ArticlePloS one2025
Machine learning-based analyzing earthquake-induced slope displacement.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Delineating homogeneous zones for rock joint wall mechanical properties in open-pit mine slope based on a multi-indicator stacked generalization model.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Risk-indexed artificial neural network for predicting duration and cost of irrigation canal-lining projects using survey-based calibration and python validation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurately evaluating earthquake-induced slope displacement is a key factor for designing slopes that can effectively respond to seismic activity. This study evaluates the capabilities of various machine learning models, including artificial neural network (ANN), support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) in analyzing earthquake-induced slope displacement. A dataset of 45 samples was used, with 70% allocated for training and 30% for testing. To improve model robustness, repeated 5-fold cross-validation was applied. Among the models, XGBoost demonstrated superior predictive accuracy, with an R2 value of 0.99 on both the train and test data, outperforming ANN, SVM, and RF, which had R2 values of 0.63 and 0.80, 0.87 and 0.86, 0.94 and 0.87 on the train and test data, respectively. Sensitivity analysis identified maximum horizontal acceleration (kmax = 0.714) as the most influential factor in slope displacement. The findings suggest that the XGBoost model developed in this study is highly effective in predicting earthquake-induced slope displacement, offering valuable insights for early warning systems and slope stability management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.