Seismic vulnerability assessment of buildings using rapid visual screening for hybrid UMNN-RFO approach

Rakesh Kumar, G (2025) Seismic vulnerability assessment of buildings using rapid visual screening for hybrid UMNN-RFO approach. International Journal of Construction Management, 25(10), pp. 1177-1185. ISSN 1562-3599

Abstract

This chapter proposes a hybrid approach for seismic vulnerability assessment of buildings using rapid visual screening (RVS). The Unconstrained Monotonic Neural Network (UMNN) and Red Fox Optimisation (RFO) are combined to create the hybrid technique, thus, the term 'UMNN-RFO approach'. The UMNN algorithm predicts the RVS score and the RFO algorithm optimizes the RVS score. The RVS methods via Google Maps are being used to examine the Andaman and Nicobar Islands because it is one of the main earthquake prone regions in the world. A score was given after a screening that looked at Reinforced Concrete moment-resisting frames, load-bearing structures, steel frames (SF) and wooden frames (WF). By then, the MATLAB platform will have the proposed model implemented. The proposed approach outperforms all current techniques, including Granular Computing Artificial Neural Network (GrC-ANN), Particle Swarm Optimization-Back Propagation Neural Network (PSO-BPNN) and Genetic Algorithm-Artificial Neural Network (GA-ANN). The proposed method's accuracy is 90%, determination coefficient is 0.91 and the Root Mean Square error is 0.27%. From the result, the proposed method concluded that older structures are more likely to sustain greater damage shortly than more recently built ones based on the score.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: mitigation; rapid visual screening; reinforced concrete structures; seismic vulnerability; wooden structures
Index terms: platform, steel frame, maps, artificial neural network, reinforced concrete, mean square error, earthquake, accuracy, vulnerability, genetic algorithm, mitigation, computing, back propagation, screening, neural network
Subjects: building materials, management, structural engineering, environmental hazards, digital design, spatial and geospatial analysis, computing systems, artificial intelligence, professional development, algorithms, probability and distributions, financial risk, modelling and simulation
Topics: Sustainability, Digital Applications, Construction Materials, Research Practice, Information Management, Cost Management, Human Resources, Engineering Principles
Descriptive scope: 3 PCA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here