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

dc.contributor.authorKina, Ceren
dc.contributor.authorTanyildizi, Harun
dc.contributor.authorAl Bakri Abdullah, Mohd Mustafa
dc.contributor.authorRazak, Rafiza Abdul
dc.contributor.authorImjai, Thanongsak
dc.date.accessioned2026-08-12T17:42:32Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.departmentFırat Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractIn 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 fc 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 fc 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 fc estimation of FA/GGBFS-based GPC due to having an R-squared value of 0.88, but kNN had very poor performance.
dc.description.sponsorshipEuropean Commission [689857-PRIGeoC-RISE-2015]; European Commission Research Executive Agency
dc.description.sponsorshipThe authors would like to acknowledge the support received from the European Commission Research Executive Agency via a Marie Sk & lstrok;odowska - Curie Research and Innovation Staff Exchange project (689857-PRIGeoC-RISE-2015).
dc.identifier.doi10.1038/s41598-025-14365-6
dc.identifier.issn2045-2322
dc.identifier.issue1
dc.identifier.pmid40998878
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-105017185093
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-14365-6
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11508/59765
dc.identifier.volume15
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001581181900014
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherNature Portfolio
dc.relation.ispartofScientific Reports
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.snmzKA_WoS_20260511
dc.subjectGeopolymer concrete
dc.subjectGround granulated blast furnace slag
dc.subjectFly ash
dc.subjectMachine learning
dc.subjectCompressive strength
dc.titleComparison of deep LSTM and machine learning models for predicting compressive strength of fly ash/slag-based geopolymer concrete
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar