Advertisement

Survey of AI Methods for the Purpose of Geotechnical Profile Creation

  • Adrian BilskiEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 889)

Abstract

The goal of this paper is to present methodology of unsupervised learning application in geotechnical data categorization. Geotechnical layers identification is conducted based on measurement from the Dilatometer of Marchetti Test taken at the campus of Warsaw University of Life Sciences. To cluster data, the Ant Clustering Algorithm, k-means, fuzzy sets and Self Organizing Map algorithms were introduced. All methods are adjusted to the presented problem and their efficiency compared. The paper is concluded with comments about the applications of computer intelligence methods for the geotechnical data analysis.

Keywords

Dilatometer of Marchetti Test Geotechnical data clustering K-means Fuzzy c-means Ant Colony Algorithm Self Organizing Map 

References

  1. 1.
    Barry, L.: Data Mining Techniques for Marketing. Sales and Customer Support. Wiley, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jain, A.K., Murty, M.N., Flynn, P.J.: Data clustering: a review. ACM Comput. Surv. 31(3), 264–323 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bilski, P., Rabarijoely, S.: Automated soil categorization using the CPT and DMT investigations. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on New Developments in Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering ZM2009, Nicosia, Northern Cyprus, 28–30 May 2009, pp. 368–375 (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shahin, M.A., Jaksa, M.B., Maier, H.R.: Neural network based stochastic design charts for settlement prediction. Can. Geotech. J. 42, 110–120 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bilski, A.: Ant clustering for the CPT and DMT-based soil profile generation. In: IDAACS 2015 (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marchetti, S.: In situ tests by flat dilatometer. J. Geotech. GeoEng. Div. 106(GT3), 299–321 (1980). ASCEGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marchetti, S., Crapps, D.K.: Flat dilatometer manual. Internal report of GPE (1981)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lechowicz Z., Rabarijoely, S.: Numerical analysis of organic soil behaviour during dilatometer test. Ann. Warsaw Agricult. Univ. Land Recl. 29, 41–49 (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tan, P.N, Steinbach, M., Kumar, V.: Introduction to Data Mining. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Davies, D.L., Bouldin D.W.: A cluster separation measure. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. PAMI-1(2), 224–227 (1979)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xie, X.L., Beni, G.: A validity measure for fuzzy clustering. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 13(8), 841–847 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Deneubourg, J.-L., Goss, S., Franks, N., Sendora-Franks, A., Detrain, C., Chretien, L.: The dynamics of collective sorting. Robot-like ants and ant-like robots. In: Meyer, J.-A., Wilson, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the First International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior: From Animals to Animats 1, pp. 356–365. MIT Press, Cambridge (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lumer, E., Faieta, B.: Diversity and adaptation in populations of clustering ants. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior: From Animals to Animats 3, pp. 501–508. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kuntz, P., Snyers, D.: New results on an ant  =  based heuristic for highlighting the organization on of large graphs. In: Proceedings of the 1999 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 1451–1488. IEEE Press, Piscataway (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Onan, A., Bukt, H., Korukoglu, S.: An improved ant algorithm with LDA-based representation for text document clustering. J. Inf. Sci. 43(2) (2017)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bonabeau, E., Dorigo, M., Theraulaz, G.: Swarm Intelligence: From Natural to Artificial Systems. Oxford University Press (1999)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tan, S.C., Ting, K.M., Teng, S.W.: Simplifying and improving ant-based clustering. Procedia Comput. Sci. 4, 46–55 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    MacQueen, J.B.: Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In: Proceedings of 5th Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Berkeley, vol. 1, pp. 281–297. University of California Press (1967)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hartigan, J.A., Wong, M.A.: Algorithm AS 136: a k-means clustering algorithm. Appl. Stat. 28(1), 100–108 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bezdek, J.C.: Pattern Recognition With Fuzzy Objective Function Algorithms, p. 256. Plenum, New York (1981)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dunn, J.C.: A fuzzy relative of the ISODATA process and its use in detecting compact well-separated clusters. J. Cybern. 3, 32–37 (1973)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kohonen, T.: Self-organizing Maps, vol. 30. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Murtagh, F.: Interpreting the Kohonen self-organizing feature map using contiguity-constrained clustering. Pattern Recognit. Lett. 16, 399–408 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Warsaw University of Life SciencesWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations