4.5 Article

A Bayesian unsupervised learning approach for identifying soil stratification using cone penetration data

Journal

CANADIAN GEOTECHNICAL JOURNAL
Volume 56, Issue 8, Pages 1184-1205

Publisher

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1139/cgj-2017-0709

Keywords

unsupervised learning; soil stratification; cone penetration test (CPT); Bayesian inferential framework; soil behavior type

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper presents a novel perspective to understanding the spatial and statistical patterns of a cone penetration dataset and identifying soil stratification using these patterns. Both local consistency in physical space (i.e., along depth) and statistical similarity in feature space (i.e., logQ(t)-logF(r) space, where Q(t) is the normalized tip resistance and F-r is the normalized friction ratio, or the Robertson chart) between data points are considered simultaneously. The proposed approach, in essence, consists of two parts: (i) a pattern detection approach using the Bayesian inferential framework and (ii) a pattern interpretation protocol using the Robertson chart. The first part is the mathematical core of the proposed approach, which infers both spatial pattern in physical space and statistical pattern in feature space from the input dataset; the second part converts the abstract patterns into intuitive spatial configurations of multiple soil layers having different soil behavior types. The advantages of the proposed approach include probabilistic soil classification and identification of soil stratification in an automatic and fully unsupervised manner. The proposed approach has been implemented in MATLAB R2015b and Python 3.6, and tested using various datasets including both synthetic and real-world cone penetration test soundings. The results show that the proposed approach can accurately and automatically detect soil layers with quantified uncertainty and reasonable computational cost.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available