Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102(
DOI 10.1007/s12517-015-2057-3
ORIGINAL PAPER
Prediction of the strength and elasticity modulus of granite
through an expert artificial neural network
Danial Jahed Armaghani 1 & Edy Tonnizam Mohamad 1 & Ehsan Momeni 1 &
Masoud Monjezi 2 & Mogana Sundaram Narayanasamy 3
Received: 9 December 2014 / Accepted: 10 September 2015
# Saudi Society for Geosciences 2015
Abstract The uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) and
Young’s modulus (E) are important parameters in designing
solutions to rock engineering problems. However, determina-
tion of these properties in the laboratory is expensive and time
consuming. Therefore, many attempts have been made to es-
timate these properties indirectly by defining various correla-
tions. These correlations often relate UCS and E to some basic
rock index tests. Nevertheless, in this study, using an artificial
neural network (ANN) enhanced with the imperialist compet-
itive algorithm (ICA), a hybrid model is developed for
predicting the UCS and E of granite samples. The samples
used in this study were taken from the face of the Pahang–
Selangor raw water transfer tunnel in Malaysia. To train the
aforementioned model, the results of the laboratory tests, in-
cluding porosity (n), P wave velocity (VP), point load strength
index (Is(50)) and the Schmidt hammer rebound number (Rn),
* Danial Jahed Armaghani
danialarmaghani@gmail.com
Edy Tonnizam Mohamad
edy@utm.my
Ehsan Momeni
mehsan23@live.utm.my
Masoud Monjezi
monjezi@modares.ac.ir
Mogana Sundaram Narayanasamy
mogana.sundaram@aurecongroup.com
1
Department of Geotechnics and Transportation, Faculty of Civil
Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM),
81310 Skudai, Johor, Malaysia
2
Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran
3
Aurecon Pty Ltd., Brisbane, Australia
were used as model inputs. For the sake of comparison,
the performance of the hybrid model was checked against
a conventional ANN predictive model with similar archi-
tecture. Value account for (VAF), root mean square error
(RMSE) and coefficient of determination (R2) were used
to control the capacity performance of the predictive
models. The performance indices obtained using the
ICA-ANN approach show that the proposed model can
predict UCS and E with a high degree of accuracy. The
results of sensitivity analysis reveal that VP is the most
influential parameter, compared to the other input param-
eters, on UCS and E.
Keywords UCS . Young’s modulus . ICA . ANN . Granite
Introduction
In geotechnical designs and construction, rock engineering
properties have the most significant role. These properties,
such as strength and deformability characteristics, are prereq-
uisites for exploration, planning and optimal utilization of the
Earth’s resources. The design of structures is influenced by
the response of the strength and elasticity of the rock under
various stress fields. The most importance elastic constant is
the extensional stress–strain ratio, knows as Young’s modulus
(E) (Ide 1936). Typically, the strength and elasticity of the
rock can be ascertained by the unconfined compression test
(UCT). This test is standardized by the International Society
for Rock Mechanics (ISRM 2007). Direct determination of
these properties in the laboratory is complicated and time
consuming (Gokceoglu and Zorlu 2004; Baykasoglu et al.
2008). Besides, the laboratory experiment for strength and
E is wearisome and needs good instrumentation which is
expensive (Eissa and Kazi 1998). It is well established that
48 Page 2 of 16 Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102(

Table 1 Some correlations between Young’s modulus and other rock index tests

Reference Predictor Correlation R2 Description

Leite and Ferland (2001) n E=10.10−0.109n 0.74 Different rocks

Lashkaripour (2002) n E=37.9e−0.863n 0.68 Claystone, clay shale, mudstone, mud shale
Yilmaz and Yuksek (2009) n E=−39.1Ln(n)+110.31 0.83 121 samples of gypsum
Beiki et al. (2013) n E=e0.10n+3.6 0.23 72 different carbonate rock types
Yasar and Erdogan (2004a) VP VP =0.0937E+1.7528 0.86 13 samples of various carbonate rock types
Moradian and Behnia (2009) VP E=2.06VP2.78 0.92 64 samples of limestone, sandstone and marlstone
Beiki et al. (2013) VP E=2.16VP2.08 0.39 72 different carbonate rock types
Jahed Armaghani et al. (2014a) VP E=7e−08VP2.375 0.61 45 samples of granite
Yilmaz and Yuksek (2008) Is(50) E=10.943Is(50)+0.8527 0.56 39 gypsum sample sets
Yilmaz and Yuksek (2009) Is(50) E=14.122Is(50)−2.745 0.56 121 samples of gypsum
Sachpazis (1990) Rn E=1.94Rn −33.92 0.78 Marble, limestone, dolomite
Yilmaz and Sendır (2002) Rn E=exp(1.146+0.054Rn) 0.83 Some gypsum samples
Dincer et al. (2004) Rn E=0.47Rn −6.25 0.85 Andesite, tuff, basalt

Is(50)=point load strength index, Rn =Schmidt hammer rebound number, VP =P wave velocity, n=porosity

performing some basic rock index tests, such as physical (Singh et al. 2012). Hence, the indirect prediction of the uni-
tests, ultrasonic velocity test, point load strength test, Schmidt axial compressive strength (UCS) and E using rock index
hammer test and Brazilian tensile test, is easy and economical tests is of interest.

Table 2 Some correlations between UCS and other rock index tests

Reference Predictor Correlation R2 Description

Palchik and Hatzor (2004) n UCS=273.15e0.076n 0.87 12 samples of chalk

Yilmaz and Yuksek (2009) n UCS=−28.429Ln(n)+78.989 0.8 121 samples of gypsum
Diamantis et al. (2009) n UCS=−33.13Ln(n)+64.6 0.82 32 samples of serpentinite rock
Beiki et al. (2013) n UCS=−7.7Ln(n)+74.5 0.37 72 different carbonate rock types
Mishra and Basu (2013) n UCS=228.2e−1.98n 0.78 20 samples of granite
Entwisle et al. (2005) VP 0.53 171 samples of volcanic rock
UCS ¼ 0:78e0:88V P
Cobanglu and Celik (2008) VP UCS=56.71VP −192.93 0.67 150 core samples of different rocks
Sharma and Singh (2008) VP UCS=0.0642VP −117.99 0.90 49 samples in different rock types
Moradian and Behnia (2009) VP 0.7 64 different rock samples
UCS ¼ 165:05e−4:452V P
Diamantis et al. (2009) VP UCS=0.11VP −515.56 0.81 32 samples of serpentinite rock
Khandelwal (2013) VP UCS=0.033VP −34.83 0.87 12 samples of a wide rock types
Beiki et al. (2013) VP UCS=3.7VP2.3 0.55 72 different carbonate rock types
Minaeian and Ahangari (2013) VP UCS=0.005VP 0.94 Some samples of weak conglomeratic rock
Jahed Armaghani et al. (2014a) VP UCS=0.0319VP −61.602 0.47 45 samples of granite
Kahraman (2001) Is(50) UCS=8.41Is(50)+9.51 0.72 27 different rock samples
Tsiambaos and Sabatakakis (2004) Is(50) UCS=7.3Is(50)1.71 0.82 188 samples (limestone, sandstone and marlstones)
Kahraman et al. (2005) Is(50) UCS=10.22Is(50)+24.31 0.75 38 different rock samples
Agustawijaya (2007) Is(50) UCS=13.4Is(50) 0.89 39 samples in different rock types
Yilmaz and Yuksek (2008) Is(50) UCS=12.4Is(50)−9.0859 0.81 39 gypsum sample sets
Yilmaz and Yuksek (2009) Is(50) UCS=10.52Is(50)−3.966 0.57 121 samples of gypsum
Tugrul and Zarif (1999) Rn UCS=8.36Rn −416 0.87 Granite
Yılmaz and Sendır (2002) Rn UCS=exp(0.818+0.059Rn) 0.96 Some gypsum samples
Yasar and Erdogan (2004b) Rn UCS=0.000004Rn4.29 0.89 Carbonates, sandstone, basalt
Kilic and Teymen (2008) Rn UCS=0.0137Rn0.272 0.93 Different rock types

Is(50)=point load strength index, Rn =Schmidt hammer rebound number, VP =P wave velocity, n=porosity
Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102( Page 3 of 16 48

There are many published traditional correlations for the
prediction of UCS and E (Kahraman 2001; Basu and Aydin
2006; Nazir et al. 2013; Liu et al. 2014). Apart from traditional
regression, as stated by several researchers (Gokceoglu and
Zorlu 2004; Yilmaz and Yuksek 2009; Dehghan et al. 2010;
Monjezi et al. 2012; Jahed Armaghani et al. 2014a) multiple
regression (MR) analyses can be applied to predict UCS and
E. In many cases, these correlations are not accurate enough
whereas exact prediction of UCS and E is essential in the field
of rock engineering (Dehghan et al. 2010; Beiki et al. 2013).
Generally, these correlations give good results only in similar
rocks (Beiki et al. 2013). Therefore, the implementation of
statistical prediction methods is not reliable if new available
data are different from the original as the form of the obtained
equation needs to be updated (Yilmaz and Yuksek 2009;
Rezaei et al. 2012). Meanwhile, the feasibility of artificial
intelligence techniques, such as artificial neural networks
(ANNs) in predicting UCS and E, has been reported in many
studies (Zorlu et al. 2008; Dehghan et al. 2010; Momeni et al.
2015a).
ANNs are one of the most dynamic areas of research in the
advanced and diverse applications of science and engineering.
Although ANNs are able to directly map input-to-output pat-
terns and utilize all influential parameters for prediction
purposes, there are still some limitations: the slow rate of
learning and entrapment in local minima (Eberhart et al.
1996; Adhikari et al. 2013). To overcome these shortcomings,
employing the imperialist competitive algorithm (ICA) is of
advantage. ICA is a population-based evolutionary algorithm
inspired by human beings’ socio-political evolution
(Atashpaz-Gargari and Lucas 2007). This algorithm has been
successfully utilized in various engineering optimization
problems (Kaveh and Talatahari 2010; Shokrollahpour et al.
2011; Talatahari et al. 2012; Taghavifar et al. 2013; Ahmadi et
al. 2013; Hajihassani et al. 2014). This paper presents a hybrid
ICA-ANN predictive model of UCS and E. The model is
developed for granite samples which were taken from the face
of the Pahang–Selangor raw water transfer tunnel in Malaysia.
For the sake of comparison, the prediction performances of
the ICA-ANN model were compared with the ANN model
and discussed.
Related works
Many researchers have been working on ascertaining the re-
lationships between the strength and elasticity of rock (UCS
and E) and other physical properties. Tables 1 and 2 list some

Table 3 Recent works on UCS and E prediction using soft computation techniques

Reference Technique Input Output R2

Meulenkamp and Grima (1999) ANN L, n, ρ, d UCS R2 =0.95

Gokceoglu and Zorlu (2004) FIS Is(50), BPI, VP, BTS USC, E R2UCS =0.67
R2E =0.79
Zorlu et al. (2008) ANN q, PD, CC UCS R2 =0.76
Yilmaz and Yuksek (2008) ANN ne, Is(50), Rn, Id UCS, E R2UCS =0.93
R2E =0.91
Yilmaz and Yuksek (2009) ANFIS VP, Is(50), Rn, WC UCS, E R2UCS =0.94
R2E =0.95
Dehghan et al. (2010) ANN VP, Is(50), Rn, n UCS, E R2UCS =0.86
R2E =0.77
Majdi and Beiki (2010) GA-ANN ρ, RQD, n, Nj, GSI E R2 =0.89
Rabbani et al. (2012) ANN n, BD, Sw UCS R2 =0.96
Singh et al. (2012) ANFIS ρ, Is(50), WA E R2 =0.66
Rezaei et al. (2012) FIS Rn, ρ, n UCS R2 =0.95
Ceryan et al. (2012) ANN n, Id, Vm, ne, PSV UCS R2 =0.88
Beiki et al. (2013) GA ρ, n, VP UCS, E R2UCS =0.83
R2E =0.67
Torabi-Kaveh et al. (2014) ANN VP, ρ, n UCS R2 =0.95
Tonnizam Mohamad et al. (2014) ANN-PSO BD, VP, Is(50), BTS UCS R2 =0.97
Momeni et al. (2015a) ANN-PSO Rn, ρ, VP, Is(50) UCS R2 =0.97

L=Equotip value, ρ=density, d=grain size, Sw =water saturation, Id =slake durability index, Vm =P wave velocity in the solid part of the sample, ne =
effective porosity, q=quartz content, Nj =number of joints per meter, n=porosity
PSV petrography study values, APLS axial point load strength, BPI block punch index, BD bulk density, PD packing density, CC concave–convex, RQD
rock quality designation, GSI geological strength index, GA genetic algorithm, WC water content, WA water absorption, FIS fuzzy inference system,
ANFIS adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system, PSO particle swarm optimization
48 Page 4 of 16
Fig. 1 Location of the PSRWT tunnel
of the empirical published correlations to estimate the E and
UCS, respectively, of intact rock. These correlations are col-
lected from different published sources and are sorted by pre-
dictors which will be used as inputs in this study. In addition,
the rock type and number of samples for each equation are
also shown in Tables 1 and 2. In these tables, the values of the
coefficients of determination (R2) show the reliability of the
established correlations. Large numbers of correlations are
expected due to the site-specific behaviour of the rock and
its variation from place to place.
Numerous researchers have focused on the prediction of
rock properties using soft computing methods. Meulenkamp
and Grima (1999) predicted UCS using a backpropagation
neural network. They used 194 different types of rock samples
Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102(
including sandstones, limestones, dolomitic stone and others.
In their study, Equotip hardness readings, density, porosity,
rock type and grain size were considered as inputs in the
UCS prediction. According to their conclusions, an ANN
can predict UCS much better than statistical models. Some
correlations between the strength parameters (UCS, axial
point load strength and tensile strength) and some index pa-
rameters (mineral composition, grain size, aspect ratio, form
factor, area weighting and orientation of foliation planes of
weakness) of the schistose rock were proposed by Singh et
al. (2001). In addition, they used petrographic properties to
predict strength parameters using a backpropagation neural
network. According to their findings, the ANN predictive
model is more accurate than the proposed correlations. In
Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102( Page 5 of 16 48

Table 4 Results of laboratory tests conducted in this study

Dataset no. Sample name n (%) Rn VP (m/s) Is(50) (MPa) UCS (MPa) E (GPa)

1 TBM 1 TD 1100 0.39 47 5506 2.31 117.9 92.9

2 TBM 1 TD 1150 0.44 38 6450 2.87 122.3 108.8
3 TBM 1 TD 1380 0.15 52 6148 3.89 166.3 92.5
4 TBM 1 TD 1900 0.23 46 5920 1.82 138.6 72.4
5 TBM 1 TD 2000 0.25 45 5950 3.12 124.7 78.4
6 TBM 1 TD 2550 0.47 44 4780 2.4 110.9 60.6
7 TBM 1 TD 2830 0.15 57 6102 4.56 152.4 149.0
8 TBM 1 TD 3200 0.4 56 5020 3.01 106.7 112.0
9 TBM 1 TD 3630 0.2 52 6910 7.1 180.1 100.6
10 TBM 1 TD 3700 0.16 51 5217 6.22 149.0 121.3
11 TBM 1 TD 4000 0.42 47 5025 1.73 95.6 50.8
12 TBM 1 TD 4800 0.37 49 4910 3.79 80.5 52.4
13 TBM 1 TD 4900 0.4 47 4670 3.34 78.8 41.2
14 TBM 1 TD 5200 0.46 50 5345 1.93 107.6 82.9
15 TBM 1 TD 5400 0.41 45 6190 3.14 101.9 67.2
16 TBM 1 TD 5800 0.4 48 4568 2.45 81.5 44.5
17 TBM 1 TD 6500 0.43 57 5785 1.98 117.9 103.4
18 TBM 1 TD 6950 0.15 57 7002 4.97 163.3 94.5
19 TBM 1 TD 7200 0.32 54 6790 5.59 141.7 80.5
20 TBM 1 TD 7600 0.43 45 7310 1.45 87.9 60.3
21 TBM 1 TD 8030 0.37 49 6635 2.02 120.0 74.9
22 TBM 1 TD 8580 0.37 52 6503 3.12 137.2 119.3
23 TBM 1 TD 8800 0.44 50 7608 2.51 93.0 115.4
24 TBM 1 TD 8980 0.4 53 6080 3.23 123.5 145.1
25 TBM 1 TD 9000 0.42 58 6620 3.21 109.9 183.3
26 TBM 2 TD 1150 0.36 43 4320 1.41 80.3 51.5
27 TBM 2 TD 1570 0.39 46 4432 2.89 99.9 59.6
28 TBM 2 TD 2000 0.45 50 4922 2.44 88.3 93.1
29 TBM 2 TD 2200 0.42 52 6848 3.56 100.6 66.7
30 TBM 2 TD 2280 0.43 54 5380 3.49 104.3 110.5
31 TBM 2 TD 2800 0.19 57 7433 5.23 184.9 156.7
32 TBM 2 TD 3280 0.39 46 5545 4.11 102.5 48.1
33 TBM 2 TD 3600 0.48 52 5643 2.75 114.6 83.5
34 TBM 2 TD 4030 0.44 42 4955 3.21 105.4 89.4
35 TBM 2 TD 4190 0.1 60 7850 6.12 209.4 123.8
36 TBM 2 TD 4300 0.22 49 5988 4.92 168.7 101.7
37 TBM 2 TD 4800 0.33 56 5040 4.65 105.6 79.7
38 TBM 2 TD 5000 0.36 48 4615 3.34 123.5 102.1
39 TBM 2 TD 5200 0.12 61 7943 6.54 211.9 156.4
40 TBM 2 TD 5450 0.11 56 5980 5.86 170.7 90.4
41 TBM 2 TD 5530 0.25 58 6080 5.21 154.4 112.3
42 TBM 2 TD 5600 0.28 59 6005 4.78 163.3 88.1
43 TBM 2 TD 5760 0.3 53 6125 2.25 135.1 77.1
44 TBM 2 TD 5920 0.18 51 6555 3.13 149.5 97.5
45 TBM 2 TD 6100 0.22 49 6430 2.99 148.6 104.5
46 TBM 2 TD 6400 0.29 45 6120 4.15 155.6 81.3
47 TBM 2 TD 6900 0.18 58 6895 5.29 191.7 132.3
48 TBM 2 TD 7000 0.19 56 6615 5.38 178.9 128.6
49 TBM 2 TD 7600 0.47 51 5715 4.88 100.9 115.6
48 Page 6 of 16 Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102(

Table 4 (continued)

Dataset no. Sample name n (%) Rn VP (m/s) Is(50) (MPa) UCS (MPa) E (GPa)

50 TBM 2 TD 7790 0.2 58 6709 4.33 152.1 142.4

51 TBM 2 TD 8680 0.28 51 6301 5.02 141.7 100.9
52 TBM 2 TD 9300 0.3 57 6150 3.22 143.9 152.8
53 TBM 2 TD 9360 0.31 55 4978 3.72 159.9 125.1
54 TBM 3 TD 750 0.51 40 2823 1.02 48.0 53.3
55 TBM 3 TD 1560 0.56 37 3065 0.91 28.0 28.6
56 TBM 3 TD 2100 0.54 43 4635 1.39 58.0 52.7
57 TBM 3 TD 2550 0.57 40 4233 1.21 40.0 23.5
58 TBM 3 TD 2650 0.57 50 4490 1.67 50.2 41.2
59 TBM 3 TD 2800 0.55 42 4230 1.31 53.6 33.7
60 TBM 3 TD 3100 0.48 39 4003 1.02 33.0 22.0
61 TBM 3 TD 3800 0.52 38 3268 0.89 35.0 25.7
62 TBM 3 TD 4050 0.5 46 4480 1.33 71.5 65.3
63 TBM 3 TD 4500 0.51 48 4108 1.34 56.5 55.3
64 TBM 3 TD 5600 0.47 46 5250 2.78 96.0 73.0
65 TBM 3 TD 6800 0.47 51 4530 2.43 87.4 61.9
66 TBM 3 TD 7950 0.45 48 4876 3.23 95.2 78.3
67 TBM 3 TD 8850 0.5 37 5463 4.23 116.8 98.7
68 TBM 3 TD 9100 0.48 44 5520 4.02 107.0 109.2
69 TBM 3 TD 9450 0.49 49 5270 3.89 105.7 85.6
70 TBM 3 TD 10460 0.5 53 5109 3.67 106.8 90.5
71 TBM 3 TD 11035 0.51 47 4659 2.89 82.2 73.4

another study, Gokceoglu and Zorlu (2004) implemented a
fuzzy model and regression techniques to predict the UCS
and E of problematic rocks. The point load index, block
punch index, ultrasonic velocity and tensile strength of 82
samples were considered as inputs in their predictive
models. They concluded that the fuzzy model provides the
most reliable predictions when compared with simple and
MR models. Zorlu et al. (2008) investigated the relationships
between strength and the petrographic properties of sandstone.
They predicted the UCS of sandstone using two different pre-
diction models: MR and ANN. The packing density, quartz
content and concave–convex of 138 datasets were considered
as inputs in their study. The results of the comparison between
the MR and ANN models showed that the ANN model has a
higher prediction capacity than that of the MR. Dehghan et al.
(2010) used a feedforward neural network and regression
analyses to predict UCS and E. In their study, some rock
index parameters, such as ultrasonic velocity, point load
index, the Schmidt hammer rebound number and porosity,
were considered as inputs to predict the UCS and E of 30
samples of travertine. They concluded that the ANN method
outperforms regression analyses. Singh et al. (2012) applied
an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) model to
predict the E of different rocks to indicate ANN and fuzzy
logic limitations. They used 85 datasets to train the network
and 10 datasets to test and validate the rules of the network.
Three geomechanical parameters, point load, density and wa-
ter absorption, were used as inputs in their study. Finally, it
was found that the estimated results were very accurate and
encouraging in measuring E. Some recent studies on the pre-
diction of UCS and E using soft computation techniques and
their model performances are tabulated in Table 3.
Experimental framework
The samples used in this study were taken from the face of the
Pahang–Selangor raw water transfer (PSRWT) tunnel in Ma-
laysia. The function of this project is to transfer water demand
of Selangor and Kuala Lumpur states to Selangor state. The
tunnel crosses under the main mountain range between Pa-
hang and Selangor states. This mountain range, forming the
backbone of Peninsular Malaysia, has a general elevation
ranging from 100 to 1400 m. Granite is the main rock type
in this tunnel with a typical rock strength of 150–200 MPa. In
PSRWT tunnel, three sections were planned to be excavated
using a tunnel boring machine (TBM) with lengths of 11.7,
11.7 and 11.3 km for TBM 1, TBM 2 and TBM 3, respective-
ly. Figure 1 shows the location of PSRWT tunnel which was
studied in this research.
In order to develop a predictive model for predicting
UCS and E, several granite block samples were collected
Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102( Page 7 of 16 48

Table 5 Results of simple

regression analyses for UCS Regression model Predictor Regression function R2 RMSE VAF
prediction
Linear n UCS=−287.7n+221.42 0.783 19.551 78.263
VP UCS=0.03VP −53.709 0.622 25.786 62.191
Is(50) UCS=22.819Is(50)+40.057 0.662 24.364 66.243
Rn UCS=4.928Rn −128.45 0.491 29.913 49.117
Exponential n UCS=288.87e(−2.71n) 0.653 22.083 72.487
VP 0.626 30.211 55.825
UCS ¼ 18:506e0:0003V P
Is(50) 0.602 27.231 58.219
UCS ¼ 50:7426e0:2242I s ð50Þ
Rn 0.484 30.011 49.829
UCS ¼ 8:777e0:05Rn
Power n UCS=47.735n−0.743 0.565 26.284 61.089
VP UCS=4E−05VP1.709 0.675 28.995 60.095
Is(50) UCS=49.337Is(50)0.713 0.711 24.299 66.699
Rn UCS=0.007Rn2.448 0.489 30.005 49.815
Logarithmic n UCS=−82.22Ln(n)+26.707 0.735 21.585 73.504
VP UCS=159.9Ln(VP)−1260.511 0.628 25.579 62.794
Is(50) UCS=67.346Ln(Is(50))+42.906 0.673 23.968 67.332
Rn UCS=234.95Ln(Rn)−799.521 0.479 30.266 47.909

from the face of the PSRWT tunnel in different TBMs.
After transferring to laboratory and coring and cutting the
samples, the end of each sample was flattened perpendic-
ular to the sample axis. Their sides were smoothed and
polished, and the samples were checked to ensure they
were free of cracks, fissures, veins and other flaws, which
can cause an undesirable change in the real properties of
the rock. In general, rock properties refer to fundamental
strengths, index strengths and physical properties. The
rock’s physical property, ultrasonic velocity, which indi-
cates the rock’s degree of compactness was measured for
all samples. Additionally, for each sample, Rn and Is(50)
were measured using L-type Schmidt’s hammer and point
load test apparatus, respectively. Moreover, porosity was
also determined for each sample. In addition, the UCS of
the 71 granite samples as well as their E, reliable param-
eters in evaluating the rock’s compressive strength, were
determined. E was estimated from the rock stress–strain

Table 6 Results of simple

regression analyses for prediction Regression model Predictor Regression function R2 RMSE VAF
of Young’s modulus
Linear n E=−152.28n+143.87 0.316 28.885 31.606
VP E=0.0216VP −32.453 0.452 25.849 38.042
Is(50) E=14.408Is(50)+40.132 0.381 27.487 38.068
Rn E=4.0736Rn −113.961 0.484 25.094 48.382
Exponential n E=169.77e−2.044n 0.331 29.945 28.431
VP 0.485 27.604 37.541
E ¼ 15:6e0:0003V P
Is(50) 0.416 29.738 28.882
E ¼ 41:591e0:1977I s ð50Þ
Rn 0.485 24.804 50.793
E ¼ 5:6441e0:053Rn
Power n E=43.899n−0.556 0.281 30.957 23.625
VP E=0.0001VP1.575 0.510 26.934 44.010
Is(50) E=39.585Is(50)0.652 0.528 27.327 39.808
Rn E=0.003Rn2.573 0.481 25.086 50.388
Logarithmic n E=−42.61Ln(n)+41.795 0.285 29.544 28.452
VP E=113.33Ln(VP)−887.481 0.455 25.793 45.467
Is(50) E=45.539Ln(Is(50))+38.662 0.444 26.048 44.380
Rn E=192.56Ln(Rn)−662.221 0.464 25.574 46.388
48 Page 8 of 16 Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102(

250 200
UCS = -287.7 n + 221.42
R² = 0.783

Measured UCS (MPa)

200

Measured E (GPa)
150

150
100
100

50
50
E = 169.77 e-2.044n
R² = 0.331
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Porosity (%) Porosity (%)
Fig. 2 Proposed equations for UCS and E using porosity

 0 # "
curve. The axial strain was measured by means of two var y−y
VA F ¼ 1−  100 ð2Þ
linear variable differential transformers (LVDTs). It is varðyÞ
worth mentioning that the tangent method was utilized
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 X N  0 2
to obtain E. Nevertheless, in this study, the procedure
recommended by ISRM (2007) was used for all tests. RMSE ¼ y−y ð3Þ
N i¼1
The results of laboratory tests conducted in this study
are shown in Table 4. where y and y′ are the measured and predicted values, respec-
tively; ỹ is the mean of the y values; and N is the total number
of data. The model will be excellent if R2 =1, VAF=100 and
Simple regression analysis RMSE=0. The computed values of R2, RMSE and VAF for all
predictors in estimating UCS and E are given in Tables 5 and 6,
To analyse the laboratory results, in this study, a statistical respectively. In the case of UCS prediction (Table 5), the best
approach was adopted. Simple regression analysis was un- equation types for n, VP, Is(50) and Rn are obtained as linear,
dertaken in order to establish the predictive equations be- power, power and linear, respectively, while they are exponen-
tween the independent variables (n, VP, Is(50) and Rn) and tial, power, power and exponential, respectively, in predicting E
dependent variables (UCS and E). The relationships be- (Table 6). Figures 2, 3, 4 and 5 show the measured UCS and E
tween UCS and E with independent variables were ana- values against their predicted values using the best equations of
lyzed, and some linear, exponential, power and logarithmic n, VP, Is(50) and Rn, respectively.
equations are proposed as tabulated in Tables 5 and 6. In
this study, R2, amount of value account for (VAF) and root
mean square error (RMSE) were calculated to control the
capacity performance of all proposed predictive models: Multivariate regression analysis

The multivariate regression analysis (MRA) aims at deter-

XN  0
2 mining the values of parameters for a function that causes
y−y
i¼1
R2 ¼ 1− X N  2 ð1Þ the function to best fit a provided set of data observations.
y−~y The function is a linear (straight-line) equation in this
i¼1 technique. In cases where more than one independent

250 200
UCS = 4E-05 Vp 1.709 E = 0.0001 Vp 1.575
R² = 0.675 R² = 0.510
Measured UCS (MPa)

200
Measured E (GPa)

150

150
100
100

50
50

0 0
2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000
Vp (m/s) Vp (m/s)
Fig. 3 Proposed equations for UCS and E using ultrasonic velocity
Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102( Page 9 of 16 48

250 200
UCS = 49.337 Is(50) 0.713 E = 39.585 Is(50) 0.652
R² = 0.711 R² = 0.528

Measured UCS (MPa)

200

Measured E (GPa)
150

150
100
100

50
50

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Is(50) (MPa) Is(50) (MPa)
Fig. 4 Proposed equations for UCS and E using point load

variable exists, MRA is employed in order to achieve the More details regarding the evaluation of the MRA equa-
best-fit equation. MRA can solve the engineering prob- tions are given later. Note that simple and MRA regres-
lems through performing a least squares fit. By employing sion analyses were performed using a statistical software
this techniques, some coefficients are suggested by means package of SPSS version 16 (SPSS 2007).
of the backslash operator (Khandelwal and Monjezi
2013). The MRA equation type is presented as follows UCS ¼ −153:616n þ 0:010V P þ 7:111I s ð50Þ
(Jahed Armaghani et al. 2015a): þ 0:541Rn þ 63:655 ð5Þ

y ¼ a þ b1 x1 þ b2 x2 þ b3 x3 þ … þ bn xn ð4Þ E ¼ 16:573n þ 0:011V P þ 4:560I s ð50Þ

þ 2:332Rn −110:968 ð6Þ

where x1,x2,x3,…,xn are the independent variables, b1,b2,
b3,…,bn are the coefficients of independent variables and
y is the output of the system.
An MRA technique has been extensively utilized to Development of ICA-ANN model
predict UCS of the rock using different rock index prop-
erties (Gokceoglu and Zorlu 2004; Dehghan et al. 2010; Many attempts have been made to apply various evolu-
Yesiloglu-Gultekin et al. 2013; Jahed Armaghani et al. tionary algorithms to train ANNs, e.g. ant colony (Socha
2014a). To predict UCS and E of granitic rock using an and Blum 2007). genetic algorithm (GA) (Montana and
MRA technique, the measured UCS and E values are con- Davis 1989) and particle swarm optimization (PSO)
sidered to be the product of the four input parameters, (Jahed Armaghani et al. 2014b; Hajihassani et al. 2015;
namely n, VP, Is(50) and Rn. The developed MRA equa- Gordan et al. 2015). The main objective of training ANNs
tions for prediction of UCS and E are shown in Eqs. 5 and using evolutionary algorithms is to obtain a set of weights
6, respectively. R2 values of 0.891 and 0.596 for Eqs. 5 and biases that minimize the error functions. Several re-
and 6, respectively, indicate a suitable capability of the searchers have demonstrated the capability of ICA in
MRA technique in predicting UCS and E of granitic rock. training ANNs and found that the ICA is an effective

250 200
UCS = 4.9279 Rn - 128.45 E = 5.644 e 0.053 Rn
R² = 0.491 R² = 0.485
Measured UCS (MPa)

200
Measured E (GPa)

150

150
100
100

50
50

0 0
30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65

Rn Rn
Fig. 5 Proposed equations for UCS and E using Schmidt hammer rebound number
48 Page 10 of 16 Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102(

Table 7 The effect of population size on the network performance

Model Number of country RMSE train RMSE test

1 100 16.839 20.764

2 150 16.950 17.478
3 200 17.140 18.787
4 250 16.224 15.417
5 300 16.171 20.867
6 350 15.451 15.728
7 400 16.164 17.009
8 500 16.786 18.528
9 600 15.883 20.789

Artificial neural network

The ANN is a soft computation technique inspired by the

human brain information process. A typical ANN comprises
three main components: network architecture, learning rule
and transfer function (Simpson PK 1990). ANNs are divided
into two major types: recurrent and feedforward. The study by
Shahin et al. (2002) suggests that if there is no time-dependent
parameter in the ANN, the feedforward ANN (FF-ANN) can
be implemented. One of the most popular FF-ANNs is the
multi-layer perceptron (MLP) neural network (Haykin 1999;
Monjezi et al. 2013; Momeni et al. 2015b). This type of ANN
comprises a number of neurons in various layers (input, hid-
den and output layers) connected to each other via different
weights. Du et al. (2002) and Kalinli et al. (2011) reported the
high efficiency of MLP-ANNs in approximating various func-
tions in high-dimensional spaces. Nevertheless, after feeding
the data into ANNs and before interpreting the results, the
ANN needs to be trained. Among different types of learning

Table 8 The effect of the number of imperialists on the network

performance

Model IMP RMSE train RMSE test

1 5 16.144 13.138
2 10 16.124 14.344
3 15 16.674 15.403
4 20 16.436 16.164
5 25 17.529 13.993
6 30 15.539 16.575
Fig. 6 ICA flowchart (Atashpaz-Gargari and Lucas 2007) 7 35 15.451 15.728
8 40 16.030 14.453
alternative for training ANNs (e.g. Taghavifar et al. 2013; 9 45 15.910 18.331
Jahed Armaghani et al. 2015b). In this paper, to obtain the 10 50 15.742 18.736
minimum error, the ICA optimization algorithm was used 11 60 17.035 12.651
to determine the optimum weights and biases of the 12 70 16.476 17.094
ANNs. In the following sections, the ANN and ICA are 13 80 16.230 17.942
described separately.
Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102( Page 11 of 16 48

Fig. 7 The effect of the number Best Mean

of decades on the network 12
performance
10

RMSE
6

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Number of Decade

algorithms for training the MLP feedforward neural networks,
the backpropagation (BP) algorithm is the most widely used
(Dreyfus 2005).
Kuo et al. (2010) explained that in a typical BP-ANN,
the imported data in the input layer starts to propagate to
hidden nodes through connection weights. In the BP-
ANN, the input from each neuron in the previous layer
(Ii) is multiplied by an adjustable connection or weight
(Wij). At each node, the sum of the weighted input signals
is computed and, afterwards, this value is added to a
threshold value known as the bias value (Bij) (see Eq. 7).
The combined input (Ji) is then passed through a non-
linear transfer function f (Jj), such as a sigmoidal function,
to produce the output of the node (see Eq. 8). However, in
general, the output of each neuron provides the input to
the next layer neuron. This procedure is continued until
the output is generated. Nevertheless, to obtain the error,
subsequently, the generated output is checked against the
desired output. The main reason for BP training is to
change the weights between the neurons iteratively in a
way that minimizes the mean square error (MSE) of the
system. Details of the BP algorithm can be found in clas-
sic artificial intelligence books (Fausett 1994).
X 
Jj ¼ wi j I i þ B j ð7Þ
 
yi ¼ f J j ð8Þ
Imperialist competitive algorithm
The ICA is a global search population-based algorithm devel-
oped by Atashpaz-Gargari and Lucas (2007) for optimization
problems. Similar to other evolutionary algorithms, ICA starts
with a random initial population called countries. After gener-
ating N countries (Ncountry), a certain number of the countries
with the lowest costs (MSE in this study) are selected as the
imperialists, i.e. Nimp. The remaining countries are called colo-
nies (Ncol). The colonies are distributed among empires based
on the empires’ initial powers which are functions of the impe-
rialists’ normalized costs. In ICA, the more powerful imperial-
ists, i.e. individuals with the least costs, have more colonies.

Table 9 Different ICA-ANN

predictive models of UCS and E Number of neuron in one ICA-ANN predictive model
hidden layer
UCS E

R2 RMSE R2 RMSE R2 RMSE R2 RMSE

train train test test train train test test

4 0.891 13.339 0.921 13.921 0.731 18.433 0.513 22.749

5 0.919 12.635 0.885 13.986 0.739 17.498 0.381 26.071
6 0.923 11.121 0.843 19.195 0.755 18.374 0.495 21.164
7 0.901 11.563 0.949 14.867 0.746 17.947 0.597 23.296
8 0.912 12.961 0.911 11.191 0.731 19.554 0.513 18.045
9 0.914 11.282 0.881 20.156 0.741 18.491 0.562 21.245
10 0.939 10.495 0.693 23.945 0.761 18.77 0.427 21.865
48 Page 12 of 16 Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102(

250 200
R² = 0.9157 R² = 0.7132

Predicted UCS (MPa)

200

Predicted E (GPa)
150

150
100
100

50
50

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200
Measured UCS (MPa) Measured E (GPa)
Fig. 8 R2 of measured and predicted values of UCS and E using ICA-ANN model

Like other algorithms, three main ICA operators are assimila-
tion, revolution and competition. Through assimilation, colo-
nies will be attracted to the imperialists. However, revolutions
provide some sudden change in the positions of the countries.
During assimilation and revolution, it is possible for a colony to
reach a state better than its imperialist state and take control of
the whole empire in the place of the previous imperialist.
Nevertheless, in competition, operator imperialists attempt
to achieve more colonies and all empires try to take possession
of the colonies of other empires. Based on their power, all the
empires have the chance to take control of a minimum of one
colony of the weakest empire. As a consequence, during com-
petition, the weak empires gradually collapse and the relative-
ly more powerful empires increase their power. This proce-
dure continues until, hopefully, all the empires, except the
most powerful, collapse or a user-defined termination criterion
(desirable MSE or maximum number of decades) is met. It is
worth mentioning that the number of decades in ICA is con-
ceptually similar to the number of generations and iterations in
genetic algorithm and particle swarm optimization algorithm,
respectively. Nevertheless, in the interests of brevity, this pa-
per is not intended to provide a mathematical formulation of
ICA. Details in this regard can be found in other studies
(Atashpaz-Gargari 2008; Hajihassani et al. 2014; Momeni
2015). The flowchart of the ICA algorithm is given in Fig. 6.
Model development
Prior to developing the ICA-ANN predictive model of UCS,
in order to determine the proper ICA parameters, a set of
parametric studies were conducted. The parametric study
was mainly conducted to determine the optimum number of
decades and countries in the ICA. In conducting the prelimi-
nary parametric study, an ICA-ANN model consisting of five
hidden nodes in one hidden layer was used. Eighty per cent of
the database was set for training the network, and the other
20 % was used for testing the network’s performance. The first
series of the parametric study dealt with determining the opti-
mum number of countries. Table 7 shows the effect of the
number of countries (ranging from 100 to 600) on the net-
work’s performance. It is worth mentioning that, in the first
series of parametric studies, the number of imperialists was set
to be 1/10 of the number of countries and the number of
decades, i.e. iterations, was set to be 30. Other ICA parameters
including θ and ζ were set to be π/4 and 2, respectively, as
suggested in the literature. The RMSE was considered to as-
sess the network performance. Nevertheless, as shown in Ta-
ble 7, the best performance of the network was observed when
the number of countries was set to be 350. Table 7 suggests
that the obtained RMSEs for the training and testing dataset
are 15.451 and 15.728, respectively.

300 200
R² = 0.8043 R² = 0.6434
Predicted UCS (MPa)

250
Predicted E (GPa)

150
200

150 100

100
50
50

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200
Measured UCS (MPa) Measured E (GPa)
Fig. 9 R2 of measured and predicted values of UCS and E using ANN model
Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102(
250
Predicted UCS (MPa)
200
150
100
50
0 0
0 50 100
Measured UCS (MPa)
Fig. 10 R2 of measured and predicted values of UCS and E using MRA technique
Knowing the optimum number of countries, to achieve the
optimum number of imperialists, another parametric study
was conducted in which the number of the imperialist was
varied, i.e. from 5 to 80, and the other parameters were kept
constant. The results are tabulated in Table 8. As shown in this
table, the best network performance was observed when the
ratio of imperialists to countries was 1:10, i.e. 35 imperialists.
After obtaining the optimum number of countries and im-
perialists, in order to investigate the effect of the number of
decades on the network’s performance, another parametric
study was conducted. In this study, the number of decades
was set to be 700. The other parameters were kept constant,
except for the number of counties and imperialists for which
the obtained optimum numbers were used. Figure 7 shows the
importance of the number of decades to the network perfor-
mance. As shown in this figure, for both mean and minimum,
i.e. best cost, the change in the network performance (RMSE)
after 500 is not significant and remarkable. Hence, the opti-
mum number of decades was set to be 500.
After determining the optimum number of ICA parameters,
the network architectures for the ICA-ANN predictive model
of UCS and E (optimum number of neurons) need to be de-
termined. Using a trial-and-error method, the optimum num-
ber of hidden nodes is determined. In the trial-and-error meth-
od, the numbers of neurons ranged from 4 to 10. Table 9
shows the performance of the different ICA-ANN predictive
models of UCS and E. To determine the best network archi-
tecture, apart from RMSE, the R2 value was also considered.
Table 9 suggests that when the number of hidden neurons is
set to 7, the best network performance is expected. According
Table 10 Performance indices of the proposed predictive models
Predictive model UCS
R2 RMSE VAF (%) R2
ICA-ANN 0.916 12.454 91.051
ANN 0.804 26.203 71.991
MRA 0.891 13.818 89.143
Page 13 of 16 48
200
R² = 0.8914 R² = 0.5963
Predicted E (GPa)
150
100
50
150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200
Measured E (GPa)
to this table, for the ICA-ANN predictive model of UCS with
seven hidden neurons, the R2 values for the testing and train-
ing datasets are 0.901 and 0.949, respectively. Nevertheless,
for the ICA-ANN model of E, these values are 0.746 and
0.597. It is worth noting that, in this study, to avoid model
complexity, only one hidden layer is used (Hornik et al. 1989).
However, for comparison purposes, the prediction perfor-
mances of the ICA-ANN models were checked against conven-
tional ANN models. Similar to the ICA-ANN models, the con-
ventional ANN models were constructed with seven hidden
neurons. The Levenberg–Marquardt (LM) learning algorithm
was used in conventional ANN models. A study by Hagan
and Menhaj (1994) suggests the efficiency of this algorithm
compared to other conventional gradient descent techniques. It
is worth mentioning that, in a conventional ANN model, similar
to the hybrid models, the dataset was divided into two subsets;
i.e. 80 % of the dataset was set for training purposes and 20 %
was used for testing the network performance.
Results and discussion
A hybrid of the ICA-ANN model was developed to predict the
UCS and E of granite samples taken from the face of the
PSRWT tunnel, Malaysia. For comparison purposes, MRA
and ANN models were also used to predict UCS and E. In this
regard, several MRA, ANN and ICA-ANN models were con-
structed using four inputs (n, VP, Is(50) and Rn) and two outputs
(UCS and E). Finally and after undertaking a parametric study,
an ICA-ANN model with one hidden layer and seven neurons
in the hidden layer was selected. The graphs of the predicted
UCS and E using the ICA-ANN, ANN and MRA approaches
E against the measured UCS and E in the laboratory are displayed
in Figs. 8, 9 and 10, respectively. As shown in these figures, the
RMSE VAF (%)
ICA-ANN model can provide higher performance in predicting
0.713 18.831 71.126 UCS and E compared to other developed models.
0.643 21.022 64.332 R2 equal to 0.916 recommends the superiority of the ICA-
0.596 22.192 59.631 ANN model in predicting UCS, while for ANN and MRA,
these values are obtained as 0.804 and 0.891, respectively.
48 Page 14 of 16
Fig. 11 Strengths of relation
between input and output
parameters
Similarly, in predicting E, R2 values of the ICA-ANN,
ANN and MRA techniques are achieved as 0.713, 0.643
and 0.596, respectively. In order to have a better compar-
ison between developed models, their performance indi-
ces, i.e. R2, VAF and RMSE, were calculated as presented
in Table 10. Theoretically, a predictive model is accepted
as excellent when the RMSE equals 0, VAF is 100 % and
R2 is 1. According to this table, the performance indices
show that the calculated results of the ICA-ANN model
are precisely highly correlated and recommend that this
model can predict UCS with a high degree of accuracy
and E with a suitable degree of accuracy. It should be
mentioned that the proposed ICA-ANN predictive model
in this study is designed based on the compressive
strength of granite samples; hence, the direct use of the
proposed model for UCS and E prediction of other rock
types is not suggested.
Sensitivity analysis
Sensitivity analysis was carried out to recognize the rela-
tive influence of each parameter in the network system
using the cosine amplitude method (Yang and Zang
1997). To undertake this technique, all data pairs were
utilized to build a data array X as follows:
X ¼ fx1 ; x2 ; x3 ; …; xi ; …; xn g ð9Þ
The variable xi in the array X is the length vector of m as
xi ¼ fxi1 ; xi2 ; xi3 ; …; xim g ð10Þ
The following equation presents the strength of the relation
(rij) between the dataset Xi and Xj.
Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102(
X
m
xik x jk
ri j ¼ vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
k¼1
ð11Þ
u m
uX X m
t x2 ik x2 ik
k¼1 k¼1
Figure 11 shows the strengths of the relations (rij values) be-
tween the input and output (UCS and E) parameters. The results
show that VP and Is(50) are the most influential parameters on
UCS whereas VP and Rn are the most effective parameters on E.
Conclusions
A series of laboratory tests including physical test, ultrasonic
velocity test, point load strength test, Schmidt hammer test
and UCS test were conducted on 71 samples of granite. When
conducting the UCS test, the E of the rock samples was also
determined. The rock samples were taken from the face of the
PSRWT tunnel in Malaysia. Based on the laboratory results,
some new correlations with suitable reliability between UCS
and E and results of n, VP, Is(50) and Rn were introduced.
The ICA-ANN technique was utilized to predict UCS and E
using n, VP, Is(50) and Rn. To develop an optimum ICA-ANN
model for prediction of UCS and E, a parametric study was
undertaken to determine the optimum parameters of the ICA-
ANN model. Finally, a model with 350 countries, 35 imperial-
ists, 500 decades, 1 hidden layer and 7 neurons in each hidden
layer was chosen as the best ICA-ANN model. Using the same
input parameters and for the sake of comparison as well as the
ICA-ANN model, ANN and MRA models were built to predict
UCS and E. R2, VAF and RMSE were used to control the
capacity performance of the predictive models in this study.
The results showed that the ICA-ANN predictive model out-
performs the other employed models. The performance indices
Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102(
obtained using the ICA-ANN model reveal the high reliability
of the new predictive model to predict the UCS and E of gran-
ite. The strength of the relation for the input parameters used in
the predictive models was obtained using sensitivity analysis.
The obtained strength of the relations indicates that VP and
Is(50) are the most influential parameters on UCS whereas VP
and Rn are the most effective parameters on E.
Acknowledgments The authors would like to extend their sincere grat-
itude to the Pahang–Selangor Raw Water Transfer Project Team especial-
ly to Ir. Dr. Zulkeflee Nordin, Ir. Arshad, the contractor and consultant
groups for facilitating this study. Also, the authors wish to express their
appreciation to the Universiti Teknologi Malaysia for supporting this
study and making it possible.
References
Adhikari R, Agrawal RK, Kant L (2013) PSO based neural networks vs.
traditional statistical models for seasonal time series forecasting. In
Advance Computing Conference (IACC), IEEE 3rd International, pp,
719–725
Agustawijaya DS (2007) The uniaxial compressive strength of soft rock.
Civil Eng Dimension 9:9–14
Ahmadi MA, Ebadi M, Shokrollahi A, Majidi SMJ (2013) Evolving artifi-
cial neural network and imperialist competitive algorithm for prediction
oil flow rate of the reservoir. Appl Soft Comput 13(2):1085–1098
Atashpaz-Gargari E, Lucas C (2007) Imperialist competitive algorithm:
an algorithm for optimization inspired by imperialistic competition.
IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pp. 4661–4667
Atashpaz-Gargari E (2008) Developing a socially-inspired optimization
algorithm. University of Tehran, Iran, Master thesis (in Persian)
Basu A, Aydin A (2006) Predicting uniaxial compressive strength by
point load test: significance of cone penetration. Rock Mech Rock
Eng 39:483–490
Baykasoglu A, Güllü H, Çanakçı H, Özbakır L (2008) Prediction of
compressive and tensile strength of limestone via genetic program-
ming. Expert Syst Appl 35(1):111–123
Beiki M, Majdi A, Givshad AD (2013) Application of genetic program-
ming to predict the uniaxial compressive strength and elastic mod-
ulus of carbonate rocks. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 63:159–169
Ceryan N, Okkan U, Kesimal A (2012) Prediction of unconfined com-
pressive strength of carbonate rocks using artificial neural networks.
Environ Earth Sci 68(3):807–819
Cobanglu I, Celik S (2008) Estimation of uniaxial compressive strength
from point load strength, Schmidt hardness and P-wave velocity.
Bull Eng Geol Environ 67:491–498
Dehghan S, Sattari GH, Chehreh CS, Aliabadi MA (2010) Prediction of
unconfined compressive strength and modulus of elasticity for
Travertine samples using regression and artificial neural. New Min
Sci Technol 20:0041–0046
Diamantis K, Gartzos E, Migiros G (2009) Study on uniaxial compres-
sive strength, point load strength index, dynamic and physical prop-
erties of serpentinites from Central Greece: test results and empirical
relations. Eng Geol 108:199–207
Dincer I, Acar A, Cobanoglu I, Uras Y (2004) Correlation between Schmidt
hardness, uniaxial compressive strength and Young’s modulus for an-
desites, basalts and tuffs. Bull Eng Geol Environ 63:141–148
Dreyfus G (2005) Neural networks: methodology and application.
Springer, Berlin
Du KL, Lai AKY, Cheng KKM, Swamy MNS (2002) Neural methods for
antenna array signal processing: a review. Sig Process 82:547–561
Page 15 of 16 48
Eberhart RC, Simpson PK, Dobbins RW (1996) Computational intelli-
gence PC tools. Academic Press Professional
Eissa EA, Kazi A (1998) Relation between static and dynamic Young’s
moduli of rocks. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 25(6):
479–482
Entwisle DC, Hobbs PRN, Jones LD, Gunn D, Raines MG (2005) The
relationships between effective porosity, uniaxial compressive
strength and sonic velocity of intact Borrowdale Volcanic Group
core samples from Sellafield. Geotech Geol Eng 23:793–809
Fausett LV (1994) Fundamentals of neural networks: architecture, algo-
rithms and applications: Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Gokceoglu C, Zorlu K (2004) A fuzzy model to predict the unconfined
compressive strength and modulus of elasticity of a problematic
rock. Eng Appl Artif Intell 17:61–72
Gordan B, Jahed Armaghani D, Hajihassani M, Monjezi M (2015)
Prediction of seismic slope stability through combination of particle
swarm optimization and neural network. Eng Comput. doi:10.1007/
s00366-015-0400-7
Hagan MT, Menhaj MB (1994) Training feed forward networks with the
Marquardt algorithm. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 5(6):861–867
Hajihassani M, Jahed Armaghani D, Marto A, Mohamad ET (2014)
Ground vibration prediction in quarry blasting through an artificial
neural network optimized by imperialist competitive algorithm. Bull
Eng Geol Environ. doi:10.1007/s10064-014-0657-x
Hajihassani M, Jahed Armaghani D, Monjezi M, Mohamad ET, Marto A
(2015) Blast-induced air and ground vibration prediction: a particle
swarm optimization-based artificial neural network approach.
Environ Earth Sci. doi:10.1007/s12665-015-4274-1
Haykin S (1999) Neural networks, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Hornik K, Stinchcombe M, White H (1989) Multilayer feedforward net-
works are universal approximators. Neural Netw 2:359–366
Ide JM (1936) Comparison of statically and dynamically determined
Young’s modulus of rocks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 22(2):81
ISRM (2007) The complete ISRM suggested methods for rock character-
ization, testing and monitoring: 1974–2006. In: Ulusay R, Hudson
JA (eds) Suggested methods prepared by the commission on testing
methods. International Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM) Turkish
National Group, Ankara
Jahed Armaghani D, Hajihassani M, Yazdani Bejarbaneh B, Marto A,
Tonnizam Mohamad E (2014a) Indirect measure of shale shear
strength parameters by means of rock index tests through an opti-
mized artificial neural network. Measurement 55:487–498
Jahed Armaghani D, Tonnizam Mohamad E, Momeni E, Narayanasamy
MS, Mohd Amin MF (2014b) An adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference
system for predicting unconfined compressive strength and Young’s
modulus: a study on Main Range Granite. Bull Eng Geol Environ.
doi:10.1007/s10064-014-0687-4
Jahed Armaghani D, Hajihassani M, Sohaei H, Mohamad ET, Marto A,
Motaghedi H, Moghaddam MR (2015a) Neuro-fuzzy technique to
predict air-overpressure induced by blasting. Arab J Geosci. doi:10.
1007/s12517-015-1984-3
Jahed Armaghani D, Hasanipanah M, Mohamad ET (2015b) A combi-
nation of the ICA-ANN model to predict air-overpressure resulting
from blasting. Eng Comput. doi:10.1007/s00366-015-0408-z
Kahraman S (2001) Evaluation of simple methods for assessing the uni-
axial compressive strength of rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 38:
981–994
Kahraman S, Gunaydin O, Fener M (2005) The effect of porosity on the
relation between uniaxial compressive strength and point load index.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 42:584–589
Kalinli A, Acar MC, Gunduz Z (2011) New approaches to determine the
ultimate bearing capacity of shallow foundations based on artificial
neural networks and ant colony optimization. Eng Geol 117:29–38
Kaveh A, Talatahari S (2010) Optimum design of skeletal structures using
imperialist competitive algorithm. Comput Struct 88(21):1220–1229
48 Page 16 of 16
Khandelwal M (2013) Correlating P-wave velocity with the physico-
mechanical properties of different rocks. Pure Appl Geophys 170:
507–514
Khandelwal M, Monjezi M (2013) Prediction of backbreak in open-pit
blasting operations using the machine learning method. Rock Mech
Rock Eng 46(2):389–396
Kilic A, Teymen A (2008) Determination of mechanical properties of
rocks using simple methods. Bull Eng Geol Environ 67(2):237–244
Kuo RJ, Wang YC, Tien FC (2010) Integration of artificial neural net-
work and MADA methods for green supplier selection. J Clean Prod
18(12):1161–1170
Lashkaripour GR (2002) Predicting mechanical properties of mudrock
from index parameters. Bull Eng Geol Environ 61:73–77
Leite MH, Ferland F (2001) Determination of unconfined compressive
strength and Young’s modulus of porous materials by indentation
tests. Eng Geol 59:267–280
Liu Z, Shao J, Xu W, Wu Q (2014) Indirect estimation of unconfined
compressive strength of carbonate rocks using extreme learning ma-
chine. Acta Geotech. doi:10.1007/s11440-014-0316-1
Majdi A, Beiki M (2010) Evolving neural network using a genetic algo-
rithm for predicting the deformation modulus of rock masses. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 47(2):246–253
Meulenkamp F, Grima MA (1999) Application of neural networks for the
prediction of the unconfined compressive strength (UCS) from
Equotip hardness. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 36(1):29–39
Minaeian B, Ahangari K (2013) Estimation of uniaxial compressive
strength based on P-wave and Schmidt hammer rebound using sta-
tistical method. Arab J Geosci 6(6):1925–1931
Mishra DA, Basu A (2013) Estimation of uniaxial compressive strength
of rock materials by index tests using regression analysis and fuzzy
inference system. Eng Geol 160:54–68
Momeni E (2015) Bearing capacity of thin-wall spread foundation in
cohesionless soil. Ph.D. dissertation. Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia, Malaysia
Momeni E, Jahed Armaghani D, Hajihassani M, Amin MFM (2015a)
Prediction of uniaxial compressive strength of rock samples using
hybrid particle swarm optimization-based artificial neural networks.
Measurement 60:50–63
Momeni E, Nazir R, Jahed Armaghani D, Maizir H (2015b) Application
of artificial neural network for predicting shaft and tip resistances of
concrete piles. Earth Sci Res J 19(1):85–93
Monjezi M, Hasanipanah M, Khandelwal M (2013) Evaluation and pre-
diction of blast-induced ground vibration at Shur River Dam, Iran,
by artificial neural network. Neural Comput Appl 22:1637–1643
Monjezi M, Khoshalan HA, Razifard M (2012) A neuro-genetic network
for predicting uniaxial compressive strength of rocks. Geotech Geol
Eng 30(4):1053–1062
Montana DJ, Davis L (1989) Training feedforward neural networks using
genetic algorithms. IJCAI 89:762–767
Moradian ZA, Behnia M (2009) Predicting the uniaxial compressive
strength and static Young’s modulus of intact sedimentary rocks
using the ultrasonic test. Int J Geomech 9(1):14–19
Nazir R, Momeni E, JahedArmaghani D, Mohd Amin MF (2013) Prediction
of unconfined compressive strength of limestone rock samples using L-
type Schmidt hammer. Electr J Geotech Eng 18:1767–1775
Palchik V, Hatzor YH (2004) The influence of porosity on tensile and
compressive strength of porous chalks. Rock Mech Rock Eng 37(4):
331–341
Rabbani E, Sharif F, Koolivand Salooki M, Moradzadeh A (2012)
Application of neural network technique for prediction of uniaxial
compressive strength using reservoir formation properties. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 56:100–111
Rezaei M, Majdi A, Monjezi M (2012) An intelligent approach to predict
unconfined compressive strength of rock surrounding access tunnels
in longwall coal mining. Neural Comput Appl 24(1):233–241
Arab J Geosci84:9 )6102(
Sachpazis CI (1990) Correlating Schmidt hardness with compressive
strength and Young’s modulus of carbonate rocks. Bull Int Assoc
Eng Geol 42:75–84
Simpson PK (1990) Artificial neural system: foundation, paradigms, ap-
plications and implementations. Pergamon, New York
Singh R, Kainthola A, Singh TN (2012) Estimation of elastic constant of
rocks using an ANFIS approach. Appl Soft Comput 12(1):40–45
Singh VK, Singh D, Singh TN (2001) Prediction of strength properties of
some schistose rocks from petrographic properties using artificial
neural networks. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 38(2):269–284
Shahin MA, Maier HR, Jaksa MB (2002) Predicting settlement of shal-
low foundations using neural networks. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng
128(9):785–793
Sharma PK, Singh TN (2008) A correlation between P-wave velocity,
impact strength index, slake durability index and uniaxial compres-
sive strength. Bull Eng Geol Environ 67:17–22
Shokrollahpour E, Zandieh M, Dorri B (2011) A novel imperialist com-
petitive algorithm for bi-criteria scheduling of the assembly
flowshop problem. Int J Prod Res 49(11):3087–3103
Socha K, Blum C (2007) An ant colony optimization algorithm for con-
tinuous optimization: application to feed-forward neural network
training. Neural Comput Appl 16:235–247
SPSS Inc (2007) SPSS for windows (version 16.0). SPSS Inc., Chicago
Talatahari S, Farahmand Azar B, Sheikholeslami R, Gandomi AH (2012)
Imperialist competitive algorithm combined with chaos for global
optimization. Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simul 17(3):1312–1319
Taghavifar H, Mardani A, Taghavifar L (2013) A hybridized artificial
neural network and imperialist competitive algorithm optimization
approach for prediction of soil compaction in soil bin facility.
Measurement 46(8):2288–2299
Tonnizam Mohamad E, Jahed Armaghani D, Momeni E, Alavi Nezhad
Khalil Abad SV (2014) Prediction of the unconfined compressive
strength of soft rocks: a PSO-based ANN approach. Bull Eng Geol
Environ. doi:10.1007/s10064-014-0638-0
Torabi-Kaveh M, Naseri F, Saneie S, Sarshari B (2014) Application of
artificial neural networks and multivariate statistics to predict UCS
and E using physical properties of Asmari limestones. Arab J
Geosci. doi:10.1007/s12517-014-1331-0
Tsiambaos G, Sabatakakis N (2004) Considerations on strength of intact
sedimentary rocks. Eng Geol 72:261–273
Tugrul A, Zarif IH (1999) Correlation of mineralogical and textural char-
acteristics with engineering properties of selected granitic rocks
from Turkey. Eng Geol 51:303–317
Yang Y, Zang O (1997) A hierarchical analysis for rock engineering using
artificial neural networks. Rock Mech Rock Eng 30:207–222
Yasar E, Erdogan Y (2004a) Correlating sound velocity with the density,
compressive strength and Young’s modulus of carbonate rocks. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 41(5):871–875
Yasar E, Erdogan Y (2004b) Estimation of rock physicomechanical prop-
erties using hardness methods. Eng Geol 71:281–288
Yesiloglu-Gultekin N, Gokceoglu C, Sezer EA (2013) Prediction of uni-
axial compressive strength of granitic rocks by various nonlinear
tools and comparison of their performances. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci 62:113–122
Yılmaz I, Sendır H (2002) Correlation of Schmidt hardness with uncon-
fined compressive strength and Young’s modulus in gypsum from
Sivas (Turkey). Eng Geol 66(3):211–219
Yilmaz I, Yuksek AG (2008) An example of artificial neural network
(ANN) application for indirect estimation of rock parameters.
Rock Mech Rock Eng 41(5):781–795
Yilmaz I, Yuksek G (2009) Prediction of the strength and elasticity mod-
ulus of gypsum using multiple regression, ANN, and ANFIS
models. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 46(4):803–810
Zorlu K, Gokceoglu C, Ocakoglu F, Nefeslioglu HA, Acikalin S (2008)
Prediction of uniaxial compressive strength of sandstones using
petrography-based models. Eng Geol 96(3):141–158