ArticleScientific reports2025
Application of machine learning techniques to predict the compressive strength of steel fiber reinforced concrete.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing machine learning and deep learning approaches to predicting the seismic response of slab-column connections.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Mechanics-informed machine learning for predicting mechanical properties of heat-treated multi-metal alloys.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Comparative Study of Machine Learning for Predicting Compressive Strength in Oyster Shell Cementitious Composites.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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The accurate prediction of compressive strength (CS) in steel fiber reinforced concrete (SFRC) remains a critical challenge due to the material's inherent complexity and the nonlinear interactions among its constituents. This study presents a robust machine learning framework to predict the CS of SFRC using a large-scale experimental dataset comprising 600 data points, encompassing key parameters such as fiber characteristics (type, content, length, diameter), water-to-cement (w/c) ratio, aggregate size, curing time, silica fume, and superplasticizer. Six advanced regression-based algorithms, including support vector regression (SVR), Gaussian process regression (GPR), random forest regression (RFR), extreme gradient boosting regression (XGBR), artificial neural networks (ANN), and K-nearest neighbors (KNN), were benchmarked through rigorous model validation processes including hold-out testing, K-fold cross-validation, sensitivity analysis, and external validation with unseen experimental data. Among the tested models, GPR consistently outperformed all others, achieving a maximum coefficient of determination (R²) of 0.93 and the lowest root mean square error (RMSE) of 16.54, thereby demonstrating superior capability in capturing the underlying nonlinear relationships within the data. The generalization performance of each model was examined by systematically altering input variables (fiber type, fiber content, w/c ratio, and aggregate size) while holding other parameters constant. GPR showed remarkable agreement with empirical trends across all validation cases, accurately identifying strength peaks and non-linear behavioral shifts, such as the parabolic relationship between w/c ratio and CS. Models like XGBR, SVR, and RFR provided reasonable estimates but lacked the precision of GPR under complex conditions. In contrast, ANN and KNN demonstrated weaker performance, frequently underpredicting or failing to capture key trends. By leveraging the predictive power and interpretability of advanced machine learning models, this research promotes a paradigm shift in structural engineering workflows.
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.