MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405283423 · doi:10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e04112

Predicting residual strength of hybrid fibre-reinforced Self-compacting concrete (HFR-SCC) exposed to elevated temperatures using machine learning

2024· article· en· W4405283423 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Saud Khan, Liqiang Ma, Waleed Bin Inqiad, Majid Khan, Naseer Muhammad Khan, Saad S. Alarifi

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Studies in Construction Materials · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire effects on concrete materials
Canadian institutionsGeomechanica (Canada)University of Manitoba
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaMinistry of EducationKing Saud UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsHfr cellMaterials scienceComposite materialResidual strengthResidualStructural engineeringEngineeringMathematicsAlgorithmChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hybrid fibre-reinforced Self-compacting concrete (HFR-SCC) offers significant advantages over conventional concrete like increased ductility, crack resistance, and eliminating the need for compaction etc. However, it is very difficult to determine residual strength properties of HFR-SCC after a fire event since it requires rigorous experimental work and resources. Thus, this research presents innovative ways for reliable prediction of compressive strength (cs), flexural strength (fs), and tensile strength (ts) of HFR-SCC using different machine learning (ML) algorithms including gene expression programming (GEP), adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS), extreme gradient boosting (XGB), AdaBoost, and random forest regression (RFR). The data to be used for this purpose was obtained from internationally published literature having nine inputs including cement, fly ash, temperature, fibre content etc. and three output parameters i.e., cs, ts, and fs. The collected dataset was split into two sets named training and testing sets to be used for training the algorithms and testing their accuracy respectively. The developed predictive models were validated by error metrices including coefficient of determination ( R 2 ) , performance index (PI), and a20-index, etc. The comparison of the algorithms revealed that XGB surpassed its counterparts having testing R 2 values equal to 0.998, 0.997, and 0.999 for cs, ts, and fs prediction respectively. Also, the PI values were the lowest for XGB-based predictive model in both phases of training and testing. Thus, Shapely Additive Analysis (SHAP) was performed on the XGB model which revealed that temperature, fibre content, and cement are some of the main contributors to predict the three outputs. The developed predictive models presented in this study can be utilized effectively by the professionals to estimate the residual strength of HFR-SCC.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Studies in Construction MaterialsSame topicFire effects on concrete materialsFrench-language works237,207