softw 173:103268
Assadi-Langroudi A et al (2022) Recent advances in nature-inspired solutions for ground engineering (NiSE). Int J Geosynth Ground Eng 8(1):3
Liu H, Maghoul P, Shalaby A, Thomson D (2023) Ultrasonic characterization of frozen soils using a multiphase poromechanical approach. Comput Geotech 153:105068
Liu H, Maghoul P, Mantelet G, Shalaby A (2022) GeoNDT: a fast general-purpose computational tool for geotechnical non-destructive testing applications. Acta Geotech 17(8):3515–3534
Liu C, Phan DT (2023) Analytical modeling of elastic moduli dispersion and poromechanical responses of a dual-porosity dual-permeability porous cylinder under dynamic forced deformation test. Rock Mech Rock Eng 56(3):2249–2269
Liu H, Maghoul P, Shalaby A (2020) Laboratory-scale characterization of saturated soil samples through ultrasonic techniques. Sci Rep 10(1):3216
Lee S, Lee SR, Kim Y (2003) An approach to estimate unsaturated shear strength using artificial neural network and hyperbolic formulation. Comput Geotech 30(6):489–503
Pujitha AK, Sivaswamy J (2018) Solution to overcome the sparsity issue of annotated data in medical domain. CAAI Trans Intell Technol 3(3):153–160
Xie H-B, Guo T, Bai S, Dokos S (2014) Hybrid soft computing systems for electromyographic signals analysis: a review. Biomed Eng Online 13(1):1–19
Sharma S, Ahmed S, Naseem M, Alnumay WS, Singh S, Cho GH (2021) A survey on applications of artificial intelligence for pre-parametric project cost and soil shear-strength estimation in construction and geotechnical engineering. Sensors 21(2):463
Hu EY, Bouteiller J-MC, Song D, Baudry M, Berger TW (2015) Volterra representation enables modeling of complex synaptic nonlinear dynamics in large-scale simulations. Front Comput Neurosci 9:112
Kawamura S, Deng M (2020) Recent developments on modeling for a 3-DOF micro-hand based on AI methods. Micromachines 11(9):792
Lozada DN, Carter AH (2020) Genomic selection in winter wheat breeding using a recommender approach. Genes 11(7):779
Raman DV, Anderson J, Papachristodoulou A (2017) Delineating parameter unidentifiabilities in complex models. Phys Rev E 95(3):032314
Raissi M, Yazdani A, Karniadakis GE (2020) Hidden fluid mechanics: learning velocity and pressure fields from flow visualizations. Science 367(6481):1026–1030
Hsu W et al (2015) An integrated, ontology-driven approach to constructing observational databases for research. J Biomed Inform 55:132–142
Shahin MA, Jaksa MB, Maier HR (2001) Artificial neural network applications in geotechnical engineering. Aust Geomech 36(1):49–62
Johnson JL (2018) Design of experiments and progressively sequenced regression are combined to achieve minimum data sample size. Int J Hydromechatron 1(3):308–331
Zhou Y, Sun Q, Liu J (2018) Robust optimisation algorithm for the measurement matrix in compressed sensing. CAAI Trans Intell Technol 3(3):133–139
Chen S, Du H, Wu L, Jin J, Qiu B (2017) Compressed sensing MRI via fast linearized preconditioned alternating direction method of multipliers. Biomed Eng Online 16:1–18
Kostić S, Vasović N, Todorović K, Samčović A (2016) Application of artificial neural networks for slope stability analysis in geotechnical practice. In: 2016 13th Symposium on neural networks and applications (NEUREL). IEEE, pp 1–6
Goh AT, Zhang W (2014) An improvement to MLR model for predicting liquefaction-induced lateral spread using multivariate adaptive regression splines. Eng Geol 170:1–10
Wang L, Wu C, Gu X, Liu H, Mei G, Zhang W (2020) Probabilistic stability analysis of earth dam slope under transient seepage using multivariate adaptive regression splines. Bull Eng Geol Environ 79:2763–2775
Zhang W, Zhang Y, Goh AT (2017) Multivariate adaptive regression splines for inverse analysis of soil and wall properties in braced excavation. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 64:24–33
Goh ATC, Zhang W, Zhang Y, Xiao Y, Xiang Y (2018) Determination of earth pressure balance tunnel-related maximum surface settlement: a multivariate adaptive regression splines approach. Bull Eng Geol Environ 77:489–500
van Natijne AL, Lindenbergh RC, Bogaard TA (2020) Machine learning: new potential for local and regional deep-seated landslide nowcasting. Sensors 20(5):1425
Zhang W, Goh AT, Zhang Y, Chen Y, Xiao Y (2015) Assessment of soil liquefaction based on capacity energy concept and multivariate adaptive regression splines. Eng Geol 188:29–37
Zhang W, Wu C, Li Y, Wang L, Samui P (2021) Assessment of pile drivability using random forest regression and multivariate adaptive regression splines. Georisk Assess Manag Risk Eng Syst Geohazards 15(1):27–40
Jin S, Zeng X, Xia F, Huang W, Liu X (2021) Application of deep learning methods in biological networks. Brief Bioinform 22(2):1902–1917
Zhan Z-H, Li J-Y, Zhang J (2022) Evolutionary deep learning: a survey. Neurocomputing 483:42–58
Mavaie P, Holder L, Beck D, Skinner MK (2021) Predicting environmentally responsive transgenerational differential DNA methylated regions (epimutations) in the genome using a hybrid deep-machine learning approach. BMC Bioinform 22(1):1–25
Nguyen G et al (2019) Machine learning and deep learning frameworks and libraries for large-scale data mining: a survey. Artif Intell Rev 52:77–124
Zhang W, Zhang R, Wang W, Zhang F, Goh ATC (2019) A multivariate adaptive regression splines model for determining horizontal wall deflection envelope for braced excavations in clays. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 84:461–471
Sigdel LD, Al-Qarawi A, Leo CJ, Liyanapathirana S, Hu P (2021) Geotechnical design practices and soil–structure interaction effects of an integral bridge system: a review. Appl Sci 11(15):7131
Tavakoli R, Kamgar R, Rahgozar R (2020) Optimal location of energy dissipation outrigger in high-rise building considering nonlinear soil–structure interaction effects. Period Polytech Civ Eng 64(3):887–903
Kim J, Lee S, Seo J, Lee D-E, Choi HS (2021) The integration of earthwork design review and planning using UAV-based point cloud and BIM. Appl Sci 11(8):3435
Onyelowe KC, Fazel Mojtahedi F, Golaghaei Darzi A, Kontoni D-PN (2023) Solving large deformation problems in geotechnical and geo-environmental engineering with the smoothed particle hydrodynamics: a state-of-the-art review of constitutive solutions. Environ Earth Sci 82(17):394
Vakili AH, Salimi M, Lu Y, Shamsi M, Nazari Z (2022) Strength and post-freeze–thaw behavior of a marl soil modified by lignosulfonate and polypropylene fiber: an environmentally friendly approach. Constr Build Mater 332:127364
Xu L, Peng X, Jiang H, An X, Xi X (2022) Distributive hydraulic engineering, cross-scale landscape planning, and climate change resilience: on the water-adaptive strategy in the Huai’an–Yangzhou Section of China’s Grand Canal. River Res Appl 39:1224
Sarker IH (2022) AI-based modeling: techniques, applications and research issues towards automation, intelligent and smart systems. SN Comput Sci 3(2):158
Kitsios F, Kamariotou M (2021) Artificial intelligence and business strategy towards digital transformation: a research agenda. Sustainability 13(4):2025
Bag S, Gupta S, Kumar A, Sivarajah U (2021) An integrated artificial intelligence framework for knowledge creation and B2B marketing rational decision making for improving firm performance. Ind Market Manag 92:178–189
Trunk A, Birkel H, Hartmann E (2020) On the current state of combining human and artificial intelligence for strategic organizational decision making. Bus Res 13(3):875–919
Harfouche A, Quinio B, Saba M, Saba PB (2023) The recursive theory of knowledge augmentation: integrating human intuition and knowledge in artificial intelligence to augment organizational knowledge. Inf Syst Front 25(1):55–70
Rajagopal NK et al (2022) Future of business culture: an artificial intelligence-driven digital framework for organization decision-making process. Complexity 2022:1–14
Grant R, Phene A (2022) The knowledge based view and global strategy: past impact and future potential. Glob Strategy J 12(1):3–30
Nishant R, Kennedy M, Corbett J (2020) Artificial intelligence for sustainability: challenges, opportunities, and a research agenda. Int J Inf Manag 53:102104
Samui P (2020) Application of artificial intelligence in geo-engineering. In: Information technology in geo-engineering: proceedings of the 3rd international conference (ICITG), Guimarães, Portugal 3. Springer, pp 30–44
Almajed A, Lemboye K, Moghal AAB (2022) A critical review on the feasibility of synthetic polymers inclusion in enhancing the geotechnical behavior of soils. Polymers 14(22):5004
Phoon K-K (2023) What geotechnical engineers want to know about reliability. ASCE-ASME J Risk Uncertain Eng Syst Part A Civ Eng 9(2):03123001
Sircar A, Yadav K, Rayavarapu K, Bist N, Oza H (2021) Application of machine learning and artificial intelligence in oil and gas industry. Pet Res 6(4):379–391
Li W, Hsu C-Y (2020) Automated terrain feature identification from remote sensing imagery: a deep learning approach. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 34(4):637–660
Xiong L, Li S, Tang G, Strobl J (2022) Geomorphometry and terrain analysis: Data, methods, platforms and applications. Earth-Sci Rev 233:104191
Feng L, Xu P, Tang H, Liu Z, Hou P (2023) National-scale mapping of building footprints using feature super-resolution semantic segmentation of Sentinel-2 images. GISci Remote Sens 60(1):2196154
Li S, Bao T, Liu H, Deng R, Zhang H (2023) Multilevel feature aggregated network with instance contrastive learning constraint for building extraction. Remote Sens 15(10):2585
Xie Y, Cai J, Bhojwani R, Shekhar S, Knight J (2020) A locally-constrained YOLO framework for detecting small and densely-distributed building footprints. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 34(4):777–801
Uhl JH, Leyk S, Chiang Y-Y, Knoblock CA (2022) Towards the automated large-scale reconstruction of past road networks from historical maps. Comput Environ Urban Syst 94:101794
Avcı C, Sertel E, Kabadayı ME (2022) Deep learning-based road extraction from historical maps. IEEE Geosci Remote Sens Lett 19:1–5
Duan W, Chiang Y-Y, Leyk S, Uhl JH, Knoblock CA (2020) Automatic alignment of contemporary vector data and georeferenced historical maps using reinforcement learning. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 34(4):824–849
Wen S, Wang T, Tao S (2022) Hybrid CNN-LSTM architecture for LiDAR point clouds semantic segmentation. IEEE Robot Autom Lett 7(3):5811–5818
Cai Y, Fan L, Atkinson PM, Zhang C (2022) Semantic segmentation of terrestrial laser scanning point clouds using locally enhanced image-based geometric representations. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 60:1–15
Diab A, Kashef R, Shaker A (2022) Deep learning for LiDAR point cloud classification in remote sensing. Sensors 22(20):7868
Zhu D, Cheng X, Zhang F, Yao X, Gao Y, Liu Y (2020) Spatial interpolation using conditional generative adversarial neural networks. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 34(4):735–758
Ren Y, Chen H, Han Y, Cheng T, Zhang Y, Chen G (2020) A hybrid integrated deep learning model for the prediction of citywide spatio-temporal flow volumes. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 34(4):802–823
Yin G et al (2022) A novel interpolation method to predict soil heavy metals based on a genetic algorithm and neural network model. Sci Total Environ 825:153948
Gao S, He D, Zhang Z, Tang X, Zhao Z (2023) A novel dynamic interpolation method based on both temporal and spatial correlations. Appl Intell 53(5):5100–5125
Jiang L, Qin X, Yam KC, Dong X, Liao W, Chen C (2023) Who should be first? How and when AI-human order influences procedural justice in a multistage decision-making process. PLoS ONE 18(7):e0284840
Monkul MM, Özhan HO (2021) Microplastic contamination in soils: a review from geotechnical engineering view. Polymers 13(23):4129
Javaid M, Haleem A, Singh RP, Suman R (2022) Artificial intelligence applications for industry 4.0: a literature-based study. J Ind Integr Manag 7(01):83–111
Mohiuddin Babu M, Akter S, Rahman M, Billah MM, Hack-Polay D (2022) The role of artificial intelligence in shaping the future of Agile fashion industry. Prod Plan Control. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2022.2060858
Di Vaio A, Hassan R, Alavoine C (2022) Data intelligence and analytics: A bibliometric analysis of human–artificial intelligence in public sector decision-making effectiveness. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 174:121201
Eslami A, Nabizadeh A, Akbarzadeh Kasani H (2022) Geotechnical and geophysical characterisations of construction waste-infilled quarry for housing and commercial developments: case study of Tehran, Iran. Waste Manag Res 40(3):349–359
Barišić I, Netinger Grubeša I, Hackenberger DK, Palijan G, Glavić S, Trkmić M (2022) Multidisciplinary approach to agricultural biomass ash usage for earthworks in road construction. Materials 15(13):4529
Wang Y (2022) The impacts of improvements in the unified economic and environmental efficiency of transportation infrastructure on industrial structure transformation and upgrade from the perspective of resource factors. PLoS ONE 17(12):e0278722
Andeobu L, Wibowo S, Grandhi S (2022) Artificial intelligence applications for sustainable solid waste management practices in Australia: a systematic review. Sci Total Environ 834:155389
Hou Y, Dong Q, Wang D, Liu J (2023) Introduction to ‘Artificial intelligence in failure analysis of transportation infrastructure and materials.’ Philos Trans R Soc 381:20220177
Najjar MK, Figueiredo K, Evangelista ACJ, Hammad AW, Tam VW, Haddad A (2022) Life cycle assessment methodology integrated with BIM as a decision-making tool at early-stages of building design. Int J Constr Manag 22(4):541–555
Ogunmakinde OE, Egbelakin T, Sher W (2022) Contributions of the circular economy to the UN sustainable development goals through sustainable construction. Resour Conserv Recycl 178:106023
Xie Y, Zhao Y, Chen Y, Allen C (2022) Green construction supply chain management: Integrating governmental intervention and public–private partnerships through ecological modernisation. J Clean Prod 331:129986
Hammond GP, Li B (2016) Environmental and resource burdens associated with world biofuel production out to 2050: footprint components from carbon emissions and land use to waste arisings and water consumption. GCB Bioenergy 8(5):894–908
Yaro NSA et al (2023) A comprehensive overview of the utilization of recycled waste materials and technologies in asphalt pavements: towards environmental and sustainable low-carbon roads. Processes 11(7):2095
Srivastava PR, Mangla SK, Eachempati P, Tiwari AK (2023) An explainable artificial intelligence approach to understanding drivers of economic energy consumption and sustainability. Energy Econ 125:106868
Sikder A, Saha P, Singha PS (2023) Sugar industry waste produced geopolymer concrete and its compressive strength prediction via statistical analysis and artificial intelligence approach. Innov Infrastruct Solut 8(7):201
Ahmad M, Rashid K, Tariq Z, Ju M (2021) Utilization of a novel artificial intelligence technique (ANFIS) to predict the compressive strength of fly ash-based geopolymer. Constr Build Mater 301:124251
Zhang W, Gu X, Tang L, Yin Y, Liu D, Zhang Y (2022) Application of machine learning, deep learning and optimization algorithms in geoengineering and geoscience: comprehensive review and future challenge. Gondwana Res 109:1–17
Zhang W, Pradhan B, Stuyts B, Xu C (2023) Application of artificial intelligence in geotechnical and geohazard investigations. Geol J 58(6):2187–2194
Phoon K-K, Zhang W (2023) Future of machine learning in geotechnics. Georisk Assess Manag Risk Eng Syst Geohazards 17(1):7–22
McAlpine ED, Pantanowitz L, Michelow PM (2021) Challenges developing deep learning algorithms in cytology. Acta Cytol 65(4):301–309
Ruamviboonsuk P, Chantra S, Seresirikachorn K, Ruamviboonsuk V, Sangroongruangsri S (2021) Economic evaluations of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology. Asia-Pacific J Ophthalmol 10(3):307–316
Schoenherr JR, Abbas R, Michael K, Rivas P, Anderson TD (2023) Designing AI using a human-centered approach: explainability and accuracy toward trustworthiness. IEEE Trans Technol Soc 4(1):9–23
Jeremiah JJ, Abbey SJ, Booth CA, Kashyap A (2021) Results of application of artificial neural networks in predicting geo-mechanical properties of stabilised clays—a review. Geotechnics 1(1):147–171
Jong S, Ong D, Oh E (2021) State-of-the-art review of geotechnical-driven artificial intelligence techniques in underground soil–structure interaction. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 113:103946
Zhang W, Gu X, Hong L, Han L, Wang L (2023) Comprehensive review of machine learning in geotechnical reliability analysis: algorithms, applications and further challenges. Appl Soft Comput 136:110066
Agwu OE, Akpabio JU, Alabi SB, Dosunmu A (2018) Artificial intelligence techniques and their applications in drilling fluid engineering: a review. J Pet Sci Eng 167:300–315
Gao W (2018) A comprehensive review on identification of the geomaterial constitutive model using the computational intelligence method. Adv Eng Inform 38:420–440
Moayedi H, Mosallanezhad M, Rashid ASA, Jusoh WAW, Muazu MA (2020) A systematic review and meta-analysis of artificial neural network application in geotechnical engineering: theory and applications. Neural Comput Appl 32:495–518
Zhang W, Li H, Li Y, Liu H, Chen Y, Ding X (2021) Application of deep learning algorithms in geotechnical engineering: a short critical review. Artif Intell Rev 54:1–41
Reddy YR (2017) Applications of artificial intelligence and machine learning in geotechnical engineering. Int J Emerg Technol Innov Res 2349–5162
Kuang L et al (2021) Application and development trend of artificial intelligence in petroleum exploration and development. Pet Explor Dev 48(1):1–14
Hussain AA, Al-Turjman F (2021) Artificial intelligence and blockchain: a review. Trans Emerg Telecommun Technol 32(9):e4268
Pham ST, Sampson PM (2022) The development of artificial intelligence in education: a review in context. J Comput Assist Learn 38(5):1408–1421
Khan MA, Khojah M, Vivek V (2022) Artificial intelligence and big data: the advent of new pedagogy in the adaptive e-learning system in the higher educational institutions of Saudi Arabia. Educ Res Int 2022:1–10
Kumar K, Thakur GSM (2012) Advanced applications of neural networks and artificial intelligence: a review. Int J Inf Technol Comput Sci 4(6):57
Dwivedi YK et al (2021) Artificial intelligence (AI): multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. Int J Inf Manag 57:101994
Khogali HO, Mekid S (2023) The blended future of automation and AI: examining some long-term societal and ethical impact features. Technol Soc 73:102232
Horáková T, Houška M, Dömeová L (2017) Classification of the educational texts styles with the methods of artificial intelligence. J Balt Sci Educ 16(3):324
Lawler RW, Rushby N (2013) An interview with Robert Lawler. Br J Edu Technol 44(1):20–30
Zurada J (1992) Introduction to artificial neural systems. West Publishing Co., Eagan
Zhou Z-H (2021) Machine learning. Springer, Singapore
Kelleher JD (2019) Deep learning. MIT Press, Cambridge
Zhou Z-H, Zhou Z-H (2021) Ensemble learning. Springer, Singapore
Kurani A, Doshi P, Vakharia A, Shah M (2023) A comprehensive comparative study of artificial neural network (ANN) and support vector machines (SVM) on stock forecasting. Ann Data Sci 10(1):183–208
Wazirali R, Yaghoubi E, Abujazar MSS, Ahmad R, Vakili AH (2023) State-of-the-art review on energy and load forecasting in microgrids using artificial neural networks, machine learning, and deep learning techniques. Electr Power Syst Res 225:109792
Fitz S, Romero P (2021) Neural networks and deep learning: a paradigm shift in information processing, machine learning, and artificial intelligence. In: Rau R, Wardrop R, Zingales L (eds) The Palgrave handbook of technological finance. Springer, Cham, pp 589–654
Wang S, Cheng TH, Lim MH (2022) A hierarchical taxonomic survey of spiking neural networks. Memet Comput 14(3):335–354
Kalinić Z, Marinković V, Kalinić L, Liébana-Cabanillas F (2021) Neural network modeling of consumer satisfaction in mobile commerce: an empirical analysis. Expert Syst Appl 175:114803
Uzair M, Jamil N (2020) Effects of hidden layers on the efficiency of neural networks. In: 2020 IEEE 23rd international multitopic conference (INMIC). IEEE, pp 1–6
Dey P (2022) Artificial neural network in diagnostic cytology. CytoJournal 19:27
Shah A et al (2023) A comprehensive study on skin cancer detection using artificial neural network (ANN) and convolutional neural network (CNN). Clin eHealth 6:76
Gholami V, Sahour H (2022) Simulation of rainfall-runoff process using an artificial neural network (ANN) and field plots data. Theor Appl Climatol 147:1–12
Kim D, Hur J (2018) Short-term probabilistic forecasting of wind energy resources using the enhanced ensemble method. Energy 157:211–226
Li H, Zhang L (2020) A bilevel learning model and algorithm for self-organizing feed-forward neural networks for pattern classification. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst 32(11):4901–4915
Abdolrasol MG et al (2021) Artificial neural networks based optimization techniques: a review. Electronics 10(21):2689
Abba SI et al (2020) Implementation of data intelligence models coupled with ensemble machine learning for prediction of water quality index. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:41524–41539
Pozzi I, Bohte S, Roelfsema P (2020) Attention-gated brain propagation: how the brain can implement reward-based error backpropagation. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 33:2516–2526
Ojo S, Imoize A, Alienyi D (2021) Radial basis function neural network path loss prediction model for LTE networks in multitransmitter signal propagation environments. Int J Commun Syst 34(3):e4680
Heidari A, Navimipour NJ, Unal M (2023) A secure intrusion detection platform using blockchain and radial basis function neural networks for internet of drones. IEEE Internet Things J 10:8445
Liu G, Hou Z (2020) Cooperative adaptive iterative learning fault-tolerant control scheme for multiple subway trains. IEEE Trans Cybernet 52(2):1098–1111
Fath AH, Madanifar F, Abbasi M (2020) Implementation of multilayer perceptron (MLP) and radial basis function (RBF) neural networks to predict solution gas–oil ratio of crude oil systems. Petroleum 6(1):80–91
Shen Y, Pan X, Zheng Z, Gerstoft P (2020) Matched-field geoacoustic inversion based on radial basis function neural network. J Acoust Soc Am 148(5):3279–3290
Quan H, Dong S, Zhao D, Li H, Geng J, Liu H (2023) Generic AI models for mass transfer coefficient prediction in amine-based CO2 absorber, Part II: RBFNN and RF model. AIChE J 69(1):e17904
Pérez-Rodríguez P, Flores-Galarza S, Vaquera-Huerta H, del Valle-Paniagua DH, Montesinos-López OA, Crossa J (2020) Genome-based prediction of Bayesian linear and non-linear regression models for ordinal data. Plant Genome 13(2):e20021
Li J et al (2022) Probability prediction approach of fatigue failure for the subsea wellhead using bayesian regularization artificial neural network. J Mar Sci Eng 10(11):1627
Sun W, Paiva AR, Xu P, Sundaram A, Braatz RD (2020) Fault detection and identification using Bayesian recurrent neural networks. Comput Chem Eng 141:106991
Emayavaramban G et al (2021) SEMG based classification of hand gestures using artificial neural network. Mater Today Proc 37:2591–2598
Dou M, Qin C, Li G, Wang C (2020) Research on calculation method of free flow discharge based on artificial neural network and regression analysis. Flow Meas Instrum 72:101707
Jafari M, Shahsavar A (2020) The application of artificial neural networks in modeling and predicting the effects of melatonin on morphological responses of citrus to drought stress. PLoS ONE 15(10):e0240427
Zheng X et al (2022) Comparison of GRNN and RF algorithms for predicting heat transfer coefficient in heat exchange channels with bulges. Appl Therm Eng 217:119263
Salgado C, Dam R, Salgado W, Werneck R, Pereira C, Schirru R (2020) The comparison of different multilayer perceptron and general regression neural networks for volume fraction prediction using MCNPX code. Appl Radiat Isot 162:109170
Baioletti M, Di Bari G, Milani A, Poggioni V (2020) Differential evolution for neural networks optimization. Mathematics 8(1):69
Haritha K, Shailesh S, Judy M, Ravichandran K, Krishankumar R, Gandomi AH (2023) A novel neural network model with distributed evolutionary approach for big data classification. Sci Rep 13(1):11052
Khan MS, Ivoke J, Nobahar M, Amini F (2022) Artificial neural network (ANN) based soil temperature model of highly plastic clay. Geomech Geoeng 17(4):1230–1246
Pawar A, Jolly A, Pandey V, Chaurasiya PK, Verma TN, Meshram K (2023) Artificial intelligence algorithms for prediction of cyclic stress ratio of soil for environment conservation. Environ Chall 12:100730
Mohammadi M, Fatemi Aghda SM, Talkhablou M, Cheshomi A (2022) Prediction of the shear strength parameters from easily-available soil properties by means of multivariate regression and artificial neural network methods. Geomech Geoeng 17(2):442–454
Özdemir E (2022) A new predictive model for uniaxial compressive strength of rock using machine learning method: artificial intelligence-based age-layered population structure genetic programming (ALPS-GP). Arab J Sci Eng 47(1):629–639
Aouadj A, Bouafia A (2022) CPT-based method using hybrid artificial neural network and mathematical model to predict the load-settlement behaviour of shallow foundations. Geomech Geoeng 17(1):321–333
Sasmal SK, Behera RN (2022) Transient settlement estimation of shallow foundation under eccentrically inclined static and cyclic load on granular soil using artificial intelligence techniques. Geomech Geoeng 18:1–17
Zhang N, Zhou A, Pan Y, Shen S-L (2021) Measurement and prediction of tunnelling-induced ground settlement in karst region by using expanding deep learning method. Measurement 183:109700
Bardhan A, Samui P (2022) Probabilistic slope stability analysis of Heavy-haul freight corridor using a hybrid machine learning paradigm. Transp Geotech 37:100815
Gao W, Raftari M, Rashid ASA, Mu’azu MA, Jusoh WAW (2020) A predictive model based on an optimized ANN combined with ICA for predicting the stability of slopes. Eng Comput 36:325–344
Ahangari Nanehkaran Y et al (2022) Application of machine learning techniques for the estimation of the safety factor in slope stability analysis. Water 14(22):3743
Broccardo M et al (2020) Induced seismicity risk analysis of the hydraulic stimulation of a geothermal well on Geldinganes, Iceland. Nat Hazard 20(6):1573–1593
Convertito V, Ebrahimian H, Amoroso O, Jalayer F, De Matteis R, Capuano P (2021) Time-dependent seismic hazard analysis for induced seismicity: the case of St Gallen (Switzerland), geothermal field. Energies 14(10):2747
Cahyadi TA, Syihab Z, Widodo LE, Notosiswoyo S, Widijanto E (2021) Analysis of hydraulic conductivity of fractured groundwater flow media using artificial neural network back propagation. Neural Comput Appl 33:159–179
Di Salvo C (2022) Improving results of existing groundwater numerical models using machine learning techniques: a review. Water 14(15):2307
Erharter GH, Marcher T, Reinhold C (2020) Artificial neural network based online rockmass behavior classification of TBM data. In: Information technology in geo-engineering: proceedings of the 3rd international conference (ICITG), Guimarães, Portugal 3. Springer, pp 178–188
Ling J, Li X, Li H, Shen Y, Rui Y, Zhu H (2022) Data acquisition-interpretation-aggregation for dynamic design of rock tunnel support. Autom Constr 143:104577
Liu J, Jiang Y, Han W, Sakaguchi O (2021) Optimized ANN model for predicting rock mass quality ahead of tunnel face using measure-while-drilling data. Bull Eng Geol Environ 80:2283–2305
Shahri AA, Shan C, Zäll E, Larsson S (2021) Spatial distribution modeling of subsurface bedrock using a developed automated intelligence deep learning procedure: a case study in Sweden. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 13(6):1300–1310
Reddy YR (2022) Reducing the risks in geotechnical engineering using artificial intelligence techniques. Int J Emerg Technol Innov Res 2349–5162
Nanehkaran YA et al (2023) Riverside landslide susceptibility overview: leveraging artificial neural networks and machine learning in accordance with the United Nations (UN) sustainable development goals. Water 15(15):2707
Onyelowe KC, Aneke FI, Onyia ME, Ebid AM, Usungedo T (2022) AI (ANN, GP, and EPR)-based predictive models of bulk density, linear-volumetric shrinkage & desiccation cracking of HSDA-treated black cotton soil for sustainable subgrade. Geomech Geoeng 18:1–20
Baghbani A, Costa S, Faradonbeh RS, Soltani A, Baghbani H (2023) Modeling the effects of particle shape on damping ratio of dry sand by simple shear testing and artificial intelligence. Appl Sci 13(7):4363
Liu L, Moayedi H, Rashid ASA, Rahman SSA, Nguyen H (2020) Optimizing an ANN model with genetic algorithm (GA) predicting load-settlement behaviours of eco-friendly raft-pile foundation (ERP) system. Eng Comput 36:421–433
Li J et al (2022) Facilitate geoengineering and completions with machine learning methods: case study from ordos tight oil field. In: Abu Dhabi international petroleum exhibition and conference. SPE, p D021S062R003
Liu S, Chang R, Zuo J, Webber RJ, Xiong F, Dong N (2021) Application of artificial neural networks in construction management: current status and future directions. Appl Sci 11(20):9616
Armaghani DJ, Mirzaei F, Shariati M, Trung NT, Shariati M, Trnavac D (2020) Hybrid ANN-based techniques in predicting cohesion of sandy-soil combined with fiber. Geomech Eng 20(3):191–205
Koopialipoor M, Fahimifar A, Ghaleini EN, Momenzadeh M, Armaghani DJ (2020) Development of a new hybrid ANN for solving a geotechnical problem related to tunnel boring machine performance. Eng Comput 36:345–357
Pham V-N, Do H-D, Oh E, Ong DE (2021) Prediction of unconfined compressive strength of cement-stabilized sandy soil in Vietnam using artificial neural networks (ANNs) model. Int J Geotech Eng 15(9):1177–1187
Zhang P, Yin Z-Y, Jin Y-F (2022) Bayesian neural network-based uncertainty modelling: application to soil compressibility and undrained shear strength prediction. Can Geotech J 59(4):546–557
Asare EN, Affam M, Ziggah YY (2023) A hybrid intelligent prediction model of autoencoder neural network and multivariate adaptive regression spline for uniaxial compressive strength of rocks. Model Earth Syst Environ 9:1–17
Narmandakh D, Butscher C, Ardejani FD, Yang H, Nagel T, Taherdangkoo R (2023) The use of feed-forward and cascade-forward neural networks to determine swelling potential of clayey soils. Comput Geotech 157:105319
Liu Y, Yang Z, Li X (2022) Adaptive ensemble learning of radial basis functions for efficient geotechnical reliability analysis. Comput Geotech 146:104753
Zhang L, Du Y-H, Yang X-J, Fan H-H (2022) Application of artificial neural network in predicting the dispersibility of soil. Iran J Sci Technol Trans Civ Eng 46(3):2315–2324
Williams CG, Ojuri OO (2021) Predictive modelling of soils’ hydraulic conductivity using artificial neural network and multiple linear regression. SN Appl Sci 3:1–13
Vakili AH, Davoodi S, Arab A, Selamat MB (2015) Use of artificial neural network in predicting permeability of dispersive clay treated with lime and pozzolan. IJSRES 3(1):23–37
Shaik S, Krishna KSR, Abbas M, Ahmed M, Mavaluru D (2019) Applying several soft computing techniques for prediction of bearing capacity of driven piles. Eng Comput 35:1463–1474
Hong C, Luo G, Chen W (2022) Safety analysis of a deep foundation ditch using deep learning methods. Gondwana Res 123:16
Bunawan AR, Momeni E, Armaghani DJ, Rashid ASA (2018) Experimental and intelligent techniques to estimate bearing capacity of cohesive soft soils reinforced with soil–cement columns. Measurement 124:529–538
Moayedi H, Gör M, Khari M, Foong LK, Bahiraei M, Bui DT (2020) Hybridizing four wise neural-metaheuristic paradigms in predicting soil shear strength. Measurement 156:107576
Jaafari A et al (2019) Meta optimization of an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system with grey wolf optimizer and biogeography-based optimization algorithms for spatial prediction of landslide susceptibility. CATENA 175:430–445
Goudjil K, Arabet L (2021) Assessment of deflection of pile implanted on slope by artificial neural network. Neural Comput Appl 33(4):1091–1101
Arabet L, Hidjeb M, Belaabed F (2022) A comparative study of reinforced soil shear strength prediction by the analytical approach and artificial neural networks. Eng Technol Appl Sci Res 12(6):9795–9801
Ebid AM (2021) 35 Years of (AI) in geotechnical engineering: state of the art. Geotech Geol Eng 39(2):637–690
Hamerly G, Elkan C (2002) Alternatives to the k-means algorithm that find better clusterings. In: Proceedings of the eleventh international conference on Information and knowledge management, pp 600–607
Mahesh B (2020) Machine learning algorithms—a review. Int J Sci Res 9(1):381–386
An Q, Rahman S, Zhou J, Kang JJ (2023) A comprehensive review on machine learning in healthcare industry: classification, restrictions, opportunities and challenges. Sensors 23(9):4178
Sarker IH (2021) Machine learning: algorithms, real-world applications and research directions. SN Comput Sci 2(3):160
Coronnello C, Francipane MG (2022) Moving towards induced pluripotent stem cell-based therapies with artificial intelligence and machine learning. Stem Cell Rev Rep 18:1–11
Hsu B-M (2020) Comparison of supervised classification models on textual data. Mathematics 8(5):851
Zhang S, May D, Gül M, Musilek P (2022) Reinforcement learning-driven local transactive energy market for distributed energy resources. Energy and AI 8:100150
Lu T, Schuurmans D, Boutilier C (2018) Non-delusional Q-learning and value-iteration. In: Advances in neural information processing systems, vol 31
Rashid T, Samvelyan M, De Witt CS, Farquhar G, Foerster J, Whiteson S (2020) Monotonic value function factorisation for deep multi-agent reinforcement learning. J Mach Learn Res 21(1):7234–7284
Marchesini E, Farinelli A (2021) Centralizing state-values in dueling networks for multi-robot reinforcement learning mapless navigation. In: 2021 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS). IEEE, pp 4583–4588
Pope AP et al (2021) Hierarchical reinforcement learning for air-to-air combat. In: 2021 international conference on unmanned aircraft systems (ICUAS). IEEE, pp 275–284
Sharma K, Singh B, Herman E, Regine R, Rajest SS, Mishra VP (2021) Maximum information measure policies in reinforcement learning with deep energy-based model. In: 2021 International conference on computational intelligence and knowledge economy (ICCIKE). IEEE, pp 19–24
Wang L, Zhang W, He X, Zha H (2018) Supervised reinforcement learning with recurrent neural network for dynamic treatment recommendation. In: Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery & data mining, pp 2447–2456
Russek EM, Momennejad I, Botvinick MM, Gershman SJ, Daw ND (2017) Predictive representations can link model-based reinforcement learning to model-free mechanisms. PLoS Comput Biol 13(9):e1005768
Polydoros AS, Nalpantidis L (2017) Survey of model-based reinforcement learning: applications on robotics. J Intell Rob Syst 86(2):153–173
Ayoub A, Jia Z, Szepesvari C, Wang M, Yang L (2020) Model-based reinforcement learning with value-targeted regression. In: International conference on machine learning. PMLR, pp 463–474
Alghanmi N, Alotaibi R, Buhari SM (2022) Machine learning approaches for anomaly detection in IoT: an overview and future research directions. Wireless Pers Commun 122(3):2309–2324
Usmani UA, Happonen A, Watada J (2022) A review of unsupervised machine learning frameworks for anomaly detection in industrial applications. In: Science and information conference. Springer, pp 158–189
Nassif AB, Talib MA, Nasir Q, Dakalbab FM (2021) Machine learning for anomaly detection: a systematic review. IEEE Access 9:78658–78700
Yuan G, Sun P, Zhao J, Li D, Wang C (2017) A review of moving object trajectory clustering algorithms. Artif Intell Rev 47:123–144
Kassambara A (2017) Practical guide to cluster analysis in R: unsupervised machine learning. Sthda
Zebari R, Abdulazeez A, Zeebaree D, Zebari D, Saeed J (2020) A comprehensive review of dimensionality reduction techniques for feature selection and feature extraction. J Appl Sci Technol Trends 1(2):56–70
Anowar F, Sadaoui S, Selim B (2021) Conceptual and empirical comparison of dimensionality reduction algorithms (PCA, KPCA, LDA, MDS, SVD, LLE, ISOMAP, LE, ICA, t-SNE). Comput Sci Rev 40:100378
Sharma N, Saroha K (2015) Study of dimension reduction methodologies in data mining. In: International conference on computing, communication & automation. IEEE, pp 133–137
Gisbrecht A, Hammer B (2015) Data visualization by nonlinear dimensionality reduction. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Data Min Knowl Discov 5(2):51–73
Nachman B, Shih D (2020) Anomaly detection with density estimation. Phys Rev D 101(7):075042
Carleo G et al (2019) Machine learning and the physical sciences. Rev Mod Phys 91(4):045002
Wang Z, Scott DW (2019) Nonparametric density estimation for high-dimensional data—algorithms and applications. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Comput Stat 11(4):e1461
Lavin A, Ahmad S (2015) Evaluating real-time anomaly detection algorithms—the Numenta anomaly benchmark. In 2015 IEEE 14th international conference on machine learning and applications (ICMLA). IEEE, pp 38–44
Beggel L, Pfeiffer M, Bischl B (2020) Robust anomaly detection in images using adversarial autoencoders. In: Machine learning and knowledge discovery in databases: European conference, ECML PKDD 2019, Würzburg, Germany, September 16–20, 2019, Proceedings, Part I. Springer, pp 206–222
Chowdhury A, Bose A, Zhou S, Woodruff DP, Drineas P (2022) A Fast, provably accurate approximation algorithm for sparse principal component analysis reveals human genetic variation across the world. In: International conference on research in computational molecular biology. Springer, pp 86–106
Weaving D, Beggs C, Dalton-Barron N, Jones B, Abt G (2019) Visualizing the complexity of the athlete-monitoring cycle through principal-component analysis. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 14(9):1304–1310
Jolliffe IT, Cadima J (2016) Principal component analysis: a review and recent developments. Philos Trans R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 374(2065):20150202
Cohn R, Holm E (2021) Unsupervised machine learning via transfer learning and k-means clustering to classify materials image data. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 10(2):231–244
Sinaga KP, Yang M-S (2020) Unsupervised K-means clustering algorithm. IEEE Access 8:80716–80727
Aytaç E (2020) Unsupervised learning approach in defining the similarity of catchments: Hydrological response unit based k-means clustering, a demonstration on Western Black Sea Region of Turkey. Int Soil Water Conserv Res 8(3):321–331
Malik A, Tuckfield B (2019) Applied unsupervised learning with R: uncover hidden relationships and patterns with k-means clustering, hierarchical clustering, and PCA. Packt Publishing Ltd, Birmingham
Nouraei H, Nouraei H, Rabkin SW (2022) Comparison of unsupervised machine learning approaches for cluster analysis to define subgroups of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction with different outcomes. Bioengineering 9(4):175
Vakeel A, Vantari NR, Reddy SN, Muthyapu R, Chavan A (2022) Machine learning models for predicting and clustering customer churn based on boosting algorithms and Gaussian mixture model. In: 2022 International conference for advancement in technology (ICONAT). IEEE, pp 1–5
Ma Y, Hao Y (2020) Antenna classification using Gaussian mixture models (GMM) and machine learning. IEEE Open J Antennas Propag 1:320–328
Wang Z, Ritou M, Da Cunha C, Furet B (2020) Contextual classification for smart machining based on unsupervised machine learning by Gaussian mixture model. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 33(10–11):1042–1054
Goldstein A, Fink L, Meitin A, Bohadana S, Lutenberg O, Ravid G (2018) Applying machine learning on sensor data for irrigation recommendations: revealing the agronomist’s tacit knowledge. Precision Agric 19:421–444
Greener JG, Kandathil SM, Moffat L, Jones DT (2022) A guide to machine learning for biologists. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 23(1):40–55
Mühlbacher T, Piringer H (2013) A partition-based framework for building and validating regression models. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Gr 19(12):1962–1971
Ghavamipour AR, Turkmen F, Jiang X (2022) Privacy-preserving logistic regression with secret sharing. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 22(1):1–11
Lydersen S (2022) Logistic regression with more than two categories. Tidsskrift for Den Norske Legeforening
Mongwe WT, Mbuvha R, Marwala T (2021) Bayesian inference of local government audit outcomes. PLoS ONE 16(12):e0261245
Ribeiro M, Nunes I, Castro L, Costa-Santos C, Henriques TS (2023) Machine learning models based on clinical indices and cardiotocographic features for discriminating asphyxia fetuses—Porto retrospective intrapartum study. Front Public Health 11:1099263
Pellegrino E et al (2021) Machine learning random forest for predicting oncosomatic variant NGS analysis. Sci Rep 11(1):21820
Mucesh S et al (2021) A machine learning approach to galaxy properties: joint redshift–stellar mass probability distributions with Random Forest. Mon Not R Astron Soc 502(2):2770–2786
Bansal M, Goyal A, Choudhary A (2022) A comparative analysis of K-nearest neighbor, genetic, support vector machine, decision tree, and long short term memory algorithms in machine learning. Decis Anal J 3:100071
Bennett-Lenane H, Griffin BT, O’Shea JP (2022) Machine learning methods for prediction of food effects on bioavailability: a comparison of support vector machines and artificial neural networks. Eur J Pharm Sci 168:106018
Tehrani FS, Santinelli G, Herrera Herrera M (2021) Multi-regional landslide detection using combined unsupervised and supervised machine learning. Geomat Natl Hazards Risk 12(1):1015–1038
Tehrani FS, Calvello M, Liu Z, Zhang L, Lacasse S (2022) Machine learning and landslide studies: recent advances and applications. Nat Hazards 114(2):1197–1245
Egbueri JC (2023) Use of joint supervised machine learning algorithms in assessing the geotechnical peculiarities of erodible tropical soils from southeastern Nigeria. Geomech Geoeng 18(1):16–33
Ma J et al (2022) Machine learning models for slope stability classification of circular mode failure: an updated database and automated machine learning (AutoML) approach. Sensors 22(23):9166
Lin Y, Zhou K, Li J (2018) Prediction of slope stability using four supervised learning methods. IEEE Access 6:31169–31179
Nanehkaran YA et al (2023) Comparative analysis for slope stability by using machine learning methods. Appl Sci 13(3):1555
Cannistraci CV, Ravasi T, Montevecchi FM, Ideker T, Alessio M (2010) Nonlinear dimension reduction and clustering by Minimum Curvilinearity unfold neuropathic pain and tissue embryological classes. Bioinformatics 26(18):i531–i539
Wang L (2016) Discovering phase transitions with unsupervised learning. Phys Rev B 94(19):195105
Soranzo E, Guardiani C, Wu W (2023) Reinforcement learning for the face support pressure of tunnel boring machines. Geosciences 13(3):82
Erharter GH, Hansen TF, Liu Z, Marcher T (2021) Reinforcement learning based process optimization and strategy development in conventional tunneling. Autom Constr 127:103701
Eyo E, Abbey S (2022) Multiclass stand-alone and ensemble machine learning algorithms utilised to classify soils based on their physico-chemical characteristics. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 14(2):603–615
Shi C, Wang Y (2021) Non-parametric machine learning methods for interpolation of spatially varying non-stationary and non-Gaussian geotechnical properties. Geosci Front 12(1):339–350
Mitelman A, Yang B, Urlainis A, Elmo D (2023) Coupling geotechnical numerical analysis with machine learning for observational method projects. Geosciences 13(7):196
Mali N, Dutt V, Uday K (2021) Determining the geotechnical slope failure factors via ensemble and individual machine learning techniques: a case study in Mandi, India. Front Earth Sci 9:701837
Tse KC, Chan AC, Yau KK (2017) Machine learning study on man-made features in hong kong—a data driven approach to feature classification.
Santos AEM, Lana MS, Pereira TM (2022) Evaluation of machine learning methods for rock mass classification. Neural Comput Appl 34(6):4633–4642
Rahman T, Sarkar K (2021) Lithological control on the estimation of uniaxial compressive strength by the P-wave velocity using supervised and unsupervised learning. Rock Mech Rock Eng 54:3175–3191
Hudson KS, Ulmer KJ, Zimmaro P, Kramer SL, Stewart JP, Brandenberg SJ (2023) Unsupervised machine learning for detecting soil layer boundaries from cone penetration test data. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 52:3201
Chou J-S, Truong D-N, Le T-L, Truong TTH (2021) Bio-inspired optimization of weighted-feature machine learning for strength property prediction of fiber-reinforced soil. Expert Syst Appl 180:115042
Jafarzadeh A, Pal M, Servati M, FazeliFard M, Ghorbani M (2016) Comparative analysis of support vector machine and artificial neural network models for soil cation exchange capacity prediction. Int J Environ Sci Technol 13:87–96
Pal SC et al (2020) Ensemble of machine-learning methods for predicting gully erosion susceptibility. Remote Sens 12(22):3675
Eyo E, Abbey S (2021) Machine learning regression and classification algorithms utilised for strength prediction of OPC/by-product materials improved soils. Constr Build Mater 284:122817
Onyelowe KC, Mahesh CB, Srikanth B, Nwa-David C, Obimba-Wogu J, Shakeri J (2021) Support vector machine (SVM) prediction of coefficients of curvature and uniformity of hybrid cement modified unsaturated soil with NQF inclusion. Clean Eng Technol 5:100290
Manzouri F, Zare M, Shojaei S (2022) Exploring the potential of spatial artificial neural network in estimating topsoil salinity changes of in arid lands. Spat Inf Res 30(4):551–562
Tahmasebi P, Kamrava S, Bai T, Sahimi M (2020) Machine learning in geo-and environmental sciences: from small to large scale. Adv Water Resour 142:103619
Shen W, Li Y, Liu Y, Han J, Wang J, Yuan X (2021) Entity linking meets deep learning: techniques and solutions. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 35:2556
Mathew A, Amudha P, Sivakumari S (2021) Deep learning techniques: an overview. In: Advanced machine learning technologies and applications: proceedings of AMLTA 2020, pp 599–608
Xu W, He J, Shu Y, Zheng H (2020) Advances in convolutional neural networks. IntechOpen, London
Vamosi S, Reutterer T, Platzer M (2022) A deep recurrent neural network approach to learn sequence similarities for user-identification. Decis Support Syst 155:113718
Chai R et al (2017) Improving EEG-based driver fatigue classification using sparse-deep belief networks. Front Neurosci 11:103
Comşa I-M, Versari L, Fischbacher T, Alakuijala J (2021) Spiking autoencoders with temporal coding. Front Neurosci 15:712667
Creswell A, Bharath AA (2018) Denoising adversarial autoencoders. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst 30(4):968–984
Li H, Parikh NA, He L (2018) A novel transfer learning approach to enhance deep neural network classification of brain functional connectomes. Front Neurosci 12:491
Azarafza M, Hajialilue Bonab M, Derakhshani R (2022) A deep learning method for the prediction of the index mechanical properties and strength parameters of marlstone. Materials 15(19):6899
Guan Q, Yang Z, Guo N, Hu Z (2023) Finite element geotechnical analysis incorporating deep learning-based soil model. Comput Geotech 154:105120
Xu Z, Ma W, Lin P, Hua Y (2022) Deep learning of rock microscopic images for intelligent lithology identification: neural network comparison and selection. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 14(4):1140–1152
Bekele YW (2021) Physics-informed deep learning for one-dimensional consolidation. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 13(2):420–430
Liu M, Liao S, Yang Y, Men Y, He J, Huang Y (2021) Tunnel boring machine vibration-based deep learning for the ground identification of working faces. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 13(6):1340–1357
Liu Z, Hu S, Sun Y, Azmoon B (2022) An exploratory investigation into image-data-driven deep learning for stability analysis of geosystems. Geotech Geol Eng 40(2):735–750
Zhang Z, Pan Q, Yang Z, Yang X (2023) Physics-informed deep learning method for predicting tunnelling-induced ground deformations. Acta Geotech 18:1–16
Campos Montero F (2023) Deep learning for geotechnical engineering: the effectiveness of generative adversarial networks in subsoil schematization.
Abbaszadeh Shahri A, Shan C, Larsson S (2022) A novel approach to uncertainty quantification in groundwater table modeling by automated predictive deep learning. Natl Resour Res 31(3):1351–1373
Nanehkaran Y, Licai Z, Chen J, Azarafza M, Yimin M (2022) Application of artificial neural networks and geographic information system to provide hazard susceptibility maps for rockfall failures. Environ Earth Sci 81(19):475
Kikuchi T, Sakita K, Nishiyama S, Takahashi K (2023) Landslide susceptibility mapping using automatically constructed CNN architectures with pre-slide topographic DEM of deep-seated catastrophic landslides caused by Typhoon Talas. Nat Hazards 117(1):339–364
Zhong Z, Sun AY, Wu X (2020) Inversion of time-lapse seismic reservoir monitoring data using CycleGAN: a deep learning-based approach for estimating dynamic reservoir property changes. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 125(3):e2019JB018408
Abbaszadeh Shahri A, Chunling S, Larsson S (2023) A hybrid ensemble-based automated deep learning approach to generate 3D geo-models and uncertainty analysis. Eng Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-023-01852-5
Soga K, Schooling J (2016) Infrastructure sensing. Interface focus 6(4):20160023
Shahin MA (2016) State-of-the-art review of some artificial intelligence applications in pile foundations. Geosci Front 7(1):33–44
Kardani N, Aminpour M, Raja MNA, Kumar G, Bardhan A, Nazem M (2022) Prediction of the resilient modulus of compacted subgrade soils using ensemble machine learning methods. Transp Geotech 36:100827
Rasol M et al (2022) GPR monitoring for road transport infrastructure: a systematic review and machine learning insights. Constr Build Mater 324:126686
Yang W, Xia K, Fan S (2023) Oil logging reservoir recognition based on TCN and SA-BiLSTM deep learning method. Eng Appl Artif Intell 121:105950
Yao P, Yu Z, Zhang Y, Xu T (2023) Application of machine learning in carbon capture and storage: An in-depth insight from the perspective of geoscience. Fuel 333:126296
Kasravi J, Safarzadeh MA, Hashemi A (2017) A population-feedback control based algorithm for well trajectory optimization using proxy model. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 9(2):281–290
Zhu D et al (2023) Deep learning approach of drilling decision for subhorizontal drain geosteering based on APC-LSTM model. SPE Drill Complet 38(01):1–17
Sagi O, Rokach L (2018) Ensemble learning: a survey. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Data Min Knowl Discov 8(4):e1249
Ngo G, Beard R, Chandra R (2022) Evolutionary bagging for ensemble learning. Neurocomputing 510:1–14
Kshatri SS, Singh D, Narain B, Bhatia S, Quasim MT, Sinha GR (2021) An empirical analysis of machine learning algorithms for crime prediction using stacked generalization: an ensemble approach. IEEE Access 9:67488–67500
Ullah I, Liu K, Yamamoto T, Zahid M, Jamal A (2021) Electric vehicle energy consumption prediction using stacked generalization: an ensemble learning approach. Int J Green Energy 18(9):896–909
Kumari P, Toshniwal D (2021) Extreme gradient boosting and deep neural network based ensemble learning approach to forecast hourly solar irradiance. J Clean Prod 279:123285
Kazmaier J, Van Vuuren JH (2022) The power of ensemble learning in sentiment analysis. Expert Syst Appl 187:115819
Wang G, Song Q, Zhu X (2021) Ensemble learning based classification algorithm recommendation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.05993
Bose S et al (2021) An ensemble machine learning model based on multiple filtering and supervised attribute clustering algorithm for classifying cancer samples. PeerJ Comput Sci 7:e671
Clark RD, Liang W, Lee AC, Lawless MS, Fraczkiewicz R, Waldman M (2014) Using beta binomials to estimate classification uncertainty for ensemble models. J Cheminform 6(1):1–19
Inamullah, Hassan S, Alrajeh NA, Mohammed EA, Khan S (2023) Data diversity in convolutional neural network based ensemble model for diabetic retinopathy. Biomimetics 8(2):187
Knafou J et al (2023) Ensemble of deep learning language models to support the creation of living systematic reviews for the COVID-19 literature. Syst Rev 12(1):94
Juraev F, El-Sappagh S, Abdukhamidov E, Ali F, Abuhmed T (2022) Multilayer dynamic ensemble model for intensive care unit mortality prediction of neonate patients. J Biomed Inform 135:104216
Perales-Gonzalez C, Fernandez-Navarro F, Carbonero-Ruz M, Perez-Rodriguez J (2021) Global negative correlation learning: a unified framework for global optimization of ensemble models. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst 33(8):4031–4042
Harrou F, Saidi A, Sun Y (2019) Wind power prediction using bootstrap aggregating trees approach to enabling sustainable wind power integration in a smart grid. Energy Convers Manag 201:112077
Xie J, Zhang J, Xie X, Bi Z, Li Z (2019) Ensemble of bagged regression trees for concrete dam deformation predicting. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 376(1):012040
Modi S, Bhattacharya J, Basak P (2021) Convolutional neural network–bagged decision tree: a hybrid approach to reduce electric vehicle’s driver’s range anxiety by estimating energy consumption in real-time. Soft Comput 25:2399–2416
Simidjievski N, Todorovski L, Džeroski S (2016) Modeling dynamic systems with efficient ensembles of process-based models. PLoS ONE 11(4):e0153507
Bian X et al (2018) Robust boosting neural networks with random weights for multivariate calibration of complex samples. Anal Chim Acta 1009:20–26
Miao Q, Cao Y, Xia G, Gong M, Liu J, Song J (2015) RBoost: label noise-robust boosting algorithm based on a nonconvex loss function and the numerically stable base learners. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst 27(11):2216–2228
Walker KW, Jiang Z (2019) Application of adaptive boosting (AdaBoost) in demand-driven acquisition (DDA) prediction: a machine-learning approach. J Acad Librariansh 45(3):203–212
Sevinç E (2022) An empowered AdaBoost algorithm implementation: a COVID-19 dataset study. Comput Ind Eng 165:107912
Kim C, Park T (2022) Predicting determinants of lifelong learning intention using Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM) with grid search. Sustainability 14(9):5256
Sunaryono D, Sarno R, Siswantoro J (2022) Gradient boosting machines fusion for automatic epilepsy detection from EEG signals based on wavelet features. J King Saud Univ Comput Inf Sci 34(10):9591–9607
Chen H, Shen Z, Wang L, Qi C, Tian Y (2022) Prediction of undrained failure envelopes of skirted circular foundations using gradient boosting machine algorithm. Ocean Eng 258:111767
Kavzoglu T, Teke A (2022) Predictive performances of ensemble machine learning algorithms in landslide susceptibility mapping using random forest, extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) and natural gradient boosting (NGBoost). Arab J Sci Eng 47(6):7367–7385
Ching PML, Zou X, Wu D, So RHY, Chen G (2022) Development of a wide-range soft sensor for predicting wastewater BOD5 using an eXtreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) machine. Environ Res 210:112953
He W et al (2022) Rapid and uninvasive characterization of bananas by hyperspectral imaging with extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost). Anal Lett 55(4):620–633
Rufo DD, Debelee TG, Ibenthal A, Negera WG (2021) Diagnosis of diabetes mellitus using gradient boosting machine (LightGBM). Diagnostics 11(9):1714
Zhang J, Mucs D, Norinder U, Svensson F (2019) LightGBM: AN effective and scalable algorithm for prediction of chemical toxicity—application to the Tox21 and mutagenicity data sets. J Chem Inf Model 59(10):4150–4158
Demir S, Sahin EK (2023) Predicting occurrence of liquefaction-induced lateral spreading using gradient boosting algorithms integrated with particle swarm optimization: PSO-XGBoost, PSO-LightGBM, and PSO-CatBoost. Acta Geotech 18(6):3403–3419
Hancock JT, Khoshgoftaar TM (2020) CatBoost for big data: an interdisciplinary review. J Big Data 7(1):1–45
Chan A, Peck R, Gibbs M, van der Schaar M (2023) Synthetic model combination: a new machine learning method for pharmacometric model ensembling. CPT Pharmacomet Syst Pharmacol 12(7):953
Wang N, Zhou W, Li H (2021) Learning diverse models for end-to-end ensemble tracking. IEEE Trans Image Process 30:2220–2231
Waqas Khan P, Byun Y-C (2022) Multi-fault detection and classification of wind turbines using stacking classifier. Sensors 22(18):6955
Zhao R, Mu Y, Zou L, Wen X (2022) A hybrid intrusion detection system based on feature selection and weighted stacking classifier. IEEE Access 10:71414–71426
Chatterjee S, Byun Y-C (2022) EEG-based emotion classification using stacking ensemble approach. Sensors 22(21):8550
Djarum DH, Ahmad Z, Zhang J (2023) Reduced Bayesian optimized stacked regressor (RBOSR): a highly efficient stacked approach for improved air pollution prediction. Appl Soft Comput 144:110466
Cai Y et al (2023) An adaptive stacking regressor with a self-iterative optimization module for improving fractional woody cover mapping. IEEE Geosci Remote Sens Lett. https://doi.org/10.1109/LGRS.2023.3281646
Peng Y, Rios A, Kavuluru R, Lu Z (2018) Extracting chemical–protein relations with ensembles of SVM and deep learning models. Database 2018:bay073
Manganelli S et al (2019) Development, validation and integration of in silico models to identify androgen active chemicals. Chemosphere 220:204–215
Morgan-Benita JA et al (2022) Hard voting ensemble approach for the detection of type 2 diabetes in mexican population with non-glucose related features. Healthcare 10(8):1362
Stephen O, Madanian S, Nguyen M (2022) A hard voting policy-driven deep learning architectural ensemble strategy for industrial products defect recognition and classification. Sensors 22(20):7846
Shareef AQ, Kurnaz S (2023) Deep learning based COVID-19 detection via hard voting ensemble method. Wirel Pers Commun. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-023-10485-2
Verma R, Chandra S (2023) RepuTE: a soft voting ensemble learning framework for reputation-based attack detection in fog-IoT milieu. Eng Appl Artif Intell 118:105670
Khan MA, Iqbal N, Jamil H, Kim D-H (2023) An optimized ensemble prediction model using AutoML based on soft voting classifier for network intrusion detection. J Netw Comput Appl 212:103560
Sherazi SWA, Bae J-W, Lee JY (2021) A soft voting ensemble classifier for early prediction and diagnosis of occurrences of major adverse cardiovascular events for STEMI and NSTEMI during 2-year follow-up in patients with acute coronary syndrome. PLoS ONE 16(6):e0249338
Wudil YS, Al-Najjar OA, Al-Osta MA, Baghabra Al-Amoudi OS, Gondal MA (2023) Investigating the soil unconfined compressive strength based on laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy emission intensities and machine learning techniques. ACS Omega 8(29):26391–26404
Chen Y, Xu Y, Jamhiri B, Wang L, Li T (2022) Predicting uniaxial tensile strength of expansive soil with ensemble learning methods. Comput Geotech 150:104904
Kardani N, Zhou A, Nazem M, Shen S-L (2021) Improved prediction of slope stability using a hybrid stacking ensemble method based on finite element analysis and field data. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 13(1):188–201
Indrasiri PL, Halgamuge MN, Mohammad A (2021) Robust ensemble machine learning model for filtering phishing URLs: expandable random gradient stacked voting classifier (ERG-SVC). IEEE Access 9:150142–150161
Jibanchand N, Devi KR (2023) Application of ensemble learning in predicting shallow foundation settlement in cohesionless soil. Int J Geotech Eng 17:1–12
Li L, Iskander M (2021) Evaluation of roundness parameters in use for sand. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 147(9):04021081
Zhang W, Wu C, Zhong H, Li Y, Wang L (2021) Prediction of undrained shear strength using extreme gradient boosting and random forest based on Bayesian optimization. Geosci Front 12(1):469–477
Dong X, Yu Z, Cao W, Shi Y, Ma Q (2020) A survey on ensemble learning. Front Comput Sci 14:241–258
Liu Y, Zhao Q (2022) Ensemble learning. In: Handbook on computer learning and intelligence: volume 2: Deep Learning, Intelligent Control and Evolutionary Computation. World Scientific, pp 635–660
Mahajan P, Uddin S, Hajati F, Moni MA (2023) Ensemble learning for disease prediction: a review. Healthcare 11(12):1808
Corner A, Pidgeon N (2020) Like artificial trees? The effect of framing by natural analogy on public perceptions of geoengineering. In: The ethics of nanotechnology, geoengineering, and clean energy. Routledge, pp 361–374
Horton JB et al (2023) Solar geoengineering research programs on national agendas: a comparative analysis of Germany, China, Australia, and the United States. Clim Change 176(4):37
Rabbani A, Samui P, Kumari S (2023) Implementing ensemble learning models for the prediction of shear strength of soil. Asian J Civ Eng 24:1–17
Zhang R, Wu C, Goh AT, Böhlke T, Zhang W (2021) Estimation of diaphragm wall deflections for deep braced excavation in anisotropic clays using ensemble learning. Geosci Front 12(1):365–373
Zhang W, Li H, Han L, Chen L, Wang L (2022) Slope stability prediction using ensemble learning techniques: a case study in Yunyang County, Chongqing, China. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 14(4):1089–1099
Wang ZZ, Goh SH (2022) A maximum entropy method using fractional moments and deep learning for geotechnical reliability analysis. Acta Geotech 17(4):1147–1166
Sahu A, Samui P, Determination of liquefaction susceptibility of soil: a deep learning approach.
Sheng D, Yu J, Tan F, Tong D, Yan T, Lv J (2023) Rock mass quality classification based on deep learning: a feasibility study for stacked autoencoders. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 15(7):1749–1758
Huang F, Zhang J, Zhou C, Wang Y, Huang J, Zhu L (2020) A deep learning algorithm using a fully connected sparse autoencoder neural network for landslide susceptibility prediction. Landslides 17:217–229
Padarian J, Minasny B, McBratney A (2019) Using deep learning to predict soil properties from regional spectral data. Geoderma Reg 16:e00198
Norouzi M, Ayoubi S, Jalalian A, Khademi H, Dehghani A (2010) Predicting rainfed wheat quality and quantity by artificial neural network using terrain and soil characteristics. Acta Agric Scand Sect B Soil Plant Sci 60(4):341–352
Salehzadeh H, Gholipoor M, Abbasdokht H, Baradaran M (2016) Optimizing plant traits to increase yield quality and quantity in tobacco using artificial neural network. Int J Plant Prod 10(1):97
Alaskar H, Saba T (2021) Machine learning and deep learning: a comparative review. In: Proceedings of integrated intelligence enable networks and computing: IIENC 2020, pp 143–150
Chauhan NK, Singh K (2018) A review on conventional machine learning vs deep learning. In: 2018 International conference on computing, power and communication technologies (GUCON). IEEE, pp 347–352
Shrestha A, Mahmood A (2019) Review of deep learning algorithms and architectures. IEEE Access 7:53040–53065
Pouyanfar S et al (2018) A survey on deep learning: algorithms, techniques, and applications. ACM Comput Surv 51(5):1–36
Krawczyk B, Minku LL, Gama J, Stefanowski J, Woźniak M (2017) Ensemble learning for data stream analysis: a survey. Inf Fusion 37:132–156
Vakili AH, Ghasemi J, Bin Selamat MR, Salimi M, Farhadi MS (2018) Internal erosional behaviour of dispersive clay stabilized with lignosulfonate and reinforced with polypropylene fiber. Constr Build Mater 193:405–415
Vakili AH, Kaedi M, Mokhberi M, Bin Selamat MR, Salimi M (2018) Treatment of highly dispersive clay by lignosulfonate addition and electroosmosis application. Appl Clay Sci 152:1–8
Shahsavani S, Vakili AH, Mokhberi M (2020) The effect of wetting and drying cycles on the swelling-shrinkage behavior of the expansive soils improved by nanosilica and industrial waste. Bull Eng Geol Environ 79(9):4765–4781
Vakili AH, Shojaei SI, Salimi M, Bin Selamat MR, Farhadi MS (2020) Contact erosional behaviour of foundation of pavement embankment constructed with nanosilica-treated dispersive soils. Soils Found 60(1):167–178
Vakili A, Selamat M, Moayedi H (2013) An assessment of physical and mechanical properties of dispersive clay treated with lime. Casp J Appl Sci Res 2:197–204
Khoshbakht EB, Vakili AH, Farhadi MS, Salimi M (2019) Reducing the negative impact of freezing and thawing cycles on marl by means of the electrokinetical injection of calcium chloride. Cold Reg Sci Technol 157:196–205
Vakili AH, Salimi M, Shamsi M (2021) Application of the dynamic cone penetrometer test for determining the geotechnical characteristics of marl soils treated by lime. Heliyon 7(9):e08062
Parsaei M, Vakili AH, Salimi M, Farhadi MS, Falamaki A (2021) Effect of electric arc and ladle furnace slags on the strength and swelling behavior of cement-stabilized expansive clay. Bull Eng Geol Environ 80(8):6303–6320
Vakili AH, Selamat MRB, Salimi M, Gararei SG (2021) Evaluation of pozzolanic Portland cement as geotechnical stabilizer of a dispersive clay. Int J Geotech Eng 15(4):504–511
Vakili AH, Rastegar S, Golkarfard H, Salimi M, Izadneshan Z (2023) Effect of polypropylene fibers on internal erosional behavior of poorly graded sandy soil stabilized with the binary mixtures of clay and polyvinyl acetate. Environ Earth Sci 82(12):1–18
Keskin I, Arslan O, Vakili AH (2023) Investigating the impact of travertine powder on strength and permeability of swelling clay. Phys Chem Earth Parts A/B/C 132:103494
Falamaki A et al (2023) Experimental investigation of the effect of landfill leachate on the mechanical and cracking behavior of polypropylene fiber-reinforced compacted clay liner. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30:1–18
Vakili AH, Salimi M, Keskin I, Abujazar MSS, Shamsi M (2023) Effects of polyvinyl acetate content on contact erosion parameters of pavement embankment constructed by dispersive soils. Bull Eng Geol Environ 82(10):398
Jamshidi M, Mokhberi M, Vakili AH, Nasehi A (2023) Effect of chitosan bio-polymer stabilization on the mechanical and dynamic characteristics of marl soils. Transp Geotech 42:101110
Funding
Open access funding provided by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Türkiye (TÜBİTAK).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Elaheh Yaghoubi involved in supervision, conceptualization, methodology, writing—reviewing and editing. Elnaz Yaghoubi took part in software, data curation, writing—original draft. Ahmed Khamees involved in visualization, investigation. Amir Hossein Vakili took part in supervision, conceptualization, methodology, writing—reviewing and editing.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Yaghoubi, E., Yaghoubi, E., Khamees, A. et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of artificial neural network, machine learning, deep learning, and ensemble learning approaches in field of geotechnical engineering. Neural Comput & Applic 36, 12655–12699 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-024-09893-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-024-09893-7