ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Physics-Informed Neural Networks for Predicting Hydration Degree in Cementitious Systems Blended with Slag and Fly Ash.
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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurately predicting the degree of hydration in cement systems blended with slag and fly ash is difficult when experimental data are limited. Empirical kinetic models typically need recalibration for each specific blend, while purely data-driven approaches often fail to maintain physical consistency. In this work, we present a physics-informed neural network for predicting isothermal hydration by incorporating the Avrami-Erofeev-Arrhenius ordinary differential equation into the training loss and using a composition-focused sub-network to relate blend proportions to blend-specific kinetic parameters. The model was trained and tested on 29,379 calorimetry data points from 77 multi-component cement systems gathered from two open-access datasets. For previously unseen test systems, it reached an R2 of 0.9864 and a symmetric mean absolute percentage error (sMAPE) of 25.3%. Its overall sMAPE was lower than that of a neural network with the same architecture but without physics-based constraints (34.9%); stage-resolved analysis showed that the largest difference occurred during early hydration. Across eight random seeds, the physics constraint did not confer a data-efficiency or training-stability advantage over the same-architecture network. The distinguishing features of the PINN are instead its explicit ODE and monotonicity regularization and its composition-conditioned effective parameters. Although random forest regression produced lower pointwise error, it failed to maintain physically consistent hydration-rate behavior. Overall, the framework provides a composition-conditioned surrogate that incorporates kinetic regularization within the composition range investigated.
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.