Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40055396›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Probabilistic and deep learning approaches for conductivity-driven nanocomposite classification.

Wejden Gazehi, Rania Loukil, Mongi Besbes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Wejden GazehiHigher institute of Information and Communication Technologies, University of Carthage, Tunis, Tunisia. wejden.gazehi@istic.ucar.tn.
Rania LoukilHigher institute of Information and Communication Technologies, University of Carthage, Tunis, Tunisia.
Mongi BesbesHigher institute of Information and Communication Technologies, University of Carthage, Tunis, Tunisia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To foster greater trust and adoption of machine learning models, particularly neural networks, it is essential to develop approaches that quantify and report epistemic uncertainties alongside random uncertainties, which often affect the accuracy of Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs). Addressing these challenges, this study proposes a hybrid approach integrating Bayesian techniques and deep learning to improve the classification of nanocomposites with a focus on evaluating their conductivity properties. The proposed framework begins with a Bayesian Network (BN) model, which provides probabilistic insights into the conductive behavior of nanocomposites by analyzing the distribution and interaction of their constituent nanoparticles. This probabilistic foundation is complemented by a Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) based on the Transformer architecture, which enhances classification accuracy by capturing sequential dependencies and complex data patterns. The hybrid model combines the probabilistic reasoning capabilities of BNs with the deep learning strengths of RNNs, yielding a more robust and adaptable classification methodology. While this study primarily focuses on methodological advancements, experimental results demonstrate that the hybrid model significantly outperforms individual approaches in terms of key evaluation metrics. This integrated framework thus represents a promising step toward improving the predictive classification of nanocomposite conductivity, offering a balance between probabilistic interpretability and data-driven accuracy.

Indexed as

BNClassificationConductivity propertiesEpistemic uncertaintiesHybrid modelNanoparticulesRNNTransformer

Identifiers

PMID40055396
PMCPMC11889113

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.