Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Characterizing geotechnical site investigation data: a comparative study using a novel distribution model

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Acta Geotechnica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The fitting of a parameterized distribution model to site investigation data is commonly adopted in geotechnical site characterization, but this exercise may require subjective interpretations from engineers. In the literature, many strategies, such as the Bayesian method, are proposed to facilitate objective selections of distribution model(s). In this paper, a novel distribution model, fractional moments-based maximum entropy distribution (MaxEnt-FM), is proposed to characterize site investigation data. Using two sets of simulated site investigation data that are of different characteristics, the MaxEnt-FM model is illustrated and compared with classic distribution models and the results obtained using the Bayesian model selection technique. A slope reliability analysis that utilizes the fitted distributions as inputs is then carried out to further compare the MaxEnt-FM model against other methods. The effects of the distribution model and the amount and variability of site investigation data on slope reliability are also discussed. The results indicate that the Bayesian method may provide biased model selections, which may result in inaccurate slope reliability calculations. In contrast, the MaxEnt-FM model not only reasonably characterizes the site investigation data, but also offers a method that is sufficiently generalizable and requires minimum interventions from engineers to handle site investigation data that is of different quantity and quality. Finally, the effectiveness of the MaxEnt-FM model is illustrated by applying to real site investigation data.

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
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data used are available from the corresponding author by request.

References

  1. Akaike H (1998) Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-1694-0_15

  2. Beck JL, Yuen K-V (2004) Model selection using response measurements: Bayesian probabilistic approach. J Eng Mech. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9399(2004)130:2(192)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Beer M, Zhang Y, Quek ST, Phoon KK (2013) Reliability analysis with scarce information: comparing alternative approaches in a geotechnical engineering context. Struct Saf. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2012.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Clayton CR, MatthewsMC, Simons NE (1982) Site investigation (No. Monograph). London: Granada

  5. Cheung RWM, Tang WH (2005) Realistic assessment of slope reliability for effective landslide hazard management. Geotechnique. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2005.55.1.85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cao Z, Wang Y, Li D (2016) Quantification of prior knowledge in geotechnical site characterization. Eng Geol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2015.08.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chen EJ, Liu Y, Lee FH (2016) A statistical model for the unconfined compressive strength of deep-mixed columns. Geotechnique. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.14.P.162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Draper D (1995) Assessment and propagation of model uncertainty. J R Stat Soc Ser B (Methodol). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02015.x

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Deng J (2022) Probabilistic characterization of soil properties based on the maximum entropy method from fractional moments: model development, case study, and application. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 219:108218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Erdogmus D, Hild KE, Rao YN, Príncipe JC (2004) Minimax mutual information approach for independent component analysis. Neural Comput. https://doi.org/10.1162/089976604773717595

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Houlsby NMT, Houlsby GT (2013) Statistical fitting of undrained strength data. Geotechnique. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.13.P.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hines KE, Middendorf TR, Aldrich RW (2014) Determination of parameter identifiability in nonlinear biophysical models: a Bayesian approach. J Gen Physiol 143(3):401–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Jaynes ET (1957) Information theory and statistical mechanics. Phys Rev. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.106.620

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Jiang SH, Huang J, Griffiths DV, Deng ZP (2022) Advances in reliability and risk analyses of slopes in spatial variable soils: a state-of-the-art review. Comput Geotech 141:104498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2021.104498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kass RE, Raftery AE (1995) Bayes factors. J Am Stat Assoc. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1995.10476572

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Li X, Tsai FTC (2009) Bayesian model averaging for groundwater head prediction and uncertainty analysis using multimodel and multimethod. Water Resour Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2008WR007488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Low YM (2013) A new distribution for fitting four moments and its applications to reliability analysis. Struct Saf. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2013.01.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Liu Y, Jiang YJ, Xiao H, Lee FH (2017) Determination of representative strength of deep cement-mixed clay from core strength data. Geotechnique. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.16.P.105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Li DQ, Wang L, Cao ZJ, Qi XH (2019) Reliability analysis of unsaturated slope stability considering SWCC model selection and parameter uncertainties. Eng Geol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2019.105207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Li G, He W, Zeng Y (2019) An improved maximum entropy method via fractional moments with Laplace transform for reliability analysis. Struct Multidiscip Optim. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-018-2129-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Liu D, Liu H, Wu Y, Zhang W, Wang Y, Santosh M (2022) Characterization of geo-material parameters: gene concept and big data approach in geotechnical engineering. Geosyst Geoenviron. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geogeo.2021.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Länsivaara T, Phoon KK, Ching J (2021) What is a characteristic value for soils? Georisk. https://doi.org/10.1080/17499518.2021.1975301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. McCulloch JH (1986) Simple consistent estimators of stable distribution parameters. Commun Stat Simul Comput. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918608812563

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Mayne PW, Christopher BR, DeJong J (2002) Subsurface investigations—geotechnical site characterization: reference manual (No. FHWA-NHI-01-031), United States, Federal Highway Administration

  25. Phoon KK, Kulhawy FH (1999) Characterization of geotechnical variability. Can Geotech J. https://doi.org/10.1139/t99-038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Pan Y, Liu Y, Lee FH, Phoon KK (2019) Analysis of cement-treated soil slab for deep excavation support—a rational approach. Geotechnique. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.18.P.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ramancha MK, Astroza R, Madarshahian R, Conte JP (2022) Bayesian updating and identifiability assessment of nonlinear finite element models. Mech Syst Signal Process 167:108517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Shannon CE (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst Tech J. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Sijbers J, Den Dekker AJ, Scheunders P, Van Dyck D (1998) Maximum-likelihood estimation of rician distribution parameters. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1109/42.712125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Tang XS, Li DQ, Rong G, Phoon KK, Zhou CB (2013) Impact of copula selection on geotechnical reliability under incomplete probability information. Comput Geotech. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2012.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Toraldo C, Modoni G, Ochmanski M, Croce P (2018) The characteristic strength of jet-grouted material. Geotechnique. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.16.P.320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Vick SG (2002) Degrees of belief: subjective probability and engineering judgment, ASCE Publications

  33. Wit E, van den Heuvel E, Romeijn JW (2012) ’All models are wrong…’: an introduction to model uncertainty. Stat Neerl. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9574.2012.00530.x

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. Wang Y, Zhao T, Cao Z (2015) Site-specific probability distribution of geotechnical properties. Comput Geotech. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2015.08.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang Y, Cao Z, Li D (2016) Bayesian perspective on geotechnical variability and site characterization. Eng Geol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2015.08.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Wu XZ (2017) Implementing statistical fitting and reliability analysis for geotechnical engineering problems in R. Georisk. https://doi.org/10.1080/17499518.2016.1201577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Wang ZZ, Goh SH (2022) A maximum entropy method using fractional moments and deep learning for geotechnical reliability analysis. Acta Geotech 17(4):1147–1166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-021-01326-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Wang C, Wang K, Tang D, Hu B, Kelata Y (2022) Spatial random fields-based Bayesian method for calibrating geotechnical parameters with ground surface settlements induced by shield tunneling. Acta Geotech. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-021-01407-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Xu C, Yang L (1998) Test of goodness of fit of random variables and Bayesian estimation of distribution parameters. J Tongji Univer 26(3):340–344

    Google Scholar 

  40. Xu J, Dang C (2019) A novel fractional moments-based maximum entropy method for high-dimensional reliability analysis. Appl Math Model. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2019.06.037

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Yacoub MD, Bautista JEV, de Rezende G, Guedes L (1999) On higher order statistics of the Nakagami-m distribution. IEEE Trans Veh Technol. https://doi.org/10.1109/25.764995

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Yang HQ, Zhang L, Pan Q, Phoon KK, Shen Z (2021) Bayesian estimation of spatially varying soil parameters with spatiotemporal monitoring data. Acta Geotech. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-020-00991-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Zhang X, Pandey MD (2013) Structural reliability analysis based on the concepts of entropy, fractional moment and dimensional reduction method. Struct Saf. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2013.03.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Zhang J, Huang HW, Juang CH, Su WW (2014) Geotechnical reliability analysis with limited data: consideration of model selection uncertainty. Eng Geol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2014.08.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Zhang X, He W, Zhang Y, Pandey MD (2017) An effective approach for probabilistic lifetime modelling based on the principle of maximum entropy with fractional moments. Appl Math Model. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2017.07.036

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Zhang X, Low YM, Koh CG (2020) Maximum entropy distribution with fractional moments for reliability analysis. Struct Saf. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2019.101904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Zhang W, Wu C, Zhong H, Li Y, Wang L (2021) Prediction of undrained shear strength using extreme gradient boosting and random forest based on Bayesian optimization. Geosci Front. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2020.03.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Zhao Z, Congress SSC, Cai G, Duan W (2022) Bayesian probabilistic characterization of consolidation behavior of clays using CPTU data. Acta Geotech. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-021-01277-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project Nos. 41867036, 52179103, 52222905, 41972280). The financial supports are gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, National University of Singapore, Block E1A, #07-03, No.1 Engineering Drive 2, Singapore, 117576, Singapore

    Ze Zhou Wang

  2. School of Infrastructure Engineering, Nanchang University, Xuefu Road 999, Nanchang, 330031, People’s Republic of China

    Shui-Hua Jiang

Authors
  1. Ze Zhou Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shui-Hua Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ze Zhou Wang.

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

Wang, Z.Z., Jiang, SH. Characterizing geotechnical site investigation data: a comparative study using a novel distribution model. Acta Geotech. 18, 1821–1839 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-022-01720-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-022-01720-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation