2022
DOI: 10.1080/15376494.2022.2114048
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Applying a novel slime mould algorithm- based artificial neural network to predict the settlement of a single footing on a soft soil reinforced by rigid inclusions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The Kriging optimization [i.e., Equation (7)] effect is often poor in high-nonlinear issues, resulting in an unacceptable modeling error. [50][51][52][53] Given the superior global optimization performance and the broad applicability, the slime mold algorithm (SMA) 54 (proposed by Li et al in 2020 54 ) is introduced, and it has been successfully applied in various fields, such as parameter tuning for machine learning models, 55,56 engineering design, 57,58 and multi-objective optimization problems. 59,60…”
Section: Optimization Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The Kriging optimization [i.e., Equation (7)] effect is often poor in high-nonlinear issues, resulting in an unacceptable modeling error. [50][51][52][53] Given the superior global optimization performance and the broad applicability, the slime mold algorithm (SMA) 54 (proposed by Li et al in 2020 54 ) is introduced, and it has been successfully applied in various fields, such as parameter tuning for machine learning models, 55,56 engineering design, 57,58 and multi-objective optimization problems. 59,60…”
Section: Optimization Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Given the superior global optimization performance and the broad applicability, the slime mold algorithm (SMA) 54 (proposed by Li et al. in 2020 54 ) is introduced, and it has been successfully applied in various fields, such as parameter tuning for machine learning models, 55,56 engineering design, 57,58 and multi‐objective optimization problems 59,60 leftfindleftθgoodbreak=false(θ1,θ2,,θmfalse)leftminleftML(bold-italicθ)=σ2false(θfalse)|Rfalse(θfalse)|1/mleftnormals.normalt.leftθigoodbreak>0,igoodbreak=1,2,,m$$\begin{equation}\left\{ \def\eqcellsep{&}\begin{array}{ll} {\rm find} & {{\bm \theta }} = ({\theta }_1,{\theta }_2,\ldots,{\theta }_m)\\[3pt] \min & ML({{\bm \theta }}) = {\sigma }^2({\bm{\theta }})|{{\bm R}}({\bm{\theta }}){|}^{1/m}\\[3pt] {\rm s.t.}…”
Section: Adaptive Optimized Kriging Combining Efficient Sampling Aok‐esmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, the mean absolute error (MAE) can further reflect the real situation of error. These statistical indices have been considered to verify the performance of different prediction models for solving the regression problem [ 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 ]. where T indicates the number of used samples.…”
Section: Performance Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on existing research, the current methods for predicting ground settlement mainly include purely theoretical calculation methods based on soil consolidation principles [17][18][19], various curvefitting methods based on measured settlement data commonly used in engineering [20][21], and emerging dynamic prediction methods represented by artificial neural network analysis [22][23][24]. In the process of settlement prediction, purely theoretical calculation methods based on ground consolidation settlement principles are overly complex and involve numerous parameters, making them less convenient to use.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%