ArticleHeliyon2024
A robust LightGBM model for concrete tensile strength forecast to aid in resilience-based structure strategies.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Compressive strength prediction of coconut fiber reinforced concrete using PSO optimized explainable machine learning.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Machine learning models with SHAP for performance prediction of eco-friendly fiber reinforced mortars with glass waste.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A comparative machine and deep learning approach for predicting ultimate bearing capacity of shallow foundations in cohesionless soil.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Exploring New Azobenzene Type Photoswitches by Machine Learning with Lowest Possible Fluorescence Excitons with Ease of Synthesis.Journal of fluorescence · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence can extract important features for diagnosing axillary lymph node metastasis in early breast cancer using contrast-enhanced ultrasonography.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The tensile strength (TS) of concrete is a factor in the design of civil engineering structures. Traditional methods for assessing concrete TS have notable limitations, leading to the emergence of non-destructive testing (NDT) as an innovative alternative. This study introduces a novel, optimized approach for accurate, non-destructive TS prediction by integrating Gradio, Bayesian optimization (BO), and Shapley additive explanations (SHAP). The input parameters for the model were ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) and electrical resistivity (ER). Using a comprehensive dataset of 3460 datapoints, a light gradient-boosting machine (LightGBM) model was developed. Through extensive hyperparameter tuning facilitated by BO, the model achieved a robust prediction accuracy of approximately 98 %. The novel application of SHAP in this study provided deep insights into model behavior, confirming UPV as the most critical variable for TS prediction. The deployment of the model using Gradio further enhances its accessibility and usability. This combined methodology not only advances the application of machine learning (ML) in civil engineering but also offers a powerful, globally applicable tool for accurately forecasting concrete TS. This supports resilience-based management strategies, essential for the sustainable development of infrastructure. The study's novel integration of BO for optimization and SHAP for interpretability marks a significant step forward in the precise prediction of TS, offering practical benefits for both researchers and industry professionals.
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.