Engineering with Computers

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-00977-1

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Design and implementation of a new tuned hybrid intelligent

model to predict the uniaxial compressive strength of the rock using
SFS‑ANFIS
Hongjun Jing1 · Hima Nikafshan Rad2 · Mahdi Hasanipanah3   · Danial Jahed Armaghani4 · Sultan Noman Qasem5,6

Received: 23 November 2019 / Accepted: 31 January 2020

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2020

Abstract
This study proposes a novel design to systematically optimize the parameters for the adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system
(ANFIS) model using stochastic fractal search (SFS) algorithm. To affirm the efficiency of the proposed SFS-ANFIS model,
the predicting results were compared with ANFIS and three hybrid methodologies based on ANFIS combined with genetic
algorithm (GA), differential evolution (DE), and particle swarm optimization (PSO). Accurate prediction of uniaxial com-
pressive strength (UCS) is of great significance for all geotechnical projects such as tunnels and dams. Hence, this study
proposes the use of SFS-ANFIS, GA-ANFIS, DE-ANFIS, PSO-ANFIS, and ANFIS models to predict UCS. In this regard,
the fresh water tunnel of Pahang–Selangor located in Malaysia was considered and the requirement data samples were col-
lected. Different statistical metrics such as coefficient of determination (R2) and mean absolute error were used to evaluate
the models. Referring to the efficiency results of SFS-ANFIS, it can be found that the SFS-ANFIS (with the R2 of 0.981) has
higher ability than PSO-ANFIS, DE-ANFIS, GA-ANFIS, and ANFIS models in predicting the UCS.

Keywords  UCS · ANFIS · Stochastic fractal search · Optimization algorithms

1 Introduction test method suggested by the International Society for

Rock strength needs to be estimated effectively as a key
factor in all geotechnical projects, including tunnels and
slope. The estimation of the uniaxial compressive strength
(UCS) of rock can be directly done by means of standard
Electronic supplementary material  The online version of this
article (https​://doi.org/10.1007/s0036​6-020-00977​-1) contains
supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Rock Mechanics (ISRM) or American Standards for Test-
ing Materials (ASTM). Though, in determining directly the
UCS value, there are a number of hindering factors, e.g.,
attaining the standard intact rock samples particularly in
highly jointed faulted rock. Additionally, carrying out the
direct experiments for this end is relatively time-consuming
and costly [1–3]. For that reason, estimating UCS utiliz-
ing simple index tests is comparatively more economical

2
* Mahdi Hasanipanah College of Computer Science, Tabari University of Babol,
Hasanipanahmahdi@duytan.edu.vn Babol, Iran
3
Hongjun Jing Institute of Research and Development, Duy Tan University,
jinghongjun@xust.edu.cn Da Nang 550000, Vietnam
4
Hima Nikafshan Rad Modeling Evolutionary Algorithms Simulation and Artificial
hima.nikafshan@mshdiau.ac.ir Intelligence, Faculty of Electrical & Electronics Engineering,
Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
Danial Jahed Armaghani
5
danialjahedarmaghani@tdtu.edu.vn Computer Science Department, College of Computer
and Information Sciences, Al Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud
Sultan Noman Qasem
Islamic University (IMSIU), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
SNMohammed@imamu.edu.sa
6
Computer Science Department, Faculty of Applied Science,
1
School of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Xi’an Taiz University, Taiz, Yemen
University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

and easier to do. For better comparison, different scholars
[4–9] have presented a number of estimation techniques in
the literature. For instance, some techniques of simple and
multiple regression analysis can be found adopted for this
aim in Singh et al. [10] and Monjezi et al. [11].
Literature also contains several empirical relations devel-
oped for the UCS estimation. Tugrul and Zarif [12] intro-
duced some new relationships between engineering proper-
ties and the petrographical properties of granite. In another
study, some empirical equations were proposed by Sharma
and Singh [4], which made an accurate estimation of UCS.
Aiming at estimating the UCS, Yagiz [13] carried out a non-
destructive experiment, namely the p-wave velocity (Vp),
and used several parameters such as modulus of elasticity
and slake durability index. He confirmed the existence of
a noteworthy relationship between UCS of rock and its Vp.
Cargill and Shakoor [14] carried out experiments upon five
different rocks aiming at assessing the correlations that may
exist between UCS and the slake durability, point load index
(Is(50)), Schmidt hammer (Rn), and the Los Angeles abrasion
test values. Their findings revealed a very significant cor-
relation between Is(50) and UCS. Singh and Singh [15] also
attempted to find out the relationships between UCS and Is(50)
in the case of quartzites. Kahraman [16] attempted to develop
the relationship between UCS and three rock parameters of
sound velocity, Rn, and Is(50). Young and Rosenbaum [17]
proposed a model with a high reliability that could be effec-
tively applied to controlling the strength and deformability of
sandstone using many mineralogical properties. Having done
some regression analyses on metamorphic, igneous, and sedi-
mentary rocks, Kahraman and Gunaydin [18] revealed some
correlation between UCS and Is(50). In another project, Basu
and Kamran [19] applied the point load test to the schistose
rocks and attempted to find out how applicable it is to the
UCS estimation. In the case of some Indian rocks, Singh et al.
[10] verified an empirical relation between UCS and Is(50). On
the other hand, Singh and Dubey [20] and Singh et al. [21]
proposed a number of empirical relationships for the estima-
tion of UCS value employing Vp chiefly for the coal measure
rocks. Having worked specifically on the Hong Kong gran-
ite, Basu, and Aydin [22] suggested an empirical relationship
between Is(50) and UCS. In another research, Sharma et al.
[23] discussed several statistical relationships between Rn and
Vp, slake durability index, and impact strength index.
In recent years, the use of soft-computing methods to solve
different engineering problems has been highlighted by differ-
ent scholars [24–53]. A review of the literature reveals differ-
ent soft-computing methods to estimate UCS (e.g., [24–27])
considering various rock index properties such as Rn, Vp, and
Is(50). Among all, Sarkar et al. [54] constructed models based
on artificial neural network (ANN) to estimate UCS as well as
the shear strength of a variety of rocks. Verma and Singh [55]
introduced an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS)
13
Engineering with Computers
to estimate Vp, emphasizing the high potential of neuro-fuzzy
method in modeling the nonlinear, multivariate, complex prob-
lems. In addition, a comparative analysis was done by Singh
and Verma [56] on intelligent algorithms to find a correlation
between the strength and petrographical properties of schistose
rock. Yagiz et al. [57] attempted to build an effective method
to accurately estimate UCS of the carbonate rock by means of
index properties and slake durability of the studied rock. Their
findings showed that the use of slake durability index (Id4),
density, Vp, and Rn values could lead to an acceptable estima-
tion of the rock UCS. Dehghanbanadaki et al. [38] offered a
hybrid of ANN and particle swarm optimization (PSO) to pre-
dict UCS and showed its effectiveness in improving ANN per-
formance. Jahed Armaghani et al. [58] employed a gene expres-
sion programming (GEP) model to predict UCS and compared
its performance with linear multiple regression (LMR). They
concluded that the accuracy of GEP was better than LMR in
predicting the UCS. An ensemble committee-based ANN was
proposed to predict UCS by Barzegar et al. [59]. They also
used several other soft-computing models in their study. They
indicated that the ANN-committee model possessed superior
predictive ability than the other models. Recently, the applica-
tion of metaheuristic algorithms has been increasing to improve
the performance of artificial intelligence methods such ANN,
ANFIS, and support vector machine [60–70].
This study proposes a hybrid of ANFIS and stochastic
fractal search (SFS) to predict UCS. In other words, the main
contribution of this study is to propose a new hybrid machine
learning model in the field of UCS prediction. For comparison
aims, PSO, Differential Evolution (DE), and genetic algorithm
(GA) were also used to improve ANFIS performance.
2 Research significance
The UCS prediction can be directly made through ISRM or
ASTM tests. However, in determining the UCS value directly,
there are several hindering factors, e.g., attaining the standard
intact rock samples, particularly in highly jointed faulted rock.
On the other hand, carrying out the direct experiments for
this end is relatively time-consuming and costly. Hence, this
study represents a novel hybrid intelligent model that uses an
improved ANFIS with an SFS algorithm (SFS-ANFIS), for
predicting the UCS. To the best of our knowledge, no research
has been tested on the efficiency of SFS-ANFIS to predict
UCS in different time scales as of yet.
3 Data source
The rock cores, which were required to achieve the objec-
tives of this study, were gathered from the Pahang–Selangor
fresh water tunnel located in Malaysia. This tunnel is built
Engineering with Computers
for the transfer of fresh water from Pahang state to Selan-
gor and Kuala Lumpur states. Of the whole tunnel, 35 km
was excavated by means of three tunnel boring machines
(TBMs), whereas the rest of the project was done adopt-
ing the method of drilling and blasting. TBMs excavated a
variety of ground conditions, namely mixed ground, blocky
ground, and very hard ground. You can refer to Fig. 1 to see
the geological map of the tunnel site and the sampling spot.
As can be observed in the geological map, in the geologi-
cal units, there are metamorphic, granite, some sedimentary
Fig. 1  Geological map of tunnel
site
rocks, etc.; however, the majority of rock excavated in the
tunneling project by means of TBMs and blasting method
is of the granite type. Geotechnical research was carried
out alongside the tunnel to achieve the predefined research
objectives, and a total of 96 granite blocks (without defect
or discontinuity) were selected from various TBMs sites to
conduct the required tests. More details regarding this pro-
ject can be found in Jahed Armaghani et al. [3]. The selected
blocks were transferred to the laboratory and prepared in
accordance with the guidelines of the International Society
13
 Engineering with Computers

( )
for Rock Mechanics [71]. Then, the samples were subjected O1i = 𝜇Ai x1 for i = 1, 2, … , n (1)
to laboratory tests of Rn, Vp, Is(50), and UCS. In case of the
failure of a sample along with the fractures or any other ( )
defect, the related test result was excluded from the data set. O1i = 𝜇Bi−2 x2 for i = 3, 4, … , n, (2)
The reason was that it could not portray well the intact rock ( ) ( )
where 𝜇Ai x1 and 𝜇Bi−2 x2 are represented as Gaussian
strength. The statistical results of data sets used in this study
membership functions. Furthermore, the number of fuzzy
are given in Table 1. Next, the constructed data sets were
sets for various input variable is shown by n [73]. Every
applied to the development of a number of models adopting
node in the layer 2 is described product layer which is
various techniques. A comparison was finally made among
appraised the firing strength of specific rule using Eq. (3):
the models in a way to mark out the most appropriate one
( ) ( )
among all in terms of achieving the predefined objectives O2i = 𝜔i = 𝜇Ai x1 𝜇Bi x2 with i = 1, 2. (3)
of the study.
In layer 3, which is denominated normalized layer, the
normalization process is done using Eq. (4) with the sum-
4 Development of predictive models mation of the ith rule’s firing strength ratio to all rules’ firing
to predict UCS strength [73]:
wi
4.1 SFS‑ANFIS O3i = w̄ i = i = 1, 2. (4)
w1 + w2
In answering complex nonlinear problems, ANFIS is an out- Defuzzification process is performed in layer four which
standing machine learning method was employed. ANFIS each node is an adaptable node with the following equation:
algorithm is the known hybrid method with effective effi- ( )
ciency, which combines the fuzzy inference system and O4i = w̄ i fi = w̄ i k1i x + k2i y + k0i , (5)
neural network [72]. ANFIS was offered by Jang performs { }
a learning model using least-squares and gradient descent where wi is the output of the layer 3, and k1i , k2i , k0i are the
algorithms [73]. variable sets of w̄ i node. Layer 5 is indicated output layer;
In the recent years, an increase in the implementation of the output is constructed by summation of the output of the
ANFIS has been observed in the different fields of engineer- previous layer Eq. (6):
ing [74–81]. The outcomes of studies manifested the ANFIS �
∑
wi fi
is a powerful equipment for estimating these problems. The 5
Oi = overall output = w̄ i fi = ∑i ; i = 1, 2. (6)
ANFIS approach utilized in this investigation involves three i i wi

inputs and five layers. In this way, the Takagi–Sugeno fuzzy The premise and the consequent parts are adjusted to
system was applied as FIS. The TSK model can be exhibited various optimization techniques in FIS method, which are
as regards [72]: gradient descent method and least-squares method. ANFIS
Rule (1): If x1 is A1 and x2 is B1 then Yi = k1i x1 + k2i x2 + k0i , includes three models, namely grid partitioning (GP), fuzzy
where A and B are determined as the membership functions, C-Means clustering (FCM), and subtractive clustering
and x1 and x2 and k1 , k2 , and k0 are the function parameters (SCM). Based on previous scientific papers the FCM algo-
for inputs and output (f), and then, TSK fuzzy model with rithm has the best results and it was selected for the ANFIS
zero-order type is particularized for ANFIS model. A five- algorithm to predict [73]. More information about FCM
layer ANFIS is defined as follows [73]: could be achieved in the study handled by Rad et al. [72].
In the first layer, which is as a fuzzification layer, all Recently, the utilization of metaheuristic algorithms
nodes are assumed as adaptive inputs: is a superior strategy for the applied problem has demon-
strated that these algorithms have vital abilities as strug-
gled to standard optimization algorithms. Fundamentally, a
Table 1  Statistical results of parameters used in this study metaheuristic optimization algorithm inspired by the natural
phenomenon of growth is the stochastic fractal search (SFS),
Parameter Unit Statistical results
which was appropriated to improve ANFIS and optimize the
Min Mean Max elements of membership functions.
Rn – 18 41.66 59 In fact, restrictions of ANFIS are quiet convergence
Vp m/s 2823 4976.12 7943 and trapped in local optima, the SFS algorithm is selected
Is(50) MPa 0.89 3.09 7.10 for increasing convergence rate and prevent any trapped.
UCS MPa 39 96.51 209.40 Employing the diffusion property, which is observed

13
Engineering with Computers
frequently in stochastic fractals, the particles in the new
algorithm investigate the search space more efficiently. In
the SFS algorithm, the diffusing and the updating process
are two main parts of optimization. In the diffusing process,
each particle diffuses is around the current position for sat-
isfying intensification property that causes increasing the
possibility of discovering the global optima, and additionally
prevents remaining in trapped in the local optima.
In the updating process, the algorithm finds that how a
particle in the group updates position rather than the position
of other particles in the group. In this algorithm according to
Fig. 2, the best-created particle from the diffusing process is
the isolated particle that is admitted, and the remainder of the
particles are rejected. Furthermore, updating process in SFS
motivates researchers to exploration properties in metaheuristic
algorithms. To generate particles in diffusion phases, there are
two statistical techniques: Levy flight and Gaussian. Introduc-
tory studies are shown that Levy flight concentrates faster than
Gaussian walk in little generations. On the other hand, The
Gaussian walk is more encouraging in finding global optima
[83]. More details about SFS algorithm could be obtained in
the study handled by Salimi [82]. The pseudo-code of hybrid
ANFIS-based SFS algorithm is proposed in the following.
13

Fig. 2  Particle diffusion [82]
4.2 GA‑ANFIS and PSO‑ANFIS
To check the effectiveness of SFS in ANFIS, PSO and
GA, as two well-known optimization algorithms [84–88],
were also used to optimize ANFIS. In this research, several
parameters were defined for minimizing error prediction.
The Sugeno type chooses the fuzzy structure and FIS type is
pursued Genfis3 with higher efficiency. The Gaussian func-
tion was chosen as a membership function for the ANFIS
model. The hybrid optimization is applied based on the
least square and backpropagation technique. The maximum
number of training was 500 and the number of fuzzy rules
equals 10. To reach the optimum number of fuzzy rules,
the trial-and--error approach was used in this study. In the
Fig. 3  Number of iteration for the SFS-ANFIS, GA-ANFIS, PSO-ANFIS, and DE-ANFIS models
13
Engineering with Computers
GA-ANFIS modeling, the crossover and mutation rates were
selected as 0.7 and 0.3, respectively. The minimum error was
defined as 1e−5 and the maximum iteration was selected as
400 (Fig. 3). To select the most optimum value for the num-
ber of populations, different values were tested, as shown
in Table 2. From this table, the lowest root-mean-square
(RMSE) value (is bolded) was achieved when the number of
populations was equal to 150. In the PSO-ANFIS algorithm,
the number of iteration and inertia weight were selected
1000 and 1, respectively. Additionally, to select coefficients
of velocity equation (C1 and C2) and the number of particles,
the different values were tested, as shown in Tables 3 and
4. From these tables, the lowest RMSE values (are bolded)
were for C1 = C2 = 2 and number of particles = 200; hence,
these values are used in this study. For better understanding,
the schemes of ANFIS optimized by GA and PSO algo-
rithms are shown in Figs. 4 and 5.
4.3 DE‑ANFIS
DE is a compelling evolutionary based on global optimi-
zation approach that was introduced by Storn and Price
[90]. The simplistic structure, quality of solutions obtained,
and easy implementation are the advantages of DE [91].
Consequently, it has been employed in various use cases.
In this paper, the DE algorithm endeavors to minimize the
fitness function utilizing the optimized parameter values.
The fitness function is the RMSE between the target and
predicted data. Similar to other evolutionary algorithms, DE
was also applied to improve ANFIS and optimize the value
of membership functions ANFIS. The flowchart of hybrid
Engineering with Computers

Table 2  Testing the different values of population size with their Table 4  Testing the different values of number of particle with their
RMSE in GA-ANFIS modeling RMSE in PSO-ANFIS modeling
Model no. Population size Network result Model no. No. of particle Network result
RMSE RMSE
Train Test Train Test

1 25 11.199 12.314 1 50 13.145 13.825

2 100 11.037 11.872 2 100 12.316 13.410
3 150 10.998 11.540 3 150 11.562 12.149
4 200 11.418 12.322 4 200 9.821 10.327
5 250 11.337 12.194 5 250 9.984 10.849
6 300 11.772 12.519 6 300 10.550 11.195
7 350 11.558 12.608 7 350 11.297 11.741
8 400 11.931 12.598 8 400 11.175 12.230
9 450 12.313 13.121 9 450 12.092 12.861
10 500 12.642 13.397 10 500 12.403 13.166

ANFIS-based DE algorithm is shown in Fig. 6. More details (Fig. 3). According to above descriptions, the values of 0.4,
about improving ANFIS model using differential evolution- 0.8, and 100 were selected as the mutation probability, cross-
ary algorithm could be obtained in the study handled by over probability, and population size, respectively.
Ebtehaj and Bonakdari [92].
In modeling process of DE-ANFIS, the number of itera-
tion, mutation probability, crossover probability, and the 5 Results and discussion
population size should be determined. To select the opti-
mum mutation probability, the different values were tested, In this study, the effectiveness of the SFS algorithm to opti-
as shown in Table 5, and based on this table, when mutation mize ANFIS results is investigated. This section discusses
probability was equal to 0.4, the best performance (lowest the performance of the SFS-ANFIS model in predicting
RMSE) was achieved (is bolded). Regarding the crossover UCS and then compares its results with GA-ANFIS, DE-
probability, the values of 0.6, 0.65, 0.7, 0.75, 0.8, 0.85, and ANFIS, PSO-ANFIS, and ANFIS models. In this study, we
0.9 were tested, as shown in Table 6. From this table, the have implemented SFS-ANFIS based on different combina-
lowest RMSE (best performance) was obtained from crosso- tions of input parameters. In other words, four different SFS-
ver probability of 0.8 (is bolded). Table 7 also shows the use ANFIS models were constructed, so that in model no. 1, Rn,
of different population size, and according to this table, the Vp, and Is(50) were used as the input parameters; in model no.
population size = 100 yielded the best performance among 2, Rn and Vp were used as the input parameters; in model
the others (is bolded). The minimum error was defined no. 3, Vp and Is(50) were used as the input parameters; and
as 1e−5 and the maximum iteration was selected as 400 in model no. 4, Rn and Is(50) were used as the input param-
eters. Totally, a database including 96 data sets was used;
Table 3  Testing the different values of C1 and C2 with their RMSE in
among them, 70 data sets were used for training the models,
PSO-ANFIS modeling and the remained 26 data sets were used to test the models.
The performances of constructed SFS-ANFIS models were
Model no. C1 C2 Network result
evaluated in terms of mean absolute error (MAE), RMSE,
RMSE and mean average percentage error (MAPE) [93–112]:
Train Test n
1 ∑|
1 1.333 2.667 11.163 13.874
MAE = A − Pi || (7)
n i=1 | i
2 2.667 1.333 12.129 12.882
3 1.5 1.5 11.955 13.239 �
∑n
4 2 2 9.514 10.278 i=1 (Ai − Pi )2
RMSE = (8)
5 1.75 1.75 10.813 11.349 n
6 1.5 1.75 11.190 12.528
7 1.75 1.5 11.481 12.313

13
 Engineering with Computers

Fig. 4  Scheme of the ANFIS

optimized by GA [89]

[ ]
n Vp was not used as the input parameter, the performance
1 ∑ ||Ai − Pi ||
MAPE = × 100, (9) of the model was the worst (the highest RMSE, MAE, and
n i=1 Am
MAPE values). Hence, it was found that the Vp was the
most effective parameter on the modeling of UCS in this
where n is the number of data (in this study n is 96), and Ai
study.
and Pi are actual and predicted UCS values, respectively.
Due to the best SFS-ANFIS model was based on three
According to the results, the lowest MAE, MAPE (%), and
input parameters (Rn, Vp, and Is(50)), we have also imple-
RMSE values were obtained from model 1 of SFS-ANFIS
mented GA-ANFIS, DE-ANFIS, PSO-ANFIS, and ANFIS
models, as shown in Fig. 7. In other words, when Rn, Vp,
models based on these three input parameters. The values of
and Is(50) were used as the input parameters, the perfor-
MAE, MAPE (%), and RMSE obtained from SFS-ANFIS,
mance of the model was the most ideal. In addition, when

13
Engineering with Computers

GA-ANFIS, PSO-ANFIS, and ANFIS models are given

in Table 8. The results summarized in Table 8 show the
superiority of SFS-ANFIS model 1 over other SFS-ANFIS,
PSO-ANFIS, DE-ANFIS, GA-ANFIS, and ANFIS models
to predict UCS. Furthermore, the scatter plots of actual
versus predicted UCS values using all predictive models
are shown in Figs. 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12. From these figures,
it can be found that higher coefficients of determination
(R2) were yielded by SFS-ANFIS model. The R2 values
of SFS-ANFIS, PSO-ANFIS, DE-ANFIS, GA-ANFIS, and
ANFIS models were equal to 0.981, 0.957, 0.947, 0.936,
and 0.880, respectively. These results indicate that the SFS
can be introduced as a better algorithm compared to PSO,
DE, and GA for improving ANFIS performance. Figure 13
also shows the relationships between different Vp values (in
range of 2900 and 7900) and obtained UCS values from the
SFS-ANFIS model. In this figure, blue, green, and yellow
points are related to Is(50) = 2 and Rn = 20, Is(50) = 2 and
Rn = 40, and Is(50) = 2 and Rn = 60, respectively. From this
figure, it can be found that the Vp has a direct relationship
with UCS, and increase in amount of Vp leads to increase
in UCS. To show the relative influence of the Vp, Is(50), and
Rn on the UCS, a sensitivity analysis is carried out in this
study by means of Yang and Zang [113] method:
∑n � �
k=1
yik × yok
rij = � , (10)
∑n 2 ∑n 2
y
k=1 ik
y
k=1 ok

where yik and yok are the input and output parameters, respec-
tively. The values of rij reveal the effect of each input on out-
put. Considering Eq. 10, the values of rij for the Vp, Is(50),
and Rn were equal to 0.964, 0.962, and 0.966, respectively,
which show that the Rn was the most influential parameter
on the UCS in the studied case.

6 Conclusions

Achieving a high-accurate model to predict UCS is very

important especially, in the field of geotechnical engineer-
ing. According to the literature, the experiments required
for predicting UCS are generally time-consuming and
costly in addition to the sample restrictions. Therefore,
rock UCS can also be calculated by means of simple rock
tests, including Vp, Rn, and Is(50). This paper evaluates
the ability of the SFS algorithm to improve the accu-
racy of ANFIS to predict UCS. In other words, the nov-
elty of this study is to propose a new machine learning
Fig. 5  Scheme of the ANFIS optimized by PSO [89]
method in the field of geotechnical engineering. To make

13
 Engineering with Computers

Fig. 6  Flowchart of DE-ANFIS model

Table 5  Testing the different values of mutation rate with their

RMSE in DE-ANFIS modeling Table 6  Testing the different values of crossover with their RMSE in
DE-ANFIS modeling
Model no. Mutation rate Network result
Model no. Crossover rate Network result
RMSE
RMSE
Train Test
Train Test
1 0.05 13.891 13.799
1 0.60 12.0173 11.9426
2 0.10 13.816 13.759
2 0.65 11.8329 11.1637
3 0.15 13.781 13.018
3 0.70 11.1748 10.7935
4 0.20 13.710 12.956
4 0.75 10.7923 10.2873
5 0.25 13.812 13.237
5 0.80 10.3018 9.7539
6 0.30 12.828 12.218
6 0.85 10.3262 10.001
7 0.35 11.782 11.923
7 0.90 10.9248 10.396
8 0.40 11.108 10.937
9 0.45 11.199 11.058
10 0.50 11.584 11.153

13
Engineering with Computers

Table 7  Testing the different values of population size with their a fair comparison, GA, DE, and PSO were used to opti-
RMSE in DE-ANFIS modeling mize ANFIS, and then, the results of SFS-ANFIS, DE-
Model no. Population size Network result ANFIS, GA-ANFIS, PSO-ANFIS, and ANFIS models were
compared. Totally, 96 data sets were gathered from the
RMSE
Pahang–Selangor fresh water tunnel located in Malaysia.
Train Test The conclusions and remarks of this study are as follows.
1 25 11.914 12.941 (1) Comparing the UCS values predicted by the models
2 100 11.108 10.937 showed that the performance of the SFS-ANFIS was better
3 150 12.319 12.924 than the PSO-ANFIS, DE-ANFIS, GA-ANFIS, and ANFIS
4 200 12.192 13.872 models, and thereby, the superiority of SFS can be con-
5 250 12.001 12.413 firmed. (2) It is recommended to use other optimization
6 300 12.851 12.812 algorithms like gradient evolution algorithm, glowworm
7 350 12.142 12.622 swarm optimization, imperialistic competitive algorithm,
8 400 12.813 13.812 and teaching–learning-based optimization algorithm to
9 450 13.167 13.723 improve the performance of ANFIS.
10 500 13.774 13.415

Fig. 7  RMSE, MAE, and MAPE values obtained from different SFS-ANFIS models

Table 8  RMSE, MAE, and Model Statistical functions

MAPE values obtained from all
predictive models RMSE MAE MAPE (%)
Train Test Train Test Train Test

ANFIS 14.201 18.772 13.286 15.444 13.415 15.921

PSO-ANFIS 8.911 9.682 6.865 8.783 6.607 10.596
GA-ANFIS 10.866 11.968 9.333 10.496 8.955 11.314
DE-ANFIS 10.745 10.301 7.495 9.069 8.232 9.528
SFS-ANFIS model 1 5.731 6.649 4.438 4.606 4.581 4.824
SFS-ANFIS model 2 10.569 13.965 9.173 12.598 9.764 11.579
SFS-ANFIS model 3 12.953 12.652 10.732 11.255 10.644 12.021
SFS-ANFIS model 4 12.846 17.350 11.182 13.725 10.616 16.420

13
 Engineering with Computers

Fig. 8  Scatter plot of actual

versus predicted UCS values
using ANFIS

Fig. 9  Scatter plot of actual

versus predicted UCS values
using PSO-ANFIS

13
Engineering with Computers

Fig. 10  Scatter plot of actual

versus predicted UCS values
using GA-ANFIS

Fig. 11  Scatter plot of actual

versus predicted UCS values
using DE-ANFIS

13
 Engineering with Computers

Fig. 12  Scatter plot of actual versus predicted UCS values using SFS-ANFIS models

Fig. 13  Relationship between different values of Vp and UCS (keeping constant the values of Is(50) = 2, and Rn = 20, 40, and 60)

13
Engineering with Computers
Acknowledgements  This research was supported by the National Natu-
ral Science Foundation of China (No. 41672305).
References
1. Minaeian B, Ahangari K (2013) Estimation of uniaxial compres-
sive strength based on P-wave and Schmidt hammer rebound
using statistical method. Arab J Geosci 6:1925–1931
2. Kahraman S (2014) The determination of uniaxial compressive
strength from point load strength for pyroclastic rocks. Eng Geol
170:33–42
3. Jahed Armaghani D, Tonnizam Mohamad E, Hajihassani M,
Yagiz S, Motaghedi H (2016) Application of several non-linear
prediction tools for estimating uniaxial compressive strength of
granitic rocks and comparison of their performances. Eng Com-
put 32:189–206
4. Sharma PK, Singh TN (2008) A correlation between P-wave
velocity, impact strength index, slake durability index and uni-
axial compressive strength. Bull Eng Geol Environ 67:17–22
5. Yagiz S (2009) Predicting uniaxial compressive strength, modu-
lus of elasticity and index properties of rocks using the Schmidt
hammer. Bull Eng Geol Environ 68(1):55–63
6. Yesiloglu-Gultekin N, Gokceoglu C, Sezer EA (2013) Prediction
of uniaxial compressive strength of granitic rocks by various
nonlinear tools and comparison of their performances. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci 62:113–122
7. Tonnizam Mohamad E, Jahed Armaghani D, Momeni E, Alavi
Nezhad Khalil Abad SV (2015) Prediction of the unconfined
compressive strength of soft rocks: a PSO-based ANN approach.
Bull Eng Geol Environ 74:745–757
8. Saedi B, Mohammadi SD, Shahbazi H (2018) Prediction of uni-
axial compressive strength and elastic modulus of migmatites
using various modeling techniques. Arab J Geosci 11:574
9. Beran Çelik S (2019) Prediction of uniaxial compressive strength
of carbonate rocks from nondestructive tests using multivariate
regression and LS-SVM methods. Arab J Geosci 12:193
10. Singh TN, Kainthola A, Venkatesh A (2012) Correlation between
point load index and uniaxial compressive strength for different
rock types. Rock Mech Rock Eng 45:259–264
11. Monjezi M, Khoshalan HA, Razifard M (2012) A neuro-genetic
network for predicting uniaxial compressive strength of rocks.
Geotech Geol Eng 30(4):1053–1062
12. Tugrul A, Zarif IH (1999) Correlation of mineralogical and
textural characteristics with engineering properties of selected
granitic rocks from Turkey. Eng Geol 51:303–317
13. Yagiz S (2011) P-wave velocity test for assessment of geo-
technical properties of some rock materials. Bull Mater Sci
34(4):947–953
14. Cargill JS, Shakoor A (1990) Evaluation of empirical methods for
measuring the uniaxial compressive strength of rock. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci 27:495–503
15. Singh VK, Singh DP (1993) Correlation between point load
index and compressive strength for quartzite rocks. Geotech Geol
Eng 11:269–272
16. Kahraman S (2001) Evaluation of simple methods for assessing
the uniaxial compressive strength of rock. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci 38:981–994
17. Young Y, Rosenbaum SM (2002) The artificial neural network as
a tool for assessing geotechnical properties. Geotech Geol Eng
20:149–168
18. Kahraman S, Gunaydin O (2009) The effect of rock classes on
the relation between uniaxial compressive strength and point load
index. Bull Eng Geol Environ 68(3):345–353
19. Basu A, Kamran M (2010) Point load test on schistose rocks and
its applicability in predicting uniaxial compressive strength. Int
J Rock Mech Min Sci 47:823–828
20. Singh TN, Dubey RK (2000) A study of transmission velocity
of primary wave (P-wave) in coal measures sandstone. J Sci Ind
Res 59:482–486
21. Singh TN, Kanchan R, Saigal K, Verma AK (2004) Prediction of
P-wave velocity and anisotropic properties of rock using artificial
neural networks technique. J Sci Ind Res 63(1):32–38
22. Basu A, Aydin A (2006) Predicting uniaxial compressive strength
by point load test: significance of cone penetration. Rock Mech
Rock Eng 39(5):483–490
23. Sharma PK, Khandelwal M, Singh TN (2011) A correlation
between Schmidt hammer rebound numbers with impact strength
index, slake durability index and P-wave velocity. Int J Earth Sci
(Geol Rundsch) 100:189–195
24. Baykasoğlu A, Güllü H, Çanakçı H, Özbakır L (2008) Predic-
tion of compressive and tensile strength of limestone via genetic
programming. Exp Syst Appl 35(1–2):111–123
25. Tiryaki B (2008) Predicting intact rock strength for mechanical
excavation using multivariate statistics, artificial neural networks,
and regression trees. Eng Geol 99:51–60
26. Dehghan S, Sattari Gh, Chehreh Chelgani S, Aliabadi MA (2010)
Prediction of uniaxial compressive strength and modulus of elas-
ticity for Travertine samples using regression and artificial neural
networks. Min Sci Technol 20:41–46
27. Cevik A, Akcapınar-Sezer E, Cabalar AF, Gokceoglu C
(2011) Modeling of the uniaxial compressive strength of some
clay-bearing rocks using neural network. Appl Soft Comput
11:2587–2594
28. Zhou J, Li X, Shi X (2012) Long-term prediction model of rock-
burst in underground openings using heuristic algorithms and
support vector machines. Saf Sci 50(4):629–644
29. Cavaleri L, Chatzarakis GE, Di Trapani F, Douvika MG, Roi-
nos K, Vaxevanidis NM, Asteris PG (2017) Modeling of surface
roughness in electro-discharge machining using artificial neural
networks. Adv Mater Res 6:169–184
30. Cavaleri L, Chatzarakis GE, Di Trapani F, Douvika MG, Roi-
nos K, Vaxevanidis NM, Asteris PG (2017) Modeling of surface
roughness in electro-discharge machining using artificial neural
networks. Adv Mater Res 6(2):169–184
31. Ghasemi E, Kalhori H, Bagherpour R, Yagiz S (2018) Model
tree approach for predicting uniaxial compressive strength and
Young’s modulus of carbonate rocks. Bull Eng Geol Environ
77:331–343
32. Wang M, Shi X, Zhou J, Qiu X (2018) Multi-planar detection
optimization algorithm for the interval charging structure of
large-diameter longhole blasting design based on rock fragmen-
tation aspects. Eng Optim 50(12):2177–2191
33. Wang M, Shi X, Zhou J (2018) Charge design scheme optimi-
zation for ring blasting based on the developed Scaled Heelan
model. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 110:199–209
34. Zhou J, Li X, Mitri HS (2018) Evaluation method of rockburst:
state-of-the-art literature review. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
81:632–659
35. Zhou J, Li C, Arslan CA, Hasanipanah M, Amnieh HB (2019)
Performance evaluation of hybrid FFA-ANFIS and GA-ANFIS
models to predict particle size distribution of a muck-pile after
blasting. Eng Comput. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s0036​6-019-
00822​-0
36. Zhou J, Li E, Wang M, Chen X, Shi X, Jiang L (2019) Feasibility
of stochastic gradient boosting approach for evaluating seismic
liquefaction potential based on SPT and CPT case histories. J
Perform Constr Facil 33(3):04019024
13

37. Wang M, Shi X, Zhou J (2019) Optimal charge scheme calcula-
tion for multiring blasting using modified Harries mathematical
model. J Perform Constr Facil 33(2):04019002
38. Dehghanbanadaki A, Sotoudeh MA, Golpazir I, Keshtkarba-
naeemoghadam A, Ilbeigi M (2019) Prediction of geotechnical
properties of treated fibrous peat by artificial neural networks.
Bull Eng Geol Environ 78:1345–1358
39. Hajihassani M, Abdullah SS, Asteris PG, Armaghani DJ (2019)
A gene expression programming model for predicting tunnel
convergence. Appl Sci 9:4650
40. Asteris PG, Mokos VG (2019) Concrete compressive strength
using artificial neural networks. Neural Comput Appl. https​://
doi.org/10.1007/s0052​1-019-04663​-2
41. Huang L, Asteris PG, Koopialipoor M, Armaghani DJ, Tahir MM
(2019) Invasive weed optimization technique-based ANN to the
prediction of rock tensile strength. Appl Sci 9:5372
42. Asteris PG, Ashrafian A, Rezaie-Balf M (2019) Prediction of
the compressive strength of self-compacting concrete using sur-
rogate models. Comput Concr 24(2):137–150
43. Asteris PG, Armaghani DJ, Hatzigeorgiou Karayannis CG,
Pilakoutas K (2019) Predicting the shear strength of reinforced
concrete beams using artificial neural networks. Comput Concr
24(5):469–488
44. Apostolopoulou M, Armaghani DJ, Bakolas A, Douvika MG,
Moropoulou A, Asteris PG (2019) Compressive strength of
natural hydraulic lime mortars using soft computing techniques.
Procedia Struct Integr 17:914–923
45. Armaghani DJ, Hatzigeorgiou GD, Karamani Ch, Skentou A,
Zoumpoulaki I, Asteris PG (2019) Soft computing-based tech-
niques for concrete beams shear strength. Procedia Struct Integr
17:924–933
46. Asteris PG, Nikoo M (2019) Artificial bee colony-based neural
network for the prediction of the fundamental period of infilled
frame structures. Neural Comput Appl 31(9):4837–4847
47. Asteris PG, Moropoulou A, Skentou AD, Apostolopoulou M,
Mohebkhah A, Cavaleri L, Rodrigues H, Varum H (2019) Sto-
chastic vulnerability assessment of masonry structures: concepts,
modeling and restoration aspects. Appl Sci 9(2):243
48. Asteris PG, Apostolopoulou M, Skentou AD, Antonia Moro-
poulou A (2019) Application of artificial neural networks for the
prediction of the compressive strength of cement-based mortars.
Comput Concr 24(4):329–345
49. Cavaleri L, Asteris PG et al (2019) Prediction of surface treat-
ment effects on the tribological performance of tool steels using
artificial neural networks. Appl Sci 9(14):2788
50. Chen H, Asteris PG, Armaghani DJ, Gordan B, Pham BT (2019)
Assessing dynamic conditions of the retaining wall using two
hybrid intelligent models. Appl Sci 9:1042
51. Psyllaki P, Stamatiou K, Iliadis I, Mourlas A, Asteris PG, Vax-
evanidis N (2018) Surface treatment of tool steels against galling
failure. MATEC Web Conf 188:04024
52. Sarir P, Chen J, Asteris PG, Armaghani DJ, Tahir MM (2019)
Developing GEP tree-based, neuro-swarm, and whale optimiza-
tion models for evaluation of bearing capacity of concrete-filled
steel tube columns. Eng Comput. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s0036​
6-019-00808​-y
53. Xu H, Zhou J, Asteris PG, Armaghani DJ, Tahir MM (2019)
Supervised machine learning techniques to the prediction of tun-
nel boring machine penetration rate. Appl Sci 9(18):3715
54. Sarkar K, Tiwary A, Singh TN (2010) Estimation of strength
parameters of rock using artificial neural networks. Bull Eng
Geol Environ 69:599–606
55. Verma AK, Singh TN (2013) A neuro-fuzzy approach for pre-
diction of longitudinal wave velocity. Neural Comput Appl
22(7–9):1685–1693
13
Engineering with Computers
56. Singh TN, Verma AK (2012) Comparative analysis of intelligent
algorithms to correlate strength and petrographic properties of
some schistose rocks. Eng Comput 28:1–12
57. Yagiz S, Sezer EA, Gokceoglu C (2012) Artificial neural net-
works and nonlinear regression techniques to assess the influence
of slake durability cycles on the prediction of uniaxial compres-
sive strength and modulus of elasticity for carbonate rocks. Int J
Numer Anal Methods 36:1636–1650
58. Jahed Armaghani D et al (2018) Uniaxial compressive strength
prediction through a new technique based on gene expression
programming. Neural Comput Appl 30:3523–3532
59. Barzegar R, Sattarpour M, Deo R, Fijani E, Adamowski J (2019)
An ensemble tree-based machine learning model for predicting
the uniaxial compressive strength of travertine rocks. Neural
Comput Appl. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s0052​1-019-04418​-z
60. Armaghani DJ, Hasanipanah M, Mohamad ET (2016) A combi-
nation of the ICA-ANN model to predict air-overpressure result-
ing from blasting. Eng Comput 32(1):155–171
61. El-Ghandour HA, Elbeltagi E (2018) Developing four
metaheuristic algorithms for multiple-objective management of
groundwater. J Soft Comput Civ Eng 2(4):1–22
62. Jahed Armaghani D, Hasanipanah M, Amnieh HB, Mohamad
ET (2018) Feasibility of ICA in approximating ground vibra-
tion resulting from mine blasting. Neural Comput Appl
29(9):457–465
63. Qiao W, Yang Z (2019) Modified Dolphin swarm algorithm
based on chaotic maps for solving high-dimensional function
optimization problems. IEEE Access 7:110472–110486
64. Qiao W, Yang Z (2019) Solving large-scale function optimization
problem by using a new metaheuristic algorithm based on quan-
tum dolphin swarm algorithm. IEEE Access 7:138972–138989
65. Qiao W, Tian W, Tian Y, Yang Q, Wang Y, Zhang J (2019) The
forecasting of PM2.5 using a hybrid model based on wavelet
transform and an improved deep learning algorithm. IEEE
Access 7:142814–142825
66. Qiao W, Huang K, Azimi M, Han S (2019) A novel hybrid pre-
diction model for hourly gas consumption in supply side based
on improved whale optimization algorithm and relevance vector
machine. IEEE Access 7:88218–88230
67. Gao W, Alqahtani AS, Mubarakali A, Mavaluru D, Khalafi S
(2019) Developing an innovative soft computing scheme for pre-
diction of air overpressure resulting from mine blasting using
GMDH optimized by GA. Eng Comput 35(131):1–8
68. Chen W, Hasanipanah M, Rad HN, Armaghani DJ, Tahir MM
(2019) A new design of evolutionary hybrid optimization of
SVR model in predicting the blast-induced ground vibration.
Eng Comput. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s0036​6-019-00895​-x
69. Hasanipanah M, Bakhshandeh Amnieh H (2020) Developing a
new uncertain rule-based fuzzy approach for evaluating the blast-
induced backbreak. Eng Comput. https​://doi.org/10.1007/s0036​
6-019-00919​-6
70. Hasanipanah M, Bakhshandeh Amnieh H (2020) A fuzzy rule-
based approach to address uncertainty in risk assessment and
prediction of blast-induced Flyrock in a quarry. Nat Resour Res.
https​://doi.org/10.1007/s1105​3-020-09616​-4
71. ISRM (2007) The complete ISRM suggested methods for rock
characterization, testing and monitoring: 1974–2006. In: Ulusay
R, Hudson JA (eds) Suggested methods prepared by the commis-
sion on testing methods, international society for rockmechanics.
ISRM Turkish National Group, Ankara
72. Rad HN, Jalali Z, Jalalifar H (2015) Prediction of rock mass rat-
ing system based on continuous functions using Chaos–ANFIS
model. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 73:1–9
73. Shahnazar A, Rad HN, Hasanipanah M, Tahir MM, Arma-
ghani DJ, Ghoroqi M (2017) A new developed approach for the
Engineering with Computers
prediction of ground vibration using a hybrid PSO-optimized
ANFIS-based model. Environ Earth Sci 76(15):527
74. Azimi H, Bonakdari H, Ebtehaj I, Michelson DG (2018) A com-
bined adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system–firefly algorithm
model for predicting the roller length of a hydraulic jump on a
rough channel bed. Neural Comput Appl 29(6):249–258
75. Ebtehaj I, Bonakdari H, Gharabaghi B (2018) Development of
more accurate discharge coefficient prediction equations for rec-
tangular side weirs using adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system
and generalized group method of data handling. Measurement
116:473–482
76. Sihag P, Esmaeilbeiki F, Singh B, Ebtehaj I, Bonakdari H (2019)
Modeling unsaturated hydraulic conductivity by hybrid soft com-
puting techniques. Soft Comput 23(23):12897–12910
77. Ebtehaj I, Bonakdari H, Es-haghi MS (2019) Design of a hybrid
ANFIS–PSO model to estimate sediment transport in open chan-
nels. Iran J Sci Technol Trans Civ Eng 43:851–857
78. Azimi H, Bonakdari H, Ebtehaj I, Shabanlou S, Talesh SHA,
Jamali A (2019) A pareto design of evolutionary hybrid opti-
mization of ANFIS model in prediction abutment scour depth.
Sādhanā 44(7):169
79. Rad HN, Bakhshayeshi I, Jusoh WAW, Tahir MM, Foong LK
(2019) Prediction of Flyrock in mine blasting: a new compu-
tational intelligence approach. Nat Resour Res. https​://doi.
org/10.1007/s1105​3-019-09464​-x
80. Hasanipanah M, Shahnazar A, Arab H, Golzar SB, Amiri M
(2017) Developing a new hybrid-AI model to predict blast
induced backbreak. Eng Comput 33(3):349–359
81. Yang H, Hasanipanah M, Tahir MM, Bui DT (2019) Intel-
ligent prediction of blasting-induced ground vibration using
ANFIS optimized by GA and PSO. Nat Resour Res. https​://doi.
org/10.1007/s1105​3-019-09515​-3
82. Salimi H (2015) Stochastic fractal search: a powerful metaheuris-
tic algorithm. Knowl Based Syst 75(2015):1–18
83. Mosbah H, El-Hawary ME (2017) Optimization of neural net-
work parameters by stochastic fractal search for dynamic state
estimation under communication failure. Electr Power Syst Res
147:288–301
84. Hasanipanah M, Naderi R, Kashir J, Noorani SA, Aaq Qaleh
AZ (2017) Prediction of blast produced ground vibration using
particle swarm optimization. Eng Comput 33(2):173–179
85. Hasanipanah M, Armaghani DJ, Amnieh HB, Majid MZA, Tahir
MMD (2017) Application of PSO to develop a powerful equation
for prediction of flyrock due to blasting. Neural Comput Appl
28(1):1043–1050
86. Hasanipanah M, Shahnazar A, Amnieh HB, Armaghani DJ
(2017) Prediction of air-overpressure caused by mine blasting
using a new hybrid PSO-SVR model. Eng Comput 33(1):23–31
87. Yang H, Rad HN, Hasanipanah M, Amnieh HB, Nekouie A
(2019) Prediction of vibration velocity generated in mine blast-
ing using support vector regression improved by optimization
algorithms. Nat Resour Res. https:​ //doi.org/10.1007/s11053​ -019-
09597​-z
88. Luo Z, Hasanipanah M, Amnieh HB, Brindhadevi K, Tahir MM
(2019) GA-SVR: a novel hybrid data-driven model to simulate
vertical load capacity of driven piles. Eng Comput. https​://doi.
org/10.1007/s0036​6-019-00858​-2
89. Rezakazemi M, Dashti A, Asghari M, Shirazian S (2017)
H2-selective mixed matrix membranes modeling using ANFIS,
PSO-ANFIS, GA-ANFIS. Int J Hydrog Energy 42:15211–15225
90. Storn R, Price K (1997) Differential evolution–a simple and effi-
cient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. J
Glob Optim 11(4):341–359
91. Bui DT et al (2016) Hybrid artificial intelligence approach based
on neural fuzzy inference model and metaheuristic optimization
for flood susceptibilitgy modeling in a high-frequency tropical
cyclone area using GIS. J Hydrol 540:317–330
92. Ebtehaj I, Bonakdari H (2017) Design of a fuzzy differential
evolution algorithm to predict non-deposition sediment transport.
Appl Water Sci 7(8):4287–4299
93. Monjezi M, Hasanipanah M, Khandelwal M (2013) Evaluation
and prediction of blast-induced ground vibration at Shur River
Dam, Iran, by artificial neural network. Neural Comput Appl
22(7–8):1637–1643
94. Zhou J, Li X, Mitri HS (2015) Comparative performance of six
supervised learning methods for the development of models of
hard rock pillar stability prediction. Nat Hazards 79(1):291–316
95. Amiri M, Bakhshandeh Amnieh H, Hasanipanah M, Mohammad
Khanli L (2016) A new combination of artificial neural network
and K-nearest neighbors models to predict blast induced ground
vibration and air-overpressure. Eng Comput 32:631–644
96. Hasanipanah M, Noorian-Bidgoli M, Armaghani DJ, Khamesi
H (2016) Feasibility of PSO-ANN model for predicting surface
settlement caused by tunneling. Eng Comput 32(4):705–715
97. Hasanipanah M, Armaghani DJ, Khamesi H, Amnieh HB,
Ghoraba S (2016) Several non-linear models in estimating
air-overpressure resulting from mine blasting. Eng Comput
32(3):441–455
98. Hasanipanah M, Armaghani DJ, Monjezi M, Shams S (2016)
Risk assessment and prediction of rock fragmentation produced
by blasting operation: a rock engineering system. Environ Earth
Sci 75(9):808
99. Hasanipanah M, Faradonbeh RS, Amnieh HB, Armaghani DJ,
Monjezi M (2017) Forecasting blast induced ground vibration
developing a CART model. Eng Comput 33(2):307–316
100. Hasanipanah M, Faradonbeh RS, Armaghani DJ, Amnieh HB,
Khandelwal M (2017) Development of a precise model for pre-
diction of blast-induced flyrock using regression tree technique.
Environ Earth Sci 76(1):27
101. Qi C, Fourie A, Chen Q (2018) Neural network and particle
swarm optimization for predicting the unconfined compres-
sive strength of cemented paste backfill. Constr Build Mater
159:473–478
102. Faradonbeh RS, Hasanipanah M, Amnieh HB et al (2018) Devel-
opment of GP and GEP models to estimate an environmental
issue induced by blasting operation. Environ Monit Assess
190:351
103. Qi C, Fourie A, Du X, Tang X (2018) Prediction of open
stope hanging wall stability using random forests. Nat Hazards
92(2):1179–1197
104. Qi C, Fourie A, Ma G, Tang X (2018) A hybrid method for
improved stability prediction in construction projects: a
case study of stope hangingwall stability. Appl Soft Comput
71:649–658
105. Hasanipanah M et al (2018) Prediction of an environmental issue
of mine blasting: an imperialistic competitive algorithm-based
fuzzy system. Int J Environ Sci Technol 15(3):551–560
106. Qi C, Fourie A (2018) A real-time back-analysis technique to
infer rheological parameters from field monitoring. Rock Mech
Rock Eng 51(10):3029–3043
107. Rad HN, Hasanipanah M, Rezaei M, Eghlim AL (2018) Devel-
oping a least squares support vector machine for estimating the
blast-induced flyrock. Eng Comput 34(4):709–717
108. Qi C, Tang X (2018) A hybrid ensemble method for improved
prediction of slope stability. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech
42(15):1823–1839
109. Zhou J, Li E, Yang S, Wang M, Shi X, Yao S, Mitri HS (2019)
Slope stability prediction for circular mode failure using gradient
boosting machine approach based on an updated database of case
histories. Saf Sci 118:505–518
13

110. Qi C, Fourie A (2019) Cemented paste backfill for mineral tail-
ings management: review and future perspectives. Miner Eng
144:106025
111. Lu X, Hasanipanah M, Brindhadevi K, Amnieh HB, Khalafi S
(2019) ORELM: a novel machine learning approach for predic-
tion of flyrock in mine blasting. Nat Resour Res. https​://doi.
org/10.1007/s1105​3-019-09532​-2
112. Keshtegar B, Hasanipanah M, Bakhshayeshi I, Sarafraz
ME (2019) A novel nonlinear modeling for the prediction of
13
Engineering with Computers
blast-induced airblast using a modified conjugate FR method.
Measurement 131:35–41
113. Yang Y, Zang O (1997) A hierarchical analysis for rock engi-
neering using artificial neural networks. Rock Mech Rock Eng
30:207–222
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.