Skip to content

New hybrid models integrating the aquila optimizer with machine learning algorithms to predict the strength of geosynthetic-reinforced subgrade soil

Oct 2026 · Frontiers in Built Environment · 87 references
Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization

Abstract

Accurately predicting the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of geosynthetic-reinforced subgrades is critical for pavement design but remains challenging due to the complex, nonlinear soil-reinforcement interaction. This study develops a novel hybrid modeling framework that integrates the Aquila Optimization Algorithm (AOA) with machine learning models such as Artificial Neural Networks (ANN), Ridge Regression, and XGBoost to enhance the prediction of soaked CBR values. A comprehensive database of 90 tests, encompassing key soil properties and reinforcement parameters, was used for model development. The AOA significantly boosted the predictive performance of all base models. The proposed AOA-XGBoost hybrid model demonstrated superior accuracy, achieving a convincing coefficient of determination (R 2 = 0.980), a low mean squared error (MSE = 1.78), and a minimal mean absolute error (MAE = 5.075) on the testing dataset. This performance notably surpassed the plain XGBoost model (R 2 = 0.954, MSE = 1.99, MAE = 11.82), corresponding to a 2.8% gain in R 2 , a 10.6% reduction in MSE, and a 57.1% reduction in MAE. Similarly, the AOA-ANN model (R 2 = 0.945, MSE = 2.87, MAE = 13.87) showed a clear improvement over the plain ANN (R 2 = 0.929, MSE = 3.06, MAE = 18.09), reflecting a 1.8% gain in R 2 , a 6.2% reduction in MSE, and a 23.3% reduction in MAE. Five-fold cross-validation, reported as mean ± standard deviation, confirmed the robustness and generalization capability of this ranking. AOA-XGBoost produced the best cross-validated results: R 2 = 0.8819 ± 0.0765, RMSE = 6.4218 ± 3.1846, MAE = 3.5217 ± 1.4826, MAPE = 19.6842 ± 4.7315%, and A20 = 0.6427 ± 0.1186. Sensitivity analysis revealed that reinforcement characteristics, particularly the number of layers (29.4% contribution) and tensile strength (21.8%), are the most dominant factors influencing CBR values. Hence, the results conclusively demonstrate that the AOA-assisted hybrid framework, particularly AOA-XGBoost, provides a robust and highly accurate tool for forecasting reinforced subgrade strength, supporting process innovation in pavement design through data‐driven assessment, with substantial potential to reduce reliance on time-consuming laboratory tests and improve pavement design efficiency.

Read PDF

Similar papers

#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54
#machine learning Review Open access Jun 2014

Why Early-Stage Software Startups Fail: A Behavioral Framework

This state-of-practice investigation was performed using a literature review followed by a multiple-case study approach and presents how inconsistency between managerial strategies and execution can lead to failure by means of a behavioral framework.

Carmine Giardino, Xiaofeng Wang, P. Abrahamsson · 175 citations · ⚡19
#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2016

“Failures” to be celebrated: an analysis of major pivots of software startups

This study conducts a case survey study based on the secondary data of the major pivots happened in 49 software startups, and demonstrates that customer need pivot is the most common among all pivot types.

Sohaib Shahid Bajwa, Xiaofeng Wang, Anh Nguyen-Duc et al. · 127 citations · ⚡15
#machine learning Review Open access May 2016

Key Challenges in Software Startups Across Life Cycle Stages

It is found that what perceived as biggest challenges by software startups do vary across different life cycle stages, even though its significance decreases when the learning focuses of the startups move from problem to solution and their products mature.

Xiaofeng Wang, Henry Edison, Sohaib Shahid Bajwa et al. · 62 citations · ⚡6

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Oct 23, 2026

Q&A: How AI came to model the “messy” human mind

Assistant Professor Benjamin Lindquist studies how engineers deliberately injected randomness into early AI, giving rise to deep-learning models that sometimes hallucinate.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.