Machine Learning-Based Flexural Capacity Prediction of Corroded RC Beams with an Efficient and User-Friendly Tool
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Steel corrosion poses a serious threat to the structural performance of reinforced concrete (RC) structures. Thus, this study evaluates the flexural capacity of RC beams through machine learning (ML)-based techniques with six parameters used as input features: beam width, beam effective depth, concrete compressive strength, reinforcement ratio, reinforcement yield strength, and corrosion level. Four single and ensemble ML models are evaluated; namely, decision tree, support vector machine, adaptive boosting, and gradient boosting. Hyperparameters of each model were optimized using grid search and K-fold cross-validation with root mean squared error used as the performance index. The predictive performance of each model was assessed using four statistical performance metrics. The analysis results demonstrated that the decision tree model exhibited overfitting and limited generalization ability. The adaptive boosting model also had a slight overfitting issue. In addition, the support vector machine reported comparable accuracy to that of adaptive boosting. Conversely, the proposed gradient boosting ensemble model achieved the best performance with strong generalization ability, as indicated by its lowest mean absolute error of 2.78 kN.m, mean absolute percent error of 13.40%, and root mean squared error of 3.56 kN.m, and the highest coefficient of determination of 97.30% on the test dataset. The optimized gradient boosting model has been deployed into a graphical user interface, allowing for practical implementation of the model and enabling fast, efficient, and intelligent prediction of the flexural capacity of corroded RC beams.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".