ArticleScientific reports2025
Experimental assessment with data-driven machine learning-based prediction of compressive strength of waste natural fiber-reinforced sustainable 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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dynamic Ensemble Learning with Transfer Learning for Fatigue Performance Prediction in Ni-Based Superalloys.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Microstructural and mechanical characteristics evaluation of alkali-activated slag concrete and optimize with supervised hybrid machine learning modeling.Scientific reports · 2026Article
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
This study presents a hybrid approach combining experimental evaluation and machine learning modeling for the compressive strength (CS) estimation of natural fiber-reinforced concrete (NFRC), which utilizes jute, coir, and bamboo fibers. A dataset of 444 concrete mix designs was compiled from the literature using seven input variables. Six advanced machine learning (ML) algorithms: Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LGBM), Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB), Random Forest, Gradient Boosting, Decision Tree, and K-Nearest Neighbors were trained and tested with proper hyperparameter optimization. Among these, the LGBM model demonstrated superior accuracy in prediction with an R2 of 0.8637 and the lowest root mean square error of 4.19 MPa on the testing sets. To ensure interpretability and mix design optimization, SHapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) and Partial Dependence Plot (PDP) analyses were incorporated. The dominant predictors of CS were found to be cement content, water, coarse aggregate, and supplementary cementitious materials, while the curing period and fiber content also showed a small but meaningful effect. To further validate the modeling outcomes, experimental investigations were conducted by developing 10 mix combinations with varying percentages of coir fiber, which were then subjected to compressive strength and scanning electron microscopy tests. The outcomes also validated that the incorporation of natural fiber up to 0.75% gradually increased the CS to a maximum of 41.3% after 28 days of curing, while further addition reduced performance. The dual-approach-based (ML and experimental) outcomes could assist in the sustainable advancement of the infrastructure industry as a potential solution for cost-effective, large-scale production of NFRC.
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.