ArticleScientific reports2026
Integrated experimental, machine learning, and life-cycle assessment of fly ash-silica fume based self-compacting geopolymer concrete.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
- Parametric modeling of random polygonal aggregates in concrete and nusssmerical simulation of uniaxial compression using SPH.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Improving the Performance of Low-Carbon Ultra-High-Performance Concrete Through the Incorporation of Recycled Coarse Aggregate.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Mechanical and flexural fatigue behaviour of steel fibre reinforced RAP-based concrete: experimental and machine learning investigation.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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates the performance of self-compacting geopolymer concrete (SCGC) incorporating fly ash (FA) and silica fume (SF) as aluminosilicate precursors, with emphasis on mechanical behaviour, durability, microstructural characteristics, environmental impact, and machine-learning-based performance prediction. Four geopolymer SCC mixes were prepared using SF to substitute FA at 0, 5, 10, and 15% by weight and an OPC-based SCC of the same class of strength was prepared to serve as a benchmark. Fresh properties were assessed as per EFNARC standards after which compressive, split tensile and flexure strength were done at intervals of 28, 90, and 180 days. Sorptivity, rapid chloride permeability (RCPT) and ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) were used to determine durability, whereas scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to measure the microstructural evolution. Findings reveal that SF is a considerable improvement to fresh and hardened geopolymer SCC, the best performance being found at a 10% replacement. The G10 mix recorded the best compressive strengths of 65.3 MPa at 180 days, which was 21% higher than the FA only geopolymer mix, and tensile and flexural strengths were 14-18% higher compared to FA only geopolymer mix. The performance of durability increased significantly, as sorptivity was reduced by about 21% and RCPT was lower than 1000 Coulombs (extremely low permeability) and the largest values of UPV were the highest, which shows the presence of a dense and uniform internal structure. Refined pore structure and well-developed the formation of aluminosilicate gels in the G10 mix had been confirmed by SEM observations. Parameters of mix, fresh properties, and curing age were used as inputs to develop machine learning models (KNN, SVM, Decision Tree, and Random Forest). Among them the predictive accuracy of the Random Forest model (R
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.