Reliability-aware compressive-strength prediction and inverse mix design of fly ash–GGBFS geopolymer concrete via conformal prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No abstract is available for this record. The assistant can identify its topic from the title, but cannot infer the study’s results.
Source: Not provided · Quality: missing
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Concrete and Cement Materials Research · Innovative concrete reinforcement materials · Concrete Properties and Behavior
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (62)
Show source-provided references
1. Shan Y, Liu Y, Tao S, Guan D (2023) Projecting future carbon emissions from cement production in developing countries. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-43660-x10.1038/s41467-023-43660-x ↗
2. McLellan BC, Williams RP, Lay J, Van Riessen A, Corder GD (2011) Costs and carbon emissions for geopolymer pastes in comparison to ordinary portland cement. J Clean Prod 19:1080–1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.02.01010.1016/j.jclepro.2011.02.010 ↗
3. Habert G, D’Espinose De Lacaillerie JB, Roussel N (2011) An environmental evaluation of geopolymer based concrete production: reviewing current research trends. J Clean Prod 19:1229–1238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.03.01210.1016/j.jclepro.2011.03.012 ↗
4. Almutairi AL, Tayeh BA, Adesina A, Isleem HF, Zeyad AM (2021) Potential applications of geopolymer concrete in construction: a review. Case Stud Constr Mater 15:e00733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2021.e0073310.1016/j.cscm.2021.e00733 ↗
5. Duxson P, Fernández-Jiménez A, Provis JL, Lukey GC, Palomo A, van Deventer JSJ (2007) Geopolymer technology: the current state of the art. J Mater Sci 42:2917–2933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-006-0637-z10.1007/s10853-006-0637-z ↗
6. Rathnayaka M, Karunasinghe D, Gunasekara C, Wijesundara K, Lokuge W, Law DW (2024) Machine learning approaches to predict compressive strength of fly ash-based geopolymer concrete: A comprehensive review. Constr Build Mater 419:135519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.13551910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.135519 ↗
7. Agarwal AK, Wadhwa S, Chandra S (1994) XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System. J Assoc Physicians India 42:665
8. Ke G, Meng Q, Finley T, Wang T, Chen W, Ma W, Ye Q, Liu TY (2017) LightGBM: A highly efficient gradient boosting decision tree. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 2017-Decem 3147–3155
9. Ji H, Lyu Y, Ying W, Liu JC, Ye H (2024) Machine learning guided iterative mix design of geopolymer concrete. J Build Eng 91:109710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.10971010.1016/j.jobe.2024.109710 ↗
10. Cihan MT, Cihan P (2025) Bayesian-Optimized Ensemble Models for Geopolymer Concrete Compressive Strength Prediction with Interpretability Analysis. Buildings 15:1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings1520366710.3390/buildings15203667 ↗
11. Shen J, Li Y, Lin H, Li H, Lv J, Feng S, Ci J (2022) Prediction of compressive strength of alkali-activated construction demolition waste geopolymers using ensemble machine learning. Constr Build Mater 360:129600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.12960010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.129600 ↗
12. Eftekhar Afzali SA, Shayanfar MA, Ghanooni-Bagha M, Golafshani E, Ngo T (2024) The use of machine learning techniques to investigate the properties of metakaolin-based geopolymer concrete. J Clean Prod 446:141305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.14130510.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141305 ↗
13. Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45:5–32. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:101093340432410.1023/A:1010933404324 ↗
14. Parhi SK, Dwibedy S, Panigrahi SK (2024) AI-driven critical parameter optimization of sustainable self-compacting geopolymer concrete. J Build Eng 86:108923. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2024.10892310.1016/j.jobe.2024.108923 ↗
15. Ghosh A, Ransinchung GD (2022) Application of machine learning algorithm to assess the efficacy of varying industrial wastes and curing methods on strength development of geopolymer concrete. Constr Build Mater 341:127828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.12782810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127828 ↗
16. M K, S SN, S A (2024) Desirability analysis of sustainable concrete containing fly ash cenosphere as fine aggregate replacement using RSM approach. J Build Pathol Rehabil 9:83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41024-024-00441-310.1007/s41024-024-00441-3 ↗
17. Khosravi A, Nahavandi S, Creighton D, Atiya AF (2011) Comprehensive review of neural network-based prediction intervals and new advances. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 22:1341–1356. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNN.2011.216211010.1109/TNN.2011.2162110 ↗
18. Cihan MT, Cihan P (2025) Bayesian-Optimized Ensemble Models for Geopolymer Concrete Compressive Strength Prediction with Interpretability Analysis. Buildings 15:1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings1520366710.3390/buildings15203667 ↗
19. Lundberg SM, Lee SI, Lundberg SM, Lee SI (2017) A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. pp. 4765–4774 NIPS-2017 Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 (2017) 4765–4774
20. Gomaa E, Han T, ElGawady M, Huang J, Kumar A (2021) Machine learning to predict properties of fresh and hardened alkali-activated concrete. Cem Concr Compos 115:103863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2020.10386310.1016/j.cemconcomp.2020.103863 ↗
21. Wang Y, Iqtidar A, Amin MN, Nazar S, Hassan AM, Ali M (2024) Predictive modelling of compressive strength of fly ash and ground granulated blast furnace slag based geopolymer concrete using machine learning techniques. Case Stud Constr Mater 20:e03130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e0313010.1016/j.cscm.2024.e03130 ↗
22. Liu L, Du YT, Amin MN, Nazar S, Khan K, Qadir MT (2024) Explicable AI-based modeling for the compressive strength of metakaolin-derived geopolymers. Case Stud Constr Mater 21:e03849. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e0384910.1016/j.cscm.2024.e03849 ↗
23. Vovk V, Gammerman A, Shafer G (2005) Algorithmic learning in a random world. https://doi.org/10.1007/b10671510.1007/b106715 ↗
24. Angelopoulos AN, Bates S (2023) Conformal Prediction: A Gentle Introduction, Foundations and Trends. Mach Learn 16:494–591. https://doi.org/10.1561/220000010110.1561/2200000101 ↗
25. Tamuly P, Nava V (2025) Machine learning based conformal predictors for uncertainty-aware compressive strength estimation of concrete. Constr Build Mater 487:141844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.14184410.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.141844 ↗
26. Hajibabaee P, Behnood A, Ngo T, Mohammadi E, Golafshani (2025) Carbonation depth assessment of recycled aggregate concrete: An application of conformal prediction intervals. Expert Syst Appl 268:126231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2024.12623110.1016/j.eswa.2024.126231 ↗
27. Yu Z, Yu B, Li B (2026) Hybrid conformal prediction framework for reliable seismic failure mode identification in reinforced concrete columns. Eng Struct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2025.12161710.1016/j.engstruct.2025.121617 ↗
28. Zhong C, Qian G, Gong X, Yu H, Jun C, Zhong Y, Ma J, Gu H (2025) Study on mesostructure evolution behavior of asphalt mixture compaction process based on deep learning image processing. Constr Build Mater 458:139650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.13965010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.139650 ↗
29. Lundberg SM, Lee SI, Lundberg SM, Lee SI (2017) A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. pp. 4765–4774 NIPS-2017 Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 (2017) 4765–4774. ttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2019.12.012%0Ahttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.11.01610.1016/j.ophtha.2018.11.016 ↗
30. Morris MD (1991) Factorial Sampling Plans for Preliminary Computational Experiments. Technometrics 33:161–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1991.1048480410.1080/00401706.1991.10484804 ↗
31. Pianosi F, Wagener T (2015) A simple and efficient method for global sensitivity analysis based oncumulative distribution functions. Environ Model Softw 67:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.01.00410.1016/j.envsoft.2015.01.004 ↗
32. Gomaa E, Han T, ElGawady M, Huang J, Kumar A (2021) Machine learning to predict properties of fresh and hardened alkali-activated concrete. Cem Concr Compos 115:103863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2020.10386310.1016/j.cemconcomp.2020.103863 ↗
33. Provis JL (2018) Alkali-activated materials. Cem Concr Res 114:40–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2017.02.00910.1016/j.cemconres.2017.02.009 ↗
34. Mahmoodi O, Siad H, Lachemi M, Şahmaran M (2025) Multi-objective optimization and predictive analytics of strength and embodied impacts of CDW-based geopolymers using various machine learning approaches. Neural Comput Appl 37:12791–12823. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-025-11191-910.1007/s00521-025-11191-9 ↗
35. Jiang P, Zhao D, Jin C, Ye S, Luan C, Tufail RF (2024) Compressive strength prediction and low-carbon optimization of fly ash geopolymer concrete based on big data and ensemble learning. PLoS One. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.031042210.1371/journal.pone.0310422 ↗
36. Li Y, Shen J, Lin H, Li Y (2023) Optimization design for alkali-activated slag-fly ash geopolymer concrete based on artificial intelligence considering compressive strength, cost, and carbon emission. J Build Eng 75:106929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2023.10692910.1016/j.jobe.2023.106929 ↗
37. Abdennaji TS, Ksibi A, Flah A, Batra V, Tipu RK (2026) GreenMix-pareto: uncertainty-aware, physics-guided multi-objective optimization of low-carbon concrete mix designs. Ain Shams Eng J 17:104009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2026.10400910.1016/j.asej.2026.104009 ↗
38. Wang H, Zhang Y, Liu J, Zhao Y, He R, Xu S, Wang W, Lyu X (2026) Data-driven reliability-based optimization framework for concrete-encased steel composite columns toward cost-effective design: Methodology and interactive tool. Adv Struct Eng. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369433226144752410.1177/13694332261447524 ↗
39. Fan Y, Liu J, Tao Y, Sun Y, Li Z, Li J, Wang K, Ma J, Fan D, Xu L (2026) A transfer-learning framework to alleviate data scarcity in cross-slope wind pressure modeling. Results Eng 29:109376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2026.10937610.1016/j.rineng.2026.109376 ↗
40. Akiba T, Sano S, Yanase T, Ohta T, Koyama M (2019) Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Framework, in: Proceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery \& Data Mining, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp. 2623–2631. https://doi.org/10.1145/3292500.333070110.1145/3292500.3330701 ↗
41. Papadopoulos H, Proedrou K, Vovk V, Gammerman A (2002) In: Elomaa T, Mannila H, Toivonen H (eds) Inductive Confidence Machines for Regression BT - Machine Learning: ECML 2002. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 345–35610.1007/3-540-36755-1_29 ↗
42. Barber RF, Candès EJ, Ramdas A, Tibshirani RJ (2021) Predictive inference with the jackknife+. Ann Stat 49:486–507. https://doi.org/10.1214/20-AOS196510.1214/20-AOS1965 ↗
43. Vovk V (2012) Conditional validity of inductive conformal predictors, in: Asian Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, pp. 475–490
44. Romano Y, Patterson E, Candes E (2019) Conformalized quantile regression. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 32
45. Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan T (2002) A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 6:182–197. https://doi.org/10.1109/4235.99601710.1109/4235.996017 ↗
46. Rahmati Sadegh M, Mahdikhani GPC, Compressive Strength Dataset M (2023) Data https://doi.org/https://https://doi.org/10.17632/ksvb32cvw6.110.17632/ksvb32cvw6.1 ↗
47. Li Z, Yoon J, Zhang R, Rajabipour F, Srubar WV, Dabo I, Radlińska A (2022) Machine learning in concrete science: applications, challenges, and best practices. NPJ Comput Mater 8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-022-00810-x10.1038/s41524-022-00810-x ↗
48. Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System, in: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp. 785–794. https://doi.org/10.1145/2939672.293978510.1145/2939672.2939785 ↗
49. Kong X, Fan Y, Liu J, Xi M, Zhang Y, Yu Y (2026) Lightweight Kolmogorov-Arnold Network with dual-objective optimization for axial capacity prediction of square coal gangue concrete-filled steel tube stub columns based on finite element simulation. Eng Appl Artif Intell 176:114843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2026.11484310.1016/j.engappai.2026.114843 ↗
50. Zhang Y, Wang Z, Liu J, Li Y, Huang Z, Yu X (2026) A metaheuristic-driven categorical boosting framework with interpretability for high-precision prediction of mechanical properties in corroded reinforced concrete beams. Eng Appl Artif Intell 163:112804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2025.11280410.1016/j.engappai.2025.112804 ↗
51. Shafer G, Vovk V (2008) A tutorial on conformal prediction. J Mach Learn Res 9:371–421
52. Luo B, Su Y, Ding X, Chen Y, Liu C (2025) Modulation of initial CaO/Al2O3 and SiO2/Al2O3 ratios on the properties of slag/fly ash-based geopolymer stabilized clay: Synergistic effects and stabilization mechanism. Mater Today Commun 47:113295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2025.11329510.1016/j.mtcomm.2025.113295 ↗
53. Toccaceli P (2022) Introduction to conformal predictors. Pattern Recognit 124:108507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2021.10850710.1016/j.patcog.2021.108507 ↗
54. Saltelli A, Ratto M, Global Sensitivity Analysis. The Primer.John WileySons, Ltd, Chichester UK (2008) http://doi.wiley.com/https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470725184.%0ASobol’10.1002/9780470725184.%0ASobol’ ↗
55. Bypour M, Yekrangnia M, Kioumarsi M (2025) Machine learning-driven optimization for predicting compressive strength in fly ash geopolymer concrete. Clean Eng Technol 25:100899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2025.10089910.1016/j.clet.2025.100899 ↗
56. Yu Z, Yu B, Li B (2026) Hybrid conformal prediction framework for reliable seismic failure mode identification in reinforced concrete columns. Eng Struct. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2025.12161710.1016/j.engstruct.2025.121617 ↗
57. Yu X, Li J, Liu J, Li Y, Chen A, Zhang Y, Chang H (2026) Cross-scenario impact damage prediction in concrete using peridynamics-trained Kolmogorov–Arnold networks with transfer learning. Int J Impact Eng 215:105764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2026.10576410.1016/j.ijimpeng.2026.105764 ↗
58. Huang Y, Huo Z, Ma G, Zhang L, Wang F, Zhang J (2023) Multi-objective optimization of fly ash-slag based geopolymer considering strength, cost and CO2 emission: a new framework based on tree-based ensemble models and NSGA-II. J Build Eng 68:106070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2023.10607010.1016/j.jobe.2023.106070 ↗
59. Abdennaji TS, Ksibi A, Flah A, Batra V, Tipu RK (2026) GreenMix-pareto: uncertainty-aware, physics-guided multi-objective optimization of low-carbon concrete mix designs. Ain Shams Eng J 17:104009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2026.10400910.1016/j.asej.2026.104009 ↗
60. Wang C, Chu W, Liu J, Zhao Y, Liu F, Zhang Y, Rashidi M, Yu Y (2026) Unified axial capacity prediction of FRP-confined concrete across natural and recycled aggregate systems using a Kolmogorov-Arnold Networks based cross-domain transfer-learning framework. Structures 90:112255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2026.11225510.1016/j.istruc.2026.112255 ↗
61. Liu J, Wang S, Chen K, Wang K, Fan Y, Wang Q (2026) Synthetic data augmentation and Integrated prediction framework for low-carbon recycled concrete: Leveraging CTGAN and multiple ML models stacking. J Clean Prod 543:147599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2026.14759910.1016/j.jclepro.2026.147599 ↗
62. Liu J, Kong X, Wang S, Peng L, Wang Q, Zhang Y, Bao X (2026) Multi-objective material-structure integrated optimization of recycled aggregate CFST stub columns for mechanical performance, reliability, and sustainability. Expert Syst Appl 324:132597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2026.13259710.1016/j.eswa.2026.132597 ↗