It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
This study conducts an extensive comparative analysis of computational intelligence approaches aimed at predicting the compressive strength (CS) of concrete, utilizing two non-destructive testing (NDT) methods: the rebound hammer (RH) and the ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) test. In the ensemble learning approach, the six most popular algorithms (Adaboost, CatBoost, gradient boosting tree (GBT), random forest (RF), stacking, and extreme gradient boosting (XGB)) have been used to develop the prediction models of CS of concrete based on NDT. The ML models have been developed using a total of 721 samples, of which 111 were cast in the laboratory, 134 were obtained from in-situ testing, and the other samples were gathered from the literature. Among the three categories of analytical models—RH models, UPV models, and combined RH and UPV models; seven, ten, and thirteen models have been used respectively. AdaBoost, CatBoost, GBT, RF, Stacking, and XGB models have been used to improve the accuracy and dependability of the analytical models. The RH-M5, UPV-M6, and C-M6 (combined UPV and RH model) models were found with highest performance level amongst all the analytical models. The MAPE value of XGB was observed to be 84.37%, 83.24%, 77.33%, 59.46%, and 81.08% lower than AdaBoost, CatBoost, GBT, RF, and stacking, respectively. The performance of XGB model has been found best than other soft computing techniques and existing traditional predictive models.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 AcSIR-Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research, Ghaziabad, India (GRID:grid.469887.c) (ISNI:0000 0004 7744 2771); CSIR-Central Building Research Institute, Structural Engineering Department, Roorkee, India (GRID:grid.464525.4) (ISNI:0000 0001 2151 2433)
2 CSIR-Central Building Research Institute, Structural Engineering Department, Roorkee, India (GRID:grid.464525.4) (ISNI:0000 0001 2151 2433)
3 J. J. Strossmayer University of Osijek, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture Osijek, Osijek, Croatia (GRID:grid.412680.9) (ISNI:0000 0001 1015 399X); Transilvania University of Brașov, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Brașov, Romania (GRID:grid.5120.6) (ISNI:0000 0001 2159 8361)
4 Transilvania University of Brașov, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Brașov, Romania (GRID:grid.5120.6) (ISNI:0000 0001 2159 8361)
5 AcSIR-Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research, Ghaziabad, India (GRID:grid.469887.c) (ISNI:0000 0004 7744 2771)