ArticleScientific reports2023
Assessment of the ground vibration during blasting in mining projects using different computational approaches.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pre-blast prediction of ground vibration in surface mining using rock acoustic impedance and wave attenuation calibrated with in-situ measurements.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Particle peak velocity prediction based on risk-oriented hybrid ensemble learning.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Simultaneous prediction and optimisation of rock fragmentation and ground vibration using an ANN-RF ensemble in open-pit blasting.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Assessment of off-road agricultural traction in situ using large scale machine learning and neurocomputing models.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Optimizing blast design and bench geometry for stability and productivity in open pit limestone mines using experimental and numerical approaches.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Assessment of compressive strength of eco-concrete reinforced using machine learning tools.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Assessment of soil classification based on cone penetration test data for Kaifeng area using optimized support vector machine.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Research on the evolution of college online public opinion risk based on improved Grey Wolf Optimizer combined with LSTM model.PloS one · 2025Article
- Prediction of peak particle velocity using hybrid random forest approach.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Study on the impact of meteorological factors on influenza in different periods and prediction based on artificial intelligence RF-Bi-LSTM algorithm: to compare the COVID-19 period with the non-COVID-19 period.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Predicting ground vibration during rock blasting using relevance vector machine improved with dual kernels and metaheuristic algorithms.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- An improved Gaussian process for filling the missing data in GNSS position time series considering the influence of adjacent stations.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Prediction of jumbo drill penetration rate in underground mines using various machine learning approaches and traditional models.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Mechanical Framework for Geopolymer Gels Construction: An Optimized LSTM Technique to Predict Compressive Strength of Fly Ash-Based Geopolymer Gels Concrete.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Boosting-based ensemble machine learning models for predicting unconfined compressive strength of geopolymer stabilized clayey soil.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Assessment of small strain modulus in soil using advanced computational models.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The investigation compares the conventional, advanced machine, deep, and hybrid learning models to introduce an optimum computational model to assess the ground vibrations during blasting in mining projects. The long short-term memory (LSTM), artificial neural network (ANN), least square support vector machine (LSSVM), ensemble tree (ET), decision tree (DT), Gaussian process regression (GPR), support vector machine (SVM), and multilinear regression (MLR) models are employed using 162 data points. For the first time, the blackhole-optimized LSTM model has been used to predict the ground vibrations during blasting. Fifteen performance metrics have been implemented to measure the prediction capabilities of computational models. The study concludes that the blackhole optimized-LSTM model PPV11 is highly capable of predicting ground vibration. Model PPV11 has assessed ground vibrations with RMSE = 0.0181 mm/s, MAE = 0.0067 mm/s, R = 0.9951, a20 = 96.88, IOA = 0.9719, IOS = 0.0356 in testing. Furthermore, this study reveals that the prediction accuracy of hybrid models is less affected by multicollinearity because of the optimization algorithm. The external cross-validation and literature validation confirm the prediction capabilities of model PPV11. The ANOVA and Z tests reject the null hypothesis for actual ground vibration, and the Anderson-Darling test rejects the null hypothesis for predicted ground vibration. This study also concludes that the GPR and LSSVM models overfit because of moderate to problematic multicollinearity in assessing ground vibration during blasting.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.