IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v10y2022i19p3432-d920999.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting Subgrade Resistance Value of Hydrated Lime-Activated Rice Husk Ash-Treated Expansive Soil: A Comparison between M5P, Support Vector Machine, and Gaussian Process Regression Algorithms

Author

Listed:
  • Mahmood Ahmad

    (Department of Civil Engineering, University of Engineering and Technology Peshawar (Bannu Campus), Bannu 28100, Pakistan)

  • Badr T. Alsulami

    (Department of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering and Islamic Architecture, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah 24382, Saudi Arabia)

  • Ramez A. Al-Mansob

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, International Islamic University Malaysia, Jalan Gombak 50728, Selangor, Malaysia)

  • Saerahany Legori Ibrahim

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, International Islamic University Malaysia, Jalan Gombak 50728, Selangor, Malaysia)

  • Suraparb Keawsawasvong

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Thammasat School of Engineering, Thammasat University, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand)

  • Ali Majdi

    (Department of Building and Construction Techniques Engineering, Al-Mustaqbal University College, Hilla 51001, Iraq)

  • Feezan Ahmad

    (State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China)

Abstract

Resistance value (R-value) is one of the basic subgrade stiffness characterizations that express a material’s resistance to deformation. In this paper, artificial intelligence (AI)-based models—especially M5P, support vector machine (SVM), and Gaussian process regression (GPR) algorithms—are built for R-value evaluation that meets the high precision and rapidity requirements in highway engineering. The dataset of this study comprises seven parameters: hydrated lime-activated rice husk ash, liquid limit, plastic limit, plasticity index, optimum moisture content, and maximum dry density. The available data are divided into three parts: training set (70%), test set (15%), and validation set (15%). The output (i.e., R-value) of the developed models is evaluated using the performance measures coefficient of determination (R 2 ), mean absolute error (MAE), relative squared error (RSE), root mean square error (RMSE), relative root mean square error (RRMSE), performance indicator ( ρ ), and visual framework (Taylor diagram). GPR is concluded to be the best performing model (R 2 , MAE, RSE, RMSE, RRMSE, and ρ equal to 0.9996, 0.0258, 0.0032, 0.0012, 0.0012, and 0.0006, respectively, in the validation phase), very closely followed by SVM, and M5P. The application used for the aforementioned approaches for predicting the R-value is also compared with the recently developed artificial neural network model in the literature. The analysis of performance measures for the R-value dataset demonstrates that all the AI-based models achieved comparatively better and reliable results and thus should be encouraged in further research. Sensitivity analysis suggests that all the input parameters have a significant influence on the output, with maximum dry density being the highest.

Suggested Citation

  • Mahmood Ahmad & Badr T. Alsulami & Ramez A. Al-Mansob & Saerahany Legori Ibrahim & Suraparb Keawsawasvong & Ali Majdi & Feezan Ahmad, 2022. "Predicting Subgrade Resistance Value of Hydrated Lime-Activated Rice Husk Ash-Treated Expansive Soil: A Comparison between M5P, Support Vector Machine, and Gaussian Process Regression Algorithms," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(19), pages 1-19, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:19:p:3432-:d:920999
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/19/3432/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/19/3432/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Despotovic, Milan & Nedic, Vladimir & Despotovic, Danijela & Cvetanovic, Slobodan, 2016. "Evaluation of empirical models for predicting monthly mean horizontal diffuse solar radiation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 246-260.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kieu Anh Nguyen & Walter Chen & Bor-Shiun Lin & Uma Seeboonruang, 2020. "Using Machine Learning-Based Algorithms to Analyze Erosion Rates of a Watershed in Northern Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, March.
    2. Jamil, Basharat & Akhtar, Naiem, 2017. "Comparison of empirical models to estimate monthly mean diffuse solar radiation from measured data: Case study for humid-subtropical climatic region of India," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 1326-1342.
    3. Feng, Lan & Lin, Aiwen & Wang, Lunche & Qin, Wenmin & Gong, Wei, 2018. "Evaluation of sunshine-based models for predicting diffuse solar radiation in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 168-182.
    4. Luo, Laipeng & Zhang, Zhiyi & Li, Chong & Nishu, & He, Fang & Zhang, Xingguang & Cai, Junmeng, 2021. "Insight into master plots method for kinetic analysis of lignocellulosic biomass pyrolysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    5. Hassan, Gasser E. & Youssef, M. Elsayed & Mohamed, Zahraa E. & Ali, Mohamed A. & Hanafy, Ahmed A., 2016. "New Temperature-based Models for Predicting Global Solar Radiation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 437-450.
    6. Qin, Wenmin & Wang, Lunche & Lin, Aiwen & Zhang, Ming & Xia, Xiangao & Hu, Bo & Niu, Zigeng, 2018. "Comparison of deterministic and data-driven models for solar radiation estimation in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 579-594.
    7. Wang, Lunche & Lu, Yunbo & Zou, Ling & Feng, Lan & Wei, Jing & Qin, Wenmin & Niu, Zigeng, 2019. "Prediction of diffuse solar radiation based on multiple variables in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 151-216.
    8. Yang, Liu & Cao, Qimeng & Yu, Ying & Liu, Yan, 2020. "Comparison of daily diffuse radiation models in regions of China without solar radiation measurement," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    9. Wiktor Olchowik & Jędrzej Gajek & Andrzej Michalski, 2023. "The Use of Evolutionary Algorithms in the Modelling of Diffuse Radiation in Terms of Simulating the Energy Efficiency of Photovoltaic Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-32, March.
    10. Fan, Junliang & Wu, Lifeng & Zhang, Fucang & Cai, Huanjie & Ma, Xin & Bai, Hua, 2019. "Evaluation and development of empirical models for estimating daily and monthly mean daily diffuse horizontal solar radiation for different climatic regions of China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 168-186.
    11. Yingbo Pang & Iftikhar Azim & Momina Rauf & Muhammad Farjad Iqbal & Xinguang Ge & Muhammad Ashraf & Muhammad Atiq Ur Rahman Tariq & Anne W. M. Ng, 2022. "Prediction of Bidirectional Shear Strength of Rectangular RC Columns Subjected to Multidirectional Earthquake Actions for Collapse Prevention," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-25, June.
    12. Lin, Chun-Tin & Chang, Keh-Chin & Chung, Kung-Ming, 2023. "Re-modeling the solar diffuse fraction in Taiwan on basis of a typical-meteorological-year data," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 823-835.
    13. Limouni, Tariq & Yaagoubi, Reda & Bouziane, Khalid & Guissi, Khalid & Baali, El Houssain, 2023. "Accurate one step and multistep forecasting of very short-term PV power using LSTM-TCN model," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 1010-1024.
    14. Năstase, Gabriel & Șerban, Alexandru & Dragomir, George & Brezeanu, Alin Ionuț & Bucur, Irina, 2018. "Photovoltaic development in Romania. Reviewing what has been done," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 523-535.
    15. Nunez Munoz, Maria & Ballantyne, Erica E.F. & Stone, David A., 2022. "Development and evaluation of empirical models for the estimation of hourly horizontal diffuse solar irradiance in the United Kingdom," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    16. Saioa Etxebarria Berrizbeitia & Eulalia Jadraque Gago & Tariq Muneer, 2020. "Empirical Models for the Estimation of Solar Sky-Diffuse Radiation. A Review and Experimental Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-23, February.
    17. Wang, Lunche & Kisi, Ozgur & Zounemat-Kermani, Mohammad & Salazar, Germán Ariel & Zhu, Zhongmin & Gong, Wei, 2016. "Solar radiation prediction using different techniques: model evaluation and comparison," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 384-397.
    18. Chen, Wei-Hsin & Aniza, Ria & Arpia, Arjay A. & Lo, Hsiu-Ju & Hoang, Anh Tuan & Goodarzi, Vahabodin & Gao, Jianbing, 2022. "A comparative analysis of biomass torrefaction severity index prediction from machine learning," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    19. Ramadhan, Raden A.A. & Heatubun, Yosca R.J. & Tan, Sek F. & Lee, Hyun-Jin, 2021. "Comparison of physical and machine learning models for estimating solar irradiance and photovoltaic power," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 1006-1019.
    20. Jamil, Basharat & Akhtar, Naiem, 2017. "Estimation of diffuse solar radiation in humid-subtropical climatic region of India: Comparison of diffuse fraction and diffusion coefficient models," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 149-164.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:19:p:3432-:d:920999. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.