[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]Comparative Study on Three Rockburst Prediction Models of Intensity Classi-fication Based on Machine Learning
Received date: 2020-04-08
Revised date: 2020-07-11
Online published: 2021-01-29
Rockburst is one of the key scientific problems that must be solved in large-scale underground geotechnical engineering and deep mineral resource mining.The safety of personnel and equipment on site was directly threatened by rockburst.Rockburst could be effectively avoided and controlled in time by scientific and accurate rockburst prediction of intensity classification.Through the analysis of six rockburst engineering examples,on the basis of the factors,characteristics and causes of rockburst,a rockburst prediction index system composed of four evaluation indices,i.e.,tunnel-wall surrounding rock’s maximum tangential stress,rock uniaxial compressive strength,rock uniaxial tensile strength,and rock elastic energy index was established.With reference to other rockburst intensity classification schemes,considering the intensity of rockburst occurrence and the main influencing factors,the rockburst intensity was divided into four levels:None rockburst(Ⅰ),slight rockburst(Ⅱ),intermediate rockburst(Ⅲ) and strong rockburst(Ⅳ).According to the selected rockburst evaluation index and rockburst intensity grade,a literature survey method was used to establish a database containing 301 groups of rockburst engineering examples,which would be used as the sample data for rockburst prediction.In order to accurately and reliably predicted rockburst disasters,machine learning technology was introduced.First,a random forest-based rockburst evaluation index importance analysis model was established,a new index weight calculation method of random forest-analytic hierarchy processs was proposed,and the rockburst prediction model based on the RF-AHP-cloud model was constructed.Then,the firefly algorithm based on good point set variable step strategy was introduced to optimize the penalty parameters and radial basis function parameters of the support vector machine,and the rockburst prediction model based on ⅠGSO-SVM was constructed.Finally,the Dropout method was used to regularize the model,and the improved Adam algorithm was used to update weight,and the rockburst prediction model based on DA-DNN was constructed.The effectiveness and correctness of the three models were validated by the prediction results of 60 groups of rockburst engineering examples.The research results show that:The DA-DNN,ⅠGSO-SVM,and RF-AHP-cloud model have prediction accuracy rates of 98.3%,90.0% and 85.0%.The core of rockburst intensity classification prediction based on cloud model is weight determination,and the RF-AHP weight calculation method proposed in this paper has a good effect.The data-driven ⅠGSO-SVM and DA-DNN models are based on rockburst engineering instance data.Through data mining,the rockburst intensity level can be effectively predicted,and higher prediction accuracy can be achieved by improvement.The theory of DA-DNN model is easy to understand,the coding is relatively simple and it is easy to implement.As various underground geotechnical engineering develops deeper,rockburst disasters occur frequently,the amount of rockburst data is increasing,and the DA-DNN model has a wider application prospect.
Rui TIAN , Haidong MENG , Shijiang CHEN , Chuangye WANG , Dening SUN , Lei SHI . Comparative Study on Three Rockburst Prediction Models of Intensity Classi-fication Based on Machine Learning[J]. Gold Science and Technology, 2020 , 28(6) : 920 -929 . DOI: 10.11872/j.issn.1005-2518.2020.06.069
http://www.goldsci.ac.cn/article/2020/1005-2518/1005-2518-2020-28-6-920.shtml
| 1 |
冯夏庭,肖亚勋,丰光亮,等.岩爆孕育过程研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2019,38(4):649-673.
|
| 2 |
李夕兵,宫凤强,王少锋,等.深部硬岩矿山岩爆的动静组合加载力学机制与动力判据[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2019,38(4):708-723.
|
| 3 |
李任豪,顾合龙,李夕兵,等.基于PSO-RBF神经网络模型的岩爆倾向性预测[J].黄金科学技术,2020,28(1):134-141.
|
| 4 |
王旷,李夕兵,马春德,等.基于改进的RS-TOPSIS模型的岩爆倾向性预测[J].黄金科学技术,2019,27(1):80-88.
|
| 5 |
田睿,孟海东,陈世江,等.基于深度神经网络的岩爆烈度分级预测研究[J].煤炭学报,2020.
|
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
胡建华,尚俊龙,周科平.岩爆烈度预测的改进物元可拓模型与实例分析[J].中国有色金属学报,2013,23(2):495-502.
|
| 8 |
徐琛,刘晓丽,王恩志,等.基于组合权重—理想点法的应变型岩爆五因素预测分级[J].岩土工程学报,2017,39(12):2245-2252.
|
| 9 |
李绍红,王少阳,朱建东,等.基于权重融合和云模型的岩爆倾向性预测研究[J].岩土工程学报,2018,40(6):1075-1083.
|
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
宫凤强,李夕兵,张伟,等.基于Bayes判别分析方法的地下工程岩爆发生及烈度分级预测[J].岩土力学,2010,31(增1):370-377.
|
| 13 |
李天斌,孟陆波,王兰生.高地应力隧道稳定性及岩爆、大变形灾害防治[M].北京:科学出版社,2016.
|
| 14 |
周德培,洪开荣.太平驿隧洞岩爆特征及防治措施[J].岩石力学与工程学报,1995,14(2):171-178.
|
| 15 |
谷明成,何发亮,陈成宗.秦岭隧道岩爆的研究[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2002,21(9):1324-1329.
|
| 16 |
严健,何川,汪波,等.雅鲁藏布江缝合带深埋长大隧道群岩爆孕育及特征[J].岩石力学与工程学报,2019,38(4):769-781.
|
| 17 |
陈原望.阿舍勒铜矿深井开采岩爆现象研究及应对措施探索[J].新疆有色金属,2018(2):80-82.
|
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
王元汉,李卧东,李启光,等.岩爆预测的模糊数学综合评判方法[J].岩石力学与工程学报,1998,17(5):493-501.
|
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
张波.基于岩体各向异性深埋公路隧道安全稳定性研究[D].武汉:中国科学院武汉岩土力学研究所,2007.
|
| 23 |
孙臣生.基于改进MATLAB-BP神经网络算法的隧道岩爆预测模型[J].重庆交通大学(自然科学版),2019,38(10):41-49.
|
| 24 |
李德毅,杜鹢.不确定性人工智能[M].北京:国防工业出版社,2014.
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
鲁月.基于随机森林因素筛选的国产电影票房组合预测模型研究[D].南京:南京航天航空大学,2019.
|
| 27 |
冯夏庭,赵洪波.岩爆预测的支持向量机[J].东北大学学报(自然科学版),2002,23(1):57-59.
|
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
李敬明.萤火虫群智能优化算法及其应用研究[D].合肥:合肥工业大学,2017.
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
张慧.深度学习中优化算法的研究与改进[D].北京:北京邮电大学,2017.
|
| 35 |
郝杰,侍克斌,王显丽,等.基于模糊C-均值算法粗糙集理论的云模型在岩爆等级评价中的应用[J].岩土力学,2016,37(3):859-866.
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |