MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6986588022

Predicting the compressive strength of ultra-lightweight concrete by an artificial neural network

2016· other· en· W6986588022 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueEspace ÉTS (ETS) · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersÉcole de technologie supérieure
KeywordsCompressive strengthArtificial neural networkAggregate (composite)Margin (machine learning)Genetic algorithmSet (abstract data type)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultra-lightweight concrete (ULWC) has potential applications for floating structures and architectural elements because of its dry density coming in at under 1000 kg/m 3 .The objective was to develop an artificial neural network (ANN) to aid the ULWC designer according to his needs.Boundary conditions were set for each material and 13 constraints based on the water binder ratio, density, air content, binder and aggregate content.The ANN predicted the compressive strength with a comfortable margin of error, with the gap encountered being attributed to variability in workability.Precise constraints and boundary conditions are needed to ensure a lower variability in workability.The ANN, coupled with a genetic algorithm, can generate millions of mixes for a given compressive strength in a short amount of time.The designer is able to choose mixes according to additional needs, such as the carbon footprint, absolute density, polymer content, cost, etc.

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)0.000
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEspace ÉTS (ETS)French-language works237,207