129 citations as recorded by crossref.

1. Stacking model based on six base classifiers to improve prediction of soil liquefaction: a multi-dataset study X. Yao et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/17499518.2025.2573637
2. Machine learning approaches for prediction of fine-grained soils liquefaction M. Ozsagir et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2022.105014
3. Assessment of liquefaction potential of the Erzincan, Eastern Turkey E. Duman et al. https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2014.7.6.589
4. Seismic liquefaction potential assessed by neural networks X. Xue & E. Liu https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-017-6523-y
5. Patient rule-induction method for liquefaction potential assessment based on CPT data A. Kaveh et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-016-0990-3
6. Soil liquefaction assessment by using hierarchical Gaussian Process model with integrated feature and instance based domain adaption for multiple data sources H. Guo et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43503-022-00004-w
7. Hybrid Stacking Ensemble Learning for Direct Prediction and Geotechnical Interpretation of Liquefaction Factor of Safety in the Port Sudan Coastal Plain A. Hussain et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/app16146867
8. On the tracking of shelly carbonate sands using deep learning M. Wu et al. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeot.21.00129
9. Detection of fatigue cracking in steel bridge girders: A support vector machine approach H. Hasni et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acme.2016.11.005
10. New insights on rainfall triggering flow-like landslides and flash floods in Campania (Southern Italy) N. Santangelo et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-021-01667-9
11. A hybrid approach for computational determination of liquefaction potential of Erzurum City Center based on SPT data using response surface methodology F. Yılmaz et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-021-09312-4
12. Probabilistic evaluation of CPT-based seismic soil liquefaction potential: towards the integration of interpretive structural modeling and bayesian belief network M. Ahmad et al. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2021454
13. A hyper parameterized artificial neural network approach for prediction of the factor of safety against liquefaction T. Kurnaz et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2023.107109
14. Assessing probabilistic hazard and risk for building, road network, and ecosystems: the case study of La Florida municipality, Galeras Volcano, Colombia G. Córdoba et al. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2025.1632282
15. Empirical approach for prediction of bearing pressure of spread footings on clayey soil using artificial intelligence (AI) techniques P. Sultana et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2022.100489
16. Explainable machine learning model for liquefaction potential assessment of soils using XGBoost-SHAP K. Jas & G. Dodagoudar https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2022.107662
17. Application of artificial intelligence in geotechnical engineering: A state-of-the-art review A. Baghbani et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2022.103991
18. Seismically Induced Liquefaction Potential Assessment by Different Artificial Intelligence Procedures D. Kumar et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40515-023-00327-w
19. Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential of Soil Using Soft Computing Techniques P. Karna et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-023-00786-5
20. Predicting the strut forces of the steel supporting structure of deep excavation considering various factors by machine learning methods H. Hu et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.undsp.2023.12.005
21. Evaluation of liquefaction potential in central Taiwan using random forest method C. Liu et al. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-79127-2
22. A Comparative Study of Soil Liquefaction Assessment Using Machine Learning Models S. Hanandeh et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-022-02180-z
23. Prediction of pore-water pressure response to rainfall using support vector regression N. Babangida et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-016-1429-4
24. Influence of Sewage Sludge Ash on Clay Properties A. Cabalar et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/app16041727
25. Particle Swarm Optimization Variants for Solving Geotechnical Problems: Review and Comparative Analysis A. Kashani et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-020-09442-0
26. An investigation of feature selection methods for soil liquefaction prediction based on tree-based ensemble algorithms using AdaBoost, gradient boosting, and XGBoost S. Demir & E. Sahin https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-07856-4
27. Soil Saturation and Stability Analysis of a Test Site Slope Using the Shallow Landslide Instability Prediction (SLIP) Model L. Montrasio et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-018-0465-3
28. Estimation of soil liquefaction using artificial intelligence techniques: an extended comparison between machine and deep learning approaches E. Şehmusoğlu et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-025-12116-4
29. Liquefaction study of fine-grained soil using computational model S. Ghani & S. Kumari https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-020-00426-4
30. Delegated Regressor, A Robust Approach for Automated Anomaly Detection in the Soil Radon Time Series Data M. Rafique et al. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-59881-9
31. SPT-Based Probabilistic Method for Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential of Soil Using Multi-Gene Genetic Programming P. Muduli & S. Das https://doi.org/10.4018/jgee.2013010103
32. CPT-based Seismic Liquefaction Potential Evaluation Using Multi-gene Genetic Programming Approach P. Muduli & S. Das https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-013-0048-4
33. Assessment of liquefaction potential of Erzincan Province and its vicinity, Turkey E. Subası Duman & S. Ikizler https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1170-z
34. Predicting Earthquake-Induced Soil Liquefaction Based on Machine Learning Classifiers: A Comparative Multi-Dataset Study H. Guo et al. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219876221420044
35. Integrating the LSSVM and RBFNN models with three optimization algorithms to predict the soil liquefaction potential M. Cai et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-021-01392-w
36. Modeling of tensile strength of rocks materials based on support vector machines approaches N. Ceryan et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.2154
37. Prediction of Liquefied Soil Settlement Using Multilayer Perceptron with Bayesian Optimization N. Van Nguyen et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-024-00894-w
38. Performance evaluation of hybrid GA–SVM and GWO–SVM models to predict earthquake-induced liquefaction potential of soil: a multi-dataset investigation J. Zhou et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-021-01418-3
39. Entropy analysis for identifying significant parameters for seismic soil liquefaction A. Dalvi et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/17486025.2013.805255
40. Improvement of spatial estimation for soil organic carbon stocks in Yuksekova plain using Sentinel 2 imagery and gradient descent–boosted regression tree M. Budak et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-26064-8
41. Prediction of Probability of Liquefaction Using Soft Computing Techniques D. Kumar et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40030-022-00683-9
42. Shear wave Velocity-Based Machine Learning Modeling for Prediction of Liquefaction Potential of Soil J. Naik et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-024-01121-2
43. Explainable Machine Learning-Based Ground Motion Characterization: Evaluating the Role of Geotechnical Variabilities on Response Parameters A. Chala et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences15110417
44. The Application of Machine Learning Techniques in Geotechnical Engineering: A Review and Comparison W. Shao et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11183976
45. Deep learning to evaluate seismic-induced soil liquefaction and modified transfer learning between various data sources H. Guo et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.undsp.2024.08.010
46. Estimation of spatiotemporal response of rooted soil using a machine learning approach Z. Cheng et al. https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.A1900555
47. Liquefaction behavior of Indo-Gangetic region using novel metaheuristic optimization algorithms coupled with artificial neural network S. Ghani & S. Kumari https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-021-05165-y
48. Drought Severity and Frequency Analysis Aided by Spectral and Meteorological Indices in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq H. Gaznayee et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14193024
49. Enhancing seismic activity classification in augmented soil gas radon time series data through computational intelligence techniques N. Bashir et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2025.106560
50. A computationally efficient system for assessing near-real-time instability of regional unsaturated soil slopes under rainfall L. Li et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-019-01307-3
51. Employing a genetic algorithm and grey wolf optimizer for optimizing RF models to evaluate soil liquefaction potential J. Zhou et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-022-10140-5
52. Machine learning modeling for predicting soil liquefaction utilizing laboratory test data C. Huang et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-026-08146-1
53. Predicting seismic-induced liquefaction through ensemble learning frameworks M. Alobaidi et al. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-48044-0
54. Multi-objective feature selection (MOFS) algorithms for prediction of liquefaction susceptibility of soil based on in situ test methods S. Das et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-04089-3
55. A new approach for modeling of flow number of asphalt mixtures A. Alavi et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acme.2016.06.004
56. Prediction and interpretation of liquefaction occurrences using explainable machine learning models K. Kumar et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-025-03005-4
57. Accuracy Assessment of Kriging, artificial neural network, and a hybrid approach integrating spatial and terrain data in estimating and mapping of soil organic carbon M. Kılıç et al. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268658
58. Large, deepwater slope failures: Implications for landslide-generated tsunamis C. Lo Iacono et al. https://doi.org/10.1130/G33446.1
59. Assessment of Soil Liquefaction Potential Using Genetic Programming Using a Probability-Based Approach N. Reddy et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-024-01421-w
60. Adoption of tree-based machine learning algorithms and CPT data for liquefaction potential assessment S. Tian et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-026-2385-1
61. A novel approach for assessment of seismic induced liquefaction susceptibility of soil D. Kumar et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-024-02341-z
62. Exploring the possibility of assessing the damage degree of liquefaction based only on seismic records by artificial neural networks A. Kamura et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2021.01.014
63. Application of machine learning in early warning system of geotechnical disaster: a systematic and comprehensive review S. Lin et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-025-11175-0
64. Machine Learning Techniques for Soil Characterization Using Cone Penetration Test Data A. Chala & R. Ray https://doi.org/10.3390/app13148286
65. Liquefaction assessment of soil based on SPT and CPT data using novel machine learning techniques: a practical solution R. Mustafa et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-025-02404-0
66. Bioclimatic analysis in a region of southern Italy (Calabria) T. Caloiero et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/11263504.2015.1037814
67. Explainable AI using ensemble machine learning with integrated SHapley additive explanations (SHAP)-Borda approach for estimation of the safety factor against soil liquefaction U. Dağdeviren et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-025-12466-z
68. Revealing the nature of soil liquefaction using machine learning S. Ghani et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-024-01688-7
69. Combining spatial autocorrelation with artificial intelligence models to estimate spatial distribution and risks of heavy metal pollution in agricultural soils E. Günal et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-10813-2
70. ESTIMATION OF SOIL LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL IN THE DALAMAN RESIDENTIAL AREA USING A SUPERVISED MACHINE LEARNING MODEL O. Türe & E. Karacan https://doi.org/10.22531/muglajsci.1602580
71. Liq-EBM: data-driven assessment of liquefaction triggering and associated ground damage Y. Hwang et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-026-08100-1
72. Engineering-Geological Features Supporting a Seismic-Driven Multi-Hazard Scenario in the Lake Campotosto Area (L’Aquila, Italy) B. Antonielli et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences11030107
73. Evaluation of soil liquefaction potential index based on SPT data in the Erzincan, Eastern Turkey E. Duman et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-014-1550-4
74. Kernel-based machine learning model for liquefaction probability prediction and its application to the seismically active indo-gangetic plain S. Ghani https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-025-01790-4
75. Coastal vulnerability assessment based on video wave run-up observations at a mesotidal, steep-sloped beach M. Vousdoukas et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-011-0480-x
76. A novel ensemble model based on GMDH-type neural network for the prediction of CPT-based soil liquefaction T. Kurnaz & Y. Kaya https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-019-8344-7
77. Assessment of Soil Liquefaction Potential Prediction Using Synthetic Data and Soft Computing Techniques J. Naik et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40515-026-00818-6
78. Estimation of contact forces of granular materials under uniaxial compression based on a machine learning model Z. Cheng & J. Wang https://doi.org/10.1007/s10035-021-01160-z
79. Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential of Coastal Alluvium Using SPT Data - A Comparative Case Study P. Muduli et al. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/970/1/012033
80. Neural transfer learning for soil liquefaction tests Y. Fang et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2022.105282
81. Developing data driven framework to model earthquake induced liquefaction potential of granular terrain by machine learning classification models K. Onyelowe et al. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-07494-5
82. Soft voting ensemble classifier for liquefaction prediction based on SPT data P. Chithuloori & J. Kim https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-025-11230-w
83. Suitability assessment of the best liquefaction analysis procedure based on SPT data D. Kumar et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41939-023-00148-x
84. A novel liquefaction study for fine-grained soil using PCA-based hybrid soft computing models S. GHANI et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-021-01640-1
85. Back-calculation of soil parameters from displacement-controlled cavity expansion under geostatic stress by FEM and machine learning F. Patino-Ramirez et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-022-01698-z
86. Assessment of earthquake-induced liquefaction susceptibility using ensemble learning S. Dadhich et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41939-023-00146-z
87. Mapping the vulnerability for evacuation of the Campi Flegrei territorial system in case of a volcanic unrest I. Alberico et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-012-0335-x
88. Application of machine learning to the Vs-based soil liquefaction potential assessment Q. Sui et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-022-7809-4
89. Relevance vector machines approach for long-term flow prediction U. Okkan et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-014-1626-9
90. Probabilistic-Based Assessment of Liquefaction-Induced Damage with Analytical Fragility Curves D. Forcellini https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences10080315
91. Stiffness and Strength of Stabilized Organic Soils—Part II/II: Parametric Analysis and Modeling with Machine Learning N. Yousefpour et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences11050218
92. Development of Prediction Models for Shear Strength of Rockfill Material Using Machine Learning Techniques M. Ahmad et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11136167
93. Integration models for predicting earthquake-induced liquefaction considering influences of integration methods and base model selection strategies J. Hu et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2026.106286
94. Prediction of California Bearing Ratio of Subgrade Soils Using Ensemble Machine Learning Models: A Comparative Study of Random Forest, XGBoost, and a Hybrid RF-XGB Framework A. Tiwari et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40009-026-02411-4
95. Green AI for Energy-Efficient Ground Investigation: A Greedy Algorithm-Optimized AI Model for Subsurface Data Prediction S. Zhang et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/app152212012
96. Model uncertainty of SPT-based method for evaluation of seismic soil liquefaction potential using multi-gene genetic programming P. Muduli & S. Das https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2015.02.003
97. Effects of the subtropical anticyclones over North Africa and Arabian Peninsula on the African easterly jet J. Spinks et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4017
98. Modelling and validation of liquefaction potential index of fine-grained soils using ensemble learning paradigms S. Ghani et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2023.108399
99. Liquefaction Potential Assessment of Soils Using Machine Learning Techniques: A State-of-the-Art Review from 1994–2021 K. Jas & G. Dodagoudar https://doi.org/10.1061/IJGNAI.GMENG-7788
100. A deep learning approach for rapid detection of soil liquefaction using time–frequency images W. Zhang et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2023.107788
101. Equivalent-Linear Seismic Ground Response Analysis of Some Typical Sites in Mumbai V. Phanikanth et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-011-9443-8
102. A Novel Methodology to Classify Soil Liquefaction Using Deep Learning D. Kumar et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-020-01544-7
103. 35 Years of (AI) in Geotechnical Engineering: State of the Art A. Ebid https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-020-01536-7
104. An AI-driven framework for state-dependent constitutive modeling of soils integrating particle swarm optimization and machine learning B. Zhang et al. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2026-0061
105. Block and boulder accumulations along the coastline between Fins and Sur (Sultanate of Oman): tsunamigenic remains? G. Hoffmann et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-012-0399-7
106. Seismic Liquefaction Analysis of MCDM Weighted SPT Data Using Support Vector Machine Classification V. Alla et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40996-023-01293-6
107. A Liquefaction Study Using ENN, CA, and Biogeography Optimized-Based ANFIS Technique S. Umar et al. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJAMC.290535
108. Evaluation and analysis of liquefaction potential of gravelly soils using explainable probabilistic machine learning model K. Jas et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2023.106051
109. Evaluation of soil liquefaction potential using ensemble classifier based on grey wolves optimizer (GWO) N. Reddy et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2024.108750
110. Evaluation of liquefaction potential of soil based on standard penetration test using multi-gene genetic programming model P. Muduli & S. Das https://doi.org/10.2478/s11600-013-0181-6
111. Liquefaction prediction with robust machine learning algorithms (SVM, RF, and XGBoost) supported by genetic algorithm-based feature selection and parameter optimization from the perspective of data processing S. Demir & E. Şahin https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-022-10578-4
112. Rainfall–runoff modeling using least squares support vector machines U. Okkan & Z. Serbes https://doi.org/10.1002/env.2154
113. GeoLiquefy-AI: Predicting Soil Liquefaction Potential via Deep Neural Architecture Search in Seismically Active Coastal Zones S. Hocine et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/land15081345
114. Evaluation of liquefaction potential based on CPT data using random forest V. Kohestani et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1893-5
115. Deterministic and Probabilistic Analysis of Liquefaction for Different Regions in Bihar S. Umar et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-018-0498-7
116. Seismic liquefaction potential assessed by support vector machines approaches X. Xue & X. Yang https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-015-0741-x
117. SPT-based liquefaction assessment with a novel ensemble model based on GMDH-type neural network T. Kurnaz & Y. Kaya https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-019-4640-5
118. Application of Feedforward Neural Network and SPT Results in the Estimation of Seismic Soil Liquefaction Triggering T. Pham & J. Hernández-Pérez https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/1058825
119. A comparative analysis of ensemble learning algorithms with hyperparameter optimization for soil liquefaction prediction A. Demir et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-024-11600-7
120. Interpretable AI for Site-Adaptive Soil Liquefaction Assessment E. Torres & J. Dungca https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences16010025
121. Ground based radon (222Rn) observations in Bucharest, Romania and their application to geophysics M. Zoran et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-012-1761-7
122. Prognostic of Soil Nutrients and Soil Fertility Index Using Machine Learning Classifier Techniques . Swapna B. et al. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJeC.304034
123. Earthquake-induced liquefaction hazard mapping at national-scale in Australia using deep learning techniques R. Jena et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2022.101460
124. Soil Liquefaction Prediction Based on Bayesian Optimization and Support Vector Machines X. Zhang et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141911944
125. Why “AI” models for predicting soil liquefaction have been ignored, plus some that shouldn’t be B. Maurer & M. Sanger https://doi.org/10.1177/87552930231173711
126. Long-term sustainability of biogas bubbles in sand X. Hu et al. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-69324-0
127. Application of genetic algorithm-based support vector machines for prediction of soil liquefaction X. Xue & M. Xiao https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-5673-7
128. Evaluation of soil liquefaction using AI technology incorporating a coupled ENN / t-SNE model P. Atangana Njock et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.105988
129. Application of artificial intelligence techniques in prediction of cyclic resistance ratio (CRR) of clean sands V. Akhila & S. Adarsh https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/491/1/012048