ArticleScientific reports2025
Predicting the strengths of basalt fiber reinforced concrete mixed with fly ash using AML and Hoffman and Gardener 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Basalt fiber-reinforced concrete (BFRC) mixed with fly ash, combined with advanced machine learning techniques, offers a practical, cost-effective, and less time-consuming alternative to traditional experimental methods. Conventional approaches to evaluating mechanical properties, such as compressive and splitting tensile strengths, typically require sophisticated equipment, meticulous sample preparation, and extended testing periods. These methods demand substantial financial resources, specialized labor, and considerable time for data collection and analysis. The integration of machine learning provides a transformative solution by enabling accurate prediction of concrete properties with minimal experimental data. The methods of data collection from literature and analysis were used and 121 records were collected from experimentally tested basalt fiber reinforced concrete samples measuring the compressive and splitting tensile strengths of the concrete. Eleven (11) critical factors have been considered as constituents of the studied concrete to predict the Fc-Compressive strength (MPa) and Fsp-Splitting tensile strength (MPa), which are the output parameters. The collected records were divided into training set (96 records = 80%) and validation set (25 records = 20%) following the requirements for data partitioning for sustainable machine learning application. Seven (7) selected machine learning techniques are applied in the prediction. Further, performance evaluation indices were used to compare the models' abilities and lastly, the Hoffman and Gardener's technique was used to evaluate the sensitivity of the parameters on the concrete strengths. At the end of the exercise, results were collated. In predicting the compressive strength (Fc), AdaBoost similarly excels, matching XGBoosting's validation performance with R
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.