MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280490353 · doi:10.3390/app12104851

Applications of Decision Tree and Random Forest as Tree-Based Machine Learning Techniques for Analyzing the Ultimate Strain of Spliced and Non-Spliced Reinforcement Bars

2022· article· en· W4280490353 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcementStructural engineeringDecision treeComputer scienceReliability (semiconductor)Random forestContext (archaeology)Tree (set theory)Bar (unit)Machine learningMaterials scienceMathematicsEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of both non-spliced and spliced steel bars significantly affects the overall performance of structural reinforced concrete elements. In this context, the mechanical properties of reinforcement bars (i.e., their ultimate strength and strain) should be determined in order to evaluate their reliability prior to the construction procedure. In this study, the application of Tree-Based machine learning techniques is implemented to analyze the ultimate strain of non-spliced and spliced steel reinforcements. In this regard, a database containing the results of 225 experimental tests was collected based on the research investigations available in peer-reviewed international publications. The database included the mechanical properties of both non-spliced and mechanically spliced bars. For better accuracy, the databases of other splicing methods such as lap and welded-spliced methods were excluded from this research. The database was categorized as two sub-databases: training (85%) and testing (15%) of the developed models. Various effective parameters such as splice technique, steel grade of the bar, diameter of the steel bar, coupler geometry—including length and outer diameter along with the testing temperatures—were defined as the input variables for analyzing the ultimate strain using tree-based approaches including Decision Trees and Random Forest. The predicted outcomes were compared to the actual values and the precision of the prediction models was assessed via performance metrics, along with a Taylor diagram. Based on the reported results, the reliability of the proposed ML-based methods was acceptable (with an R2 ≥ 85%) and they were time-saving and cost-effective compared to more complicated, time-consuming, and expensive experimental examinations. More importantly, the models proposed in this study can be further considered as a part of a comprehensive prediction model for estimating the stress-strain behavior of steel bars.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.472
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.240 · 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