ArticleScientific reports2025
Machine learning based optimization of fly ash content for improving geopolymer concrete compressive strength.
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.
- Explainable AI-based optimization framework for sustainable fly ash concrete design.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Hybrid ML and metaheuristic optimization of slag-fly ash-gypsum modified solidified sludge for construction.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a machine learning-based predictive model for carotid plaque in type 2 diabetes.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increasing demand for sustainable construction materials has intensified interest in fly ash-based geopolymer concrete (FA-GC) as an alternative to traditional concrete. This study aims to predict the compressive strength (CS) of FA-GC and optimize its mix design for maximum performance. Several artificial intelligence (AI) models-Tabular Prior-Data Fitted Network (TabPFN), Histogram-based Gradient Boosting (HistGBoost), M5Prime, and Automatic Feature Interaction Learning (AutoInt)-were applied to predict CS, with hyperparameters tuned via Optuna. Data were split into 75% training and 25% testing. TabPFN achieved the highest accuracy during training (R² = 0.981) and testing, with the lowest RMSE (4.02) and sMAPE (8.20%). Uncertainty analysis also showed TabPFN had the lowest CI (0.697) and R-Factor (2.730), indicating superior stability and predictive reliability compared to other models. For mix design optimization, four metaheuristic algorithms-Harris Hawks Optimization (HHO), Grey Wolf Optimization (GWO), Lyrebird Optimization Algorithm (LOA), and Polar Bear Algorithm (PBA)-were employed. HHO yielded the highest CS at 61.56 MPa, outperforming the others. Sensitivity analysis using SHAP values revealed that Al₂O₃ (%) and SiO₂ (%) most strongly enhanced CS, followed by Coarse aggregate (kg/m³). Partial dependence plots confirmed these trends, while Fine aggregate (kg/m³) and Duration (hr) had less influence. This study highlights that combining advanced AI models with metaheuristic optimization, sensitivity analysis, and uncertainty evaluation can significantly improve the prediction, stability, and mix design of FA-GC, paving the way for more efficient and sustainable geopolymer concrete solutions.
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.