MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094015353 · doi:10.3390/ma13214757

Predicting Ultra-High-Performance Concrete Compressive Strength Using Tabular Generative Adversarial Networks

2020· article· en· W3094015353 on OpenAlexaff
Afshin Marani, Armin Jamali, Moncef L. Nehdi

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative concrete reinforcement materials
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGenerative grammarMachine learningArtificial intelligenceParametric statisticsExperimental dataRandom forestNonlinear systemBoosting (machine learning)Predictive modellingPerformance predictionSimulationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There have been abundant experimental studies exploring ultra-high-performance concrete (UHPC) in recent years. However, the relationships between the engineering properties of UHPC and its mixture composition are highly nonlinear and difficult to delineate using traditional statistical methods. There is a need for robust and advanced methods that can streamline the diverse pertinent experimental data available to create predictive tools with superior accuracy and provide insight into its nonlinear materials science aspects. Machine learning is a powerful tool that can unravel underlying patterns in complex data. Accordingly, this study endeavors to employ state-of-the-art machine learning techniques to predict the compressive strength of UHPC using a comprehensive experimental database retrieved from the open literature consisting of 810 test observations and 15 input features. A novel approach based on tabular generative adversarial networks was used to generate 6513 plausible synthetic data for training robust machine learning models, including random forest, extra trees, and gradient boosting regression. While the models were trained using the synthetic data, their ability to generalize their predictions was tested on the 810 experimental data thus far unknown and never presented to the models. The results indicate that the developed models achieved outstanding predictive performance. Parametric studies using the models were able to provide insight into the strength development mechanisms of UHPC and the significance of the various influential parameters.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.193 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations172
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicInnovative concrete reinforcement materialsFrench-language works237,207