PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 19, 2026Buildings0 citationsOpen Access

A Framework for Structural-Collapse-Sensitive Ground-Motion Identification Based on Unsupervised Clustering and Explainable Ensemble Learning

View Full Paper
XZXinyu ZhaoWPWen PanYLYE Liao-yuan

Key Points

  • This research aims to develop a framework for identifying critical ground motions related to structural collapse with enhanced interpretability.
  • Utilized a dataset of 5074 records from the PEER NGA-West2 database.
  • Applied STA/LTA event detection and multi-source feature extraction.
  • Employed Gaussian mixture model (GMM) for unsupervised clustering into four groups.
  • Tested cluster separability using LightGBM, XGBoost, and Random Forest algorithms.
  • Conducted SHAP-based feature-importance analysis for interpretability.
  • Cluster 2 displayed significantly higher relative seismic energy and stronger time-domain variability.
  • All models achieved F1 scores above 0.89, with LightGBM reaching approximately 93% accuracy.
  • Cluster 2 was identified as the collapse-sensitive phenotype (COP) based on its enrichment in engineering markers.

Abstract

To address the small ATC-63 record set for collapse-oriented motion selection and the limited interpretability of data-driven approaches, this study proposes a framework for identifying structural-collapse-critical ground motions. Using 5074 records from the PEER NGA-West2 database, we applied STA/LTA event detection and extracted multi-source features. A Gaussian mixture model (GMM) was then used to perform unsupervised clustering and identify four physically interpretable groups. LightGBM, XGBoost, and Random Forest were employed to test the separability of the cluster labels, with all three models achieving F1 scores above 0.89 and LightGBM reaching an accuracy of about 93%. SHAP-based feature-importance analysis was used at the model level to clarify feature contributions and improve interpretability. Cluster 2 exhibits markedly higher relative seismic energy, stronger time-domain variability, and more dominant frequencies, forming a typical strong-motion hazard signature. For external engineering verification, 22 ATC-63 far-field records were mapped onto the full dataset to examine cluster-level enrichment and coverage. Cluster 2 shows significant enrichment in engineering markers and high coverage and is therefore identified as the collapse-sensitive phenotype cluster (COP). Overall, the framework provides a technical basis for ground-motion selection in collapse assessment, fragility analysis, and design evaluation.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Zhao et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6996a8c7ecb39a600b3efd9dhttps://doi.org/10.3390/buildings16040820
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Assessing Ground Motion Intensity Measures and Structural Damage Measures in Underground Structures: A Finite Element Analysis of the Daikai Subway Station2024 · 6 citations
  2. 2Automatic microseismic event picking via unsupervised machine learning2020 · 163 citations
  3. 3Random Forests2001 · 131,640 citations
  4. 4A review and appraisal of arrival-time picking methods for downhole microseismic data2016 · 209 citations
  5. 5Ensemble unsupervised autoencoders and Gaussian mixture model for cyberattack detection2022 · 249 citations