ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Predicting the Compressive Strength of Sustainable Portland Cement-Fly Ash Mortar Using Explainable Boosting Machine Learning Techniques.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Durability and damage evolution of cement-fly ash stabilized aeolian sand gravel under high-temperature curing and freeze-thaw cycles.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Current Status and Trends of the Cement Admixtures.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Deterioration Effects and Microscopic Mechanisms of Solidified/Stabilized Red Mud by CGFPA Binders Under Freeze-Thaw Cycles.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Prediction of Bandgap in Lithium-Ion Battery Materials Based on Explainable Boosting Machine Learning Techniques.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Unconfined compressive strength (UCS) is a critical property for assessing the engineering performances of sustainable materials, such as cement-fly ash mortar (CFAM), in the design of construction engineering projects. The experimental determination of UCS is time-consuming and expensive. Therefore, the present study aims to model the UCS of CFAM with boosting machine learning methods. First, an extensive database consisting of 395 experimental data points derived from the literature was developed. Then, three typical boosting machine learning models were employed to model the UCS based on the database, including gradient boosting regressor (GBR), light gradient boosting machine (LGBM), and Ada-Boost regressor (ABR). Additionally, the importance of different input parameters was quantitatively analyzed using the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) approach. Finally, the best boosting machine learning model's prediction accuracy was compared to ten other commonly used machine learning models. The results indicate that the GBR model outperformed the LGBM and ABR models in predicting the UCS of the CFAM. The GBR model demonstrated significant accuracy, with no significant difference between the measured and predicted UCS values. The SHAP interpretations revealed that the curing time (T) was the most critical feature influencing the UCS values. At the same time, the chemical composition of the fly ash, particularly Al
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.