Predicting the Compressive Strength of Concrete Containing Binary Supplementary Cementitious Material Using Machine Learning Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several advantages of supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) have led to widespread use in the concrete industry. Many various SCMs with different characteristics are used to produce sustainable concrete. Each of these materials has its specific properties and therefore plays a different role in enhancing the mechanical properties of concrete. Multiple and often conflicting demands of concrete properties can be addressed by using combinations of two or more SCMs. Thus, understanding the effect of each SCM, as well as their combination in concrete, may pave the way for further utilization. This study aims to develop a robust and time-saving method based on Machine Learning (ML) to predict the compressive strength of concrete containing binary SCMs at various ages. To do so, a database containing a mixture of design, physical, and chemical properties of pozzolan and age of specimens have been collected from literature. A total of 21 mix design containing binary mixes of fly ash, metakaolin, and zeolite were prepared and experimentally tests to fill the possible gap in the literature and to increase the efficiency and accuracy of the ML-based model. The accuracy of the proposed model was shown to be accurate and ML-based model is able to predict the compressive strength of concrete containing any arbitrary SCMs at ay ages precisely. By using the model, the optimum replacement level of any combination of SCMs, as well as the behavior of binary cementitious systems containing two different SCMs, can be determined.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".