ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Investigation of Ensemble Machine Learning Models for Estimating the Ultimate Strain of FRP-Confined Concrete Columns.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurately predicting the ultimate strain of fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP)-confined concrete columns is essential for the widespread application of FRP in strengthening reinforced concrete (RC) columns. This study comprehensively investigates the performance of ensemble machine learning (ML) models in estimating the ultimate strain of FRP-confined concrete (FRP-CC) columns. A dataset of 547 test results of the ultimate strain of FRP-CC columns was collected from the literature for training and testing ML models. The four best single ML models were used to develop ensemble models employing voting, stacking and bagging techniques. The performance of the ensemble models was compared with 10 single ML and 11 empirical strain models. The study results revealed that the single ML models yielded good agreement between the estimated ultimate strain and the test results, with the best single ML models being the K-Star, k-Nearest Neighbor (k-NN) and Decision Table (DT) models. The three best ensemble models, a stacking-based ensemble model comprising K-Star, k-NN and DT models; a stacking-based ensemble model comprising K-Star and k-NN models and a voting-based ensemble model comprising K-Star and k-NN models, achieved higher estimation accuracy than the best single ML model in estimating the strain capacity of FRP-CC columns.
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.