Safety prediction of bearing capacity of rectangular concrete four-pile caps using XGBoost-PSO regression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The design of the reinforced concrete structures using machine-learning techniques corresponds to the symmetrical distribution of the results, where the application of a safety coefficient includes sliding for all values (lower and upper bands). This paper presents a practical and comprehensive implementation of machine learning based on the Extreme gradient boosting model for the safety prediction of the bearing capacity of four concrete pile caps. To target the upper band only for the safety factor, the suggested model seeks to accurately under-predict the strength capacity to accommodate safety issues in pile caps design using a customized asymmetric loss function optimized by the particle swarm optimization algorithm. For the development of the Extreme gradient boosting regression model, a widely used dataset consisting of 107 four-pile cap tests is used for training and testing the model. Using five-fold cross-validation for model performance evaluation and the grid search method to tune the hyper-parameters, the developed Extreme gradient boosting regressor outperforms several recently reported mechanical models and different design codes (Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute Design 2002; American Concrete Institute 318-05, and Canadian Standards Association A23.3). The results exhibited very acceptable performance metrics (coefficient of variation = 4.2 and a mean ratio of the bearing capacity values (test sample/model) equal to 1.09). The obtained results prove the ability of the proposed model to accurately and safely predict the bearing capacity, which allows it to be incorporated into any design software engineering for complete safety calculation.
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".