MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408248549 · doi:10.1016/j.mtcomm.2025.112139

Explainable machine learning predictive model for mechanical strength of recycled ceramic tile-based concrete

2025· article· en· W4408248549 on OpenAlexaff
Celal Çakıroğlu, Farnaz Batool, Abdul Jabbar Sangi, Bushra Fatima, Moncef L. Nehdi

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials Today Communications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNED University of Engineering and Technology
KeywordsTileMaterials scienceCeramicComposite materialMechanical strength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Valorizing industrial byproducts in construction applications is a promising approach for enhancing sustainability. Global annual production of ceramic waste including broken tiles is a considerable challenge. Yet, such ceramic tile waste has great potential in sustainable concrete production, for instance as fine and coarse aggregate. Effective use of ceramic tile waste in concrete requires accurate prediction of recycled tile concrete mechanical strength. This study deploys state-of-the-art machine learning techniques for predicting the compressive and tensile strength of ceramic tile-based concrete. The authors recently performed an extensive experimental program on the mechanical characterization of ceramic tile-based concrete, allowing to build a comprehensive database of 252 data points with varying key mixture proportions. The latter was used to develop a data-driven machine learning (ML) modeling framework for predicting the mechanical properties of the concrete using XGBoost, CatBoost, LightGBM, and Extra Trees regressors. The independent variables of the dataset affecting mechanical strength included the cast density, percentage of ceramic tiles used as coarse and fine aggregate, water-to-cement ratio, water absorption capacity, and hydration age. The influence of different input features on the model predictions was visualized using SHAP feature importance plots. Ultimately, a machine learning-based and user-friendly graphical interface was created and made available through the Streamlit platform to aid in the design of ceramic tile-based sustainable concrete.

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 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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.581

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterials Today CommunicationsSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207