Explainable machine learning models for predicting the axial compression capacity of concrete filled steel tubular columns

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridCakiroglu, Celal/0000-0001-7329-1230
dc.authoridIslam, Kamrul/0000-0002-2780-9884
dc.authoridIsikdag, Umit/0000-0002-2660-0106
dc.contributor.authorCakiroglu, Celal
dc.contributor.authorIslam, Kamrul
dc.contributor.authorBekdas, Gebrail
dc.contributor.authorIsikdag, Umit
dc.contributor.authorMangalathu, Sujith
dc.date.accessioned2025-02-20T08:42:19Z
dc.date.available2025-02-20T08:42:19Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.departmentTürk-Alman Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractConcrete-filled steel tubular (CFST) columns have been popular in the construction industry due to enhanced mechanical properties such as higher strength and ductility, higher seismic resistance, and aesthetics. Extensive experimental, numerical and analytical studies have been conducted in the past few decades to assess the structural response of CFST columns under various loading conditions. However, there is still uncertainty in predicting the capacity of CFST columns, and most of the current codes are conservative. In this paper, data-driven machine learning (ML) models have been developed to predict the axial compression capacity of rectangular CFST columns. An extensive database of 719 experiments was collected from literature and is randomly used to train, test, and validate the ML models. Seven ML models, namely lasso regression, random forest, Adaptive Boosting (AdaBoost), Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM), Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM), Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), and Categorical Gradient Boosting (CatBoost), are evaluated to predict the compression capacity of CFST stub columns under axial load. The performance of the different ML models in predicting the compressive strength of CFST columns is compared by different code equations prevalent in different parts of the world. It is found that LightGBM and CatBoost models performed better with an accuracy of 97.9% and 98.3%, respectively, compared to the existing design codes in predicting the capacity of CFST columns. Feature importance analyses and SHapley Additive explanations (SHAP) explain the ML model performances and make the developed models interpretable. Resistance factor is determined using the best performing ML model for compressive strength prediction of CFST stub columns following AISC 360-16 code provision.
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.129227
dc.identifier.issn0950-0618
dc.identifier.issn1879-0526
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85139076371
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.129227
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12846/1647
dc.identifier.volume356en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000901169700005
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherElsevier Sci Ltd
dc.relation.ispartofConstruction and Building Materials
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.snmzKA_WOS_20250220
dc.subjectExplainable machine learningen_US
dc.subjectArtificial intelligence (AI)en_US
dc.subjectComposite columnen_US
dc.subjectCompressive capacityen_US
dc.subjectResistance factoren_US
dc.titleExplainable machine learning models for predicting the axial compression capacity of concrete filled steel tubular columns
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu