ArticlePolymers2025
Machine Learning-Driven Prediction of Composite Materials Properties Based on Experimental Testing Data.
Article in Polymers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review of Progress of AI in Biomimetics: From Biological Patterns to Closed-Loop Discovery.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Graphene/CNT Nanocomposites: Processing, Properties, and Applications.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Development of an Artificial Neural Network-Based Tool for Predicting Failures in Composite Laminate Structures.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Optimization of Hierarchical Groove-Perforation Structures in PET Foam Cores for Wind Turbine Blade Applications.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Epoxy Adhesive Materials as Protective Coatings: Strength Property Analysis Using Machine Learning Algorithms.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The growing demand for high-performance and cost-effective composite materials necessitates advanced computational approaches for optimizing their composition and properties. This study aimed at the application of machine learning for the prediction and optimization of the functional properties of composites based on a thermoplastic matrix with various fillers (two types of fibrous, four types of dispersed, and two types of nano-dispersed fillers). The experimental methods involved material production through powder metallurgy, further microstructural analysis, and mechanical and tribological testing. The microstructural analysis revealed distinct structural modifications and interfacial interactions influencing their functional properties. The key findings indicate that optimal filler selection can significantly enhance wear resistance while maintaining adequate mechanical strength. Carbon fibers at 20 wt. % significantly improved wear resistance (by 17-25 times) while reducing tensile strength and elongation. Basalt fibers at 10 wt. % provided an effective balance between reinforcement and wear resistance (by 11-16 times). Kaolin at 2 wt. % greatly enhanced wear resistance (by 45-57 times) with moderate strength reduction. Coke at 20 wt. % maximized wear resistance (by 9-15 times) while maintaining acceptable mechanical properties. Graphite at 10 wt. % ensured a balance between strength and wear, as higher concentrations drastically decreased mechanical properties. Sodium chloride at 5 wt. % offered moderate wear resistance improvement (by 3-4 times) with minimal impact on strength. Titanium dioxide at 3 wt. % enhanced wear resistance (by 11-12.5 times) while slightly reducing tensile strength. Ultra-dispersed PTFE at 1 wt. % optimized both strength and wear properties. The work analyzed in detail the effect of PTFE content and filler content on composite properties based on machine learning-driven prediction. Regression models demonstrated high R-squared values (0.74 for density, 0.67 for tensile strength, 0.80 for relative elongation, and 0.79 for wear intensity), explaining up to 80% of the variability in composite properties. Despite its efficiency, the limitations include potential multicollinearity, a lack of consideration of external factors, and the need for further validation under real-world conditions. Thus, the machine learning approach reduces the need for extensive experimental testing, minimizing material waste and production costs, contributing to SDG 9. This study highlights the potential use of machine learning in polymer composite design, offering a data-driven framework for the rational choice of fillers, thereby contributing to sustainable industrial practices.
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.