Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 624

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Influence of Data Splitting on Performance of Machine Learning Models in Prediction of Shear Strength of Soil

Open access
Nguyen, Quang Hung, Ly, Hai-Bang, Ho, Lanh Si, Al-Ansari, Nadhir, Le, Hiep Van, Tran, Van Quan, Prakash, Indra, Pham, Binh Thai·2021·Mathematical Problems in Engineering

Abstract

The main objective of this study is to evaluate and compare the performance of different machine learning (ML) algorithms, namely, Artificial Neural Network (ANN), Extreme Learning Machine (ELM), and Boosting Trees (Boosted) algorithms, considering the influence of various training to testing ratios in predicting the soil shear strength, one of the most critical geotechnical engineering properties in civil engineering design and construction. For this aim, a database of 538 soil samples collected from the Long Phu 1 power plant project, Vietnam, was utilized to generate the datasets for the modeling process. Different ratios (i.e., 10/90, 20/80, 30/70, 40/60, 50/50, 60/40, 70/30, 80/20, and 90/10) were used to divide the datasets into the training and testing datasets for the performance assessment of models. Popular statistical indicators, such as Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE), Mean Absolute Error (MAE), and Correlation Coefficient (R), were employed to evaluate the predictive capability of the models under different training and testing ratios. Besides, Monte Carlo simulation was simultaneously carried out to evaluate the performance of the proposed models, taking into account the random sampling effect. The results showed that although all three ML models performed well, the ANN was the most accurate and statistically stable model after 1000 Monte Carlo simulations (Mean R = 0.9348) compared with other models such as Boosted (Mean R = 0.9192) and ELM (Mean R = 0.8703). Investigation on the performance of the models showed that the predictive capability of the ML models was greatly affected by the training/testing ratios, where the 70/30 one presented the best performance of the models. Concisely, the results presented herein showed an effective manner in selecting the appropriate ratios of datasets and the best ML model to predict the soil shear strength accurately, which would be helpful in the design and engineering phases of construction projects.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1155/2021/4832864

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 71 references

Cited by

See all 624

Metadata

Authors
Nguyen, Q. H., Ly, H.-B., Ho, L. S., Al-Ansari, N., Le, H. V., Tran, V. Q., Prakash, I., & Pham, B. T.
Venue
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-02-05
Volume
2021
Pages
1-15
ISSN
  • 1024-123X (ISSN-L)
  • 1563-5147
OpenAlex
W3128290931
Cited by
624
References
71
FWCI
79.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Influence of Data Splitting on Performance of Machine Learning Models in Prediction of Shear Strength of Soil. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1155/2021/4832864
The paper
Nguyen, Q. H., Ly, H.-B., Ho, L. S., Al-Ansari, N., Le, H. V., Tran, V. Q., Prakash, I., & Pham, B. T. (2021). Influence of Data Splitting on Performance of Machine Learning Models in Prediction of Shear Strength of Soil. Mathematical Problems in Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/4832864

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.