ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Prediction of the Fatigue Strength of Steel Based on Interpretable Machine Learning.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dynamic Ensemble Learning with Transfer Learning for Fatigue Performance Prediction in Ni-Based Superalloys.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Research on the Accelerated Fatigue Experiment Method of the Crankshaft Based on a Modified Particle Filtering Algorithm and the Fatigue Crack Growth Property.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Prediction of martensite start temperature of steel combined with expert experience and machine learning.Science and technology of advanced materials · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Most failures in steel materials are due to fatigue damage, so it is of great significance to analyze the key features of fatigue strength (FS) in order to improve fatigue performance. This study collected data on the fatigue strength of steel materials and established a predictive model for FS based on machine learning (ML). Three feature-construction strategies were proposed based on the dataset, and compared on four typical ML algorithms. The combination of Strategy Ⅲ (composition, heat-treatment, and atomic features) and the GBT algorithm showed the best performance. Subsequently, input features were selected step by step using methods such as the analysis of variance (ANOVA), embedded method, recursive method, and exhaustive method. The key features affecting FS were found to be TT, mE, APID, and Mo. Based on these key features and Bayesian optimization, an ML model was established, which showed a good performance. Finally, Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) and symbolic regression (SR) are introduced to improve the interpretability of the prediction model. It had been discovered through SHAP analysis that TT and Mo had the most significant impact on FS. Specifically, it was observed that 160 < TT < 500 and Mo > 0.15 was beneficial for increasing the value of FS. SR was used to establish a significant mathematical relationship between these key features and FS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.