Prediction of Ultimate Strain and Strength of FRP-Confined Concrete Cylinders Using Soft Computing Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the effectiveness of four different soft computing methods, namely radial basis neural network (RBNN), adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) with subtractive clustering (ANFIS-SC), ANFIS with fuzzy c-means clustering (ANFIS-FCM) and M5 model tree (M5Tree), for predicting the ultimate strength and strain of concrete cylinders confined with fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) sheets. The models were compared according to the root mean square error (RMSE), mean absolute relative error (MARE) and determination coefficient (R2) criteria. Similar accuracy was obtained by RBNN and ANFIS-FCM, and they provided better estimates in modeling ultimate strength of confined concrete. The ANFIS-SC, however, performed slightly better than the RBNN and ANFIS-FCM in estimating ultimate strain of confined concrete, and M5Tree provided the worst strength and strain estimates. Finally, the effects of strain ratio and the confinement stiffness ratio on strength and strain were investigated, and the confinement stiffness ratio was shown to be more effective.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".