Loading…

An in-depth comparative analysis of data-driven and classic regression models for scour depth prediction around cylindrical bridge piers

The study focuses on the critical concern of designing secure and resilient bridge piers, especially regarding scour phenomena. Traditional equations for estimating scour depth are limited, often leading to inaccuracies. To address these shortcomings, modern data-driven models (DDMs) have emerged. T...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Applied water science 2023-12, Vol.13 (12), p.231-22, Article 231
Main Authors: Fuladipanah, Mehdi, Hazi, Mohammad Azamathulla, Kisi, Ozgur
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-3daeed392ce84c33377a9e6aadbc86d653659e84e42bae493da014f0378fb4033
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-3daeed392ce84c33377a9e6aadbc86d653659e84e42bae493da014f0378fb4033
container_end_page 22
container_issue 12
container_start_page 231
container_title Applied water science
container_volume 13
creator Fuladipanah, Mehdi
Hazi, Mohammad Azamathulla
Kisi, Ozgur
description The study focuses on the critical concern of designing secure and resilient bridge piers, especially regarding scour phenomena. Traditional equations for estimating scour depth are limited, often leading to inaccuracies. To address these shortcomings, modern data-driven models (DDMs) have emerged. This research conducts a comprehensive comparison involving DDMs, including support vector machine (SVM), gene expression programming (GEP), multilayer perceptron (MLP), gradient boosting trees (GBT) and multivariate adaptive regression spline (MARS) models, against two regression equations for predicting scour depth around cylindrical bridge piers. Evaluation employs statistical indices, such as root-mean-square error (RMSE), coefficient of determination ( R 2 ), mean average error (MAE) and normalized discrepancy ratio ( S (DDRmax) ), to assess their predictive performance. A total of 455 datasets from previous research papers are employed for assessment. Dimensionless parameters Froude number F r = U gy , Pier Froude number F r P = U g ′ D , and the ratio of scour depth to pier diameter ( y D ) are carefully selected as influential model inputs through dimensional analysis and the gamma test. The results highlight the superior performance of the SVM model. In the training phase, it exhibits an RMSE of 0.1009, MAE of 0.0726, R 2 of 0.9401, and S DDR of 2.9237. During testing, the SVM model shows an RMSE of 0.023, MAE of 0.017, R 2 of 0.984, and S DDR of 5.301. Additionally, it has an average error of − 0.065 and a total error of − 20.642 in the training set and an average error of − 0.005 and a total error of − 0.707 in the testing set. Conversely, the M5 model exhibits the lowest accuracy. The statistical metrics unequivocally establish the SVM model as significantly outperforming the experimental models, placing it in a higher echelon of predictive accuracy.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s13201-023-02022-0
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_635becfc107645ee868b84f66ed1b5a1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_635becfc107645ee868b84f66ed1b5a1</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2886750587</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-3daeed392ce84c33377a9e6aadbc86d653659e84e42bae493da014f0378fb4033</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc9q3DAQxk1oICHNC_Qk6Nmt_ls-hpC2gUAvzVmMpfFWi9dyR97AvkEfu9q4pLcKhIbR9_0G6WuaD4J_Epx3n4tQkouWS1U3l7LlF821FD1vje7Nu7fadVfNbSl7XpcRppfuuvl9N7M0txGX9ScL-bAAwZpekMEM06mkwvLIIqzQRqrtufYjCxOUkgIj3BHWKs_skCNOhY2ZWAn5SGwjLoQxhfWsAMrHs_c0pbmyAkxsoBR3yJaEVN43lyNMBW__njfN85eHH_ff2qfvXx_v757aoK1bWxUBMapeBnQ6KKW6Dnq0AHEIzkZrlDV9vUItB0DdVz0XeuSqc-OguVI3zePGjRn2fqF0ADr5DMm_NjLtPNCawoTeKjNgGIPgndUG0Vk3OD1ai1EMBkRlfdxYC-VfRyyr39en148rXjpnO8ON66pKbqpAuRTC8W2q4P4coN8C9DVA_xqg59WkNlOp4nmH9A_9H9cfYgugMg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2886750587</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>An in-depth comparative analysis of data-driven and classic regression models for scour depth prediction around cylindrical bridge piers</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><source>Springer Nature - SpringerLink Journals - Fully Open Access </source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Fuladipanah, Mehdi ; Hazi, Mohammad Azamathulla ; Kisi, Ozgur</creator><creatorcontrib>Fuladipanah, Mehdi ; Hazi, Mohammad Azamathulla ; Kisi, Ozgur</creatorcontrib><description>The study focuses on the critical concern of designing secure and resilient bridge piers, especially regarding scour phenomena. Traditional equations for estimating scour depth are limited, often leading to inaccuracies. To address these shortcomings, modern data-driven models (DDMs) have emerged. This research conducts a comprehensive comparison involving DDMs, including support vector machine (SVM), gene expression programming (GEP), multilayer perceptron (MLP), gradient boosting trees (GBT) and multivariate adaptive regression spline (MARS) models, against two regression equations for predicting scour depth around cylindrical bridge piers. Evaluation employs statistical indices, such as root-mean-square error (RMSE), coefficient of determination ( R 2 ), mean average error (MAE) and normalized discrepancy ratio ( S (DDRmax) ), to assess their predictive performance. A total of 455 datasets from previous research papers are employed for assessment. Dimensionless parameters Froude number F r = U gy , Pier Froude number F r P = U g ′ D , and the ratio of scour depth to pier diameter ( y D ) are carefully selected as influential model inputs through dimensional analysis and the gamma test. The results highlight the superior performance of the SVM model. In the training phase, it exhibits an RMSE of 0.1009, MAE of 0.0726, R 2 of 0.9401, and S DDR of 2.9237. During testing, the SVM model shows an RMSE of 0.023, MAE of 0.017, R 2 of 0.984, and S DDR of 5.301. Additionally, it has an average error of − 0.065 and a total error of − 20.642 in the training set and an average error of − 0.005 and a total error of − 0.707 in the testing set. Conversely, the M5 model exhibits the lowest accuracy. The statistical metrics unequivocally establish the SVM model as significantly outperforming the experimental models, placing it in a higher echelon of predictive accuracy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2190-5487</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2190-5495</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s13201-023-02022-0</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Aquatic Pollution ; Bridge piers ; Bridges ; Civil engineering ; Comparative analysis ; Comparative Law ; Dimensional analysis ; Earth and Environmental Science ; Earth Sciences ; Froude number ; Hydrogeology ; Industrial and Production Engineering ; International &amp; Foreign Law ; Local scour ; Meta-heuristic models ; Nanotechnology ; Original Article ; Performance assessment ; Piers ; Private International Law ; Regression analysis ; Regression models ; Scour ; Sediment particle ; Support vector machines ; Waste Water Technology ; Water Industry/Water Technologies ; Water Management ; Water Pollution Control</subject><ispartof>Applied water science, 2023-12, Vol.13 (12), p.231-22, Article 231</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2023</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2023. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-3daeed392ce84c33377a9e6aadbc86d653659e84e42bae493da014f0378fb4033</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-3daeed392ce84c33377a9e6aadbc86d653659e84e42bae493da014f0378fb4033</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5305-2718</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2886750587/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2886750587?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,25753,27924,27925,37012,44590,75126</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Fuladipanah, Mehdi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hazi, Mohammad Azamathulla</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kisi, Ozgur</creatorcontrib><title>An in-depth comparative analysis of data-driven and classic regression models for scour depth prediction around cylindrical bridge piers</title><title>Applied water science</title><addtitle>Appl Water Sci</addtitle><description>The study focuses on the critical concern of designing secure and resilient bridge piers, especially regarding scour phenomena. Traditional equations for estimating scour depth are limited, often leading to inaccuracies. To address these shortcomings, modern data-driven models (DDMs) have emerged. This research conducts a comprehensive comparison involving DDMs, including support vector machine (SVM), gene expression programming (GEP), multilayer perceptron (MLP), gradient boosting trees (GBT) and multivariate adaptive regression spline (MARS) models, against two regression equations for predicting scour depth around cylindrical bridge piers. Evaluation employs statistical indices, such as root-mean-square error (RMSE), coefficient of determination ( R 2 ), mean average error (MAE) and normalized discrepancy ratio ( S (DDRmax) ), to assess their predictive performance. A total of 455 datasets from previous research papers are employed for assessment. Dimensionless parameters Froude number F r = U gy , Pier Froude number F r P = U g ′ D , and the ratio of scour depth to pier diameter ( y D ) are carefully selected as influential model inputs through dimensional analysis and the gamma test. The results highlight the superior performance of the SVM model. In the training phase, it exhibits an RMSE of 0.1009, MAE of 0.0726, R 2 of 0.9401, and S DDR of 2.9237. During testing, the SVM model shows an RMSE of 0.023, MAE of 0.017, R 2 of 0.984, and S DDR of 5.301. Additionally, it has an average error of − 0.065 and a total error of − 20.642 in the training set and an average error of − 0.005 and a total error of − 0.707 in the testing set. Conversely, the M5 model exhibits the lowest accuracy. The statistical metrics unequivocally establish the SVM model as significantly outperforming the experimental models, placing it in a higher echelon of predictive accuracy.</description><subject>Aquatic Pollution</subject><subject>Bridge piers</subject><subject>Bridges</subject><subject>Civil engineering</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Comparative Law</subject><subject>Dimensional analysis</subject><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Earth Sciences</subject><subject>Froude number</subject><subject>Hydrogeology</subject><subject>Industrial and Production Engineering</subject><subject>International &amp; Foreign Law</subject><subject>Local scour</subject><subject>Meta-heuristic models</subject><subject>Nanotechnology</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Performance assessment</subject><subject>Piers</subject><subject>Private International Law</subject><subject>Regression analysis</subject><subject>Regression models</subject><subject>Scour</subject><subject>Sediment particle</subject><subject>Support vector machines</subject><subject>Waste Water Technology</subject><subject>Water Industry/Water Technologies</subject><subject>Water Management</subject><subject>Water Pollution Control</subject><issn>2190-5487</issn><issn>2190-5495</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc9q3DAQxk1oICHNC_Qk6Nmt_ls-hpC2gUAvzVmMpfFWi9dyR97AvkEfu9q4pLcKhIbR9_0G6WuaD4J_Epx3n4tQkouWS1U3l7LlF821FD1vje7Nu7fadVfNbSl7XpcRppfuuvl9N7M0txGX9ScL-bAAwZpekMEM06mkwvLIIqzQRqrtufYjCxOUkgIj3BHWKs_skCNOhY2ZWAn5SGwjLoQxhfWsAMrHs_c0pbmyAkxsoBR3yJaEVN43lyNMBW__njfN85eHH_ff2qfvXx_v757aoK1bWxUBMapeBnQ6KKW6Dnq0AHEIzkZrlDV9vUItB0DdVz0XeuSqc-OguVI3zePGjRn2fqF0ADr5DMm_NjLtPNCawoTeKjNgGIPgndUG0Vk3OD1ai1EMBkRlfdxYC-VfRyyr39en148rXjpnO8ON66pKbqpAuRTC8W2q4P4coN8C9DVA_xqg59WkNlOp4nmH9A_9H9cfYgugMg</recordid><startdate>20231201</startdate><enddate>20231201</enddate><creator>Fuladipanah, Mehdi</creator><creator>Hazi, Mohammad Azamathulla</creator><creator>Kisi, Ozgur</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><general>SpringerOpen</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5305-2718</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20231201</creationdate><title>An in-depth comparative analysis of data-driven and classic regression models for scour depth prediction around cylindrical bridge piers</title><author>Fuladipanah, Mehdi ; Hazi, Mohammad Azamathulla ; Kisi, Ozgur</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-3daeed392ce84c33377a9e6aadbc86d653659e84e42bae493da014f0378fb4033</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Aquatic Pollution</topic><topic>Bridge piers</topic><topic>Bridges</topic><topic>Civil engineering</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Comparative Law</topic><topic>Dimensional analysis</topic><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Earth Sciences</topic><topic>Froude number</topic><topic>Hydrogeology</topic><topic>Industrial and Production Engineering</topic><topic>International &amp; Foreign Law</topic><topic>Local scour</topic><topic>Meta-heuristic models</topic><topic>Nanotechnology</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Performance assessment</topic><topic>Piers</topic><topic>Private International Law</topic><topic>Regression analysis</topic><topic>Regression models</topic><topic>Scour</topic><topic>Sediment particle</topic><topic>Support vector machines</topic><topic>Waste Water Technology</topic><topic>Water Industry/Water Technologies</topic><topic>Water Management</topic><topic>Water Pollution Control</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Fuladipanah, Mehdi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hazi, Mohammad Azamathulla</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kisi, Ozgur</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution &amp; Environmental Quality</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Applied water science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Fuladipanah, Mehdi</au><au>Hazi, Mohammad Azamathulla</au><au>Kisi, Ozgur</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>An in-depth comparative analysis of data-driven and classic regression models for scour depth prediction around cylindrical bridge piers</atitle><jtitle>Applied water science</jtitle><stitle>Appl Water Sci</stitle><date>2023-12-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>231</spage><epage>22</epage><pages>231-22</pages><artnum>231</artnum><issn>2190-5487</issn><eissn>2190-5495</eissn><abstract>The study focuses on the critical concern of designing secure and resilient bridge piers, especially regarding scour phenomena. Traditional equations for estimating scour depth are limited, often leading to inaccuracies. To address these shortcomings, modern data-driven models (DDMs) have emerged. This research conducts a comprehensive comparison involving DDMs, including support vector machine (SVM), gene expression programming (GEP), multilayer perceptron (MLP), gradient boosting trees (GBT) and multivariate adaptive regression spline (MARS) models, against two regression equations for predicting scour depth around cylindrical bridge piers. Evaluation employs statistical indices, such as root-mean-square error (RMSE), coefficient of determination ( R 2 ), mean average error (MAE) and normalized discrepancy ratio ( S (DDRmax) ), to assess their predictive performance. A total of 455 datasets from previous research papers are employed for assessment. Dimensionless parameters Froude number F r = U gy , Pier Froude number F r P = U g ′ D , and the ratio of scour depth to pier diameter ( y D ) are carefully selected as influential model inputs through dimensional analysis and the gamma test. The results highlight the superior performance of the SVM model. In the training phase, it exhibits an RMSE of 0.1009, MAE of 0.0726, R 2 of 0.9401, and S DDR of 2.9237. During testing, the SVM model shows an RMSE of 0.023, MAE of 0.017, R 2 of 0.984, and S DDR of 5.301. Additionally, it has an average error of − 0.065 and a total error of − 20.642 in the training set and an average error of − 0.005 and a total error of − 0.707 in the testing set. Conversely, the M5 model exhibits the lowest accuracy. The statistical metrics unequivocally establish the SVM model as significantly outperforming the experimental models, placing it in a higher echelon of predictive accuracy.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><doi>10.1007/s13201-023-02022-0</doi><tpages>22</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5305-2718</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2190-5487
ispartof Applied water science, 2023-12, Vol.13 (12), p.231-22, Article 231
issn 2190-5487
2190-5495
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_635becfc107645ee868b84f66ed1b5a1
source Publicly Available Content Database; Springer Nature - SpringerLink Journals - Fully Open Access ; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry
subjects Aquatic Pollution
Bridge piers
Bridges
Civil engineering
Comparative analysis
Comparative Law
Dimensional analysis
Earth and Environmental Science
Earth Sciences
Froude number
Hydrogeology
Industrial and Production Engineering
International & Foreign Law
Local scour
Meta-heuristic models
Nanotechnology
Original Article
Performance assessment
Piers
Private International Law
Regression analysis
Regression models
Scour
Sediment particle
Support vector machines
Waste Water Technology
Water Industry/Water Technologies
Water Management
Water Pollution Control
title An in-depth comparative analysis of data-driven and classic regression models for scour depth prediction around cylindrical bridge piers
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T19%3A40%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=An%20in-depth%20comparative%20analysis%20of%20data-driven%20and%20classic%20regression%20models%20for%20scour%20depth%20prediction%20around%20cylindrical%20bridge%20piers&rft.jtitle=Applied%20water%20science&rft.au=Fuladipanah,%20Mehdi&rft.date=2023-12-01&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=231&rft.epage=22&rft.pages=231-22&rft.artnum=231&rft.issn=2190-5487&rft.eissn=2190-5495&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s13201-023-02022-0&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2886750587%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-3daeed392ce84c33377a9e6aadbc86d653659e84e42bae493da014f0378fb4033%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2886750587&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true