ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
A Comprehensive Review of Numerical and Machine Learning Approaches for Predicting Concrete Properties: From Fresh to Long-Term.
Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The growing demand for innovation and the use of diverse materials in cementitious composites necessitate predictive models that account for material variability. Numerical, code-based, and machine learning (ML) models have been developed to predict various concrete properties. However, their accuracy is significantly influenced by factors such as mix design, composition, intrinsic properties, and external conditions. Developing robust models that integrate these variables is essential for improving predictive accuracy and optimizing material performance. This paper presents a comprehensive review of numerical, code-based, and ML modelling techniques for predicting both fresh and long-term concrete properties. Since both numerical and ML models rely on experimental data-either to determine coefficients in numerical approaches or to train ML models-data gathering, preprocessing, and handling are crucial for model performance. Previous studies indicated that data variability significantly impacts accuracy, emphasizing the importance of effective preprocessing. While larger datasets generally improve reliability, some models achieve high accuracy even with very limited data. This review not only demonstrates the superior performance of ML models over traditional numerical approaches but also highlights the relative effectiveness of different ML algorithms based on reported accuracy metrics. ML-based approaches, including both ensemble and non-ensemble models, have exhibited strong predictive capabilities across a wide range of concrete property categories. In contrast, traditional numerical models often yield lower accuracy, although modified versions that incorporate additional parameters have shown improved performance. Furthermore, the integration of optimization algorithms and interpretability tools enhances both predictive reliability and model transparency-critical aspects that are often overlooked.
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.