ArticlePloS one2025
Predicting the tensile properties of heat treated and non-heat treated LPBFed AlSi10Mg alloy using machine learning regression algorithms.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, the ability of machine learning algorithms to predict tensile properties of both heat-treated and non-heat treated LPBFed AlSi10Mg alloy is investigated. The data was analyzed using various Machine Learning Regression (MLR) models such as Linear Regression (LR), Gaussian Process Regression (GPR), Random Forest Regression (RFR), and Decision Tree (DT). The AlSi10Mg alloys, heat-treated and non heat-treated, had different tensile characteristics. The tensile characteristics were forecasted using trained and evaluated MLR models. Because the performance of various MLR models has been verified by several performance indicators, such as Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), R2 (coefficient of determination), Mean Square Error (MSE), and Mean Absolute Error (MAE). Moreover, scatter plots were made for checking the accuracy of the forecast. The GPR model demonstrated better prediction performance than the other three models, i.e., higher R2 values and lower error values for the heat-treated samples. For predicting the UTS value of non-heat treated samples, the LR model performs very well with R2 of 1.000. In that case, GPR has the better predictive performance for the other tensile features in non-heat treated samples. Summing up, it is obvious that GPR is well capable of predicting tensile properties of AlSi10Mg alloy with high precision. This indicates how important GPR is to additive manufacturing to achieve great quality.
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.