ArticleScientific reports2025
Method and application of stability prediction model for rock slope.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Dominant factors and prediction model of toppling collapse for steep cliffs in strong earthquake zones.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Slope instability is a prevalent dynamic disaster encountered in the construction of geotechnical engineering projects. Intelligent detection and early warning systems serve as crucial measures for preventing and controlling slope instability. To accurately and efficiently predict the stability state of slopes, we propose a combined model that integrates the Newton-Raphson optimization algorithm (NRBO) with an optimized extreme gradient boosting tree (XGBoost). Firstly, the primary factors influencing slope instability are thoroughly analyzed. The sample outline is standardized utilizing polar deviation, and the distribution of sample classes is balanced through the application of the Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (SMOTE). Secondly, the XGBoost model is optimized by fine-tuning parameters such as maximum depth (max_depth), learning rate (learning_rate), subsample rate, column sampling rate (colsample-bytree), and minimum loss (gamma) through NRBO. The stability of the model was assessed using a ten fold cross validation method, while the prediction results were comprehensively evaluated utilizing metrics including accuracy (Acc), precision (Pre), recall (Rec), F1 score (Fs), and Cohen's Kappa coefficient (Ka). Finally, the SHAP additive interpretation method is employed to elucidate the significance and contributions of features influencing the XGBoost model. This model is subsequently applied to ten specific engineering case studies. The results show that after NRBO optimization, the optimal values for the maximum depth, learning rate, subsample proportion, column sample proportion, and minimum loss of the XGBoost model are 7, 0.8247, 0.6326, 0.6263, and 0.0758, respectively. Based on the SHAP model analysis, the main factors influencing the stability of the slopes are g, c, φ, H, and j.
Indexed as
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.