Comparative performance evaluation of machine learning models for predicting the ultimate bearing capacity of shallow foundations on granular soils.

Accurate estimation of the ultimate bearing capacity (UBC) of shallow foundations is critical for safe and economical geotechnical design. Traditional approaches depend heavily on extensive and costly field and laboratory investigations, while numerical simulations, though effective, are computationally intensive and time-consuming. To address these limitations, this study investigates the application of machine learning (ML) models for efficient and reliable prediction of the ultimate bearing capacity of shallow foundations. Although numerous studies have explored individual ML techniques for this purpose, a comprehensive and consistent comparison of widely used models under identical conditions remains limited. This research evaluates six ML algorithms; k-Nearest Neighbors (kNN), Artificial Neural Network (NN), Random Forest (RF), Extreme Gradient Boosting (xGBoost), Adaptive Boosting (AdaBoost), and Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD), using a dataset of 169 experimental results collected from literature. The input features include foundation width (B), depth (D), length-to-width ratio (L/B), soil unit weight (γ), and angle of internal friction (φ). Model performance was assessed using multiple evaluation metrics: coefficient of determination (R²), Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE), Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE), Mean Squared Error (MSE), and objective function (OBJ). To enhance model interpretability, SHapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) and Partial Dependence Plots (PDPs) were employed to analyze feature importance and input-output relationships, highlighting the influence of both soil properties and foundation geometry on predicted bearing capacity. Among the evaluated models, AdaBoost demonstrated the best overall performance, achieving R² values of 0.939 and 0.881 on the training and testing sets, respectively. Based on the cumulative ranking of the models across all evaluation metrics, the models were ranked in the following order of performance: AdaBoost > kNN > RF > xGBoost > NN > SGD. While the results are promising, a key limitation is the use of single-layer soil data, which restricts applicability to more complex, multilayered soil profiles. Future studies should incorporate multilayer datasets and account for spatial variability to enhance the generalizability and robustness of predictive models.