Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Estimating the Maximum Dry Density of Soil via Least Square Support Vector Regression Individual and Hybrid Forms

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Indian Geotechnical Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Maximum dry density (MDD) holds pivotal importance in geotechnical engineering as it signifies the ideal soil mass per unit volume given particular circumstances. It is important in determining the stability and effectiveness of various earthworks, such as embankments and foundations. MDD is subject to variation based on factors including soil type, distribution of grain sizes, level of compaction, and moisture content. Typically, increasing compaction efforts result in higher MDD values, leading to a denser structure, while elevated moisture levels tend to decrease it. The precise estimation of MDD is indispensable for engineers to make well-founded decisions, ensuring the longevity and safety of civil engineering structures over time. This paper introduces a novel method for predicting maximum dry density \(({\text{MDD}})\) by utilizing the least square support vector regression (LSSVR) algorithm. The approach involves utilizing the LSSVR technique to develop precise models that connect the MDD of stabilized soil with several intrinsic soil characteristics such as particle size distribution, plasticity, linear shrinkage, and the composition and amount of stabilizing agents used. In this study, a comprehensive dataset comprising 187 samples of various soil types sourced from previously published stabilization test results is utilized to formulate and evaluate the predictive models. Furthermore, the accuracy of the LSSVR model in this research is augmented through the incorporation of meta-heuristic techniques, specifically Leader Harris Hawk's optimization (LHHO) and generalized normal distribution optimization (GNDO). The R2 values for the training, validation, and testing data for the LSLH model were 99.55%, 98.51%, and 99.32%, respectively. Additionally, LSLH had the most suitable RMSE of 15.72 \({\text{kN}}/{\text{m}}\)3. Generally, the LSLH model demonstrated acceptable predictive and generalization capabilities compared to the LSGN model developed in this study.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Janjua ZS, Chand J (2016) Correlation of CBR with index properties of soil. Int J Civ Eng Technol 7:57–62

    Google Scholar 

  2. Duque J, Fuentes W, Rey S, Molina E (2020) Effect of grain size distribution on california bearing ratio (CBR) and modified proctor parameters for granular materials. Arab J Sci Eng 45:8231–8239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Preethi S, Tangadagi RB, Manjunatha M, Bharath A (2020) Sustainable effect of chemically treated aggregates on bond strength of bitumen. J Green Eng 10:5076–5089

    Google Scholar 

  4. Akpokodje EG (1985) The stabilization of some arid zone soils with cement and lime. Q J Eng Geol 18:173–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bell FG (1996) Lime stabilization of clay minerals and soils. Eng Geol 42:223–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Alavi AH, Gandomi AH, Gandomi M, Sadat Hosseini SS (2009) Prediction of maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of stabilised soil using RBF neural networks. IES J Part A Civ Struct Eng 2:98–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ngowi AB (1997) Improving the traditional earth construction: a case study of Botswana. Constr Build Mater 11:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. KS C, Chew YM, Osman MH, SK MG (2015) Estimating maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of compacted soils. In: International conference on advances in civil and environmental engineering. pp 1–8

  9. Bharath A, Manjunatha M, Reshma TV, Preethi S (2021) Influence and correlation of maximum dry density on soaked & unsoaked CBR of soil. Mater Today Proc 47:3998–4002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Suman S, Mahamaya M, Das SK (2016) Prediction of maximum dry density and unconfined compressive strength of cement stabilised soil using artificial intelligence techniques. Int J Geosynth Ground Eng 2:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Metropolis N, Rosenbluth AW, Rosenbluth MN et al (1953) Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. J Chem Phys 21:1087–1092

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Alavi AH, Gandomi AH, Mollahasani A (2012) A genetic programming-based approach for the performance characteristics assessment of stabilized soil. Variants of evolutionary algorithms for real-world applications pp 343–376

  13. Alavi AH, Heshmati AA, Gandomi AH et al (2008) Utilisation of computational intelligence techniques for stabilised soil. In: 6th International conference on engineering computational technology, ECT 2008

  14. Narendra BS, Sivapullaiah PV, Suresh S, Omkar SN (2006) Prediction of unconfined compressive strength of soft grounds using computational intelligence techniques: a comparative study. Comput Geotech 33:196–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Banzhaf W, Nordin P, Keller RE, Francone FD (1998) Genetic programming: an introduction: on the automatic evolution of computer programs and its applications. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.

  16. Koza J (1992) Genetic programming, on programming of computer by natural selection

  17. Mahesh B (2020) Machine learning algorithms-a review. Int J Sci Res (IJSR) 9:381–386

    Google Scholar 

  18. Zhou Z-H (2021) Machine learning. Springer Nature

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Wang H, Lei Z, Zhang X, et al (2016) Machine learning basics. Deep Learn 98–164

  20. Biau G (2012) Analysis of a random forests model. J Mach Learn Res 13:1063–1095

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Kim K (2003) Financial time series forecasting using support vector machines. Neurocomputing 55:307–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Jordan MI, Mitchell TM (2015) Machine learning: trends, perspectives, and prospects. Science 349:255–260

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Allawi MF, Salih SQ, Kassim M et al (2022) Application of computational model based probabilistic neural network for surface water quality prediction. Mathematics 10:3960

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Allawi MF, Aidan IA, El-Shafie A (2021) Enhancing the performance of data-driven models for monthly reservoir evaporation prediction. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28:8281–8295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11062-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Yafouz A, AlDahoul N, Birima AH et al (2022) Comprehensive comparison of various machine learning algorithms for short-term ozone concentration prediction. Alex Eng J 61:4607–4622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2021.10.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Allawi MF, Ahmed ML, Aidan IA et al (2021) Developing reservoir evaporation predictive model for successful dam management. Stoch Env Res Risk Assess 35:499–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-020-01918-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Taffese WZ, Abegaz KA (2022) Prediction of compaction and strength properties of amended soil using machine learning. Buildings 12:613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Das SK, Samui P, Sabat AK (2011) Application of artificial intelligence to maximum dry density and unconfined compressive strength of cement stabilized soil. Geotech Geol Eng 29:329–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kisi O (2015) Streamflow forecasting and estimation using least square support vector regression and adaptive neuro-fuzzy embedded fuzzy c-means clustering. Water Resour Manag 29:5109–5127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kumar M, Kar IN (2009) Non-linear HVAC computations using least square support vector machines. Energy Convers Manag 50:1411–1418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Suykens JAK, Vandewalle J, Kisi O (2000) Streamflow forecasting and estimation using least square support vector r. IEEE Trans Circuits Syst I Fundam Theory Appl 47:1109–1114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Ghiasi MM, Shahdi A, Barati P, Arabloo M (2014) Robust modeling approach for estimation of compressibility factor in retrograde gas condensate systems. Ind Eng Chem Res 53:12872–12887

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Mahmoodi NM, Arabloo M, Abdi J (2014) Laccase immobilized manganese ferrite nanoparticle: synthesis and LSSVM intelligent modeling of decolorization. Water Res 67:216–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Kisi O, Parmar KS (2016) Application of least square support vector machine and multivariate adaptive regression spline models in long term prediction of river water pollution. J Hydrol (Amst) 534:104–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Moreno-Salinas D, Chaos D, Besada-Portas E et al (2013) Semiphysical modelling of the nonlinear dynamics of a surface craft with LS-SVM. Math Probl Eng 2013:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Cao S-G, Liu Y-B, Wang Y-P (2008) A forecasting and forewarning model for methane hazard in working face of coal mine based on LS-SVM. J China Univ Min Technol 18:172–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Fletcher R (1987) Practical methods ofoptimization. JohnWiley & Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

  38. Heidari AA, Mirjalili S, Faris H et al (2019) Harris hawks optimization: algorithm and applications. Futur Gener Comput Syst 97:849–872

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Zhang Y, Jin Z, Mirjalili S (2020) Generalized normal distribution optimization and its applications in parameter extraction of photovoltaic models. Energy Convers Manag 224:113301

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was financed by the Technological Project of Heilongjiang Province "The open competition mechanism to select the best candidates" (No. 2022ZXJ05C01-03-04), Funding for the Opening Project of Key Laboratory of Agricultural Renewable Resource Utilization Technology (No. HLJHDNY2114) and Heilongjiang University of Science and Technology the introduction of high-level talent research start-up fund projects (No. 000009020315).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Electronical and Information Engineering, Heilongjiang University of Science and Technology, Harbin, 150022, Heilongjiang, China

    Qiuduo Zhao, Ke Liu, Chen Xiong, Xing Deng & Saifei Yang

Authors
  1. Qiuduo Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ke Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chen Xiong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xing Deng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Saifei Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qiuduo Zhao.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing of interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhao, Q., Liu, K., Xiong, C. et al. Estimating the Maximum Dry Density of Soil via Least Square Support Vector Regression Individual and Hybrid Forms. Indian Geotech J (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-024-00952-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-024-00952-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation