4.5 Article

Prediction of Surface Settlement Induced by Large-Diameter Shield Tunneling Based on Machine-Learning Algorithms

Journal

GEOFLUIDS
Volume 2022, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY-HINDAWI
DOI: 10.1155/2022/4174768

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2019YFC1511104]
  2. Shenzhen Fundamental Research Program [JCYJ20210324121402008]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study predicts surface settlement caused by large-diameter shield tunneling using machine-learning methods, and results show that the LSTM algorithm has the best accuracy in predicting maximum surface settlement.
The accurate prediction of surface settlement caused by large-diameter shield tunneling is crucial for the safety of the tunnel environment. However, due to the complexity and uncertainty of the rock-machine interaction and groundwater variation, it is difficult to predict the settlement by developing traditional theoretical methods. Recently, a big number of data obtained from the Chunfeng shield tunnel in China provides the possibility to predict the settlement using machine-learning methods. In this study, the equipment parameters, the geological parameters, and the monitored settlements are used to establish the models. Three machine-learning algorithms (i.e., long-short-term memory (LSTM), random forest (RF), and gated recurrent unit (GRU)) are used to predict the surface settlement. Three indicators, mean absolute error (MAE), accuracy (ACC), and coefficient of determination (R-2), are selected to evaluate the prediction performance. Results demonstrated that the filtering and selection of model parameters is vitally important to the accuracy of model prediction. Among the three machine-learning algorithms, the LSTM algorithm gives the best accuracy in predicting the maximum surface settlement and can effectively predict the settlement development in different strata.

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