2018
DOI: 10.1007/s00521-018-3570-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Application of an evolutionary technique (PSO–SVM) and ANFIS in clear-water scour depth prediction around bridge piers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The Taylor diagrams (Figure 4) plotted to comparatively evaluate the individual model performances based on multiple statistical indicators (RMSD, R, and standard deviation) portray the superiority and predictive power of the GTB model against the GMDH model. Since the models developed in the current study used the same data and model (input-output) structure of the earlier research by Sreedhara et al (2019), the performance of GTB and GMDH models were further compared against the SVM, (ANFIS), and hybrid particle swarm optimization-based SVM (PSO-SVM) models. Table 5 presents the performance of GTB and GMDH models and other AI models (SVM, ANFIS, PSO-SVM), evaluated in terms of coefficient of determination (R 2 ) statistic.…”
Section: Prediction Of Scour Depth Under Clear-water Scour Conditionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Taylor diagrams (Figure 4) plotted to comparatively evaluate the individual model performances based on multiple statistical indicators (RMSD, R, and standard deviation) portray the superiority and predictive power of the GTB model against the GMDH model. Since the models developed in the current study used the same data and model (input-output) structure of the earlier research by Sreedhara et al (2019), the performance of GTB and GMDH models were further compared against the SVM, (ANFIS), and hybrid particle swarm optimization-based SVM (PSO-SVM) models. Table 5 presents the performance of GTB and GMDH models and other AI models (SVM, ANFIS, PSO-SVM), evaluated in terms of coefficient of determination (R 2 ) statistic.…”
Section: Prediction Of Scour Depth Under Clear-water Scour Conditionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Aside from experimental studies and empirical models, in late decades soft computing techniques, artificial neural network (ANN), adaptive Neuro inference system (ANFIS) [2][3][4], support vector regression (SVR) [5,6], genetic algorithm (GA) [7], group method-data handling (GMDH) [8] etc., are being used widely to predict the scour depth using experimental values. The individual models have been applied by various researchers to estimate scour depth around piers [9,10], risk assessment for structure maintenance [11] and scour below spillways [12].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The individual models have been applied by various researchers to estimate scour depth around piers [9,10], risk assessment for structure maintenance [11] and scour below spillways [12]. In recent years, the combined effect of the evolutionary algorithm is developed using optimization technique, particle swarm optimization (PSO) [2] with ANN as an emerging tool in various fields. The (PSO-ANN) technique is used to identify the surface settlement due to tunneling [13], to check the floating type breakwater efficiency [14], to predict wave transmission of tandem breakwater [15] and fault prediction of objectoriented systems [16].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To overcome these difficulties, the focus of researchers has turned to use Artificial Intelligence (AI) method for prediction of bridge pier scour depth. Recently, different artificial intelligence approaches such as artificial neural networks (ANN), adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy inference systems (ANFIS), genetic programming (GP), gene-expression programming (GEP), support vector machines (SVM), model trees (MT), evolutionary polynomial regressions (EPR), POS-SVM, multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS), and self-adaptive extreme learning machines (SAELM) have been applied to predict the local scour depth around hydraulic structures [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]. Among these soft computing techniques, group method of data handling (GMDH) methods were widely applied to predict the local scour depth around bridge piers and abutments, downstream of ski-jump bucket spillways, downstream of grade-control structures, and below pipelines induced currents and waves [17][18][19][20].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%