A Comparative Assessment of Regularized Regression Techniques for Modeling the Mechanical Properties of Rubberized Concrete

B. Yasin, Faroq Maraqa, E. Al-Sahawneh, Jamal Al Adwan, Yazan Alzubi
{"title":"A Comparative Assessment of Regularized Regression Techniques for Modeling the Mechanical Properties of Rubberized Concrete","authors":"B. Yasin, Faroq Maraqa, E. Al-Sahawneh, Jamal Al Adwan, Yazan Alzubi","doi":"10.2174/18741495-v16-e2208170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Over the last few decades, many researchers have investigated the properties and behavior of concrete mixtures incorporating rubber-based solid wastes as a partial substitution of natural aggregates. Within this context, they have conducted experimental studies and developed numerical models that simulate the nature of rubberized concrete. Some of these mathematical simulations were intended to provide a rapid mixture of proportioning approaches and property estimation methods. Currently, it is believed that regression analysis provides an effective tool to simply construct a mathematical expression that models a set of data. For that reason, multiple linear regression was extensively utilized in predicting rubberized concrete properties in the literature. However, the performances of regularized regression analysis approaches were not evaluated even though they provide better alternatives to traditional regression methods in terms of controlling the overfitting issue.\n \n \n \n This study aims to assess the performance of Ridge, Lasso, and elastic net regression models in estimating the compressive and tensile strengths, and modulus of elasticity of rubberized concrete. Additionally, it intends to benchmark their capabilities against the traditional multiple linear regression method.\n \n \n \n Multiple linear regression, Ridge regression, Lasso regression, ElasticNet regression, Bayesian ridge regression, Stochastic gradient descent, Huber regression, and Quantile regression methods were used in the study.\n \n \n \n \n In general, the research findings illustrated the superior performance of regression assessment in modeling the mechanical properties of rubberized concrete.\n \n \n \n Indeed rubberized concrete mechanical properties can be better modeled using regularized regression techniques, such as ElasticNet-based SGD compared to traditional methods, such as MLR.\n","PeriodicalId":350575,"journal":{"name":"The Open Civil Engineering Journal","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Open Civil Engineering Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/18741495-v16-e2208170","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Over the last few decades, many researchers have investigated the properties and behavior of concrete mixtures incorporating rubber-based solid wastes as a partial substitution of natural aggregates. Within this context, they have conducted experimental studies and developed numerical models that simulate the nature of rubberized concrete. Some of these mathematical simulations were intended to provide a rapid mixture of proportioning approaches and property estimation methods. Currently, it is believed that regression analysis provides an effective tool to simply construct a mathematical expression that models a set of data. For that reason, multiple linear regression was extensively utilized in predicting rubberized concrete properties in the literature. However, the performances of regularized regression analysis approaches were not evaluated even though they provide better alternatives to traditional regression methods in terms of controlling the overfitting issue. This study aims to assess the performance of Ridge, Lasso, and elastic net regression models in estimating the compressive and tensile strengths, and modulus of elasticity of rubberized concrete. Additionally, it intends to benchmark their capabilities against the traditional multiple linear regression method. Multiple linear regression, Ridge regression, Lasso regression, ElasticNet regression, Bayesian ridge regression, Stochastic gradient descent, Huber regression, and Quantile regression methods were used in the study. In general, the research findings illustrated the superior performance of regression assessment in modeling the mechanical properties of rubberized concrete. Indeed rubberized concrete mechanical properties can be better modeled using regularized regression techniques, such as ElasticNet-based SGD compared to traditional methods, such as MLR.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
橡胶混凝土力学性能建模的正则回归技术比较评价
在过去的几十年里,许多研究人员已经研究了含有橡胶基固体废物作为部分替代天然骨料的混凝土混合物的性能和行为。在此背景下,他们进行了实验研究并开发了模拟橡胶混凝土性质的数值模型。其中一些数学模拟旨在提供比例方法和属性估计方法的快速混合。目前,人们认为回归分析提供了一种有效的工具,可以简单地构建一个数学表达式来对一组数据进行建模。因此,在文献中,多元线性回归被广泛用于预测橡胶混凝土的性能。然而,尽管正则化回归分析方法在控制过拟合问题方面提供了比传统回归方法更好的选择,但它们的性能并未得到评估。本研究旨在评估Ridge, Lasso和弹性网回归模型在估计橡胶混凝土的抗压强度和抗拉强度以及弹性模量方面的性能。此外,它打算将它们的能力与传统的多元线性回归方法进行基准测试。研究采用多元线性回归、Ridge回归、Lasso回归、ElasticNet回归、Bayesian Ridge回归、随机梯度下降、Huber回归和分位数回归等方法。总的来说,研究结果表明回归评价在建模橡胶混凝土力学性能方面具有优越的性能。实际上,与传统方法(如MLR)相比,使用正则化回归技术(如基于elasticnet的SGD)可以更好地建模橡胶混凝土的机械性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Selection of Building Materials Using Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process Sewer Inlets Detection in UAV Images Clouds based on Convolution Neural Networks Effect of Magnetized Water on Partially Replaced Aggregate with Silica Sand in Concrete Speed Corridor Enforcement System (SCES) - A Case Study of the Highways of Kosovo Determination of Temperature Stresses during the Construction of Massive Monolithic Foundation Slabs, Taking into Account the Subgrade Compliance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1