Influence of Fine Recycled Concrete Powder on the Compressive Strength of Self-Compacting Concrete (SCC) Using Artificial Neural Network
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to investigate the effect of fine recycled concrete powder (FRCP) on the strength of self-compacting concrete (SCC). For this purpose, a numerical artificial neural network (ANN) model was developed for strength prediction of SCC incorporating FRCP. At first, 240 experimental data sets were selected from the literature to develop the model. Approximately 60% of the database was used for training, 20% for testing, and the remaining 20% for the validation step. Model inputs included binder content, water/binder ratio, recycled concrete aggregates’ (RCA) content, percentage of supplementary cementitious materials (fly ash), amount of FRCP, and curing time. The model provided reliable results with mean square error (MSE) and regression values of 0.01 and 0.97, respectively. Additionally, to further validate the model, four experimental recycled self-compacting concrete (RSCC) samples were tested experimentally, and their properties were used as unseen data to the model. The results showed that the developed model can predict the compressive strength of RSCC with high accuracy.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it