ArticleScientific reports2025
Prediction of the axial compression capacity of ECC-CES columns using adaptive sampling and machine learning techniques.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- An optimized machine learning approach for reliable design of hybrid FRP-steel-concrete tubular columns.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Explainable ML modeling of saltwater intrusion control with underground barriers in coastal sloping aquifers.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Prediction of ultimate strength and strain in FRP wrapped oval shaped concrete columns using machine learning.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
An innovative form of concrete-encased steel (CES) composite columns incorporating engineered cementitious composites (ECC) confinement (ECC-CES) has recently been introduced, displaying superior performance in failure behavior, ductility, and toughness compared to traditional CES columns. This study presents an innovative approach to predicting the axial capacity of ECC-CES columns using adaptive sampling and machine learning (ML) techniques. This study initially introduces a finite element (FE) modeling for ECC-CES columns, integrating material and geometric nonlinearities to accurately capture the inelastic behavior of ECC and steel through appropriate constitutive material laws. The FE model was validated against experimental data and demonstrated strong predictive accuracy. An adaptive sampling process is employed for efficient exploration of the design space to generate a database of 840 FE models. Subsequently, seven ML models are utilized to predict the axial compression capacity based on the FE database. These models were comprehensively evaluated, displaying a superior prediction performance compared to design standards such as EC4 and AISC360. From evolution metrics, the Gaussian process regression, CatBoost (CATB), and LightGBM (LGBM) models emerged as the most accurate and reliable model, with nearly more than 97% of FE samples within the 10% error range. Despite the robust performance of the ML models, their black-box nature limits practical applicability in design contexts. To address this, the study proposes a symbolic regression-derived design that offers interpretable, explicit design equations with competitive performance metrics.
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.