MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3103111311 · doi:10.11159/iccste20.238

Probabilistic Inference Approach for Predicting Concrete CompressiveStrength - A Bayesian Network Algorithm

2020· article· en· W3103111311 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Omar Najm, Hilal El-Hassan, Amr El-Dieb, Hamad Al Jassmi

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Conference on Civil, Structural and Transportation Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBayesian networkInferenceProbabilistic logicAlgorithmBayesian inferenceBayesian probabilityCompressive strengthArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study highlights innovative and novel techniques that employ Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology in evaluating and predicting concrete compressive strength.Past literature utilized different AI algorithms to predict the nonlinear behaviour of concrete, of which the most commonly used is the Artificial Neural Network (ANN).Limited past studies used the probabilistic inference approach by using Bayesian Networks (BN) to envisage the structural health integrity and mechanical performance of concrete.This research investigates the potential applicability of BN in predicting the compressive strength of self-compacting concrete made with various supplementary cementitious materials and basalt fibers.Two learning algorithms, namely Naïve Bayes and Markov Blanket, were employed along with various discretization methods to maximize network performance and minimize integral absolute error.Research findings showed that Naïve Bayes classifier, coupled with K-means discretization tool with 4 segments of 'days' variable and 3 segments of the remaining variables, gave the highest correlation between experimental and predicted values.The accuracy of the predicted BN results was slightly superior to that obtained from the ANN model.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Conference on Civil, Structural and Transportation EngineeringSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207