Skip to content

Source-Study-Aware Validation and Explainable Machine Learning for Reliable Shear Capacity Assessment of Steel-Fiber-Reinforced Concrete Corbels

Sep 2026 · Buildings · 25 references
Innovative concrete reinforcement materials

Abstract

This study proposes a source-study-aware validation framework to estimate the shear capacity of stirrup-free steel-fiber-reinforced concrete corbels and assess the reliability and generalizability of machine-learning models in structural engineering. A database of 108 specimens, compiled from seven independent studies, was analyzed using linear regression, ridge regression, and hyperparameter-optimized XGBoost. The evaluation combined standard specimen-level five-fold cross-validation, predefined source-study holdout evaluation, exhaustive partition-sensitivity analysis, and specimen-level out-of-bag bootstrap uncertainty analysis. In the predefined source-study hold-out evaluation, with hyperparameters selected exclusively from the training portion via an inner group-aware search, the models achieved test R2 values of 0.842, 0.866, and 0.912, respectively, with XGBoost providing the highest point estimate of performance. However, an exhaustive sensitivity analysis of source-study partitions, in which hyperparameters were re-selected independently within the training portion of each partition, indicated that this ranking was not maintained: Linear Regression achieved the highest mean and median R2 and the narrowest interquartile range, whereas XGBoost exhibited the lowest mean and median R2, the widest interquartile range, and the highest incidence of negative R2 values and large prediction errors among the three models; this reflects instability introduced by re-tuning under limited, group-diverse training data. The specimen-level out-of-bag bootstrap uncertainty analysis also favored the linear models in terms of mean performance and confidence-interval width. Standardized coefficients and SHAP analyses consistently identified the shear span-to-effective-depth ratio, the longitudinal reinforcement ratio, and the fiber ratio as the dominant predictors. This study provides a transparent and uncertainty-aware framework for determining when predictive performance is transferable across independent experimental studies and when caution is required in engineering applications.

View source

Similar papers

#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54
#machine learning Review Open access Jun 2014

Why Early-Stage Software Startups Fail: A Behavioral Framework

This state-of-practice investigation was performed using a literature review followed by a multiple-case study approach and presents how inconsistency between managerial strategies and execution can lead to failure by means of a behavioral framework.

Carmine Giardino, Xiaofeng Wang, P. Abrahamsson · 175 citations · ⚡19
#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2016

“Failures” to be celebrated: an analysis of major pivots of software startups

This study conducts a case survey study based on the secondary data of the major pivots happened in 49 software startups, and demonstrates that customer need pivot is the most common among all pivot types.

Sohaib Shahid Bajwa, Xiaofeng Wang, Anh Nguyen-Duc et al. · 127 citations · ⚡15
#machine learning Review Open access May 2016

Key Challenges in Software Startups Across Life Cycle Stages

It is found that what perceived as biggest challenges by software startups do vary across different life cycle stages, even though its significance decreases when the learning focuses of the startups move from problem to solution and their products mature.

Xiaofeng Wang, Henry Edison, Sohaib Shahid Bajwa et al. · 62 citations · ⚡6

Related blog posts

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.