Artificial Neural Network Approach for Assessing Mechanical Properties and Impact Performance of Natural-Fiber Composites Exposed to UV Radiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amidst escalating environmental concerns, short natural-fiber thermoplastic (SNFT) biocomposites have emerged as sustainable materials for the eco-friendly production of mechanical components. However, their limited durability has prompted research into the experimental evaluation of the deterioration of the mechanical characteristics of SNFT biocomposites, particularly under the influence of ultraviolet rays. However, conducting tests to evaluate the mechanical properties can be time-consuming and expensive. In this study, an artificial neural network (ANN) model was employed to predict the mechanical properties (tensile strength) and the impact performance (resistance and absorbed energy) of polypropylene reinforced with 30 wt.% short flax or wood pine fibers (referred to as PP30-F or PP30-P, respectively). Eight parameters were collected from experimental studies. The ANN input parameters comprised nondestructive test results, including mass, hardness, roughness, and natural frequencies, while the output parameters were the tensile strength, the maximum impact load, and absorbed energy. The model was developed using the ANN toolbox in MATLAB. The linear coefficient of correlation and mean squared error were selected as the metrics for evaluating the performance function and accuracy of the ANN model. They calculate the relationship and the average squared difference between the predicted and actual values. The data analysis conducted by the models demonstrated exceptional predictive capability, achieving an accuracy rate exceeding 96%, which was deemed satisfactory. For both the PP30-F and PP30-P biocomposites, the ANN predictions deviated from the experimental data by 3, 5, and 6% with regard to the impact load, absorbed energy, and tensile strength, respectively.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".