Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 856

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Machine learning-based compressive strength prediction for concrete: An adaptive boosting approach

Feng, De-Cheng, Liu, Zhen-Tao, Wang, Xiao-Dan, Chen, Yin, Chang, Jia-Qi, Wei, Dong-Fang, Jiang, Zhong-Ming·2020·Construction and Building Materials

Abstract

Abstract In this paper, an intelligent approach based on the machine learning technique is proposed for predicting the compressive strength of concrete. This approach employs the adaptive boosting algorithm to construct a strong learner by integrating several weak learners, which can find the mapping between the input data and output data. The weak learner whose predicting error is small will have a larger weight in the entire system, thus the overall accuracy of the strong learner will be enhanced. A total of 1030 sets of concrete compressive strength tests is collected to train and test the learners, in which the concrete mixture components (e.g., coarse/fine aggregates, cement, water, additive, etc.) and the curing time are set as the input data while the compressive strength value is set as the output data. The proposed approach is validated through a 10-fold cross validation method, and reaches an average accuracy of over 95% in sense of determination coefficient. In addition, a new dataset of 103 samples for concrete compressive strength is also adopted to demonstrate the generalization power of the proposed mode. The proposed approach is also compared to some other individual machine learning techniques that are already applied in this field, e.g., artificial neural network (ANN) and support vector machine (SVM), and shows superior advantages over these methods. Finally, the influence of some key factors in the adaptive boosting approach is also investigated, e.g., the amount of training data, the choice of weak learner, and the influence of the sensitivity and number of the input parameters. It is shown that using 80% of the total data for training can obtain acceptable prediction results and decision tree is the best choice for the weak learner in the boosting framework. Also, the importances of different input variables are obtained based on the sensitivity analysis results.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117000

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 856

Metadata

Authors
Feng, D.-C., Liu, Z.-T., Wang, X.-D., Chen, Y., Chang, J.-Q., Wei, D.-F., & Jiang, Z.-M.
Venue
Construction and Building Materials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-01
Volume
230
Pages
117000
ISSN
0950-0618 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2976353133
Cited by
856
References
4
FWCI
34.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Machine learning-based compressive strength prediction for concrete: An adaptive boosting approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117000
The paper
Feng, D.-C., Liu, Z.-T., Wang, X.-D., Chen, Y., Chang, J.-Q., Wei, D.-F., & Jiang, Z.-M. (2020). Machine learning-based compressive strength prediction for concrete: An adaptive boosting approach. Construction and Building Materials. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117000

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.