ArticleScientific reports2025
Deep learning driven prediction and comparative study of surrounding rock deformation in high speed railway tunnels.
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.
- Intelligent Recognition of Muffled Blasting Sounds and Lithology Prediction in Coal Mines Based on RDGNet.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To tackle the challenge of discrete and complex monitoring data generated during high-speed rail tunnel construction, this study proposes a hybrid deep learning model for deformation forecasting. Using 300-hour continuous deformation records from multiple cross-sections of the G Tunnel (March 2023), a novel WOA-CNN-GRU model is developed, integrating data preprocessing, feature extraction, and prediction. The methodology incorporates quadratic exponential smoothing for outlier mitigation, followed by sequential feature extraction using convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and bidirectional gated recurrent units (GRUs). Comparative experiments demonstrate the model's superiority over conventional architectures including RNN, LSTM, GRU, and CNN-GRU. The WOA-CNN-GRU model achieves an RMSE of 0.1257 mm and a MAPE of 0.51%, significantly outperforming baseline models, with RMSE reductions of 0.9814 mm (RNN), 0.7629 mm (LSTM), 0.4188 mm (GRU), and 0.2292 mm (CNN-GRU), and MAPE improvements of 2.64%, 1.37%, 1.05%, and 0.86%, respectively. Moreover, the model exhibits robust generalization, with average absolute errors below 1 mm and relative errors under 1% across various construction methods and tunnel segments. These results provide compelling evidence for the effectiveness of hybrid intelligent models in capturing nonlinear, spatiotemporal deformation patterns in tunnel engineering. The WOA-CNN-GRU model offers practical guidance for real-time monitoring system development and risk mitigation in civil infrastructure projects.
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.