ArticleScientific reports2026
A hybrid GPR framework with feature selection for enhanced prediction and explainability of subgrade soil strength.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In order to overcome the drawbacks of the labour-intensive California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test for pavement design, a Hybrid Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) model for predicting subgrade soil strength was developed. The model is optimised using the Bayesian Tree Parzen Estimator and uses Recursive Feature Elimination for feature selection. Several machine learning techniques, such as Multi-Linear Regression (MLR), Multi-Layer Perceptron of Artificial Neural Networks (MLPNN), and Random Forest (RF), were used in the first stage of evaluation on a regional geotechnical database with over 1000 samples. In the second stage, performant hybrid models based on Dense Neural Network and tree-based ensembles models were used. All of the machine learning models utilised in this study were outperformed by the Hybrid GPR model, According to the trial results, the hybrid GPR model outperformed all the machine learning models used in this study. It achieved the highest accuracy with the mean squared error (MSE), mean absolute error (MAE), mean absolute percentage error (MAPE), and the determination coefficient (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.