Comparison of deep LSTM and machine learning models for predicting compressive strength of fly ash/slag-based geopolymer concrete

In the production of geopolymer concrete (GPC), using ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS) and fly ash (FA) can reduce the carbon dioxide footprint and decrease the amount of waste materials released into the environment. Finding the compressive strength (fc) of GPC through experiments is time-consuming and costly; thus, applying artificial intelligence models can expedite this process. This study aims to compare the performance of deep Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) and the machine learning (ML)-based algorithms in predicting the f<sub>c</sub> of FA/GGBFS-based GPC. Artificial neural networks (ANN), Bootstrap aggregating (Bagging), Least-Squares Boosting (LSBoost) and K-Nearest-Neighbours (kNN) were used for ML-based algorithms. For this goal, data were collected from the previous studies in the literature. The selected input characteristic variables included the chemical composition and quantities of FA and GGBFS, fine and coarse aggregates, sodium hydroxide molarity, alkaline activators, superplasticizer dosage, and curing temperature. Based on sensitivity analysis, the most influential parameter in the f<sub>c</sub> of FA/GGBFS-based GPC was the fine aggregate content. Performance metrics, error percentage distribution, and Taylor diagrams indicate that the highest accuracy was achieved by LSTM, which had an R-squared value of 0.98. This was followed by ANN, LSBoost, Bagging, and kNN. Notably, LSBoost and ANN also demonstrated strong performance, with R-squared values of 0.94 and 0.95, respectively. Also, Bagging showed acceptable ability for f<sub>c</sub> estimation of FA/GGBFS-based GPC due to having an R-squared value of 0.88, but kNN had very poor performance.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-09-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-14365-6
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Concrete and Cement Materials Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.91
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of deep LSTM and machine learning models for predicting compressive strength of fly ash/slag-based geopolymer concrete

Rafiza Abd Razak, Harun Tanyıldızı, Thanongsak Imjai, Mohd Mustafa Al Bakri Abdullah et al.
2 citations
Scientific Reports
Concrete and Cement Materials Research
1.91
article

Comparison of deep LSTM and machine learning models for predicting compressive strength of fly ash/slag-based geopolymer concrete

Rafiza Abd Razak, Harun Tanyıldızı, Thanongsak Imjai, Mohd Mustafa Al Bakri Abdullah, Ceren Kına
article en
2 citations

Abstract

In the production of geopolymer concrete (GPC), using ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS) and fly ash (FA) can reduce the carbon dioxide footprint and decrease the amount of waste materials released into the environment. Finding the compressive strength (fc) of GPC through experiments is time-consuming and costly; thus, applying artificial intelligence models can expedite this process. This study aims to compare the performance of deep Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) and the machine learning (ML)-based algorithms in predicting the f<sub>c</sub> of FA/GGBFS-based GPC. Artificial neural networks (ANN), Bootstrap aggregating (Bagging), Least-Squares Boosting (LSBoost) and K-Nearest-Neighbours (kNN) were used for ML-based algorithms. For this goal, data were collected from the previous studies in the literature. The selected input characteristic variables included the chemical composition and quantities of FA and GGBFS, fine and coarse aggregates, sodium hydroxide molarity, alkaline activators, superplasticizer dosage, and curing temperature. Based on sensitivity analysis, the most influential parameter in the f<sub>c</sub> of FA/GGBFS-based GPC was the fine aggregate content. Performance metrics, error percentage distribution, and Taylor diagrams indicate that the highest accuracy was achieved by LSTM, which had an R-squared value of 0.98. This was followed by ANN, LSBoost, Bagging, and kNN. Notably, LSBoost and ANN also demonstrated strong performance, with R-squared values of 0.94 and 0.95, respectively. Also, Bagging showed acceptable ability for f<sub>c</sub> estimation of FA/GGBFS-based GPC due to having an R-squared value of 0.88, but kNN had very poor performance.

Scientific ReportsVol. 15(1)
Fırat University (TR), Malatya Turgut Özal Üniversitesi (TR), Universiti Malaysia Perlis (MY), Turgut Özal University (TR), Walailak University (TH)
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Concrete and Cement Materials Research
1.91
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.