Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
www.keaipublishing.com/undsp

Research paper

Rockburst prediction and prevention in underground space excavation

Jian Zhou a,⇑, Yulin Zhang a, Chuanqi Li b, Haini He a, Xibing Li a,⇑
a
School of Resources and Safety Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China
b
Laboratory 3SR, CNRS UMR 5521, Grenoble Alpes University, Grenoble 38000, France

Received 30 November 2022; received in revised form 10 May 2023; accepted 23 May 2023
Available online 22 July 2023

Abstract

The technical challenges associated with deep underground space activities have become increasingly significant. Among these chal-
lenges, one major concern is the assessment of rockburst risks and the instability of rock masses. Extensive research has been conducted
by numerous scholars to mitigate the risks and prevent occurrences of rockburst through various assessment methods. Rockburst inci-
dents commonly occur during the excavation of hard rock in underground environments, posing severe threats to personnel safety,
equipment integrity, and operational continuity. Thus, it is crucial to systematically document real cases of rockburst, allowing for a
comprehensive understanding of the underlying mechanisms and triggering conditions. This understanding will contribute to the
advancement of rockburst prediction and prevention methods. Proper selection of an appropriate rockburst assessment method is a fun-
damental aspect in underground operations. However, there is a limited number of studies that summarize and compare different pre-
diction and prevention methods of rockburst. This paper aims to address this gap by analyzing global trends using CiteSpace software
since 1990. It discusses rockburst classification and characteristics, comprehensively reviews research findings related to rockburst pre-
diction, including empirical, simulation, mathematical modeling, and microseismic monitoring methods. Additionally, the paper presents
a compilation of current rockburst prevention measures. Notably, the paper emphasizes the significance of control strategies, which pro-
vide key insights into the effective utilization of stored energy within rock. Finally, the paper concludes by suggesting six directions for
implementing intelligent management techniques to mitigate hazards during underground operations and reduce the probability of rock-
burst incidents.

Keywords: Rockburst; Underground space; Scientometric analysis; Characteristic analysis; Rockburst prediction; Rockburst prevention

1 Introduction factors, and mining design factors (such as excavation

Rockburst is a significant and hazardous phenomenon
that can occur during underground projects involving hard
and brittle rock. It is characterized by its destructiveness,
suddenness, and complexity (Feng et al., 2012; Zhao
et al., 2021; Meng et al., 2021; Askaripour et al., 2022).
The literature reveals that rockburst induced by deep min-
ing can be attributed to various factors, including geologi-
cal factors (such as rock formations, folds, fractures, and
the nature of the ore body), tectonic factors, excavation
⇑ Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: j.zhou@csu.edu.cn (J. Zhou), xbli@csu.edu.cn (X.
Li).
sequence, roadway shape, and pillar design) (Chen &
Zhou, 2023; Jiang et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2020; Wang
et al., 2019a; Yang et al., 2019; Zhou et al., 2021a; Zhou
et al., 2018; Zhu et al., 2018). However, in excavation areas
where the in-situ stresses are sufficiently high and certain
cracks exist, the sudden release of elastic energy stored
within the rock mass can rapidly trigger a rockburst, lead-
ing to phenomena such as shock, spalling, and zonal disin-
tegration (Cai, 2013; Sun et al., 2021). Rockburst poses a
substantial threat to the safety of workers, equipment,
and subsurface structures and galleries. Suorineni et al.
(2014) describes rockburst as a profound challenge in deep
underground engineering, often referred to as a ‘‘cancer”
due to its detrimental effects.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.undsp.2023.05.009
2467-9674/Ó 2023 Tongji University. Publishing Services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co. Ltd.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
Given the increasing depths of civil engineering and
mining activities in underground projects, seismic activity
resulting from excavation and rockburst issues has become
inevitable and cannot be effectively prevented (Li et al.,
2019). Although rockburst occurrences are likely to take
place in early underground projects, the first officially doc-
umented case of rockburst was reported in a tin mine in
England (Zhou et al., 2012). Since then, numerous inci-
dents of varying intensity and impact have been reported
in projects such as mines, tunnels, shafts, underground lab-
oratories, and hydroelectric facilities in countries such as
China, the United States, South Africa, Australia, and
Canada, coinciding with the deepening of operating depths
(Li et al., 2017b). Figure 1 provides an overview of excava-
tion depths in various regions, as documented by Li et al.
(2017b), Rehman et al. (2021), Xi et al. (2017), and
Hudson and Feng (2015). Notably, over 20 mines in
Canada have encountered rockburst accidents. In the Uni-
ted States, between 1936 and 1993, a total of 172 recorded
rockburst events resulted in 78 fatalities and 158 injuries
(Mark, 2016; Pu et al., 2019). Despite a decline in mining
activities, Germany reported more than 40 cases of rock-
burst from 1983 to 2007, all of which caused significant
injuries and fatalities. In China, numerous metal mines
have faced challenging dynamic hazards such as mine tre-
mors, roof collapse, high-intensity rockburst incidents,
and extensive destabilization of goaf. These hazards are
Fig. 1. Excavation depths for typical underground project.
71
notoriously difficult to predict and effectively prevent (Du
et al., 2022; Li & Gu, 2002; Pu et al, 2019; Zhou et al.,
2020, 2015b, 2016b). Hence, prioritizing prevention and
the control of these problems is of utmost importance in
underground excavation.
Based on the information presented above, rockburst
incidents commonly arise in areas characterized by high
in-situ stress and brittle hard rock formations. The man-
agement of high magnitudes of in-situ stress represents a
primary challenge when undertaking underground projects
in deep environments. Failure to adopt appropriate exca-
vation techniques in high-stress environments will inevita-
bly lead to large-scale engineering disasters. Moreover,
the occurrence of rockburst directly disrupts project oper-
ations and production, thereby significantly impacting the
economic benefits of the company. Therefore, it is crucial
to have the ability to effectively summarize typical rock-
burst cases and visually review the research field, as this
provides a factual foundation for in-depth investigations
into the mechanisms and classifications of rockburst. The
visual analysis process is illustrated in Fig. 2.
Due to the complex nature of rockburst, effective predic-
tion and prevention of rockburst poses significant chal-
lenges (Zhou et al., 2010). The causes of rockburst in
hard rock mines are multifaceted, involving unclear mech-
anisms, uncertain causes, and inaccurate location determi-
nation, leading to severe consequences. Figure 3 provides a
72 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
Fig. 2. Research methodology of visual review for rockburst research.
detailed illustration of these specific factors. However,
given the multitude of influential factors contributing to
rockburst, establishing a general mechanical theory of
rockburst mechanism, particularly regarding fault slip
bursts, remains elusive and necessitates further research.
These challenges are inherent to the deep engineering envi-
ronment. Therefore, it is crucial to carefully consider the
selection of prediction and prevention technologies based
on the engineering geological conditions of the rock mass.
The remaining sections of this paper are structured as
follows. In Section 2, the global collaborations, hotspots,
and trends in the field of rockburst are analyzed using
CiteSpace software (Chen, 2006). Section 3 provides a sum-
mary of typical cases of rockburst in underground projects
and elucidates the corresponding rockburst characteristics.
Traditional methods of rockburst prediction and microseis-
mic monitoring techniques are reviewed in Section 4. Sec-
tion 5 presents the underlying control strategies and
support methods for mitigating rockburst, emphasizing
the framework for safe and efficient excavation. The future
directions of excavation in underground space are dis-
cussed in Section 6. Finally, in Section 7, comprehensive
conclusions are drawn based on the extensive review con-
ducted in this study.
2 Scientometric review on rockburst
The occurrence of rockburst hazards during under-
ground excavation represents a significant scientific chal-
lenge that demands attention. These hazards arise from
the sudden and intense release of accumulated high-
magnitude strain energy in deep underground engineering.
However, due to an unclear understanding of the progres-
sive failure process, effectively addressing these challenges,
including precise prediction and effective prevention of
rockburst, remains highly difficult. Consequently, this issue
has become a universal concern worldwide, as evidenced by
documented cases in countries such as South Africa (Leger,
1991), Canada (Simser, 2019), the United States (Blake &
Hedley, 2003), China (Zhou et al., 2012; Zhang et al.,
2011), and others (Barton et al., 1974). Rockburst incidents
occur in various contexts, including the construction and
resource extraction of deep mines, hydroelectric tunnels
and chambers, nuclear waste geological treatment, and
deep physical underground laboratories. These incidents
lead to significant economic losses, casualties, and schedule
delays. In general, there exists a positive linear correlation
between the number and severity of rockburst events and
the depth of excavation.
 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
Fig. 3. Status of underground space excavation.
To date, there has been a limited number of papers pro-
viding a comprehensive analysis of the overall research sta-
tus of rockburst. As scholars increasingly focus their
attention on rockburst research, it is necessary to conduct
a systematic analysis of the current state of this field. Such
analysis can help identify the existing knowledge gaps and
explore potential research directions. Various software
options are available today for visual analysis, each with
its own advantages and limitations. Among these options,
CiteSpace stands out due to its comprehensive features, its
focus on analyzing the evolutionary path of the research
field, and its ability to highlight emerging and cutting-
edge topics. These features align well with our goal of con-
ducting a thorough analysis. For this study, CiteSpace soft-
ware is employed to perform a scientometric analysis of
2,645 English literature articles from the Web of Science
Core Collection (WOSCC) database. The literature search
in WOSCC includes the following criteria: subject = (rock
burst or rock burst), language restricted to English, and the
time span is set from 1990 to 2022.
2.1 Global cooperation analysis
Given the numerous research efforts devoted to the
field of rockburst, it is imperative to display the spatial
73
distribution of articles in a quantitative manner through
co-country analysis. Figure 4(a) illustrates the leading
countries that have made substantial contributions to
rockburst research. The top 5 countries with the highest
number of publications are China (1584 articles), the US
(171 articles), Australia (153 articles), Canada (130 arti-
cles), and Russia (122 articles), respectively. Notably,
these countries initiated research on rockburst in the con-
text of underground excavation at an early stage and
have made significant contributions to the field. Further-
more, the innovative research results in rockburst mainly
come from these countries, which indicates their domi-
nant position in the target domain. It is worth paying
special attention to China, Australia, Canada, and Rus-
sia, as these countries have a correlated significant role
in the field. As a developing country, China has realized
the importance of disaster management and conducted
in-depth research on rockburst over the last two decades.
Jiang et al. (2010) introduced a novel energy index for
simulating rockburst conditions during tunneling activi-
ties at the Jinping II hydropower plant. This index was
computed by capturing the peak and trough values of
elastic strain energy intensity before and after brittle
damage occurred. In a study by Feng et al. (2004),
indoor tests were conducted to analyze the evolution
74 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
Fig. 4. (a) Research countries and issuing institutions in the field of rockburst and percentage of publications, and (b) annual volume of documents.
mechanism of sandstone damage. Real-time CT tech-
niques were employed to subject sandstone specimens
to triaxial loading with chemical corrosion. Computed
tomography images and CT values of the sandstone
specimens were obtained during compression, microfrac-
ture, and expansion until failure at different loading
levels. Tang (1997) proposed a rock failure process anal-
ysis (RFPA) method based on finite element theory to
simulate the process of rock damage. Subsequently,
Wang et al. (2006) investigated the rockburst model of
ore pillars using the RFPA 2D program. Zhu et al.
(2010) developed a numerical model for the dynamic dis-
turbance of rockburst in underground excavated cavities.
Canada and the United States have also made significant
contributions to the field of rockburst research over a
considerable period. Kidybinski (1981) proposed a series
of rockburst propensity indices for coal mines. Kaiser
et al. (1992) published rockburst assessment procedures
for underground mining engineering. The co-occurrence
analysis of countries reveals a close collaboration
between researchers and research institutions in promi-
nent mining countries. Cook (1965, 1983) provided valu-
able insights and observations on the origin of rockburst
in South Africa and the stability of rockburst events.
Co-institution analysis enables the identification of core
research strengths in the field and provides a scientific eval-
uation of the academic impact of these institutions. Figure 4
(a) illustrates the top 9 institutions based on publication fre-
quency. The institution with the highest publication fre-
quency is China University of Mining and Technology,
followed by Shandong University and the Chinese Acad-
emy of Sciences. These higher education institutions spe-
cializing in the mining industry have emerged as major
contributors to current rockburst research. In Canada,
prominent institutions include McGill University (24 arti-
cles) and the University of Toronto (21 articles). Addition-
ally, several internationally renowned scientific institutions,
such as the Russian Academy of Sciences (86 articles) and
Monash University (20 articles), have made significant con-
tributions. Notably, the top 3 publishers in terms of institu-
tional affiliation are all Chinese institutions, indicating the
prominent position and high level of attention given to
rockburst research within the Chinese academic commu-
nity. While global communication has become more acces-
sible with the rapid expansion of the Internet, institutional
cooperation remains largely dominated by institutions
and disciplines with similar interests, resulting in less inter-
disciplinary and cross-disciplinary collaboration.
 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98 75

Figure 4(b) illustrates the publication count pertaining
to the domain of rockburst. Evidently, there exists a dis-
cernible upward trend in the number of published papers
within this field, accompanied by a J-shaped growth in cita-
tion frequency. This observation signifies the escalating
global interest in the topic of rockburst.
2.2 Research frontier analysis
Keywords serve as the core and summary of an article,
providing a concise description and condensation of the
research content. Thus, keywords with high frequency
can effectively identify the hot topics within the research
domain of rockburst. Table 1 presents the detailed results
of burst keywords, with the highest occurrence intensity
observed for ‘rockburst’ at 8.93. This indicates that rock-
burst has been a persistent hazard in underground excava-
tion from 1999 to 2010. The seismic intensity of rockburst
has had a lasting and widespread impact since its initial
occurrence in 1999. Over the past decade, keywords such
as ‘‘electromagnetic radiation,” ‘‘numerical simulation,”
‘‘mathematical models,” and ‘‘microseismic monitoring”
have been employed in rockburst prediction. Researchers
have also shown great interest in studying the ‘‘rockburst
mechanism” and ‘‘energy release” to elucidate the pro-
cesses involved in pillar burst and fault-slip burst move-
ment, thereby gaining a deeper understanding of the
occurrence mechanism and its impact. The burst strength
of keywords such as ‘rock support’ and ‘rockburst disaster’
reaching 3.91 and 4.07, respectively, indicates that security
concerns related to deep mining have been a significant
focus for various countries. Overall, the diverse range of
these keywords reflects the extensive topics of interest in
this field over a specific time span. The keyword time-line
graph (Fig. 5) provides a general overview of rockburst
studies. Early rockburst research primarily focused on deep
excavation, mine seismicity, and rockburst damage.
Experts employed rock mechanics engineering knowledge
and conducted physical model experiments to explore the
damage process of rockburst, leading to the proposal of
prediction methods such as acoustic emission. Subse-
quently, various prediction methods, including stress
strength, energy release, numerical simulation, machine
learning, and microseismic monitoring, have been
expanded upon to enhance our understanding of failure
mechanisms and facilitate preventive measures. Notably,
rockburst research is progressing in integration with the
field of artificial intelligence. For example, Adoko et al.
(2013) employed fuzzy inference system and adaptive
neuro-fuzzy inference system to classify 174 rockburst
cases in China. Similarly, Zhou et al. (2016a) used ten
supervised learning methods to classify 246 rockburst
events. A comprehensive review of recent advances in rock-
burst prediction was conducted by Zhou et al. (2018),
which highlights the application of machine learning tech-
niques, among other methods, to improve the accuracy of
prediction models
3 Rockburst statistical analysis
The objective of rockburst classification is to identify the
crucial point for statistical analysis of rockburst occur-
rences in underground excavations. Before conducting the
statistical analysis, it is essential to precisely establish the
definitions and classification of rockburst and understand
their underlying mechanisms. The challenges associated
with rockburst discussed earlier are considered some of
the most difficult in the field. Numerous researchers have
conducted scientific analyses focusing on the deep rock
environment and stress conditions throughout the excava-
tion process (Meng et al., 2012, 2013).
Regarding rockburst phenomena during excavation,
Oliver et al. (2022) identified three rockburst mechanisms
in Ontario’s Canadian mines (Fig. 6). Strainburst-induced

Table 1
Top 15 keywords with the strongest citation bursts.
Keywords Strength Begin End 1999–2021
Earthquake 8.93 1999 2010
Electromagnetic radiation 4.04 2000 2004
Fracture 5.39 2004 2011
Growth 4.72 2005 2015
Numerical simulation 5.07 2006 2016
Rockburst 27.73 2008 2015
Rock mechanics 6.06 2008 2015
Hard roof 5.01 2012 2017
Deep mining 4.31 2012 2017
Rockburst hazard 4.07 2012 2014
Rock support 3.91 2012 2013
Stress–strain state 3.83 2012 2018
Energy release 3.64 2013 2016
Event 3.44 2013 2017
Longwall mining 3.56 ‘2014 2018
Notes: The blue section shows the time span from 1999 to 2021. The red part indicates the time span from the occurrence to the termination of the burst
keywords.
76 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98

Fig. 5. Timeline chart for rockburst keywords. (#0: acoustic emission; #1: coal burst; #2: rock burst; #3: microseismic monitoring; #4: rock bursts; #5:
depth; #6: failure; #7: rock discontinuity).

stress is concentrated behind the excavation face, and the
region between this stressed zone and the free face can
become unstable, resulting in sudden failure and ejection
of rock material into the opening. In pillar burst, stress is
concentrated in the core of the pillar, leading to overstress-
ing, sudden failure, and material ejection into surrounding
openings. For fault-slip burst, changes in the stress acting
on the locking point can alter the shear stress (s) and
clamping normal stress (rN). Deng and Gu (2018) treated
rockburst as a structural instability problem and classified
it into three categories based on the magnitude of dynamic
stimulation force: intrinsic rockburst, triggered rockburst,
and induced rockburst. Keneti and Sainsbury (2018) char-
acterized 26 rockburst events and concluded that the causes
of rockburst are related to rock loading conditions and
rock properties (Fig. 7). Russenes (1974) assessed rock-
burst intensity based on changes in the environmental state
(e.g., damage noise, shape, and characteristics) at the time
of occurrence, resulting in a classification into four grades.
The Canadian Rockburst Research Project employed the
depth and geometry of rock damage zones to classify
rockburst damage as minor, moderate, and severe

Fig. 6. Three typical rockburst types and mechanisms.

 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
Fig. 7. Factors contributing to rockburst.
(Kaiser et al., 1996; Kaiser & Cai, 2012). In China, Chen
et al. (2015) proposed a quantitative method for evaluating
rockburst classification based on the energy dissipated by
rockburst radiation and the extent of surrounding rock
damage.
In recent years, there has been an increase in the con-
struction and excavation of deep and long underground
space projects. Extensive literature highlights the chal-
lenges in accurately predicting and preventing hazards such
as high-energy rockburst and mine seismicity in these deep
environments. Rockburst is one of the most prominent and
complex issues encountered in such projects. Therefore, it
is crucial to compile and analyze rockburst data from var-
ious sources to provide reference experiences for evaluation
and prevention, as well as theoretical support for in-depth
dynamic disaster research. To assess the occurrence and
severity of rockburst, Zhou (2015a) compiled 102 cases of
rockburst in hard rock mines in China (Fig. 8(a)). They
developed a classification model utilizing variables such
as maximum tangential stress around the excavation
(MTS or rh), uniaxial compressive strength of rock (UCS
or rc), uniaxial tensile strength of rock (UTS or rt), stress
concentration factor (SCF or rh/rc), rock brittleness index
(B = rc/rt), and elastic strain energy storage index (Wet).
The stochastic gradient boosting method was used to ana-
lyze the data and determine the relative importance of each
variable. The results (Fig. 8(c)) indicate that the Wet index
is the most sensitive in predicting rockburst intensity, fol-
lowed closely by MTS. SCF and B are more sensitive than
UTS and UCS. Furthermore, Heal (2010) collected 254
databases of rockburst events in Canada and Australia
(Fig. 8(b)), considering variables such as SCF, ground
support capacity (GSSC), geological structures (GS),
77
excavation structures (ES), and peak particle velocity
(PPV) at the site. The same analysis method was employed
to identify the main controlling factors of rockburst occur-
rence, as depicted in Fig. 8(d). PPV is the most sensitive
index in assessing the tendency for rockburst damage, fol-
lowed by ES. SCF is more sensitive than GSSC and GS.
These research findings demonstrate the feasibility and
practicality of artificial intelligence-driven methods in rock-
burst studies. By gaining a comprehensive understanding
of the primary controlling variables of rockburst occur-
rence, the risk can be effectively mitigated in the design
of underground projects.
3.1 Disaster statistics analysis
Drawing systematic conclusions from a limited sample
size or a small number of mine rockburst instances poses
significant challenges. To establish the general patterns of
rockburst, statistical analysis was conducted on several
typical cases of underground hard rock engineering (refer
to Appendix A). The analysis considered factors such as
the maximum burial depth, rock characteristics, and
observed rockburst phenomena. The statistical results indi-
cate that rockburst events occurring below 1000 m depth
are predominantly of weak to moderate intensity, with a
few cases classified as severe. The macro manifestations
of rockburst include the rattling sound of rocks, rock ejec-
tion, tunnel fragmentation, roof collapse, and surrounding
rock failure. In the initial stages, rockburst incidents above
1000 m depth are typically minor to moderate in severity.
However, as excavation progresses and the construction
area expands, the intensity of rockburst tends to increase
and may reach high or severe levels in the later stages. At
78 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98

Fig. 8. Data visualization of rockburst and feature importance in underground projects. Dataset visualization: (a) Zhou (2015a) rockburst cases, and (b)
Heal (2010) rockburst cases; Feature importance: (c) Zhou (2015a) rockburst cases, and (d) Heal (2010) rockburst cases.

this point, rockburst events are accompanied by loud blast-
ing sounds, noticeable surface tremors, intermittent crack-
ing sounds, and occasional dull popping sounds. These
findings lead to the conclusion that, irrespective of the type
of hard rock and burial depth, rockburst incidents of vary-
ing severity can occur in practical engineering scenarios.
3.2 Rockburst characteristics analysis
This review aims to collect and compile information on
the characteristics and causes of rockburst phenomena in
typical hard rock projects worldwide. Additionally, it pro-
vides a grading of rockburst severity, serving as a founda-
tion and guidance for the development of subsequent
disaster management measures to mitigate rockburst risks
in deep excavations. Based on the experience gained from
treating typical rockburst projects, this review extensively
describes the classification and characteristics of rockburst,
as presented in Table 2. The ratio between the maximum
shear stress and the uniaxial compressive strength of the
rock serves as the fundamental criterion for determining
the level of rockburst. Subsequently, various factors
including movement characteristics, sound characteristics,
phenomenological characteristics, incision shape character-
istics, time characteristics, and the degree of damage are
employed to identify appropriate prevention strategies.
4 Rockburst prediction
Before delving into the discussion of suitable prevention
measures for different types of rockburst, it is essential to
provide a comprehensive overview of rockburst prediction.
The prediction of rockburst events is crucial in effectively
preventing and controlling rock damage in underground
 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98 79

excavation and mining projects, considering the complex

Support system is seriously destroyed, and

A large block of rock mass was suddenly

stability of the whole carve was seriously

nature of this phenomenon. Since the 1960s, extensive

ejected with intensive seismicity and the

research has been conducted on various techniques for

construction is seriously affected.

forecasting rockburst occurrences. Researchers have made

Loud sounds like dull thunder

efforts to develop, refine, and calibrate prediction methods

Use special means to prevent

using diverse approaches. The prediction methods for
rockburst can be broadly categorized into five aspects:
empirical methods, simulation techniques, mathematical
New fracture face
Serious rockburst

algorithms, rockburst charts, and monitoring technologies,

as depicted in Fig. 9. Figure 10 presents a refined and
>150 cm

adapted representation of the major advancements in

> 3:0 m
affected.

empirical, numerical, statistical, and intelligent classifica-

tion methods for rockburst evaluation from 1965 to 2021,
based on the temporal analysis of various classification
failure range was extensive

destroyed and construction

Spalling and even ejection

A great deal of rock mass

was suddenly ejected; the

methods summarized by Zhou et al. (2018).

Rock noises of gun shot

Set up inverted arch if

4.1 Empirical criteria method

Support system is
Heavy rockburst

are affected.
1:0 2:0 m

In the initial stages of engineering design and construc-

80–150 cm

necessary
strength

tion, empirical criteria are commonly employed to assess

the quality of rock mass and evaluate the risk of rockburst,
providing practical guidance for project design and sup-
port. The empirical criteria encompass both single-
severe spalling and slabbing of the

rock bolt and shotcrete lining are

surrounding rock mass; the rock

construction is slightly affected

indicator and multi-indicator integrated criteria, utilizing

The shotcrete lining could be
damaged among rock bolts,
mass was obviously ejected

a range of indicators to determine the classification of rock-

burst intensity based on the analysis of physical tests and
Strong cracking noises
Rockburst classification and characteristics (Russenes, 1974; Chen et al., 2015; Zhou et al., 2018; Ke, 2021).

Wall caving, spalling

mechanical factors in engineering case studies. Building

constructed in time
Medium rockburst

upon the main achievements and theoretical methods of

rockburst prediction, numerous single index criteria have
0:5 :0 m

been proposed to assess rockburst risks. These criteria

30–80 cm

include the Torchaninov criterion (Turchaninov et al.,

1972), Barton criterion (Barton et al., 1974), Tao Zhenyu
criterion (Tao, 1988), Russense criterion (Russenes,
surface of the surrounding rock mass;

1974), Hoek criterion (Brown & Hoek, 1980), Wet’s strain

slight spalling and slabbing in the

the rock mass was slightly ejected

energy storage index (Kidybiński, 1981), Excavation vul-

Neither the support system nor

nerability potential (Heal et al., 2006), Potential stress fail-

Appropriate safety measures
construction are damaged

ure (Mitri, 2007), Erlang mountain method (Wang et al.,

1999), Hou criterion (Hou and Wang, 1989), Composite
index criterion (Tan et al., 1991), Rockburst vulnerability
Light rockburst

index (Qiu et al., 2011), maximum stored elastic strain

Light noises
Wall caving

energy index ES (Guo et al., 2011), improved brittleness

10–30 cm
< 0:5 m

index BIM (Zhang et al., 2017) and rockburst danger index

(Dou et al., 2012), and others. The empirical criteria serve
as important qualitative tools for gaining a comprehensive
understanding of rock engineering issues, particularly when
No support system

No support system
and construction

reliable object label information is available. The results

occurred inside
No rockburst

obtained from these criteria for assessing rockburst poten-

No stability

are affected
rock mass
The crack

No noises

tial can provide early risk warnings for underground exca-

problems

<10 cm

vation projects. The various approaches and methods

associated with empirical criteria will be explained and
compared in detail in the subsequent discussion.
Depth of failure (Df)

Prevention methods

In the context of predicting rockburst events, single-

Movement features

indicator criteria, primarily stress and energy approaches,

Damage degree
Sound features

Size of ejected
Classification

are widely recognized as the primary indicators for classify-

Failure type

fragment

ing the intensity of rockburst. The former focuses on

Table 2

geomechanical characteristics and induced stress levels,

while the latter considers the stored elastic energy within
80 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
the rock mass (Cook, 1963). Among stress estimation
approaches, the rock brittleness coefficient and tangential
stress criterion have demonstrated reliable results in fore-
casting rockburst intensity. These criteria rely on simple
assessments of rock mass properties, which can be deter-
mined through practical experiments and provide realistic
values. Energy approaches, on the other hand, are more
commonly used to evaluate the severity of rockburst. These
methods offer greater insights into the causes of rockburst
by comparing the results with seismicity data collected in
burst-prone areas. Another reason for the adoption of
energy methods is that the energy evolution of the rock
mass, including storage, release, and dissipation, is directly
associated with rockburst occurrence. Hence, compared to
other criteria, energy-based approaches are more likely to
indicate the tendency for rockburst. Multi-index indicators,
such as the five factors criterion, have gained popularity as
they consider multiple indicators and significant rock prop-
erties, enabling a more comprehensive assessment of rock-
burst intensity. The empirical criteria and severity
classification methods employed in the assessment of rock-
burst disasters in underground excavation projects are
highly regarded for their practicality and feasibility. Pre-
dicting rockburst potential and classifying rockburst sever-
ity are two fundamental aspects in evaluating rockburst
approaches. The severity classification follows four levels:
none, weak, moderate, and severe (Russenes, 1974). In
most cases, the thresholds for intensity levels are deter-
mined based on analytical and statistical characteristics
of the region where rockburst events have been recorded,
or through engineering experience (Zhou et al., 2012;
Feng et al., 2013). However, the classification of rockburst
intensity may vary across different projects, and using the
same threshold as evaluation criteria presents significant
drawbacks. For instance, Kidybiński (1981) suggested that
a Wet index greater than 5 indicates the potential for severe
rockburst, while Singh (1987) proposed that Wet < 10
Fig. 9. Major methods of rockburst prediction.
corresponds to no or weak rockburst intensity, based on
experimental findings for hard rock samples from the Sud-
bury area in Ontario, Canada. The variety of rockburst cri-
teria makes it difficult for frontline engineers to accurately
determine the severity of rockburst disasters (Zhou et al.,
2018).
4.2 Simulation technology
Various types of rockburst occurrences are influenced by
a multitude of geomechanical parameters, which have a
significant impact on the underlying mechanisms and
observable characteristics of rockburst. In addition to these
contributing factors, the magnitude and orientation of
in situ stresses, dynamic disturbances, excavation geome-
try, and advancement rate also play a crucial role in deter-
mining the severity, shape, and location of rockburst
events. As mentioned earlier, empirical criteria for rock-
burst primarily include energy criteria and stress criteria.
These methods find extensive application in different
aspects of rock engineering, such as classifying the severity
of rockburst and serving as input parameters for numerical
simulation methods. According to Gu (2013), numerical
methods and physical experiments have become essential
tools for tackling scientific problems that were previously
difficult to address when there is ample labeled information
available to engineers and researchers. Numerical simula-
tion experiments constitute the majority of research efforts
related to rockburst prediction. Zubelewicz and Mroz
(1983) utilized the finite element method (FEM) and kinetic
methods to simulate the destabilization damage of rock
masses and investigate the dynamic behavior of rockburst.
Bardet (1989) demonstrated the effectiveness of FEM in
predicting surface instability and proposed that FEM can
be employed to analyze rockburst problems by considering
them as surface instability issues, as evidenced by the eigen-
value method. Müller (1991) compared the performance of
 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
Fig. 10. Major work on mathematical methods, numerical simulations and empirical criteria. The red and white outer boxes represent the English and
Chinese literature respectively. The different color blocks depict author information and methods for different research directions.
FEM-based and finite difference method (FDM)-based
approaches in simulating rockburst, and it was found that
FDM is the more appropriate method. It is evident that
dynamic damage plays a significant role in the formation
and occurrence process of rockburst. However, capturing
the true development processes of instantaneous behavior
using numerical simulations can be challenging. To assess
rockburst hazards, Tajduś (1997) developed a three-
dimensional numerical stress field calculation model based
on the ratio of induced stress to original stress conditions.
To investigate the effect of non-uniformity on rock frac-
ture, Ishida et al. (2009) proposed a simulation of uniaxial
compression tests using a discrete element method (DEM)
program. Additionally, many experts have conducted var-
ious physical model tests. Notably, several researchers in
China (Xu et al., 2002; Li et al., 2001; Yang, 1993) have uti-
lized similar materials in their experiments to model rock-
burst during tunnel construction. Lu et al. (2008)
proposed an analogous materials model to simulate stress
wave propagation behavior and the damage process of
hard rock. Du et al. (2016) studied the damage behavior
of granite, red sandstone, and cement mortar using an
advanced test system that combines genuine triaxial static
stress and local dynamic disturbance. The test results
revealed that sandstone and granite experienced slab spal-
ling in true triaxial unloading tests, while no significant
fractures occurred under low amplitude local dynamic
loading. However, the degree of rock damage increased
with higher local dynamic loading amplitude, regardless
of the loading direction. In another study, Du et al.
(2022) investigated the mechanical characteristics of
81
rectangular prismatic rock samples and isolated columns
made of granite, marble, and sandstone with various
height-to-breadth and width-to-thickness ratios under uni-
axial compressive stress.
Future studies will require a significant number of engi-
neering instances to be statistically examined, as it is cur-
rently not possible to establish a suitable classification
system for rockburst solely through numerical simulation
without an acceptable energy criterion. Although physical
model tests have limitations compared to numerical simu-
lation methods, they still offer certain advantages. For
instance, while it may not be possible to fully simulate
the real engineering environment (including excavation dis-
turbances and methods) or incorporate artificial boundary
conditions in rockburst simulations, physical model tests
provide a high degree of restoration of the engineering
environment and yield credible data results. As a result,
some scholars continue to employ physical model tests to
address complex issues encountered during the excavation
of hard rock.
4.3 Mathematical modeling method
The precision of rockburst predictions relies heavily on
the quantity and quality of the data used (Qiu & Zhou,
2023; Shi et al., 2010). Mathematical models are commonly
developed using collected input and output data, allowing
them to handle diverse data types. Therefore, it is feasible
to construct suitable mathematical models based on empir-
ical criteria for data-driven prediction of previous rock-
burst cases. Data-driven prediction can be broadly
82 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
categorized into two groups: uncertainty theory and
machine learning.
In situations where there is insufficient rockburst data,
statistical-based methods or artificial intelligence tools have
limitations in their application. Considering that the influ-
encing factors of rockburst are stochastic and fuzzy, uncer-
tainty theories have been introduced in rockburst studies
(Zhou et al., 2018). These theories include unascertained
mathematical theory (Jin et al., 2017), fuzzy mathematical
theory (He et al., 2021), catastrophe theory (Qiao et al.,
2021), grey system theory (Pei et al., 2013), cloud models
(Liu et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2020), rough set theory (Jia
et al., 2014), extension theory (Zhang et al., 2020c), attri-
bute mathematical theory (Wen, 2008), interval number
theory (Wang et al., 2019b), and set pair analysis (Chen
et al., 2008), as shown in Fig. 11. Recently, several hybrid
comprehensive evaluation models have been utilized for
rockburst assessment. The multidimensional connected
cloud model proposed by Wang et al. (2020) offers a sim-
pler and more convenient approach for practical applica-
tions compared to the one-dimensional cloud model.
Liang et al. (2019) employed an extended multi-attribute
boundary approximation area comparison method based
on triangular fuzzy numbers to evaluate rockburst tenden-
cies in four critical areas of the Kaiyang phosphate mine.
Liu et al. (2019) developed a rockburst classification model
based on rough set and cloud model theory, which was val-
idated using five rockburst cases. Zhou et al. (2022a) com-
bined four indicators and utilized set pair analysis to
evaluate coal burst liability, creating an improved connec-
tion cloud model (ICCM). The results indicate that the
ICCM exhibits significantly superior classification index
accuracy and Kappa coefficient of 0.88 and 0.772, respec-
tively, compared to other conventional uncertainty
approaches.
The machine learning approach has several advantages
over other methods, as it does not require prior knowledge
about the relationship between input and output variables,
thereby reducing human intervention. This has made it a
popular choice for researchers in solving nonlinear prob-
lems. Various machine learning algorithms such as support
vector machines (SVM) (Zhou et al., 2012), logistic regres-
sion classifiers (Li & Jimenez, 2018), decision trees (DT)
(Shirani & Taheri, 2019), Bayesian networks (N. Li et al.,
2017a; C. Li et al., 2021), random forest (RF) and
gradient-boosting machine (GBM) (Zhou et al., 2016a),
and K-nearest neighbor (KNN) (Afraei et al., 2019) have
been employed for classification and prediction of rock-
burst. Ensemble learning is a method of enhancing learning
ability by combining multiple weak classifiers (Wang et al.,
2021). Recently, Li et al. (2022a) proposed a deep forest
rockburst prediction model based on a database of 329
actual rockburst cases. The model achieved a final test set
accuracy of 90.48% and a performance gain of 12.7%. In
another study, Li et al. (2022b) utilized a Bayesian opti-
mization and synthetic minority oversampling tech-
nique + Tomek Link approach to build a feedforward
neural network model based on 314 rockburst examples.
Similarly, Li et al. (2022c) developed rockburst prediction
methods using combined trees, such as random forest,
extremely randomized tree, adaptive boosting machine,
gradient boosting machine, extreme gradient boosting
machine, light gradient boosting machine, and category
gradient boosting machine, using the same rockburst data-
set. They integrated three voting, bagging, and stacking
procedures with a Bayesian optimization algorithm to
enhance model performance. Zhang et al. (2020b) com-
bined seven classifiers and nine data interpolation methods
to solve the rockburst severity classification problem. The
results showed a 15.4% improvement in accuracy over the
best individual classifier. Yin et al. (2021) used the ensem-
ble learning stacking idea to predict the rockburst potential
by developing four ensemble learning models: KNN-
Recurrent neural network (RNN), SVM-RNN, Deep neu-
ral network (DNN)-RNN, and KNN-SVM-DNN-RNN.
Zhou et al. (2021b) developed a hybrid model combining
of firefly algorithm and artificial neural network (ANN)
to deal with various complex relationships of rockburst
in deep hard rock mines.
4.4 Microseismic monitoring technology
Rockburst events involve complex processes of rock
deformation and fracture extension. The utilization of
microseismic monitoring technology allows for the acquisi-
tion and analysis of information regarding the develop-
ment of rock fractures through a microseismic system
(Fig. 12). Figure 12(a) illustrates the operational mode of
a typical microseismic positioning system in metal mines.
Over the years, three major challenges in underground
space excavation have been the significant errors in locat-
ing disaster sources, difficulties in identifying microseismic
signals, and the lack of accurate warning and protection
mechanisms (Zhu et al., 2021). In addressing these chal-
lenges, Li and Dong (2014) proposed a theoretical system
for microseismic source location without pre-velocimetry
and developed fully automatic software for processing
microseismic data based on wave velocity determination
without pre-measurement, resulting in a significant
improvement in localization accuracy. Perol et al. (2018)
conducted an initial exploration of deep learning algo-
rithms for microseismic localization. They employed con-
volutional neural networks to initially localize
microseismic events into six major regions, followed by cal-
culating the seismic wave delay time in underground mines
and identifying the location of the earthquake source. Fig-
ure 12(b) represents the microseismic flow diagram, while
Fig. 12(d) depicts microseismic signal identification and
learning (Ma et al., 2015).
Microseismic location systems typically require both
speed and accuracy. However, the pursuit of high precision
often leads to longer computation times. To address this
issue, Zhou et al. (2022b) applied three metaheuristic algo-
rithms to enhance the performance of Cross-correlation
 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
Fig. 11. Suggested methods for assessing hard rock rockburst using a data-driven approach.
stacking and increase computational efficiency. The effec-
tiveness of this approach was demonstrated through engi-
neering applications at the Fankou Pb-Zn mine in China.
The virtual field optimization method (VFOM), which is
a rapid and precise microseismic locating technique, has
gained popularity within the mining community. It can
accurately locate microseismic sources even in the presence
of significant picking errors. However, the VFOM’s objec-
tive function complexity, particularly when multiple sen-
sors are used, may result in longer localization times. To
overcome these challenges, Zhou et al. (2021c) utilized
two heuristic algorithms to improve the location efficiency
of the VFOM with minimal accuracy loss and to avoid
convergence to local optimal values.
According to Cai et al. (2007), acoustic emission and
microseismic activity are low-energy seismic events associ-
ated with sudden inelastic deformation, such as the abrupt
movement of existing fractures, generation of new frac-
tures, or fracture propagation. These events occur within
a specific volume of rock and emit detectable seismic
waves. Figure 12(c) illustrates the key distinction between
acoustic emissions and microseismic events, which lies in
the higher seismic motion frequencies of the former com-
pared to the latter. Sensors are capable of recording the
seismic waves radiated by rock microcracks to a certain
extent. Subsequently, specialized software is employed to
interpret the data and determine the source characteristics
of microseismic events, including their time, location,
energy, magnitude, and apparent stress. Each microseismic
event contains detailed information about the stress varia-
tion within the targeted rock volume. By analyzing the
83
source parameters of numerous microseismic events, it
becomes possible to predict the tendency, location, and
severity of rockburst through an in-depth analysis of
microseismic data. Notably, while earthquakes and mine
rockbursts can be sensed by humans, microseismic events
associated with underground excavation can only be
detected by sensors (Ma et al., 2021).
4.5 Comments for different forecasting methods
An important finding of the current review is that
researchers have extensively employed various intelligent
methods to address the significant issue of rockburst pre-
diction. This trend is expected to contribute to the develop-
ment of reliable and effective models in this field. In the
context of forecasting rockburst events, approaches can
be broadly categorized into four main types: empirical,
simulation, mathematical, and microseismic monitoring
methods. Empirical models possess distinct advantages in
providing fair findings. Their ease of use for engineering
applications and straightforward form are particularly
noteworthy. However, some conventional classification
thresholds for these models are inconsistent or even signif-
icantly different, raising concerns about their effectiveness.
Another significant advantage of empirical criteria is their
reduced reliance on data pretreatment processes and train-
ing settings compared to mathematical or numerical meth-
ods. Simulation technology, as revealed in the review,
generally requires less data compared to mathematical
modeling techniques. It allows for easy manipulation of
influencing parameters under controlled circumstances.
84 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
Fig. 12. Microseismic monitoring diagram. (a) Application of microseismic monitoring systems in hard rock mines, (b) microseismic monitoring flow
chart, (c) seismic motion wave frequency spectrum and field of application of acoustic emissions and microseismic events techniques, and (d) recognition
and studying of microseismic signals.
However, accurately simulating defects can often be chal-
lenging due to their unpredictability and complexity, lead-
ing to significant computational costs. Mathematical
models are evolving rapidly, with the introduction of new
and sophisticated technologies in this field. These advance-
ments hold the potential for improvements or even signifi-
cant breakthroughs in rockburst prediction. Additionally,
these models offer simplicity in calculations and the ability
to forecast future scenarios. However, a notable limitation
is the requirement for a substantial amount of rockburst
data to accurately determine important model parameters.
In contrast, microseismic monitoring technologies have the
advantage of immediately and continuously collecting
essential data, providing accurate insights into the forma-
tion mechanism and evolution patterns of rockburst. This
enables timely assessment and prediction of rockburst
events. Nevertheless, deriving meaningful patterns from
large volumes of microseismic data remains a pressing chal-
lenge in this area.
Overall, comparing the superiority of different methods
is challenging without conducting comprehensive evalua-
tions under the same conditions. Each approach is still
under development and has its own advantages and disad-
vantages. Consequently, there is no standardized method
or approach that can universally evaluate the effectiveness
of all projects in underground space excavation. The level
of precision and data accessibility play crucial roles in
determining the appropriateness of a particular model for
rockburst forecasting.
5 Rockburst prevention
5.1 Rockburst support design principles and control
strategies
The reduction of rockburst risk often relies on the selec-
tion of effective advance prediction methods. It is com-
monly recognized among scholars that accurate
prediction of rockburst occurrences necessitates the deter-
mination of their location, timing, intensity, and underly-
ing mechanisms. However, due to the inherent instability
of rock mass characteristics and various boundary condi-
tions (such as high in-situ stress, pressure relief, and signif-
icant disturbances), the design of rockburst support must
prioritize ground control methods rather than relying
solely on uncertain predictions. A critical line of defense
is the implementation of burst-resistant support systems,
which aim to prevent or mitigate damage and ensure oper-
ational safety. Therefore, it is crucial to thoroughly com-
prehend the principles and objectives of support design
during the initial phase of project development.
In contrast to conventional rock support methods that
focus on managing loose rock in shallow zones and pre-
venting gravity-induced rockfalls, support design in
burst-prone ground must take different variables into
account. Dou et al. (2021) suggested that the root cause
of tunnel damage and surrounding rock deformation at
high stress levels is due to strong shock waves that cause
sharp increases in rock stress in a short period of time.
 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
Thus, support design in burst-prone areas must consider
the ability to withstand dynamic loads and significant
deformations resulting from rock dilation. Engineers must
conduct a rockburst severity division, evaluate the require-
ments for rock support, and choose appropriate support
measures based on the site characteristics. Kaiser and Cai
(2012) introduced six principles of consideration for rock-
burst support, as shown in Fig. 13. The first principle is
to avoid rockburst occurrences as much as possible by
using hefty rock support to sustain the rock without reduc-
ing its loads or counteracting its stresses. Methods based
on this principle include adjusting the size or shape of the
stope, transforming the position of the roadway, using
alternative excavation shapes, changing the mining
sequence, or switching mining techniques. The second prin-
ciple suggests that yielding support should be applied to
burst-prone ground. Brittle rock may experience significant
impact energy and undergo significant rock dilation when
it cracks. Therefore, the yielding support system must be
flexible and able to absorb dynamic energy, as well as com-
bine with the surrounding rock as a whole to reinforce the
rock mass. The third principle emphasizes the importance
of considering the weakest link, which is typically the
retaining element. In significant rockburst occurrences,
the contact between bolts and the mesh often fails. There-
fore, one critical element to consider is the performance of
the connections between bolts and the mesh. The choice of
surface support components and the strength of the con-
nections must be matched with the bearing capacity of
the bolts. Additionally, the design principle should incor-
porate the integrated system approach. The retaining ele-
ments and surface support elements form the
fundamental components of a rock support system. How-
ever, some support components may only function effec-
tively in specific environments. Therefore, it is necessary
to integrate all support components into a cohesive and
integrated system. The fifth principle emphasizes simplicity
and cost control in design. Clients are unlikely to adopt
rock support products that are complex and expensive to
manufacture. Simplicity also contributes to efficiency.
While many businesses strive to reduce costs and stream-
line operations to enhance competitiveness, they cannot
compromise on safety. Statistics indicate that the financial
losses resulting from security incidents far outweigh the
benefits of cost control. In other words, the cost of prevent-
ing burst-prone grounds is significantly lower than the eco-
nomic losses caused by rockburst accidents. The final
principle is the predictability and adaptability of the rock
support system. It is unrealistic to create a design that can-
not be modified, as the burst-prone ground environment
and the classification of rockburst severity are constantly
changing. Therefore, a successful strategy for managing
burst-prone ground involves a well-adapted and flexible
rock support system. These fundamental principles serve
as a guide for steering support design in the right direction
for specific projects.
85
According to Kaiser and Cai (2012), the comprehensive
approach employed in managing the entire mining or tun-
neling process is referred to as the strategy in underground
excavation. In essence, the utilization of diverse tools or
methods to address field problems necessitates strategic
thinking. Rockburst control strategies can be classified into
two categories: active induction and passive protection.
The passive support method comprises three key compo-
nents: ground preconditioning, alternate mining tech-
niques, and rockburst support. Active induction aims to
harness the high stress and stored energy within and sur-
rounding deep hard rock, employing regulation and con-
trolled release to enhance the rock environment and
induce controlled self-fracturing. The overall control strat-
egy is illustrated in Fig. 14.
To address dynamic instability issues, the core element is
the risk management strategy, which is an extension of the
control strategy. Notably, Diederichs (2018) introduced the
well-known ‘‘Butterfly” risk management strategy for rock-
burst in hard rock excavations (refer to Fig. 15). The but-
terfly risk management consists of two components: the
propensity to disaster and its resulting consequences. The
hazard potential component identifies rockburst triggers
and outlines a contractor control sequence from top to bot-
tom. The consequence aspect addresses potential hazards
and prioritizes their handling once they occur. The imple-
mentation of a microseismic monitoring system is crucial
for situational awareness in advance. Additionally, incor-
porating ‘‘Management” measures is recommended to mit-
igate the impact of dynamic fractures.
A crucial aspect of disaster prevention and control in
burst-prone zones involves the timely implementation of
rockburst prevention and control measures. Failure to do
so can result in a significant increase in support costs. Dur-
ing the design phase of underground excavation, it is essen-
tial to accurately estimate the occurrence time of rockburst
to enhance the effectiveness and practicality of prevention
and control strategies. While various techniques for rock-
burst prevention and control are available, further investi-
gation is needed to determine the efficacy of specific
measures. Therefore, in order to effectively guide support
work in burst-prone areas, it is necessary to outline the
specific actions and contents of rockburst risk prevention
and management. Figure 16 presents a comprehensive
guide for preventing and controlling rockburst in deep
hard rock mines. This figure illustrates the five processes
involved in rockburst risk prevention and control, namely
type identification, risk assessment, selection of prevention
and control methods, design work, and efficacy verifica-
tion. The specific details of each process are represented
by the corresponding color blocks below the figure.
5.2 Rockburst support methods
It is well-established that mining-induced rockburst is a
complex phenomenon that frequently occurs during deep
86 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
Fig. 13. Six basic rockburst support design principles based on field experience.
underground construction. Extensive efforts have been
devoted to understanding the causes of rockburst and
devising effective support strategies for burst-prone zones.
Consequently, a substantial body of research has been con-
ducted on rockburst support methods. The widely utilized
‘‘New Austrian Method” is commonly adopted for tunnel
support design (Kolymbas, 2005; Meng et al., 2011;
Rehman et al., 2020). Independently, Pan et al. (2021)
developed the asymmetric support method of full-section
anchor cable spraying, which significantly enhances the
ability of the surrounding rock in roadways to withstand
rockburst damage and further elucidates the principle of
asymmetric damage. Wu et al. (2021) introduced a new
synergistic support method for deep hard rocks, employing
the synergistic approach of ‘‘pressure relief - support – pro-
tection” to effectively enhance the rock bolting capacity. Li
et al. (2007) examined the damage characteristics of the
surrounding rock in a stope roadway following a
rockburst, providing insights into how rockbolt support
maintains stress balance and supports the roadway. Subse-
quently, a high-strength composite support method was
designed.
Currently, rockbolts are extensively employed to rein-
force underground excavation projects, making them the
primary safety protection method. Conventional bolts are
typically characterized by their load-bearing capacity or
ductility. However, due to the dynamic and destructive nat-
ure of rockburst events, it is essential for the supporting
structure to possess robustness to withstand the kinetic
energy of ejected rock and toughness to absorb energy
emitted from the rock mass. Evidently, the conventional
method is not the ideal choice for rockburst support due
to its limited energy absorption capacity. In contrast,
energy-absorbing rockbolts have emerged as a novel type
of support device that has garnered considerable attention.
These bolts exhibit a high energy-absorbing capacity,
 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98 87

Fig. 14. Rockburst control strategy.

Fig. 15. Management of risk of rockburst in underground space excavations. (Modified from Diederichs, 2018).

enabling them to bear substantial loads and accommodate
significant rock displacement. Consequently, they prove to
be effective support mechanisms during dynamic failure
processes.
Energy-absorbing bolts offer a dual advantage of high
deformation capacity and resistance. On one hand, they
can absorb a significant amount of energy from the sur-
rounding rock before reaching equilibrium. On the other
hand, they reinforce the rock mass and enhance its
mechanical condition. The development of energy-
absorbing bolts has attracted considerable attention from
scholars (Wang et al., 2020). Bolts with strong energy
absorption capacity have gained international recognition
as essential components of underground engineering sup-
port systems (Wu et al., 2022). Since their invention,
researchers have continuously optimized and improved
each component of energy-absorbing bolts to enhance their
effectiveness. Figure 17 illustrates some typical energy-
absorbing bolt designs. These bolts dissipate energy
through buffering interactions with the surrounding rock,
effectively reducing impact energy and forming a cohesive
unit with the rock mass to withstand impact loads. This
88 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98

Fig. 16. Guidance on rockburst risk prevention and control in underground space excavation. Blue indicates rockburst type identification; green indicates
rockburst risk assessment; yellow indicates prevention and control measure selection; pink indicates prevention and control measure design; purple
indicates prevention and control effectiveness verification.

ensures the safety of underground construction projects structural design of rockbolts. Jing et al. (2020) investi-
and maintains the stability of the support system. Further- gated the load-bearing changes and evolutionary character-
more, significant advancements have been made in the istics of deformation damage in tunnel surrounding rock
 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98 89

after the installation of rockbolts, obtaining process curves precision and effectiveness of rockburst prediction and pre-
for structural deformation and fracture damage. Jiao and vention, reduce the workload and risks faced by miners,
Ju (2021), based on the strength characteristics, impact and foster the sustainable development of the mining
damage, and stress state changes of rock bolt weighing industry (Li et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2020a; Tang et al.,
members, derived an impact damage criterion for bolts. 2019; Pan & Zhang, 2021).
Huang et al. (2020) studied the deformation mode and pro-
posed a mechanism for deep large deformation damage in (1) Deep learning
anchored structures. Wang et al. (2014) examined the tan-
Deep learning (DL), a cutting-edge data-driven technol-
gential stress acting on the surrounding rock and investi-
ogy, has recently shown promise in engineering applica-
gated the overall structural mechanics law of rock bolts
tions, presenting both opportunities and challenges.
and the support effect on the surrounding rock as a whole.
Compared to traditional methods, DL algorithms have
Looking ahead, future underground construction projects
demonstrated remarkable predictive capabilities across
will involve even deeper excavations and challenging envi-
various fields and hold great potential for rockburst predic-
ronments, characterized by high stress, high temperature,
tion (Bergen et al., 2019; Merghadi et al., 2020; Yu & Ma,
and great lifting depth. These conditions will test the capa-
2021). Mining data typically encompass geological infor-
bilities of support technologies.
mation, groundwater conditions, ground stress, blasting
parameters, and more, which can be analyzed and modeled
5.3 Safe and efficient excavation concept for deep hard rock
using DL algorithms to enhance the accuracy of rockburst
projects
prediction. For instance, DL models can be employed to
classify and cluster geological data, identifying potential
Deep hard rock environments are characterized by high
anomalies in the structural behavior of rock masses and
levels of stress, and the process of deep rock excavation
enabling the forecast of rockburst probability and severity.
involves rapid unloading of the highly stressed rock mass,
Furthermore, DL algorithms can automatically segment
accompanied by dynamic disturbances such as blasting
and identify rock masses, thereby improving the accuracy
impact, large-scale collapses, and even seismic activity in
and efficiency of mine design.
the surrounding mining area. The key to technological
advancement in deep hard rock mining lies in transforming
(2) Intelligent robots
the unconventional rock fractures induced by mining dis-
turbances in deep, high-stress rock into controlled frac-
Intelligent robots are experiencing rapid advancements
tures, and effectively regulating the energy release of the
and are increasingly being adopted in hard rock engineer-
deep, high-stress rock. Li et al., (2017b) proposed the con-
ing for semi-automatic or fully automated applications.
cept of ‘‘turning harm into profit” for the safe and efficient
Two primary types of robots are utilized: ground-based
exploitation of deep earth resources, as depicted in Fig. 18.
robots and aerial robots. The widespread use of intelligent
The three primary factors influencing deep mining and dis-
robots has brought significant benefits to mine inspection,
aster mitigation are high stress, high ground temperature,
mining operations, and blasting activities. These robots
and great lifting depth. These factors can be transformed
aid in better predicting and avoiding rockburst incidents,
from sources of catastrophe into advantageous factors.
while facilitating the identification of potential rock-
High stress facilitates the fracturing of hard rock and
related issues. Equipped with sensors and cameras, intelli-
enables better control of rock blocks. High ground temper-
gent robots can continuously monitor the conditions of
ature accelerates the interaction between minerals and
the rock mass and the underground environment. The
leaching fluids in in-situ leach mining. The high water pres-
gathered information is then relayed to miners for analysis
sure in great lifting depth promotes the use of high-pressure
and decision-making processes. Furthermore, the autono-
equipment or underground power sources for efficient
mous inspections and processing capabilities of intelligent
water supply. Figure 19 presents an overview of the strate-
robots alleviate the workload and risks faced by miners.
gies to achieve an effective transformation of these three
challenges.
(3) Digital technology
6 Future directions
The increasing convergence and evolution of new digital
technologies and applications have resulted in the frequent
In the foreseeable future, the field of underground exca-
utilization of digital creation, digital transactions, and dig-
vation is expected to undergo a rapid transition towards
ital assets. Empowered by digital technology, traditional
intelligent technologies. Figure 20 illustrates various
industries are swiftly undergoing digital transformation,
emerging technologies such as deep learning, intelligent
bringing forth new revolutions across various sectors. In
robots, digital technology, 5G networks + VR/AR, Inter-
the field of mining engineering, digital technology has
net of Things, and digital twins, which will progressively
gained widespread adoption and provides crucial data
play a crucial role in rockburst prediction and prevention.
and information to support rockburst prediction and
The integration of these technologies will enhance the
90 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98

Fig. 17. History of energy absorbing bolts.

Fig. 18. Framework for the development of safe and efficient exploitation from deep earth resources.

prevention. For instance, digital technology enables the
creation of 3D geological models, allowing for accurate
analysis and prediction of rock distribution and structure.
Additionally, digital technology facilitates the optimization
and adjustment of blasting parameters, thereby reducing
the risk of rockburst incidents.
(4) 5G networks + VR/AR
environment, thereby improving their ability to prevent
rockburst incidents. For instance, VR technology can
establish a comprehensive mine scene model and provide
immersive virtual reality displays, allowing miners to intu-
itively perceive the rock structure and underground envi-
ronment. Moreover, AR technology facilitates intelligent
management and monitoring of mine equipment and tools,
thereby reducing the risk of rockburst occurrences.

Leveraging the advancements in fifth-generation net- (5) Internet of Things (IoT) technology
work technology, the combination of Virtual Reality
IoT refers to a network of interconnected physical
(VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) is rapidly evolving,
devices that collect real-time operational data and
offering enhanced user experiences. The integration of 5G
resources within a project. The utilization of IoT technol-
networks with VR/AR technologies has found extensive
ogy in mine monitoring and management has become a
application in mine design and training, enabling miners
common practice, as it enables equipment connectivity,
to better comprehend the rock mass conditions and mine
 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
Fig. 19. ‘‘Turning harm into profit” strategy for the three high environments.
real-time monitoring, and enhances the capacity for rock-
burst prediction and prevention. For instance, IoT technol-
ogy enables the networking and data sharing among
sensors and monitoring equipment within mines, enabling
real-time monitoring and early warning systems for the
underground environment and the state of the rock mass.
Additionally, IoT technology facilitates the tracking and
localization of miners and equipment, timely identification
and treatment of engineering disasters, and improves the
efficiency and accuracy of rockburst prediction and
prevention.
(6) Digital Twins
Digital twin technology, which digitizes the physical
world and creates a three-dimensional model, enables
real-time monitoring and simulation (Pan & Zhang, 2021;
Min et al., 2019). By employing digital twin technology,
miners can gain a comprehensive understanding of the sub-
surface environment and the condition of the rock mass,
thereby enhancing their capabilities for rockburst predic-
tion and prevention. Specifically, digital twin technology
can establish a virtual representation of the mine, enabling
real-time monitoring and simulation of the state and
changes within the rock mass, facilitating the estimation
of rockburst possibilities. Additionally, digital twin tech-
nology enables the simulation and optimization of blasting
parameters and engineering schemes, thereby enhancing
the accuracy and efficiency of rockburst prediction and
prevention.
91
7 Conclusion
A growing body of research has emerged in recent years
to address the global challenge of rockburst risk reduction.
To comprehensively understand the current state and pro-
gress of this field, it is imperative to conduct thorough and
quantitative literature studies. One commonly used tool for
analyzing global trends since 1990 is the software CiteS-
pace. Analysis of publications reveals that China, the US,
Australia, Canada, and Russia are the top five countries
contributing significantly to the field. This indicates their
notable contributions to rockburst research. Furthermore,
an examination of co-institutions demonstrates that while
global communication has strengthened with the rapid
expansion of the Internet, institutional cooperation primar-
ily occurs among organizations and disciplines with similar
interests, with limited interdisciplinary and cross-
disciplinary collaboration. Notably, the analysis of the
timeline graph indicates that prediction is currently the
most prominent research area, with a strong connection
to artificial intelligence.
In rockburst classification, selecting the appropriate cri-
teria is crucial due to the existence of numerous indicators.
Different criteria are applied depending on factors such as
lithology, geological zone, and burial depth. Therefore, it is
essential to systematically document the basic information
of typical rockburst incidents and statistically analyze their
characteristics. This will provide a comprehensive
understanding of the mechanisms and conditions that
trigger rockburst events and facilitate the improvement of
92 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98

Fig. 20. Directions for the development of underground space excavation based on intelligent technology.

classification criteria. Based on this foundation, it can be
inferred that hard rocks, including granite, gneiss, horn-
blende, silica, and other hard brittle rocks, are typically
found at depths of 300 meters or more where rockburst
phenomena occur.
As the depth of excavations increases, the occurrence of
dynamic rock failure events, such as rockburst, becomes
more likely. Extensive research has been conducted to
investigate the causes and mechanisms of rockburst. One
triggering mechanism of rockburst is the increase in tan-
gential stress and decrease in radial stress caused by exca-
vation. Various approaches for predicting rockburst in
underground engineering have been explored, including
empirical criteria, numerical simulations, mathematical
methods, microseismic monitoring, and rockburst charts.
A comprehensive review of these approaches is presented.
However, comparing the superiority of these methods
under the same conditions is challenging as each method
is still in development and has its own advantages and lim-
itations. Furthermore, as excavations reach greater depths,
severe rockburst events become inevitable and preventive
strategies must be regularly employed. Understanding the
mechanics of rockburst and identifying the key parameters
that affect rockburst damage are crucial steps in designing
effective rockburst support systems. Additionally, it is
essential to comprehend two key prevention strategies,
namely rockburst control strategy and butterfly risk man-
agement approach, along with the seven design principles
for rockburst support. It is of utmost importance that
any rockburst support design adheres to guidelines for
preventing rockburst risk. By outlining concrete actions
and considerations for rockburst risk prevention and
management, the practical aspects of support design in
burst-prone grounds can be defined. Lastly, acknowledging
 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98 93

the negative effects of subterranean excavation, including
high ground temperature, great lifting depth, and high
stress, the design process for rock support should aim to
transform the challenging excavation environment into
favorable and controllable elements. However, due to the
unpredictable nature of dynamic destruction and the
uncertain surrounding contributing factors, there is still
limited confidence in predictive means and preventive
measures.
In recent decades, digital technology has rapidly
advanced, and the utilization of big data has expanded in
the field of traditional underground engineering. Particu-
larly, the application of cutting-edge technologies has gar-
nered significant attention. It has been observed that
various cutting-edge methodologies have made substantial
contributions to the modernization of the underground
engineering industry, resulting in a more reliable, auto-
mated, time-saving, and cost-effective excavation process.
Implementing future directions that incorporate cutting-
edge science, such as DL, IoT, sensing technology, and
more, can decrease the risk of engineering disasters. These
directions can assist project decision-makers in effectively
managing the challenging and hazardous tasks associated
with excavation while promoting the development of intel-
ligent disaster mitigation and preparedness.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
This research is partially supported by the National
Natural Science Foundation Project of China (Grant
Nos. 42177164 and 72088101), and the Distinguished
Youth Science Foundation of Hunan Province of China
(Grant No. 2022JJ10073).

Appendix A Statistics on rockburst examples of typical hard rock projects in China

Projects Burial Rock properties Rockburst phenomenon

depth (m)
Tongguan Gold Mine, 360–730 Mixed rocks, mixed granites, plagioclase,
Minor rockburst, where rock fragments
Shaanxi, China gneisses, f = 10–16, complex tectonic
are dislodged, often with loud noises and
stresses, brittle and hard. local ejections from the surrounding rock.
Yangtze Valley Mine, 335–450 Quartz-mica gneiss, medium to coarseAfter compression and expansion of the
Henan Qinling grained structure, gneissic. The lithology is
450 m level, a sudden rock burst occurred
Mining Company, hard and brittle with well-developedon the roof, resulting in a large area of
China joints. flaky gang within 10 m of the shaft above
and a large area of sprayed protective
anchor mesh falling off..
Baima Iron Ore Mine, 400–600 Rocks of high strength and good integrity, Rockburst occurs from the construction
China hornblende orthoclase. surface 5 to 8 m, 8 m away from the
strongest performance. The form of
expression is shear damage and splitting
damage 2 kinds, mainly ejected and burst
2 kinds of phenomena.
Chengchao Iron Ore 430–568 Mainly amphibolite, amphibolite, dacite, Rockburst occurs in shafts or chambers in
Mine, China diorite, granite, granite porphyry and areas of concentrated stress due to large
quartz amphibolite. scale blasting vibrations during shaft
development and quarry cutting work.
Hongtushan Copper 400–1077 Mixed granites, gneisses, metamorphic The main forms of rockburst are pit
Mine, China rocks, high tectonic stresses. flakes, block ejections and roof falls. A
strong rockburst occurs when a sound
similar to a large blast is emitted and the
ground is usually felt as a distinct tremor.
(continued on next page)
94 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98

Appendix A (continued)

Projects Burial Rock properties Rockburst phenomenon

depth (m)
Selenium Flag River 518 Granite greenstone. The intensity and frequency of rockburst
Phosphate Mine, increased significantly as the project
China progressed, with varying degrees of
rockburst occurring during the
construction of the 518-deep ramp below
the shaft, and creating a great potential for
construction safety.
Waya IV Mine, China 586.18 This is a brittle, hard, siliceous dolomite. Rockburst accompany the entire
The fissures are mostly filled with calcite production process, and are frequent
and other impurities due to the influence during the process of back mining and
of faults, and the joints are well developed. roadway boring. Rockburst and slagging
and roof eruptions occur from time to
time, accompanied by a gradual increase
in the size of the mining area.
Sanshan Island Gold 555–960 Granite. Rockburst such as rock rattles and small
Mine, China rock ejections occurred during the
construction of the southern flank of the
555 m middle section and the 960 m
middle section ramp at the mine.
Ashel Copper Mine, 550–1100 Elastic energy index Wet = 2.3, pyrite The manifestations are cracking of
China (88.74 MPa), brittleness factor B1 = 25.95. concrete spraying in the roadway, collapse
of large pieces of the surrounding rock,
shelling of the surrounding rock,
deformation of the supporting steel arch
and brittle ejection of the surrounding
rock.
Chener Gold Mine, 580–943 Quartz veins It occurred in a large section, causing
China rapid ejection of broken rock, flaking off
on both sides of the roadway, and severe
dislodgement of the top of the constructed
roadway.
Xinjiang Water 600–720 Metamorphic granite, amphibolite and Rockburst begins along the weak points of
Diversion Tunnel, mica-quartz schist are medium to hard the section joints, the rock falls in response
China rocks of average strength, with to the sound, followed by the sound of
undeveloped joints and fissures and intact flake and block spalling.
rock masses.
Bayu Tunnel, China 3260– Hornblende Black Cloud Granite. The main manifestations are the bending
5500 and bulging of rock slabs caused by tensile
action and the spalling of rock flakes
caused by shear action.
Shuangjiangkou 2300 Granite pegmatite veins. The rocks have a The roof arch of the branch cavern has
Hydropower mean uniaxial compressive strength of suffered a more serious rockburst.
Station, China 139 MPa.
Cao Guo Shan Tunnel, 903.8 Granite. At K35 + 480 (burial depth 507 m) there
China was a slight block drop and abnormal
sound, which is a slight rockburst
phenomenon.
 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98 95

Appendix A (continued)

Projects Burial Rock properties Rockburst phenomenon

depth (m)
Qinling Water 1260 Semipelagic rocks. Average field test rock Four strong rockbursts occurred
Transfer Tunnel, strengths range from 75 to 230 MPa. consecutively on the excavation face, with
China the bursting of the slag body mostly in
large pieces
Jinping Secondary 1500– Marl, limestone, sandstone and slate. A number of rockbursts occurred during
Hydropower 2000 Rocks are relatively intact. Uniaxial the construction of the tunnel, mainly in
Station, China compressive strength of the rock ranges the arch of the cavern, and most of the
from 55 to 114 MPa. rock blocks were spalling in flakes and
layers, with rough fracture surfaces,
showing tensional damage.
Sanzuling Tunnel, 450 Granite and amphibolite. There are local The presence of rock crumbling
Lalin Railway, stress concentrations after excavation. phenomenon, the area is generally in the
China 2–4 m2, individual more than 8 m2, burst
pit depth of about 50 cm, mostly occurring
near the arch waist.
Gangmu La Mountain 300–760 Clinopyroxene, amphibolite and gneiss. This is manifested by the loosening and
Tunnel, China stripping of the structural face, forming a
wedge or trapezoidal shaped burst pit in
the wall of the surrounding rock.

References Chen, C., & Zhou, J. (2023). A new empirical chart for coal burst liability
classification using Kriging method. Journal of Central South Univer-
sity, 30(4), 1205–1216.
Adoko, A. C., Gokceoglu, C., Wu, L., & Zuo, Q. J. (2013). Knowledge-
Chen, H. J., Li, X. B., & Zhang, Y. (2008). Study on application of set pair
based and data-driven fuzzy modeling for rockburst prediction.
analysis method to prediction of rockburst. Journal of University of
International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 61,
South China, 22(4), 10–14 (in Chinese).
86–95.
Cook, N. G. W. (1983). Origin of rockbursts. In Rockbursts: prediction
Afraei, S., Shahriar, K., & Madani, S. H. (2019). Developing intelligent
and control. Symposium (pp. 1–9).
classification models for rock burst prediction after recognizing
Cook, N. G. W. (1965). A note on rockbursts considered as a problem of
significant predictor variables, section 2: Designing classifiers. Tun-
stability. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and
nelling and Underground Space Technology, 84, 522–537.
Metallurgy, 65(8), 437–446.
Askaripour, M., Saeidi, A., Rouleau, A., & Mercier-Langevin, P. (2022).
Cook, N. G. W. (1963). The basic mechanics of rockbursts. Journal of the
Rockburst in underground excavations: A review of mechanism,
Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 64(3), 71–81.
classification, and prediction methods. Underground Space, 7(4),
Deng, J., & Gu, D. S. (2018). Buckling mechanism of pillar rockbursts in
577–607.
underground hard rock mining. Geomechanics and Geoengineering, 13
Bardet, J. P. (1989). Finite element analysis of rockburst as surface
(3), 168–183.
instability. Computers and Geotechnics, 8(3), 177–193.
Diederichs, M. S. (2018). Early assessment of dynamic rupture hazard for
Barton, N., Lien, R., & Lunde, J. (1974). Engineering classification of rock
rockburst risk management in deep tunnel projects. Journal of the
masses for the design of tunnel support. Rock Mechanics, 6(4),
Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 118(3), 193–204.
189–236.
Dou, L., Chen, T., Gong, S., He, H., & Zhang, S. (2012). Rockburst
Bergen, K. J., Johnson, P. A., de Hoop, M. V., & Beroza, G. C. (2019).
hazard determination by using computed tomography technology in
Machine learning for data-driven discovery in solid Earth geoscience.
deep workface. Safety Science, 50(4), 736–740.
Science, 363(6433), eaau0323.
Dou, L., Zhou, K., Song, S., Cao, A., Cui, H., Gong, S., & Ma, X. (2021).
Blake, W., & Hedley, D. G. F. (2003). Rockbursts: Case studies from
Occurrence mechanism, monitoring and prevention technology of
North American hard-rock mines. Littleton, CO: Society for Mining,
rockburst in coal mines. Journal of Engineering Geology, 29(4),
Metallurgy, and Exploration. Inc.
917–932.
Brown, E. T., & Hoek, E. (1980). Underground excavations in rock. CRC
Du, K., Li, X., Su, R., Tao, M., Lv, S., Luo, J., & Zhou, J. (2022). Shape
Press.
ratio effects on the mechanical characteristics of rectangular prism
Cai, M., Kaiser, P. K., Morioka, H., Minami, M., Maejima, T., Tasaka,
rocks and isolated pillars under uniaxial compression. International
Y., & Kurose, H. (2007). FLAC/PFC coupled numerical simulation of
Journal of Mining Science and Technology, 32(2), 347–362.
AE in large-scale underground excavations. International Journal of
Du, K., Tao, M., Li, X. B., & Zhou, J. (2016). Experimental study of
Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 44(4), 550–564.
slabbing and rockburst induced by true-triaxial unloading and local
Cai, M. (2013). Principles of rock support in burst-prone ground.
dynamic disturbance. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 49(9),
Tunnelling & Underground Space Technology Incorporating Trenchless
3437–3453.
Technology Research, 36, 46–56.
Feng, X. T., Chen, S., & Zhou, H. (2004). Real-time computerized
Chen, B. R., Feng, X. T., Li, Q. P., Luo, R. Z., & Li, S. (2015). Rock burst
tomography (CT) experiments on sandstone damage evolution during
intensity classification based on the radiated energy with damage
triaxial compression with chemical corrosion. International Journal of
intensity at Jinping II hydropower station, China. Rock Mechanics and
Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 41(2), 181–192.
Rock Engineering, 48, 289–303.
Feng, X. T., Xue, Y. S., & Feng, G. L. (2012). Mechanism, warning and
Chen, C. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends
dynamic control of rockburst evolution process pp. ISRM-ARMS7.
and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American
ISRM International Symposium-Asian Rock Mechanics Symposium.
Society for information Science and Technology, 57(3), 359–377.
ISRM.
96 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
Feng, X. T., Chen, B. R., Zhang, C. Q., Li, S. J., & Wu, S. Y. (2013).
Mechanism, Warning and Dynamical Control of Rockburst Evolution
Process. Beijing: Science Press (pp. 380–391). Beijing: Science Press (in
Chinese).
Gu, R. (2013). Distinct element model analyses of unstable failures in
underground coal mines. Colorado School of Mines.
Guo, C., Zhang, Y. S., Deng, H., Su, Z., & Sun, D. (2011). Study on rock
burst prediction in the deep-buried tunnel at Gaoligong Mountain
based on the rock proneness. Geotech Invest Survey, 39(10), 8–13, in
Chinese).
He, S., Song, D., Mitri, H., He, X., Chen, J., Li, Z., Xue, Y., & Chen, T.
(2021). Integrated rockburst early warning model based on fuzzy
comprehensive evaluation method. International Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 142, 104767.
Heal, D. (2010). Observations and analysis of incidences of rockburst
damage in underground mines [Ph. D. Thesis]. Australia: University of
Western Australia.
Heal, D., Hudyma, M., & Potvin, Y. (2006). Evaluating rockburst damage
potential in underground mining. Golden Rocks 2006, The 41st US
Symposium on Rock Mechanics (USRMS). OnePetro.
Hou, F. L., & Wang, M. Q. (1989). Criterion and prevention measures on
rockburst in circular tunnel. Proceedings of the 2nd national rock
mechanics and engineering (Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Engineering). Beijing: Knowledge Press (in Chinese).
Huang, B. X., Zhang, N., & Jing, H. W. (2020). Large deformation theory
of surrounding rock rheology and structural instability of deep mining
roadway. Chinese Journal of Coal, 45(03), 911–926 (in Chinese).
Hudson, J. A., & Feng, X. T. (2015). Rock engineering risk (Vol. 1). CRC
Press.
Ishida Shimizu Murata & Kanagawa (2009). Importance of inhomogene-
ity in rock fracturing deduced from distinct element simulation and in-
situ direct shear test. In Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium
on Rockburst and Seismicity in Mines (Keynote Presentation), Dalian,
China (pp. 3–18).
Jia, Y. P., Lv, Q., Shang, Y. Q., Du, L. L., & Zhi, M. M. (2014).
Rockburst prediction based on rough set and ideal point method.
Journal of Zhejiang University (Engineering Science), 48(3), 498–503
(in Chinese).
Jiang, L., Kong, P., Zhang, P., Shu, J., Wang, Q., Chen, L., & Wu, Q.
(2020). Dynamic analysis of the rock burst potential of a longwall
panel intersecting with a fault. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering,
53, 1737–1754.
Jiang, Q., Feng, X. T., Xiang, T. B., & Su, G. S. (2010). Rockburst
characteristics and numerical simulation based on a new energy index:
A case study of a tunnel at 2,500 m depth. Bulletin of engineering
geology and the environment, 69, 381–388.
Jiao, J. K., & Ju, W. J. (2021). Impact failure mechanism of roadway
anchorage bearing structure under dynamic load disturbance. Journal
of China Coal Society, 46, 94–105 (in Chinese).
Jing, H. W., Yin, Q., Zhu, D., Sun, Y. J., & Wang, B. (2020).
Experimental study on the whole process of instability and failure of
anchorage structure in surrounding rock of deep-buried roadway.
Journal of China Coal Society, 45(3), 889–901 (in Chinese).
Jin, Y. N., Li, X. B., Liu, P. J., & Guo, Y. (2017). Predictive liability of the
rockburst classification based on the improved unascertained cluster-
ing model. Journal of Safety and Environment, 17(1), 12–16.
Kaiser, P. K., & Cai, M. (2012). Design of rock support system under
rockburst condition. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical
Engineering, 4(3), 215–227.
Kaiser, P. K., McCreath, D., & Tannant, D. (1996). Canadian Rockburst
Support Handbook. Geomechanics Research Centre: Laurentian
University.
Kaiser, P. K., Tannant, D. D., McCreath, D. R., & Jesenak, P. (1992).
Rockburst damage assessment procedure. In International symposium
on rock support (pp. 639–647).
Keneti, A., & Sainsbury, B. A. (2018). Review of published rockburst
events and their contributing factors. Engineering Geology, 246,
361–373.
Ke, W. (2021). Overview of State-of-Art of Rockburst Prediction and
Prevention Techniques for Deep-buried Tunnels. Tunnel Construction,
41(02), 212–224.
Kidybiński, A. (1981). Bursting liability indices of coal. In International
Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics
Abstracts (Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 295–304). Pergamon.
Kolymbas, D. (2005). The new Austrian tunnelling method. Tunnelling
and Tunnel Mechanics: A Rational Approach to Tunnelling, 171–175.
Leger, J. P. (1991). Trends and causes of fatalities in South African mines.
Safety science, 14(3–4), 169–185.
Li, C., Zhou, J., Armaghani, D. J., & Li, X. (2021). Stability analysis of
underground mine hard rock pillars via combination of finite difference
methods, neural networks, and Monte Carlo simulation techniques.
Underground Space, 6(4), 379–395.
Li, D., Liu, Z., Armaghani, D. J., Xiao, P., & Zhou, J. (2022a). Novel
ensemble tree solution for rockburst prediction using deep forest.
Mathematics, 10(5), 787.
Li, D., Liu, Z., Xiao, P., Zhou, J., & Armaghani, D. J. (2022b). Intelligent
rockburst prediction model with sample category balance using
feedforward neural network and Bayesian optimization. Underground
Space, 7(5), 833–846.
Li, D., Liu, Z., Armaghani, D. J., Xiao, P., & Zhou, J. (2022c). Novel
ensemble intelligence methodologies for rockburst assessment in
complex and variable environments. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 1–23.
Li, G. F., Cai, J., & Guo, Z. B. (2007). Research and application of bolt
and grouting combined support technology to deep mine soft rock
roadway. Coal Science and Technology, 35(4), 44–46 (in Chinese).
Li, L. G., Wensheng, X., Yingnian, X., & Yuanhan, W. (2001).
Experimental study on simulation materials of rockburst. Journal-
Huazhong University of Science and Technology Chinese Edition, 29(6),
80–82.
Li, N., Feng, X., & Jimenez, R. (2017a). Predicting rock burst hazard with
incomplete data using Bayesian networks. Tunnelling and Underground
Space Technology, 61, 61–70.
Li, N., & Jimenez, R. (2018). A logistic regression classifier for long-term
probabilistic prediction of rock burst hazard. Natural Hazards, 90(1),
197–215.
Li, X., Yi, W., Chi, H. L., Wang, X., & Chan, A. P. (2018). A critical
review of virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) applications in
construction safety. Automation in Construction, 86, 150–162.
Li, X. B., & Dong, L. J. (2014). An efficient closed-form solution for
acoustic emission source location in three-dimensional structures. AIP
Advances, 4(2), 027110.
Li, X. B., Gong, F. Q., Wang, S. F., Li, D. Y., Tao, M., Zhou, J., Huang,
L. Q., Ma, C. D., Du, K., & Feng, F. (2019). Coupled static-dynamic
loading mechanical mechanism and dynamic criterion of rockburst in
deep hard rock mines. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Engineering, 38(4), 708–723 (in Chinese).
Li, X. B., & Gu, D. S. (2002). Disaster control and fracture mutagenesis of
high stress in mining of deep hard deposits. Paper presented at the
175th Xiangshan Scientific Conference: Frontiers and the Future of
Science: Volume 6. Beijing: China Environmental Science Press.
Li, X. B., Zhou, J., Wang, S. F., & Liu, B. (2017b). Review and practice of
deep mining for solid mineral resources. The Chinese Journal of
Nonferrous Metals, 27(6), 1236 (in Chinese).
Liang, W., Zhao, G., Wu, H., & Dai, B. (2019). Risk assessment of
rockburst via an extended MABAC method under fuzzy environment.
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 83, 533–544.
Liu, J., Liu, C., Yao, Q., & Si, G. (2020). The position of hydraulic
fracturing to initiate vertical fractures in hard hanging roof for stress
relief. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences,
132, 104328.
Liu, R., Ye, Y., Hu, N., Chen, H., & Wang, X. (2019). Classified
prediction model of rockburst using rough sets-normal cloud. Neural
Computing and Applications, 31, 8185–8193.
Lu, A. H., Mao, X. B., & Liu, H. S. (2008). Physical simulation of rock
burst induced by stress waves. Journal of China University of Mining
and Technology, 18(3), 401–405.
Ma, T. H., Tang, C. A., Liu, F., Zhang, S. C., & Feng, Z. Q. (2021).
Microseismic monitoring, analysis and early warning of rockburst.
Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 12(1), 2956–2983.
Ma, T. H., Tang, C. A., Tang, L. X., Zhang, W. D., & Wang, L. (2015).
Rockburst characteristics and microseismic monitoring of deep-buried
tunnels for Jinping II Hydropower Station. Tunnelling and Under-
ground Space Technology, 49, 345–368.
Mark, C. (2016). Coal bursts in the deep longwall mines of the United
States. International Journal of Coal Science & Technology, 3(1), 1–9.
Merghadi, A., Yunus, A. P., Dou, J., Whiteley, J., ThaiPham, B., Bui, D.
T., ... Abderrahmane, B. (2020). Machine learning methods for
landslide susceptibility studies: A comparative overview of algorithm
performance. Earth-Science Reviews, 207, 103225.
 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
Meng, B., Jing, H. W., Chen, K. F., Su, H. J., Yang, S. Q., & Li, Y. H.
(2012). Shear and slip failure mechanism and control of tunnels with
weak surrounding rock. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
34(12), 2255–2262.
Meng, B., Jing, H., Chen, K., & Su, H. (2013). Failure mechanism and
stability control of a large section of very soft roadway surrounding
rock shear slip. International Journal of Mining Science and Technol-
ogy, 23(1), 127–134.
Meng, B., Jing, H., Yang, S., Wu, Y., Wang, Y., & Huang, Y. (2021).
Experimental investigation on shear behavior of intact sandstones
under constant normal stiffness conditions. International Journal of
Geomechanics, 21(2), 04020259.
Meng, Q. B., Kong, L. H., Wei, L. C., Shen, H. L., & Yang, Y. M. (2011).
Research Status and Prospect on The Support of Soft Rock Roadway
Engineering in Coal Mine. Coal, 01, 1–6 (in Chinese).
Min, Q., Lu, Y., Liu, Z., Su, C., & Wang, B. (2019). Machine learning
based digital twin framework for production optimization in petro-
chemical industry. International Journal of Information Management,
49, 502–519.
Mitri, H. S. (2007). Assessment of horizontal pillar burst in deep hard rock
mines. International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, 7(5),
695–707.
Müller, W. (1991). Numerical simulation of rock bursts. Mining Science
and Technology, 12(1), 27–42.
Oliver, L. C., Sampara, P., Pearson, D., Martell, J., & Zarnke, A. M.
(2022). Sarcoidosis in Northern Ontario hard-rock miners: A case
series. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 65(4), 268–280.
Pan, J. F., Liu, S. H., Xia, Y. X., & Gao, J. M. (2021). Impact failure
characteristics and support method of roadway in broken coal seam
with large dip angle. Chinese Journal of Mining and Safety Engineering,
38(05), 946–953.
Pan, Y., & Zhang, L. (2021). Roles of artificial intelligence in construction
engineering and management: A critical review and future trends.
Automation in Construction, 122, 103517.
Pei, Q. T., Li, H. B., Liu, Y. Q., & Niu, J. T. (2013). Rockburst prediction
based on a modified grey evaluation model. Chinese Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Engineering, 32(10), 2088–2093.
Perol, T., Gharbi, M., & Denolle, M. (2018). Convolutional neural
network for earthquake detection and location. Science Advances, 4(2),
e1700578.
Pu, Y., Apel, D. B., Liu, V., & Mitri, H. (2019). Machine learning methods
for rockburst prediction-state-of-the-art review. International Journal
of Mining Science and Technology, 29(4), 565–570.
Qiao, C., Guo, Y. H., & Li, C. H. (2021). Study on rock burst prediction
of deep buried tunnel based on cusp catastrophe theory. Geotechnical
and Geological Engineering, 39(1), 1–15.
Qiu, S. L., Feng, X. T., Zhang, C. Q., & Wu, W. P. (2011). Development
and validation of rockburst vulnerability index (RVI) in deep hard
rock tunnels. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering., 30
(6), 1126–1141 (in Chinese).
Qiu, Y. G., & Zhou, J. (2023). Short-term rockburst prediction in
underground project: Insights from an explainable and interpretable
ensemble learning model. Acta Geotechnica, 1–31. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11440-023-01988-0.
Rehman, H., Naji, A. M., Ali, W., Junaid, M., Abdullah, R. A., & Yoo,
H. K. (2020). Numerical evaluation of new Austrian tunneling method
excavation sequences: A case study. International Journal of Mining
Science and Technology, 30(3), 381–386.
Rehman, H., Naji, A. M., Nam, K., Ahmad, S., Muhammad, K., & Yoo,
H. K. (2021). Impact of construction method and ground composition
on headrace tunnel stability in the Neelum-Jhelum Hydroelectric
Project: A case study review from Pakistan. Applied Sciences, 11(4),
1655.
Russenes, B. F. (1974). Analysis of rock spalling for tunnels in steep valley
sides [Master’s thesis, Norwegian Institute of Technology].
Shi, X. Z., Zhou, J., Dong, L., Hu, H. Y., Wang, H. Y., & Chen, S. R.
(2010). Application of unascertained measurement model to prediction
of classification of rockburst intensity. Chinese Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Engineerin, 29(S1), 2720–2726 (in Chinese).
Shirani, F. R., & Taheri, A. (2019). Long-term prediction of rockburst
hazard in deep underground openings using three robust data mining
techniques. Engineering with Computers, 35(2), 659–675.
Simser, B. P. (2019). Rockburst management in Canadian hard rock
mines. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 11(5),
1036–1043.
97
Singh, S. P. (1987). The influence of rock properties on the occurrence and
control of rockbursts. Mining Science and Technology, 5(1), 11–18.
Sun, Y., Li, G., Zhang, J., & Huang, J. (2021). Rockburst intensity
evaluation by a novel systematic and evolved approach: Machine
learning booster and application. Bulletin of engineering geology and
the environment, 80(11), 8385–8395.
Suorineni, F. T., Hebblewhite, B., & Saydam, S. (2014). Geomechanics
challenges of contemporary deep mining: A suggested model for
increasing future mining safety and productivity. Journal of the
Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 114(12),
1023–1032.
Tajduś, A. (1997). Estimation of rockburst hazard basing on 3D stress
field analysis. Ratio, 1(2), 3.
Tang, C. (1997). Numerical simulation of progressive rock failure and
associated seismicity. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Mining Sciences, 34(2), 249–261.
Tang, S., Shelden, D. R., Eastman, C. M., Pishdad-Bozorgi, P., & Gao, X.
(2019). A review of building information modeling (BIM) and the
internet of things (IoT) devices integration: Present status and future
trends. Automation in Construction, 101, 127–139.
Tan, Y. A., Guangzhong, S., & Zhi, G. U. O. (1991). A composite index
Krb criterion for the ejection characteristics of the burst rock. Chinese
Journal of Geology, 26(2), 193–200.
Tao, Z. Y. (1988). Support design of tunnels subjected to rockbursting pp.
ISRM-IS. ISRM International Symposium. ISRM.
Turchaninov, I. A., Markov, G. A., Gzovsky, M. V., Kazikayev, D. M.,
Frenze, U. K., Batugin, S. A., & Chabdarova, U. I. (1972). State of
stress in the upper part of the Earth’s crust based on direct
measurements in mines and on tectonophysical and seismological
studies. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors, 6(4), 229–234.
Wang, B., Wang, W., Zhao, F., Fan & Tang (2014). Research on bolt
anchoring effect based on self-supporting characteristics of roadway
surrounding rock. Geotechnical Mechanics, 35(7), 8.
Wang, H., Shi, R., Lu, C., Jiang, Y., Deng, D., & Zhang, D. (2019a).
Investigation of sudden faults instability induced by coal mining.
Safety Science, 115, 256–264.
Wang, L. S., Li, T. B., Xu, J., Xu, L. S., Jin, X. G., & Li, Y. L. (1999).
Rockburst and its intensity classification of Erlangshan highway
tunnel. Highway, 28(2), 41–45.
Wang, M., Liu, Q., Wang, X., Shen, F., & Jin, J. (2020). Prediction of
rockburst based on multidimensional connection cloud model and set
pair analysis. International Journal of Geomechanics, 20(1), 04019147.
Wang, S. M., Zhou, J., Li, C. Q., Armaghani, D. J., Li, X. B., & Mitri, H.
S. (2021). Rockburst prediction in hard rock mines developing bagging
and boosting tree-based ensemble techniques. Journal of Central South
University, 28(2), 527–542.
Wang, S. Y., Lam, K. C., Au, S. K., Tang, C. A., Zhu, W. C., & Yang, T.
H. (2006). Analytical and numerical study on the pillar rockbursts
mechanism. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 39, 445–467.
Wang, X., Li, S., Xu, Z., Xue, Y., Hu, J., Li, Z., & Zhang, B. (2019b). An
interval fuzzy comprehensive assessment method for rock burst in
underground caverns and its engineering application. Bulletin of
Engineering Geology and the Environment, 78, 5161–5176.
Wu, M., Ye, Y., Wang, Q., & Hu, N. (2022). Development of rockburst
research: A comprehensive review. Applied Sciences, 12(3), 974.
Wu, Y. Z., Fu, Y. K., He, J., Chen, J. Y., Chu, X. W., & Meng, X. Z.
(2021). Principle and technology of ‘‘pressure relief-support-
protection” collaborative prevention and control in deep rock burst
roadway. Journal of China Mine Society, 46(1), 132–144.
Xi, Y. L., Xu, Y. Z., & Wang, L. C. (2017). Study and countermeasures on
key technologies for long deeply buried tunnel of Qireha Starr
Hydropower Station. Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering,
48(10), 26–30.
Xu, Y. N., Xu, W. S., Wang, Y. H., Tham, L. G., & Lee, P. K. K. (2002).
Simulation testing and mechanism studies on rockburst. Chinese
Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 21, 1462–1466.
Yang, Z. Y., Liu, C., Zhu, H. Z., Xie, F. X., Dou, L. M., & Chen, J. H.
(2019). Mechanism of rock burst caused by fracture of key strata
during irregular working face mining and its prevention methods.
Journal of Mining Science and Technology: English Edition, 29(6), 9.
Yang, S. Q. (1993). An experimental study on rockburst mechanism
around tunnels by physical simulation. Journal of Wuhan University of
Hydraulic and Electric Engineering, 26(2), 160–166.
Yin, X., Liu, Q., Pan, Y., Huang, X., Wu, J., & Wang, X. (2021). Strength
of stacking technique of ensemble learning in rockburst prediction with
98 J. Zhou et al. / Underground Space 14 (2024) 70–98
imbalanced data: Comparison of eight single and ensemble models.
Natural Resources Research, 30, 1795–1815.
Yu, S., & Ma, J. (2021). Deep learning for geophysics: Current and future
trends. Reviews of Geophysics, 59(3), e2021RG000742.
Zhang, C. Q., Lu, J. J., Chen, J., Zhou, H., & Yang (2017). Discussion on
rock burst proneness indexes and their relation. Rock and Soil
Mechanics, 38(5), 1397–1404.
Zhang, C. Q., Zhou, H., & Feng, X. T. (2011). An index for estimating the
stability of brittle surrounding rock mass: FAI and its engineering
application. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 44(4), 401–414.
Zhang, G., Pan, Y., Zhang, L., & Tiong, R. L. K. (2020a). Cross-scale
generative adversarial network for crowd density estimation from
images. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 94, 103777.
Zhang, J., Wang, Y., Sun, Y., & Li, G. (2020b). Strength of ensemble
learning in multiclass classification of rockburst intensity. International
Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 44(13),
1833–1853.
Zhang, L., Zhang, X., Wu, J., Zhao, D., & Fu, H. (2020c). Rockburst
prediction model based on comprehensive weight and extension
methods and its engineering application. Bulletin of Engineering
Geology and the Environment, 79, 4891–4903.
Zhao, H., Chen, B., & Zhu, C. (2021). Decision tree model for rockburst
prediction based on microseismic monitoring. Advances in Civil
Engineering, 2021, 1–14.
Zhou, J. (2015a). Supervised learning methods for strain-based rockburst
prediction and crater depth estimation. Ph.D thesis, Changsha, Central
South University.
Zhou, J., Chen, C., Wang, M., & Khandelwal, M. (2021a). Proposing a
novel comprehensive evaluation model for the coal burst liability in
underground coal mines considering uncertainty factors. International
Journal of Mining Science and Technology, 31(5), 99–812.
Zhou, J., Chen, C., Wei, C., & Du, K. (2022a). An Improved Connection
Cloud Model of an Updated Database: A Multicriteria Uncertainty
Model for Coal Burst Liability Evaluation. Natural Resources
Research, 31(3), 1687–1704.
Zhou, J., Koopialipoor, M., Li, E., & Armaghani, D. J. (2020). Prediction
of rockburst risk in underground projects developing a neuro-bee
intelligent system. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment,
79(8), 4265–4279.
Zhou, J., Li, X. B., & Mitri, H. S. (2015b). Comparative performance of
six supervised learning methods for the development of models of hard
rock pillar stability prediction. Natural Hazards, 79(1), 291–316.
Zhou, J., Li, X., & Mitri, H. S. (2016a). Classification of rockburst in
underground projects: Comparison of ten supervised learning meth-
ods. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 30(5), 04016003.
Zhou, J., Li, X. B., & Mitri, H. S. (2018). Evaluation method of rockburst:
State-of-the-art literature review. Tunnelling and Underground Space
Technology, 81, 632–659.
Zhou, J., Li, X. B., & Shi, X. Z. (2012). Long-term prediction model of
rockburst in underground openings using heuristic algorithms and
support vector machines. Safety Science, 50(4), 629–644.
Zhou, J., Guo, H., Koopialipoor, M., Jahed Armaghani, D., & Tahir, M.
M. (2021b). Investigating the effective parameters on the risk levels of
rockburst phenomena by developing a hybrid heuristic algorithm.
Engineering with Computers, 37(3), 1679–1694.
Zhou, J., Shen, X., Qiu, Y., Li, E., Rao, D., & Shi, X. (2021c). Improving
the efficiency of microseismic source locating using a heuristic
algorithm-based virtual field optimization method. Geomechanics and
Geophysics for Geo-Energy and Geo-Resources, 7(3), 1–18.
Zhou, J., Shen, X., Qiu, Y., Shi, X., & Khandelwal, M. (2022b). Cross-
correlation stacking-based microseismic source location using three
metaheuristic optimization algorithms. Tunnelling and Underground
Space Technology, 126, 104570.
Zhou, J., Shi, X. Z., Dong, L., Hu, H. Y., & Wang, H. Y. (2010). Fisher
discriminant analysis model and its application for prediction of
classification of rockburst in deep-buried long tunnel. Journal of Coal
Science and Engineering (China), 16(2), 144–149.
Zhou, J., Shi, X. Z., Huang, R. D., Qiu, X. Y., & Chen, C. (2016b).
Feasibility of stochastic gradient boosting approach for predicting
rockburst damage in burst-prone mines. Transactions of Nonferrous
Metals Society of China, 26(7), 1938–1945.
Zhu, Q., Zhao, X., & Westman, E. (2021). Review of the evolution of
mining-induced stress and the failure characteristics of surrounding
rock based on microseismic tomography. Shock and Vibration, 2021,
1–19.
Zhu, S., Feng, Y., Jiang, F., & Liu, J. (2018). Mechanism and risk
assessment of overall-instability-induced rockbursts in deep island
longwall panels. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining
Sciences, 106, 342–349.
Zhu, W. C., Li, Z. H., Zhu, L., & Tang, C. A. (2010). Numerical
simulation on rockburst of underground opening triggered by dynamic
disturbance. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 25(5),
587–599.
Zubelewicz, A., & Mroz, Z. (1983). Numerical simulation of rock burst
processes treated as problems of dynamic instability. Rock Mechanics
and Rock Engineering, 16(4), 253–274.
Wen, C.P., 2008. Application of attribute synthetic evaluation system in
prediction of possibility and classification of rockburst. Engineering
Mechanics. 25 (6), 153–158. (in Chinese)