Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Development of hybrid models using metaheuristic optimization techniques

to predict the carbonation depth of fly ash concrete
Rahul Biswas a, Enming Li b, *, Ning Zhang c, Shashikant Kumar d, Baboo Rai e, Jian Zhou f, *
a
Department of Appiled Mechanics, Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology, Nagpur, India
b
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid–ETSI Minasy Energía, Ríos Rosas 21, Madrid 28003, Spain
c
Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development (IOER), Weberplatz 1, Dresden 01217, Germany
d
Government Engineering College Jamui, India
e
National Institute of Technology Patna, India
f
School of Resources and Safety Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Carbonation is one of the utmost serious issues affecting the long-term durability of reinforced concrete. When
Carbonation H2O is present, a reaction between CO2 gas and Ca(OH)2 occurs, forming powdered CaCO3, which affects the
Fly Ash microstructure of the concrete by lowering the pH level and causing corrosion, shortening the structure’s service
Support Vector Regression
life. The complexity of the interaction between important parameters is difficult to capture for conventional
Metaheuristic Optimization
carbonation prediction models. As a result, implementing powerful machine learning (ML) algorithms to over­
Prediction
come a lack of understanding of the consequences of such governing input parameters is critical. ML-based
carbonation prediction models that blend four metaheuristic algorithms with Support Vector Regression (SVR)
were developed to increase the accuracy and methodology of the prediction. 300 datasets from previous re­
searches were used to develop, train, and test the SVR model. For the estimate of carbonation depth using
experimental data, the possible hybrid SVR, which is made up of a Chicken Swarm Optimization (CSO), Grey
Wolf Optimization (GWO), Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), and Seagull Optimization Algorithm (SOA), was
used. The modelling accuracy was verified using four distinct performance indexes: Coefficient of determination
(R2), Mean Square Error (MSE), Mean Absolute Error (MAE), and Variance Accounted For (VAF). The training
and test sets of AI models (CSO-SVR, GWO-SVR, PSO-SVR, and SOA-SVR) exhibit a strong correlation (R2 > 0.95)
between the actual and predicted carbonation depth values. The application of this model for numerical research
on the parameters affecting the carbonation depth in fly-ash concrete is successful, according to this study, and it
gives scientific direction for durability design.

1. Introduction alkalinity of concrete in reinforced concrete (RC) structures passivates

The interaction of hydrated cementitious composites with carbon
dioxide initiates the physical–chemical process which known as
carbonation [1]. This process starts on the surface of concrete members
and progresses through the core at a rate determined by the alkaline
balance of the cementitious paste, the porosity of the concrete relative
humidity, CO2 concentration, and other environmental factors [2].
Calcite (CaCO3) is formed when carbon dioxide (CO2) from the envi­
ronment or dissolved in water combines with calcium hydroxide (Ca
(OH)2) in the concrete matrix [3]. The alkalinity of the concrete declines
when calcite is formed, and it may reach a pH of less than 9. The high
the steel reinforcement, whereas a decrease of alkalinity might result in
reinforcement de-passivation and corrosion risk [4]. The corrosion in
reinforcement is the most prevalent and severe kind of concrete degra­
dation, resulting in multibillion-dollar losses and a significant arrears of
damaged structures worldwide [5]. However, Carbonation, on the other
hand, enhances the concrete’s impermeability, owing to clogging of
carbonate pore: absorption of capillary is decreased as well as the me­
chanical property is enhanced [6]. Carbonation happens slowly in high
strength concrete structures with an suitable depth of cover, requiring
several years to reach the reinforcement. The speed of carbonation re­
action is influenced by the relative air humidity significantly [7].

* Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: rahulbiswas@apm.vnit.ac.in (R. Biswas), enming.li@alumnos.upm.es (E. Li), n.zhang@ioer.de (N. Zhang), shashikant.ce15@nitp.ac.in
(S. Kumar), baboo.rai@nitp.ac.in (B. Rai), j.zhou@csu.edu.cn (J. Zhou).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.128483
Received 21 April 2022; Received in revised form 10 July 2022; Accepted 12 July 2022
Available online 19 July 2022
0950-0618/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
R. Biswas et al.
Carbonation peaks at 50–60 % relative humidity in typical concrete, but
reduces in dry or water-saturated concrete. An increase in the carbon­
ation rate is also aided by a considerable CO2 concentration [8]. The
global cement manufacturing industry contributes between 5 % and 7 %
of CO2 emissions to the environment [9]. Supplementary cementitious
materials (SCMs) are progressively utilised into concrete as a substitute
of the cement in order to lessen the negative environmental effect. Fly-
ash (FA), a by-product of coal combustion, is frequently utilised in
concrete as a partial cement substitute to dramatically reduce carbon
emissions [10,11]. Fly-ash increases the mechanical characteristics and
workability of concrete [12,13]. Furthermore, the decreased perme­
ability of FA concretes improves durability and resilience to many types
of degradation caused by sulphate assault, chloride intrusion, and
corrosion. The carbonation resistance of FA concrete is a point of
disagreement in the literature, with contradictory results. Some studies
have found that replacing cement with FA boosts the speed and depth of
carbonation [7,14,15]. In contrast, Khunthongkeaw et al. [16] found
that in concretes containing 10 % FA, the impact of FA could be ignored.
They discovered that by lowering the water-to-binder ratio and the FA
percentage, they could attain excellent carbonation resistance. Simi­
larly, concrete containing class C fly ash is more resistant to carbonation
than concrete containing class F FA. When FA was employed as a fine
aggregate substitute, Papadakis [17] found that the carbonation rate
was reduced. Under both curing conditions, Atis [18] found that con­
crete with 70 % FA replacement had more carbonation compared to
concrete containing 50 % FA replacement and ordinary Portland cement
(OPC) concrete (wet and dry). The carbonation depth rose as the FA
replacement,CO2 and water to binder ratio (w/b) concentration
increased, according to Khunthongkeaw and Tangtermsirikul [19].
Carbonation depth forecasts has been presented using linear
regression models based on numerous parameters, with the binder type,
water-to-binder ratio and environmental conditions, up until the year
eighty [20]. Furthermore, a variety of analytical and mathematical
prediction methods for predicting carbonation depth in FA concrete
have been presented by various authors. Papadakis [21] devised a
theoretical model to predict the characteristics of FA concrete. This
model may be used to estimate the strength and durability of concrete.
He also employed chemical processes modelling to characterise the anti-
carbonation activity of silica fume and FA, as well as quantitative rep­
resentations of the final chemical composition [17]. Jiang et al. [22], on
the other hand, projected carbonation in high-volume FA concrete by
accounting for the influence of the cement content on carbonation and
water/binder ratio. Using accelerated testing, a mathematical model to
predict the carbonation depth of FA concrete was suggested [16]. Most
of these models are based on laboratory experiments due to the intricacy
of the affecting elements, and their prediction results show very signif­
icant errors when compared to field observations. As a result, a number
of researches have been conducted in order to establish analytical
methods for measuring the carbonation depth of concrete. The majority
of those models are based on Fick’s first law, states that carbonation
depth is a function of the squared root of time:
√̅
x=K t (1)
where x is the carbonation depth, t is the exposure period, and K is
the carbonation coefficient, which is dependent on the CO2 concentra­
tion and the concrete diffusion properties [5]. Many additional models
use Eq. (1) to connect the carbonation coefficient to concrete material
and environmental parameters. The connected characteristics have
traditionally been thought of as random variables that dictate concrete
attributes such as water to binder ratio (w/b), exposure and compressive
strength, all of which influence CO2 intrusion rates. The majority of the
improved models do not account for all of the important factors that
influence the carbonation process. The problem is not solved by
combining two or more of these models [15,23]. The present carbon­
ation prediction models’ performance is highly unclear due to a mix of
2
Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483
several assumptions and simplifications. As a result, a sophisticated
model that considers the majority of the variables is required. Because
imperative relationships may be neglected, accurate prediction may be
generated if all important parameters are analysed as a group rather
than separately. Because the behaviour of concrete is a consequence of
numerous characteristics that are difficult to define mathematically,
development of an advanced carbonation prediction model that covers
all the important aspects without introducing additional assumptions is
a difficult challenge. Standard laboratory experiments are insufficient to
forecast long-term carbonation because the concrete microstructure
changes as a result of time-dependent chemical reactions in the cement
paste, as well as its interaction with the environment. Another issue is a
lack of consensus on how to apply the results of accelerated carbonation
tests done in the lab to concrete exposed to natural conditions for an
extended period of time [24,25]. As a result, utilising ML approaches to
construct a carbonation prediction model which can learn from freely
accessible long-term field data is a lucrative option. Despite the fact that
this technique is becoming more prevalent in other technical domains,
its use in determining the carbonation depth of concrete buildings is still
limited.
As a non-destructive approach in material testing, ML prediction has
received the greatest research attention in recent years. Various research
projects in the construction business have used a ML prediction model
[25]. Artificial intelligence’s ML is an important subfield. It makes
intelligent judgments by using learning approaches to detect compli­
cated patterns from empirical data without adopting a preconceived
equation as a model [26–29]. ANN, MLR, SVM and other approaches
have been used in concrete carbonation research to forecast the ingress
of carbonation. One of the earliest studies of ML based modelling of
carbonation development was undertaken in 1993. It was about using
fuzzy logic to simulate carbonation in concrete buildings [30]. The ANN
was used by Buenfeld and Hassanein [31] to investigate concrete service
life. Chloride binding, chloride profiles and carbonation depth were
chosen as factors for predicting service life of concrete in this study. The
study’s average errors varied from 20 to 30 %. In order to predict the
carbonation depth in concrete buildings, Buenfeld et al. [32] divided 39
independent variables into environmental parameters (region, exterior,
sheltered), concrete factors (cement type, water-to-cement ratio, air
content), curing and duration of concrete’s carbonation. The data was
culled from 88 peer-reviewed papers that totalled 6600 instances. The
average inaccuracy of the test cases chosen from 20 investigations was
found to be 27.5 percent. In comparison to accelerated carbonation
cases, naturally exposed cases have a greater prediction accuracy, ac­
cording to the study. ANN and radial basis function incorporated neural
networks are used by Lu [33] to model concrete carbonation (RBFNNs).
The ratio of cement, fine aggregate, cement, coarse aggregates and the
age of carbonation were all used as input factors in the study. The
findings reveal that the absolute percentage error of the ANN was 2.42
percent greater than the absolute percentage error of the RBFNN, which
was 8.46 percent, after trial-and-error computing. To simulate carbon­
ation depth in concrete, Xiang [34] used support vector regression (SVR)
with three number of input variables (w/c, cement concentration, and
time). Six test scenarios were chosen to put the model to the test. The
findings demonstrate that the SVR average percentage error was inferior
than the ANN’s, demonstrating that the SVR has a powerful calculation
capacity. The average percentage error has improved in recent predic­
tion experiments, which might be attributable to increased computer
capacity in ML.
Four ML techniques (ANN, decision tree, bagged decision tree, and
boosted) were merged by Taffese et al. [35]. The ensembled technique
was capable to classify the input factors in order of significance to pre­
dicting carbonation depth in concrete, resulting in a reduction in the
error factor. Two comparable research publications [36,37] employed
ANN to test the prediction model’s performance on parameters affecting
carbonation depth and show that the ANN model’s findings resembled
the natural carbonation process’ pattern. There are 396 publications in
R. Biswas et al.
the Science Direct database connected to concrete carbonation model­
ling that were published in the recent decade [38]. For modelling, 108
(27 %) of these publications employ ML approaches (Support Vector
Machine, ANN, generic algorithms, and others). Fifty research (13 %)
make use of ANN specifically. Only a few works have been generated in
recent years to predict the carbonation of concrete containing additives,
particularly FA, compared to the total number of published articles in
the subject, which only accounts for 7 % of the total. This occurs because
it’s difficult to come up with a formula for carbonation depth that
considers all of the variables that affect the phenomena, particularly the
impact of the kind and content of the addition on concrete [36].
According to the literature, no research has been done on predicting
carbonation depth using metaheuristic algorithms and an advanced ML
(ML) model. It has also been observed that the application of support
vector machines for the same is relatively limited. Recent research has
shown that metaheuristic algorithms combined with advanced ML
models outperform traditional ML models. As a result, a comparison of
the SVR with several metaheuristic algorithms (i.e., PSO, CSO, GWO,
and SOA) has been suggested in this work to estimate carbonation depth.
The dataset was split into two sections: training and testing (simulation).
Statistical characteristics were used to compare the outcomes of Hybrid
SVR with different optimization techniques. The chosen comparison
methodologies can be used in a wide range of carbonation and related
investigations. The Taylor’s diagram was used to examine the correla­
tion and variance departure from the real values.
1.1. Background of carbonation in concrete
Carbon dioxide (CO2 ) reacts with the hydrated cement product in the
carbonation reaction in concrete. The chemistry of the cement hydration
process is the starting point for understanding concrete carbonation. The
Portland cement is made up of the following compounds: dicalcium
silicate (C2 S), tricalcium silicate (C3 S), tricalcium aluminate (C3 A), and
tetra calcium alumino-ferrite (C4 AF). Calcium hydroxide (CH) and cal­
cium–silicate–hydrate (C–S–H) gel, as well as additional compounds,
are formed during the hydration of cement components. In addition, the
hydration of cement produces sodium (Na2+ ) and potassium (K2+ ) hy­
droxyl ions, which are important during the carbonation process [39].
C3 S + H→CSH + 2CH (2)
C2 S + 2H→CSH + CH (3)
C3 A + H→CAH (4)
C4 AF + 4CH + 22H→C4 AH13 + C4 FH13 (5)
When pozzolans such slag, silica fume and FA are added, comparable
reactants are produced that are similar to Eq. (1). (4). FA includes
reactive silicate (aluminosilicate A-S and calcium aluminosilicate C-A-S)
that reacts with precipitated CH to form C–S–H [14]. As a result, the
concrete’s compressive strength and microstructure are enhanced. Eq.
(5) shows the standard equation for the pozzolanic reaction of FA.
2S + 3CH + 10H→C3 S2 H3 (6)
Carbonation in concrete is primarily caused by the interaction of CO2
with hydrated cement components, which results in the formation of
carbonate [40]. As a result, adding FA, which transforms the precipi­
tated CH into C–S–H, is a traditional technique for reducing carbon­
ation in concrete. The carbonation reaction equations are as follows:
CO2 (aq) + 2NaOH→Na2 CO3 + H2 O (7)
Na2 CO3 + Ca(OH)2 →CaCO3 ↓ + 2NaOH (8)
2Na2 CO3 + 3CaO • 2SiO2 • 4H2O→CaCO3 ↓ + 2SiO2 + 6NaOH + H2 O
(9)
3
Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483
Because CO2 is an inert gas, the chemical reaction in Eq. (6) involves
the dissolution of the compounds in an aqueous solution. Carbonation
attack, on the other hand, might be caused by the interaction of HCO−3
(bicarbonate) and CO2−3 (carbonate) ions with Ca
2+
(calcium ion) in CSH
and CH [41,42]. The decomposition of CO2 in the pore space of concrete
produces the HCO−3 and CO2− 3 ions [42,43]. Carbonation of CH results in
Ca CO3 and OH− , whereas C–S–H results in amorphous silica gel and
more Ca CO3 and OH− [44].
2. Research significance
Because of the limitations of traditional Fick’s law-based carbonation
prediction, learning-based models must be used, as stated in Section 2.
Suitable learning methods that map input parameters to output pa­
rameters that are comparable to the aim might be an appealing choice.
For generating models based on experimental data, a range of ML al­
gorithms are available. Among these are neural networks, decision trees,
and ensemble approaches. Despite the fact that there are several ML
algorithms for carbonation prediction, only the neural network method
is the most often employed [33,45,46]. Researchers are particularly
interested in the relative strengths of various ML models. Unless other­
wise explored, no one can predict which ML approaches would excel for
a specific task. ML models’ comparative strength is highly dependent on
the specifics of the problems being addressed. One model (for example, a
neural network) may achieve best on tasks from one dataset but not from
another. As a result, the capacity of well-known ML techniques to
forecast carbonation must be examined.
In addition, no previous research has been done on the application of
a hybrid ML model based on metaheuristic optimization for carbonation
depth prediction. Several authors claim that hybrid models outperform
single models when it comes to predicting engineering features [47–49].
To characterise the concrete qualities, the most frequent factors used in
most of the available models are the composition and amount of cement,
as well as the water to cement ratio (w/c). These factors are insufficient
to forecast concrete carbonation as becuase it is a function of numerous
variables, and omitting other important variables reduces the model’s
prediction accuracy. Certainly, there are a few neural network-based
models that consider a large number of parameters but fail to conduct
some crucial pre-processing stages during model construction. It is well
known that including more information on concrete qualities improves
the model’s learning performance. Some factors, on the other hand, may
be useless or redundant for carbonation prediction, and therefore reduce
learning performance. As a result, it’s critical to use a unique method to
identify the most significant variables during model construction. The
goal of this project is to combine optimization approaches with support
vector machines. The usefulness of advanced ML algorithms for
carbonation prediction is investigated in this study. Using optimised and
integrated ML approaches, a higher performing carbonation prediction
model is constructed based on the exploration. The model that are used
for the study is PSO-SVR, GWO-SVR, SOA-SVR and CSO-SVR. Whereas,
the input parameters were selected based on sensitivity analysis. A
Taylor Diagram is also used to compare the developed models.
3. Data collection
As a soft computing based model for carbonation behaviour of FA
concrete, an SVR technique was used in combination with metaheuristic
algorithms in this study. The application depends on data from previous
experimental research on accelerated carbonation of FA concrete, and
the efficiency of these analytical method was evaluated by comparing
with experimental findings. The database was built using 300 data from
different sources as mentioned in Kellouche’s study [36]. The most
successful SVR input data include a number of factors, including mixing
proportions and exposure circumstances. Cover binder and FA content,
time of exposure (t), relative humidity (RH), CO2 concentration, and
R. Biswas et al. Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483

Fig. 1. A general flow chart of this study.

Fig. 2. Grey wolf hierarchy.

4
R. Biswas et al. Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483

water-to-binder ratio (w/b) are the factors used in this study and was order to reproduce the assaulting prey, wolves must attack the prey and
found very relevant to the outcome by sensitivity analysis carried out in get the prey’s current position when random values of A are in the range
the study in coming sections. The Hybrid SVR models were trained and [− 1, 1]. The impact of obstacles near to prey may be thought of as the
evaluated using the given parameters, and then architectural perfor­ ⇀
vector C in nature. The prey random weights are generated by the
mances were carried out. In order to examine the performance of the ⇀
prediction models, a parametric study analysis was performed, followed random values of C, which helps to avoid local optima stagnation,
by a model comparison. Finally, the projected carbonation depth’s especially in later rounds.
applicability is evaluated. A flow chart has been depicted to demonstrate Grey wolves are capable of searching for and hunting prey, which is
the general work in this study as Fig. 1 shows. normally guided by the wolf. We can get the α, β, and δ wolves in each
iteration and force the remaining search agents (including the ω) to
change their placements in light of the current top three places. This
4. Methodology
part’s procedure may be summarised as follows:
⃒ ⃒(
4.1. Support vector Machine ⇀ ⃒⇀ ⇀ ⇀⃒
Di = ⃒⃒Cj Xi − X⃒⃒ i = α, β, δ; j = 1, 2, 3) (14)
A Support Vector Machine (SVM) is a supervised learning method
that can be used for both regression and classification [50]. SVM tech­ ⇀ ⇀ ⇀⇀
Xj = Xi − Aj Di (i = α, β, δ; j = 1, 2, 3) (15)
nique projects the data into a high-dimensional feature space and
employing kernels to classify nonlinearly separable data sets [51,52]. In ⇀ ⇀ ⇀
multi-dimensional space, an SVM model is essentially a representation
⇀ X1 + X2 + X3
X(t + 1) = (16)
of various classes in a hyperplane. SVM will generate the hyperplane in 3
an iterative manner in order to reduce the error. SVM’s objective is to
split datasets into classes such that a maximum marginal hyperplane
4.3. Chicken swarm optimization
(MMH) may be found. The data points closest to the hyperplane, or the
points of a data set that, if deleted, would change the location of the
The CSO optimizer was proposed by Meng et al. (2014) [57]. The
dividing hyperplane, are called support vectors. As a result, they might
CSO optimizer is a group intelligent optimizer that replicates the chicken
be regarded important components of a data collection. In general, the
swarm’s hierarchical architecture and foraging behaviour. The
accuracy of the SVM model is determined by the kernels used and their
following rules are employed in the CSO optimizer to imitate flock dy­
parameters. The radial basis function (RBF) has been shown to perform
namics [58]: (1) The chicken population is divided into various sub­
well as a kernel function for SVM in several forecasting experiments
populations. A cock, many hens, and chicks make up each
[53–55] and therefore utilized in this study. As an important branch of
subpopulation. The flock is dominated by cocks, who have the best
SVM, support vector regression (SVR) is utilized in this study as a
foraging skills. The chick’s foraging skill is the lowest, while the hen’s is
regression tool to solve the issue of prediction of carbonation behaviour
the second best. (2) The flocks are categorised based on their fitness
of FA concrete.
levels. A few hens with high fitness ratings are chosen as cocks, while
others with low fitness are chosen as chicks. (3) Under a given hierarchy,
4.2. Grey wolf optimization the mother–child bond and the leadership relationship stay unchanged.
However, as the chicks mature, these statuses are updated on a regular
Mirjalili (2014) [56] introduced the grey wolf optimizer (GWO) basis with certain value of the update time G.
meta-heuristic method. The GWO algorithm is divided into four sections: The position of each chicken symbolises a potential solution for
social hierarchy, encircling, tracking, and prey attack. GWO models the addressing an optimization issue. Suppose there are N chickens in total if
wolf hierarchy, which includes four different kinds of grey wolves: alpha the search space for chickens is d. There are Nc chicks, Nh hens and Nr
(α), beta (β), delta (δ), and omega (ω), as shown in Fig. 2. Grey wolves cocks. At time t, Zti,j (i = 1, 2, ⋯, N; j = 1, 2, ⋯, d) represents the position
are mostly gregarious since they are the apex predators in the food of the ith chicken in the jth dimension.
chain.
The update equation of ith rooter is as follows:
The most acceptable option is alpha (α), followed by beta (β) and
delta (δ) wolves. With the goal of finding better solutions, the remaining Zi,jt+1 = Zi,jt + Zi,jt *randn(0, σ2 ) (17)
wolves (ω wolves) surround the first three best wolves (α, β and δ). As for
⎧
encircling prey, the encircling prey behaviour can be mathematically ⎪
⎪ 1Se ≥ Si
⎪
modelled as follows: ⎪
⎨
.
⃒ ⃒ σ2 = ( ) (18)
⇀ ⃒ ⇀⇀ ⇀ ⃒ ⎪
⎪ S − S
D = ⃒⃒CXp (t) − X(t) ⃒⃒ (10) ⎪
⎪
⎩ exp
e i
Se < Si
|Si + ε|

⇀ ⇀ ⇀⇀ where randn(0, σ2 ) represents the Gaussian distribution. Se (e ∈

X(t + 1) = Xp (t) − AD (11)
= e) specifies a cock other than the ith cock. ε is infinitesimal,
[1, Nr ], i ∕
⇀ ⇀
where X represents the current position vector of a grey wolf, Xp the ensuring that the denominator is not 0.
⇀ ⇀ The update equation of the ith hen is as shown in Equation.
current prey position, and A and C are respectively the coefficient vec­ ( ) ( )
tors and emphasize exploitation and exploration, which can be found by: Zi,jt+1 = Zi,jt + p1 *randm Zrt1 ,j − Zi,jt + p2 *randm Zrt2 ,j − Zi,jt (19)
⇀
(12)
⇀⇀ ⇀
A = 2a r 1 − a ⎧ ( )
⎨ p1 = exp Si − Sr1
⎪
⇀ ads(Si + ε) (20)
(13)
⇀
C = 2r2 ⎪
⎩
p2 = (Sr2 − Si )
where a decreases linearly from 2 to 0 as the number of iterations
⇀
where randm represents a random number between 0 and 1. The cock
increases, and r 1 and r 2 are random vectors between 0 and 1. As a
⇀ ⇀
in the group where the ith hen is found is r1 and r2 (r1 ∕
= r2 ) is the cock in
⇀
consequence, A is a number that falls somewhere between –a and a. In the other group.

5
R. Biswas et al. Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483

Table 1 current iteration}:

Descriptive statistics of the input and output variables. ( ) ( )
uk+1 = wk uki + d1 k1k lki − wki + d2 k2k lkg − wki (25)
Mean Standard Median Standard Min Max i

Error Deviation

B (kg/ 369.68 3.11 350.00 53.93 260.00 500.00 wk+1

i = wki + vk+1
i (26)
m3 )
FA (%) 21.44 1.19 17.50 20.56 0.00 70.00
where n signifies the entire dimension, lg the best particle, and su­
w/b 0.45 0.00 0.45 0.09 0.28 0.63 perscripts the number of iterations w stands for weight, while d1, d2
CO2 9.08 0.67 6.50 11.65 1.00 50.00 stands for cognitive and social qualities, respectively (position con­
(%) stants). The two position constants must be properly tuned for the model
RH (%) 64.25 0.21 65.00 3.66 55.00 70.00
to work at its best. The random numbers k1 and k2 are evenly distrib­
t (Days) 7.60 0.25 6.48 4.41 1.73 19.08
X (mm) 9.05 0.54 6.00 9.34 0.00 57.00 uted and range from 0 to 1 [60].

4.5. Seagull optimization algorithm

The seagull optimization algorithm (SOA) [61] is a newly developed

metaheuristic optimization approach based on real seagull behaviour.
The most essential aspect of seagulls is their ability to migrate and
attack. As a result, the SOA concentrates on these two natural behav­
iours, with mathematical models provided below. During migration,
seagull swarm members should avoid clashing with one another. An
extra variable A is used to attain this goal.
→ →
C s = A × P s (t) (27)
→
where C s indicates the position of seagull which avoid clashing with
→
one another, P s represents the current position of seagulls in the tth
iteration and A represents the movement behaviour of seagulls.
( )
fc
A = fc − t × (28)
Maxiteration
where fc is a constant that controls the frequency with which variable
A is used, which decreases linearly from fc to 0. Seagulls swarm to the
finest search agent in order to find the best food supplies.
→ → →
M s = B × ( P bs (t) − P s (t)) (29)
→
where M s denotes the seagull’s location in relation to the best search
→
agent P bs (i.e. fittest seagull). The coefficient B is a random variable that
Fig. 3. Correlation matrix. is used to make a trade-off between exploitation and exploration. Its
definition is as follows:
The equation for updating chick particles is as follows.
( ) B = 2 × A2 × rd (30)
Zi,jt+1 = Zi,jt + GL(i)* Zm,j
t
− Zi,jt (21)
where rd is a random number that ranges between 0 and 1. Seagulls
may stay close together as they fly toward the fittest search agent. As a
where Ztm,j
is the mother chicken followed by the i chick; GL rep­
th
result, seagulls can update their position using the following formula:
resents a random number between 0 and 2. ⃒ ⃒
→ ⃒→ → ⃒
D s = ⃒⃒ C s + M s ⃒⃒ (31)
4.4. Particle swarm optimization
→
where D s represents the distance between seagulls and the best
Kennedy and Eberhart invented PSO in 1995 [59] and it is a search agent.
commonly utilized optimization approach that belongs to the swarm Second, when seagulls arrive at a new location, they attack prey in a
intelligence family. The metaheuristic algorithm mimics a swarm of spiral pattern. Their aggressive behaviour can be summarised as follows:
birds’ activity. In PSO, the birds are the ’particles,’ and they have some (→ ) →
→
fitness value. The particle has some speed and flies across the population P s (t) = D s × x × y × z + P bs (t) (32)
looking for the best options. The P population of the swarm is repre­
→
sented by the following equation [59]: where P s (t) retains the best solution and ×, y, z represents the traits
of spiral motion.
P = (p1 , p2 , p3 ...pn ) (22)
x = r × cos(k) (33)
The u are denoted as velocities of the individual particles:
u = (u1 , u2 , u3 ...un ) (23) y = r × sin(k) (34)

Previously visited best location (l best) is shown as: z=r×k (35)

l = (l1 , l2 , l3 ...wn ) (24)
r = u × ekv (36)
The swarm is updated as follows {for (i = 1, 2,..,n) and k being

6
R. Biswas et al.
Fig. 4. a) Sensitivity Analysis b) Radar Diagram.
where u and v are constants to define the spiral shape, e is the base of
the natural logarithm, and k is a random number between 0 ≤ k ≤ 2π.
5. Data processing and analysis
5.1. Descriptive statistics and analysis
As mentioned above, a sum of 300 experimental results for carbon­
ation of concrete collected from different sources mentioned in the
paper of in Kellouche’s study [36] and will be used to develop a
hybridised SVR model with the metaheuristic optimization technique.
The input parameter for the study Cover binder (B) and FA content (FA),
time of exposure (t), relative humidity (RH), CO2 concentration (CO2),
and water-to-binder ratio (w/b). Table 1 shows the descriptive statistic
of the input and output parameters where it can be seen that the B varies
from 260 to 500 kg/m3, FA varies from 0 to 70 %, w/b vary from 0.28 to
0.63, CO2 concentration vary from 1 % to 50 % whereas the output
value X varies from 0 mm to 57 mm indicating the wide variety of
experimental data. Statistical analysis was undertaken in order to
measure the degree of correlation (DOC) using Pearson correlation be­
tween the above parameters after the descriptive analysis described
above revealed that the collected database had a wide range of experi­
mental data. When all parameters are evaluated, the DOC between X
with t, CO2, w/b and B, was shown to be significantly higher according
to the information provided by the Pearson Correlation in Fig. 3. On the
other hand, the DOC between X and other parameters (excluding t, CO2,
w/b and B) is smaller.
5.2. Sensitivity analysis
In this part, the cosine amplitude approach [49] was used to inves­
tigate and compare the sensitivity of various influenced factors on
carbonation depth. A single column matrix was created from each input
parameter and one output parameter. As a result, six individual column
matrices were created:
xi = {xi1 , xi2 , xi3 , ⋯, xim } (37)
The sensitivity of different influencing factors on carbonation depth
may be determined as follows, where the length of each column matrix is
equivalent to the number of datasets:
∑300
xik xjk
Rij = √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅k=1 (38)
∑
300 ∑ the k-fold cross-validation process was conducted. The main aim of
x2ik × 300 k=1 x 2
jk
k=1
Conferring to the results (Fig. 4), it can be concluded that the utmost
sensitive factor is water-binder ratio and time factors has also an
important sensitive factor. Although the sensitivity of RH, CO2 and FA is
very relevant. Lastly, the sensitivity of different parameters on carbon­
ation depth can be sorted in descendant order as: w/b, t, RH, CO2, FA
and B. A combined analysis was also performed, and the results are
7
Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483
shown in the form of a Radar diagram in Fig. 4 (b), from which the
degree of significance of each parameter can be easily inferred. The
significance of all the characteristics is between 19.85 and 13.06
percent, which is nearly identical to their average significance value.
6. Data pre-processing
In the current study, total six influenced factors including FA
replacement level, binder content, water-to-binder ratio, relative hu­
midity, CO2 concentration and time of exposure are utilized as input
parameters and the carbonation depth is the only output. Before
adopting these parameters to develop intelligent prediction models of
carbonation depth, some data pre-processing procedures need to be
carried out involving dataset partition, normalization, principal
component analysis and cross validation. First of all, the original dataset
was divided into two independent datasets in which one part is used as
establishing the training network and the other part is utilized as veri­
fying the goodness of proposed prediction models of carbonation depth.
The former is named as a training set and the latter is called as a testing
set. It should be noted that the partition of the training set and testing set
is completely random. After determination of the training set and testing
set, only the training set participates in the model development while
the testing set can be regarded as unseen data and only used for the
evaluation of developed prediction model. Generally, the ratio of a
training set and a testing set is 7:3 or 8:2 [62,63]. In this study, the ratio
of training set and testing set is determined to be 8:2 after trial-and-error
tests. The main aim of normalization is to eliminate the influence of
outliers and magnitude [48]. The normalization is implemented towards
the training set and testing set and all data is normalized to be the range
of [0, 1]. In the next step, the principal component analysis (PCA)
technique is employed [64]. The PCA is mainly used for reducing the
dimension of high-dimension data and extracting the principal features
from the original data. The threshold equal to 95 % was set to exact the
principal components which means the information after PCA can
explain 95 % of the original information. This operation reduces noise
intervention while ensuring that information is reserved as much as
possible. By implementing the PCA, it can be found that the explanation
percent of components to the whole data is [32.3127, 23.4786, 18.9649,
13.0459, 10.5879, 1.6100] and the cumulative percent is [32.3127,
55.7913, 74.7562, 87.8021, 98.3900, 100]. Therefore, the former 5
principal components were retained. The dimension of input parameters
is reduced from 6 to 5 and the dimension of new inputs is 5. After that,
cross-validation is to enhance the generalization and robustness of
training network and prevent the over-fitting. Generally, five or tenfold
cross validation is desirable which is determined by the scale of data
[65]. In this study, fivefold cross validation was adopted to randomly
divide the original training set into five equal subsets where four subsets
were used as new training sets and the last one subset was used as
validation set. The optimized hyper-parameters of four kinds of
carbonation models along with the new training set will constitute a new
R. Biswas et al. Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483

Fig. 5. Optimization process of PSO-SVR, GWO-SVR, SOA-SVR and CSO-SVR models.

training network and the validation set will participate in the exami­ evaluation indicators. But this type of variance is elusive. Regarding this,
nation of the goodness of the new training network. Aforementioned the swarm size equal to 25, 50, 75, 100, 125, 150, 175 and 200 were
procedure will be repeatedly conducted for five times. The MSE value is employed in each method to carefully select the most suitable swarm
employed as the optimization criterion. The average performance of size. Finally, total 32 carbonation prediction models were established
each cross-validation will be considered as the actual performance of the and developed based on four SVR-based regression techniques. In this
original training set. study, the developed carbonation prediction models were assessed by
four classical mathematical indicators, i.e., R2, VAF, MSE and MAE
7. Model development [49,67–73]. The detailed calculation functions are illustrated as follows:
∑ ′ 2
In order to evaluate the carbonation behaviour of FA concrete, R2 = 1 − ∑i
(yi − yi )
(39)
aforementioned ML-based techniques are combined to develop intelli­
2
i (yi − yi )
gent and fast prediction models. Among these technologies, the support
vector machine is used as the benchmark to build up the best mapping 1 ∑N
(40)
′ 2
MSE = (yi − yi )
relationship between influenced factors and carbonation degree and N i=1
four kinds of optimization algorithms are utilized to optimize the hyper-
parameters of support vector machine. Although only two hyper- ( ′ )
vaf (yi − yi )
parameters need to be tuned for RBF-kernel based support vector ma­ VAF = 1− × 100% (41)
vaf (yi )
chine, it is not easy to find the most suitable hyper-parameter combi­
nation aiming at a specific problem. Therefore, optimization algorithms 1 ∑N ⃒ ⃒
will play significant roles in searching for the suitable hyper-parameters. MAE = ⃒yi − y′ ⃒
i (42)
N i=1
For swarm-based meta-heuristic algorithms, two important parameters
control the optimization performance, namely swarm size and iteration Where i represents the current number of the dataset being evalu­
number [56,66]. Generally, the optimization time will increase with the ated, yi represents the measured carbonation depth, yi denotes the
increase of iteration number as well as swarm size while less iteration average value of the average value of the measured carbonation depth,
and swarm size probably cause under-fitting. By lots of experiments and yi is the corresponding predictive value, N is the total number of the
′

comparisons, it can be found that when the iteration number is equal to
500, the optimization process is comparatively stable and brings satis­
factory optimization results. Therefore, the iteration number equal to
500 will be applied in each carbonation prediction model. Similarly, by
carrying out lots of tests towards the swarm size, it can be indicated that
different swarm size would produce slight variance towards various
whole carbonation depth data and VAF signifies the variance function.
Single evaluation indicator tends to be limited and thus a compre­
hensive ranking system proposed by Zorlu et al [74]. was adopted in this
study to describe the synthetic performance of each prediction model. In
this ranking system, an indicator with higher performance would be
endowed with a higher score of ranking and by adding each score, a

8
R. Biswas et al. Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483

Table 2
The detailed prediction performance of PSO-SVR based prediction models.
Swarm size Training set Testing set Total ranking score c g
R2 (10− 2) MSE VAF MAE R2 (10− 2) MSE VAF MAE

25 98.68 1.097 98.68 0.6457 95.76 4.163 95.81 0.9724 58 15.005 1.534
8 8 8 8 6 6 6 8
50 98.63 1.136 98.63 0.6639 95.60 4.304 95.68 1.0182 18 15.639 1.443
2 2 2 1 3 3 3 2
75 98.67 1.105 98.67 0.6505 95.87 4.044 95.93 0.9813 57 12.570 1.633
7 7 7 5 8 8 8 7
100 98.65 1.119 98.65 0.6488 95.72 4.188 95.78 0.9821 39 13.977 1.523
4 4 4 6 5 5 5 6
125 98.63 1.138 98.63 0.6622 95.56 4.346 95.63 1.0214 11 15.777 1.433
2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1
150 98.66 1.113 98.66 0.6486 95.68 4.224 95.75 0.9853 42 15.038 1.496
6 6 6 7 4 4 4 5
175 98.65 1.123 98.65 0.6590 95.58 4.322 95.66 1.0125 23 16.520 1.435
4 3 4 3 2 2 2 3
200 98.66 1.117 98.66 0.6536 95.77 4.142 95.82 0.9935 46 12.787 1.582
6 5 6 4 7 7 7 4

Table 3
The detailed prediction performance of GWO-SVR based prediction models.
Swarm size Training set Testing set Total ranking score c g
R2 (10− 2) MSE VAF MAE R2 (10− 2) MSE VAF MAE

25 98.65 1.123 98.65 0.6552 95.77 4.138 95.82 0.9962 49 12.606 1.577
7 5 7 4 7 7 7 5
50 98.64 1.129 98.64 0.6578 95.64 4.272 95.70 0.9969 24 14.687 1.481
3 2 3 3 3 3 3 4
75 98.63 1.134 98.63 0.6598 95.60 4.302 95.68 1.0141 8 14.955 1.465
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
100 98.66 1.115 98.66 0.6516 95.85 4.062 95.90 0.9922 62 11.824 1.647
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 6
125 98.65 1.122 98.65 0.6527 95.69 4.215 95.75 0.9879 42 14.302 1.513
4 6 7 6 4 4 4 7
150 98.64 1.127 98.64 0.6589 95.61 4.299 95.68 1.0082 19 15.526 1.459
3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2
175 98.65 1.118 98.65 0.6519 95.71 4.203 95.77 0.9859 51 14.415 1.510
7 7 7 7 5 5 5 8
200 98.65 1.124 98.65 0.6551 95.75 4.163 95.80 0.9997 41 12.726 1.570
7 4 7 5 6 6 6 3

Table 4
The detailed prediction performance of SOA-SVR based prediction models.
Swarm size Training set Testing set Total ranking score c g
R2 (10− 2) MSE VAF MAE R2 (10− 2) MSE VAF MAE

25 98.52 1.226 98.52 0.6813 96.96 2.971 97.01 0.9747 34 1.877 3.151
1 1 1 1 8 8 8 6
50 98.60 1.160 98.60 0.6670 96.38 3.546 96.43 0.9610 40 5.347 2.172
3 3 3 2 7 7 7 8
75 98.59 1.174 98.59 0.6614 95.30 4.602 95.36 1.0338 17 21.848 1.229
2 2 2 4 2 2 2 1
100 98.66 1.112 98.66 0.6495 95.92 3.994 95.97 0.9864 52 10.904 1.705
8 8 8 8 5 5 5 5
125 98.65 1.123 98.65 0.6548 95.64 4.268 95.71 0.9955 40 15.271 1.474
6 6 6 6 4 4 4 4
150 98.66 1.116 98.66 0.6574 95.55 4.352 95.63 1.0142 40 17.793 1.411
8 7 8 5 3 3 3 3
175 98.61 1.156 98.61 0.6649 96.31 3.616 96.35 0.9635 40 5.829 2.090
4 4 4 3 6 6 6 7
200 98.64 1.132 98.64 0.6522 95.19 4.712 95.25 1.0228 27 29.867 1.154
5 5 5 7 1 1 1 2

model would get comprehensive scores. The model with the highest updated based on the open-source toolbox named “LIBSVM” invented by
comprehensive scores would be regarded as the most desirable model in Chang and Lin [75].
this study. It should be noted that all codes are conducted based on the
environment of MATLAB R2016b and the basic configurations of used
computer include the processor with Intel (R) Core (TM) i7-7500U CPU 7.1. Model development based on PSO-SVR methods
running at 2.90 GHz and a 12.0 GB RAM. The hybrid SVR codes were
To develop the intelligent prediction model of carbonation degree,

9
R. Biswas et al. Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483

Table 5
The detailed prediction performance of CSO-SVR based prediction models.
Swarm size Training set Testing set Total ranking score c g
R2 (10− 2) MSE VAF MAE R2 (10− 2) MSE VAF MAE

25 98.65 1.125 98.65 0.6563 95.64 4.271 95.70 0.9968 27 14.851 1.482
3 3 3 3 4 4 4 3
50 98.71 1.074 98.71 0.6433 95.93 3.987 95.99 0.9777 48 13.430 1.678
5 5 5 5 7 7 7 7
75 98.61 1.155 98.61 0.6544 95.68 4.229 95.74 0.9883 28 12.398 1.518
2 2 2 2 5 5 5 5
100 98.84 0.967 98.84 0.6099 95.31 4.594 95.34 0.9735 41 11.920 2.069
6 6 6 6 3 3 3 8
125 98.88 0.934 98.88 0.6068 95.26 4.643 95.28 0.9868 40 12.927 2.143
7 7 7 7 2 2 2 6
150 98.16 1.526 98.16 0.7593 97.50 2.448 97.51 0.9997 30 14.270 1.031
1 1 1 1 8 8 8 2
175 99.02 0.817 99.02 0.5938 95.16 4.734 95.17 1.0224 36 19.857 2.171
8 8 8 8 1 1 1 1
200 98.66 1.116 98.66 0.6528 95.74 4.174 95.79 0.9900 38 13.884 1.543
4 4 4 4 6 6 6 4

Table 6
The best prediction model and corresponding prediction performance of four kinds of prediction methods.
Method Swarm size Training set Testing set Total score c g
R2 (10− 2) MSE VAF MAE R2 (10− 2) MSE VAF MAE

PSO 25 98.68 1.0973 98.683 0.64573 95.75 4.1631 95.811 0.97244 19 15.005 1.534
3 1
CSO 50 98.71 1.0744 98.714 0.64334 95.93 3.9874 95.994 0.97773 31 13.430 1.678
4 4
SOA 100 98.66 1.1122 98.662 0.64952 95.92 3.9943 95.973 0.98642 19 10.904 1.705
2 3
GWO 100 98.66 1.1151 98.66 0.6516 95.85 4.062 95.90 0.9922 13 11.824 1.647
2 2 1 2 2 2 1

Fig. 6. (a) Comparison of optimization process of four kinds of carbonation depth prediction methods (b) Final fitness value of four kinds of carbonation depth
prediction methods.

the PSO algorithm was combined with SVRs in this section. In PSO, there
are a few parameters controlling the optimization performance in
addition to the swarm size and iteration such as acceleration speed of
particle and inertia weight. These parameters are set to be default ac­
cording to the original version of libsvm [75]. It can be found that when
the iteration number reaches around 200, all models basically complete
the optimization process from Fig. 5. By observing the detailed predic­
tion performance in Table 2, it can be found that optimized hyper-
parameters of SVR are in the range of [12.5, 16.5] for C and [1.4, 1.7]
for g. For the PSO-SVR model with the swarm size equal to 25, it brings
the best comprehensive performance as reflected in the highest ranking
score in each indicator of the training set and second highest ranking
score in the testing set. Followed by the model with the swarm size equal
to 75, it obtains the highest ranking score in the testing set and the
second highest ranking score in the whole dataset. In addition, it can be
observed that when the swarm size is equal to 125, it shows all lowest
scores in the testing set and a comprehensive lowest score. Therefore,
the swarm size must be selected carefully so as to procure the most
robust carbonation prediction model.
7.2. Model development based on GWO-SVR methods
To select the most optimal model, eight swarm sizes were opted to
develop GWO-SVR prediction models. According to the optimization
results, it can be found that optimized hyper-parameter C locate in the
range of [11.8, 15.5] and optimized g locate in the range of [1.4, 1.7].
These parameter ranges are similar to the ones from PSO. Different from
the PSO, GWO presents a faster convergence speed and all models
almost accomplish convergence before 10 iterations from Fig. 5. In
addition, the shapes of convergence curves are similar. But the predic­
tive results brought by different swarm size is different. When the swarm
size is 100, it produces the best comprehensive performance which is not
only confined to the performance of training set but also illustrated by
the best performance of testing set in R2, MSE and VAF. The lowest

10
R. Biswas et al. Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483

comprehensive score was produced by the swarm size equal to 75 in

which each indicator presents the lowest score. Detailed prediction
performance of GWO-SVR based prediction models can be found in
Table 3.

7.3. Model development based on SOA-SVR methods

SOA is a novel optimization algorithm and has not been investigated

Fig. 7. Intuitive display of ranking results of four kinds of SVR-based carbon­
ation depth prediction models.
in the field of intelligent prediction of carbonation depth. By observing
the optimization curves from Fig. 5, fast convergence phenomenon still
can be produced by SOA-SVR approaches. A comparatively higher
fitness value brought by swarm size equal to 25 can be found in Fig. 5
compared with other SOA-based models which indicates that this model
brings inferior optimization performance in the training set. And this
finding can be verified by the data from Table 4, because when the
swarm size is 25, it presents the lowest score of each indicator in the
training set. According to the optimization results, it can be observed
that optimized C locate in the range of [1.8, 29.9] and optimized g locate
in the range of [1.1, 3.2]. These results indicates that SOA achieve the
searching of optimal hyper-parameters in a greater range compared with
PSO and GWO. Finally, the best comprehensive performance is procured
by the GWO model with swarm size equal to 100. Corresponding
training performance includes R2 = 0.9866, MSE = 1.112, VAF = 98.66
and MAE = 0.6495 and for the testing set: R2 = 0.9592, MSE = 3.994,
VAF = 95.97, MAE = 0.9864.

Fig. 8. Correlation analysis between measured carbonation depth and predicted carbonation depth for training sets.

11
R. Biswas et al. Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483

Fig. 9. Correlation analysis between measured carbonation depth and predicted carbonation depth for testing sets.

Fig. 10. (a) Taylor Diagram for training sets (b) Taylor Diagram for testing sets.

12
R. Biswas et al.
7.4. Model development based on CSO-SVR methods
The CSO was proposed in the recent years and has not been inves­
tigated in the area of prediction of carbonation depth to the best of our
knowledge. In this study, it was combined with SVR techniques to
explore the carbonation behaviour of FA concrete. The sharp decrease of
fitness value of all optimization curve before 10-iteration and a slightly
difference of the final fitness value of each optimal curve can be
observed in Fig. 5. From Table 5, optimized hyper-parameters C and g
are located in the range of [11.9, 19.9] and [1.0, 2.2], respectively. For
the model with the swarm size equal to 175, it produces the superior
performance in the training set but fails to present desirable in the
testing set. For the issues of carbonation prediction, the performance of
training set and testing set is the same significant because the former
determines the goodness of optimization process and the former de­
termines the generalization ability of prediction models. Herein, the
comprehensive ranking system plays an important role in selecting the
most robust model. By means of the comprehensive ranking system, it
can be found that when the swarm size is equal to 50, its performance of
single indicator is moderate but its comprehensive is outstanding.
Therefore, the model with the swarm size equal to 50 will be recom­
mended to be best CSO-SVR model.
8. Discussion
The main aim of the present study is to investigate and anticipate the
carbonation degree. Regarding this, four kinds of modelling techniques
were utilized to approximate carbonation degree, namely PSO-SVR,
CSO-SVR, SOA-SVR and GWO-SVR. Six significant influential factors
were identified and integrated to investigate the carbonation perfor­
mance. The same iteration number and swarm size group were tried to
explore the performance of four kinds of prediction approaches. By
means of four evaluation indicators and comprehensive ranking sys­
tems, the best model in each prediction method can be screened out
according to Tables 2-5. Filtered results have been listed in Table 6. It
can be found that when the swarm size is equal to 25, 50, 100 and 100
for PSO-SVR, CSO-SVR, SOA-SVR and GWO-SVR, respectively. Devel­
oped model can procure the best comprehensive prediction perfor­
mance. From Fig. 6 (a), the optimization process of the best model of
each method can be observed. The fast convergence of optimization
process can be observed in CSO-SVR, SOA-SVR and GWO-SVR which
reflects their stronger learning ability compared with PSO-SVR. In
addition, the comparatively slight variance of the final fitness value can
be observed among CSO-SVR, SOA-SVR and GWO-SVR. For making this
difference clearly, the final fitness values of four kinds of SVR-based
carbonation depth prediction methods were demonstrated in Fig. 6
(b). It can be found that CSO-SVR based model obtain the best fitness
value. This finding can be verified in Table 6 because CSO-SVR model
get the best performance of each indicator in the training set. Aside from
that, CSO-SVR based model also achieve the best comprehensive per­
formance in the testing set. And thus, the CSO-SVR based model would
be considered as the most suitable to anticipate carbonation depth.
Detailed results can be found in Table 6. An intuitive display of ranking
results of four kinds of SVR-based carbonation depth prediction models
have been demonstrated in Fig. 7. Predicted carbonation depth along
with measured carbonation depth by PSO-SVR, CSO-SVR, SOA-SVR,
GWO-SVR have been demonstrated in Figs. 8-9. Three functions
including y = x, y = 1.1x and y = 0.9x are used for depicting the predict
performance. It can be found that most predicted values are in good
agreement with actual carbonation depth which indicated that proposed
four kinds of techniques can be considered to be accurate and robust.
It should be noted that the data analyzed in this study was compiled
by Kellouche et al. (2019) [36]. These authors developed different
carbonation depth prediction models based on various back-propagation
ANN techniques. The data was divided into training set, validation set
and testing set according to the ratio of 6:2:2. A desirable agreement can
13
Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483
be achieved between the predictive carbonation and experimental
carbonation. Compared with the study by Kellouche et al. (2019) [36],
the 5-fold cross validation was implemented and thus enhance the
robustness of proposed four intelligent prediction models in the current
study.
The created models are also examined using the Taylor diagram for
both the training and testing datasets [76] as illustrated in Fig. 10 (a)
and Fig. 10 (b) for a more understandable presentation. The accuracy of
the model in forecasting expected output is determined by this graphic.
The relative quantification of the three models is investigated using
three distinct statistical measures (RMSE, correlation coefficients, and
ratio of standard deviations). The reference point, also known as centred
RMSE, is the distance from the measurement point. The standard devi­
ation and correlation coefficient of the reference model are both 1. Ac­
cording to the graph, all three models performed well, with standard
deviation and correlation coefficient values approaching 1. The data
points are overlapped for the models as because the results are very close
to each other.
9. Conclusion
This study developed four kinds of SVR-based methods to rapidly
predict the carbonation depth by integrating six influenced factors, i.e.,
binder content, FA replacement level, water-to-binder ratio, CO2 con­
centration, relative humidity and time of exposure. Predictive perfor­
mance of each prediction approach was evaluated by four kinds of
mathematical indicators, i.e., R2, MSE, VAF and MAE. All prediction
models can achieve the R2 above 0.95 for the training set and 0.98 for
the testing set. It can be indicated that proposed carbonation prediction
methods can produce satisfactory prediction results. By utilizing the
comprehensive ranking system, it can be calculated that CSO-SVR based
model with swarm size equal to 50 and iteration number equal to 500
brings the best comprehensive prediction performance. Although a
slightly better performance of CSO-SVR was observed (R2 = 0.9871,
MSE = 1.074, VAF = 98.71 and MAE = 0.6433 for the training set and
R2 = 0.9593, MSE = 3.987, VAF = 95.99 and MAE = 0.977 for the
testing set). This reflects that CSO-SVR is a more flexible and robust
method for predicting the carbonation depth based on the current
dataset. This also indicates that CSO is a comparatively more effective
optimization algorithm compared with other three kinds of optimization
algorithms. Finally, obtained carbonation prediction models can be
considered to assess the accelerated carbonation of FA concrete when
encountering the similar carbonation cases and also anticipate other
carbonation-related events.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Rahul Biswas: Conceptualization, Data curation. Enming Li:
Methodology, Writing – original draft. Ning Zhang: Visualization,
Investigation, Software. Shashikant Kumar: Supervision. Baboo Rai:
Validation. Jian Zhou: Writing – review & editing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgments
Enming Li is supported by China Scholarship Council (Grant No.
202006370006). Jian Zhou is supported by National Key R&D Program
R. Biswas et al.
of China (Grant No. 2019YFC0605304).
References:
[1] P. Amorim J. De Brito L. Evangelista Concrete made with coarse concrete
aggregate: Influence of curing on durability ACI Materials Journal 109 2 2012 195
204 https://doi.org/10.14359/51683706.
[2] S. Marinković, J. Dragaš, I. Ignjatović, N. Tošić, Environmental assessment of green
concretes for structural use, J. Cleaner Prod. 154 (2017) 633–649, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.015.
[3] S. Chiranjiakumari Devi, R. Ahmad Khan, Influence of graphene oxide on sulfate
attack and carbonation of concrete containing recycled concrete aggregate, Constr.
Build. Mater. 250 (2020), 118883, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
conbuildmat.2020.118883.
[4] V. Carević, I. Ignjatović, J. Dragaš, Model for practical carbonation depth
prediction for high volume fly ash concrete and recycled aggregate concrete,
Constr. Build. Mater. 213 (2019) 194–208, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
conbuildmat.2019.03.267.
[5] I. Monteiro, F.A. Branco, J.D. Brito, R. Neves, Statistical analysis of the carbonation
coefficient in open air concrete structures, Constr. Build. Mater. 29 (2012)
263–269, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.10.028.
[6] N.S. Martys, C.F. Ferraris, Capillary transport in mortars and concrete, Cem. Concr.
Res. 27 (5) (1997) 747–760.
[7] K. Sisomphon, L. Franke, Carbonation rates of concretes containing high volume of
pozzolanic materials, Cem. Concr. Res. 37 (12) (2007) 1647–1653, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.08.014.
[8] H.-J. Ho, A. Iizuka, E. Shibata, H. Tomita, K. Takano, T. Endo, Utilization of CO2 in
direct aqueous carbonation of concrete fines generated from aggregate recycling:
Influences of the solid–liquid ratio and CO2 concentration, J. Cleaner Prod. 312
(2021) 127832.
[9] C. Chen G. Habert Y. Bouzidi A. Jullien Environmental impact of cement
production: detail of the different processes and cement plant variability
evaluation Journal of Cleaner Production 18 5 2010 478 485 https://doi.org/
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.12.014.
[10] P.J. Williams, J.J. Biernacki, L.R. Walker, H.M. Meyer, C.J. Rawn, J. Bai,
Microanalysis of alkali-activated fly ash-CH pastes, Cem. Concr. Res. 32 (6) (2002)
963–972, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-8846(02)00734-2.
[11] J. Liu, K. Tang, Q. Qiu, D. Pan, Z. Lei, F. Xing, Experimental investigation on pore
structure characterization of concrete exposed to water and chlorides, In Materials
(Vol. 6 (9) (2014) 6646–6659, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma7096646.
[12] T.R. Naik, S.S. Singh, M.M. Hossain, Permeability of concrete containing large
amounts of fly ash, Cem. Concr. Res. 24 (5) (1994) 913–922, https://doi.org/
10.1016/0008-8846(94)90011-6.
[13] M.J. McCarthy, R.K. Dhir, Development of high volume fly ash cements for use in
concrete construction, Fuel 84 (11) (2005) 1423–1432, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuel.2004.08.029.
[14] S. Lammertijn, N. De Belie, Porosity, gas permeability, carbonation and their
interaction in high-volume fly ash concrete, Mag. Concr. Res. 60 (7) (2008)
535–545, https://doi.org/10.1680/macr.2008.60.7.535.
[15] N. Bouzoubaâ, A. Bilodeau, B. Tamtsia, S. Foo, Carbonation of fly ash concrete:
Laboratory and field data, Can. J. Civ. Eng. 37 (12) (2010) 1535–1549, https://doi.
org/10.1139/L10-081.
[16] J. Khunthongkeaw, S. Tangtermsirikul, T. Leelawat, A study on carbonation depth
prediction for fly ash concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 20 (9) (2006) 744–753,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2005.01.052.
[17] V.G. Papadakis, Effect of supplementary cementing materials on concrete
resistance against carbonation and chloride ingress, Cem. Concr. Res. 30 (2) (2000)
291–299, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0008-8846(99)00249-5.
[18] C.D. Atiş, Accelerated carbonation and testing of concrete made with fly ash,
Constr. Build. Mater. 17 (3) (2003) 147–152, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-
0618(02)00116-2.
[19] J. Khunthongkeaw, S. Tangtermsirikul, Model for Simulating Carbonation of Fly
Ash Concrete, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 17 (5) (2005) 570–578, https://doi.org/10.1061/
(asce)0899-1561(2005)17:5(570).
[20] K. Kobayashi, Y. Uno, Mechanism of Carbonation of Concrete, Concrete Library of
JSCE 41 (8) (1989) 677–680.
[21] V.G. Papadakis, Effect of fly ash on Portland cement systems: Part I. Low-calcium
fly ash, Cem. Concr. Res. 29 (11) (1999) 1727–1736, https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0008-8846(99)00153-2.
[22] L. Jiang, B. Lin, Y. Cai, A model for predicting carbonation of high-volume fly ash
concrete, Cem. Concr. Res. 30 (5) (2000) 699–702, https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0008-8846(00)00227-1.
[23] S.-J. Kwon, B.J. Lee, Y.Y. Kim, Concrete mix design for service life of rc structures
under carbonation using genetic algorithm, Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2014 (2014)
1–13.
[24] A. Muntean, S.A. Meier, M.A. Peter, J. Kropp, A note on limitations of the use of
accelerated concrete-carbonation tests for sevice-life predictions, Berichte Aus Der
Technomathematik April (2005) 15.
[25] R. Neves, F. Branco, J. De Brito, Field assessment of the relationship between
natural and accelerated concrete carbonation resistance, Cem. Concr. Compos. 41
(2013) 9–15, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2013.04.006.
[26] Alpaydin, E. (2010). Introduction to Machine Learning, Second Editon. In MIT Press
(2010/09/01, Vol. 25, Issue 3). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/
s0269888910000056.
14
Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483
[27] Agarwal, S. (2014). Data mining: Data mining concepts and techniques. In
Proceedings - 2013 International Conference on Machine Intelligence Research and
Advancement, ICMIRA 2013. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMIRA.2013.45.
[28] R. Bekkerman, M. Bilenko, J. Langford, Scaling up machine learning: Introduction,
in: R. Bekkerman, M. Bilenko, J. Langford (Eds.), Scaling up Machine Learning:
Parallel and Distributed Approaches, Cambridge University Press, 2011, pp. 1–20.
[29] S. Marsland Machine learning: An algorithmic perspective. In Machine Learning:
An Algorithmic Perspective, Second Edition (Second) 2014 10.1201/b17476.
[30] G. Danying, W. Bo, Z. Qiming, Fuzzy Possibility Analysis On The Reliability Of The
Carbonation Control Of Concrete. Industrial, Construction 3 (1993).
[31] N.R. Buenfeld, N.M. Hassanein, PREDICTING THE LIFE OF CONCRETE
STRUCTURES USING NEURAL NETWORKS. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil
Engineers - Structures and Buildings 128 (1) (1998) 38–48.
[32] N.R. Buenfeld, N.M. Hassanein, A.J. Jones, Artificial neural network for predicting
carbonation depth in concrete structures, Manuals and Reports on Engineering
Practice, American Society of Civil Engineers (1998) 77–117.
[33] C. Lu, R. Liu, Predicting Carbonation Depth of Prestressed Concrete under Different
Stress States Using Artificial Neural Network, Advances in Artificial Neural Systems
2009 (2009) 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1155/2009/193139.
[34] Ruan, X. (2009). Prediction of concrete carbonation depth based on support vector
regression. 3rd International Symposium on Intelligent Information Technology
Application, IITA 2009, 3, 172–175. https://doi.org/10.1109/IITA.2009.469.
[35] W.Z. Taffese, E. Sistonen, J. Puttonen, CaPrM: Carbonation prediction model for
reinforced concrete using machine learning methods, Constr. Build. Mater. 100
(2015) 70–82, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.09.058.
[36] Y. Kellouche, B. Boukhatem, M. Ghrici, A. Tagnit-Hamou, Exploring the major
factors affecting fly-ash concrete carbonation using artificial neural network,
Neural Comput. Appl. 31 (2019) 969–988, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-017-
3052-2.
[37] P. Akpinar, I.D. Uwanuakwa, Investigation of the parameters influencing progress
of concrete carbonation depth by using artificial neural networks, Materiales de
Construccion 70 (337) (2020), https://doi.org/10.3989/mc.2020.02019.
[38] E.F. Felix, R. Carrazedo, E. Possan, Carbonation model for fly ash concrete based on
artificial neural network: Development and parametric analysis, Constr. Build.
Mater. 266 (2021) 121050.
[39] S. Chatterji, K.A. Snyder, J. Marchand, Depth profiles of carbonates formed during
natural carbonation, Cem. Concr. Res. 32 (12) (2002) 1923–1930, https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0008-8846(02)00908-0.
[40] L.J. Parrott, Carbonation, moisture and empty pores, Adv. Cem. Res. 4 (15) (1992)
111–118, https://doi.org/10.1680/adcr.1992.4.15.111.
[41] A. Morandeau, M. Thiéry, P. Dangla, Investigation of the carbonation mechanism
of CH and C-S-H in terms of kinetics, microstructure changes and moisture
properties, Cem. Concr. Res. 56 (2014) 153–170, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cemconres.2013.11.015.
[42] P.H.R. Borges, J.O. Costa, N.B. Milestone, C.J. Lynsdale, R.E. Streatfield,
Carbonation of CH and C-S-H in composite cement pastes containing high amounts
of BFS, Cem. Concr. Res. 40 (2) (2010) 284–292, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cemconres.2009.10.020.
[43] A.V. Saetta, B.A. Schrefler, R.V. Vitaliani, The carbonation of concrete and the
mechanism of moisture, heat and carbon dioxide flow through porous materials,
Cem. Concr. Res. 23 (4) (1993) 761–772, https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-8846(93)
90030-D.
[44] G. Villain, M. Thiery, G. Platret, Measurement methods of carbonation profiles in
concrete: Thermogravimetry, chemical analysis and gammadensimetry, Cem.
Concr. Res. 37 (8) (2007) 1182–1192, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cemconres.2007.04.015.
[45] Y. Liu, S. Zhao, C. Y. (2008). The forecast of carbonation depth of concrete based
on RBF neural network. Second Int. Symp. Intell. Inf. Technol. Appl. IITA 2008, Vol. 3,
IEEE Computer Society, Shanghai, 544–548.
[46] Bu, N., Yang, G., Zhao, H. (2009). Prediction of Concrete Carbonization Depth
Based on DE-BP Neural Network. 2009 Third International Symposium on Intelligent
Information Technology Application, 3, 240–243. https://doi.org/10.1109/
IITA.2009.252.
[47] E. Li F. Yang M. Ren X. Zhang J. Zhou M. Khandelwal Prediction of blasting mean
fragment size using support vector regression combined with five optimization
algorithms Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 13 6 2021
1380 1397 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2021.07.013.
[48] E. Li, J. Zhou, X. Shi, D. Jahed, A. Zhi, Y. Xin, C. Peisheng, Developing a hybrid
model of salp swarm algorithm - based support vector machine to predict the
strength of fiber - reinforced cemented paste backfill, Engineering with Computers
37 (4) (2021) 3519–3540, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-01014-x.
[49] R. Biswas A. Bardhan P. Samui B. Rai S. Nayak D.J. Armaghani Efficient soft
computing techniques for the prediction of compressive strength of geopolymer
concrete Computers and Concrete 28 2 2021 221 232 https://doi.org/10.12989/
cac.2021.28.2.221.
[50] C. Cortes, V. Vapnik, Support-vector networks, Machine Learning 20 (3) (1995)
273–297, https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00994018.
[51] Y. Karimi, S.O. Prasher, R.M. Patel, S.H. Kim, Application of support vector
machine technology for weed and nitrogen stress detection in corn, Comput.
Electron. Agric. 51 (1–2) (2006) 99–109, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compag.2005.12.001.
[52] M. Trebar, N. Steele, Application of distributed SVM architectures in classifying
forest data cover types, Comput. Electron. Agric. 63 (2) (2008) 119–130, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2008.02.001.
R. Biswas et al.
[53] Q. Li, B. Yang, Y. Li, N. Deng, L. Jing, Constructing support vector machine
ensemble with segmentation for imbalanced datasets, Neural Comput. Appl. 22
(SUPPL.1) (2013) 249–256, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-012-1041-z.
[54] H. Moayedi, S. Hayati, Artificial intelligence design charts for predicting friction
capacity of driven pile in clay, Neural Comput. Appl. 31 (11) (2019) 7429–7445,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-018-3555-5.
[55] P. Samui, B. Dixon, Application of support vector machine and relevance vector
machine to determine evaporative losses in reservoirs, Hydrol. Process. 26 (9)
(2012) 1361–1369.
[56] S. Mirjalili, S.M. Mirjalili, A. Lewis, Grey Wolf Optimizer, Adv. Eng. Softw. 69
(2014) 46–61.
[57] X. Meng, Y. Liu, X. Gao, H. Zhang, A new bio-inspired algorithm: Chicken swarm
optimization, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture
Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (2014),
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11857-4_10.
[58] W. Shi, Y. Guo, S. Yan, Y. Yu, P. Luo, J. Li, Optimizing Directional Reader Antennas
Deployment in UHF RFID Localization System by Using a MPCSO Algorithm, IEEE
Sens. J. 18 (12) (2018) 5035–5048.
[59] M. Kumar, J. Raman, P. Priya, Particle swarm optimization, IEEE International
Conference on Neural Networks - Conference Proceedings 2 (1) (2015) 54–87.
[60] V.N. Gaitonde, S.R. Karnik, Minimizing burr size in drilling using artificial neural
network (ANN)-particle swarm optimization (PSO) approach, J. Intell. Manuf. 23
(5) (2012) 1783–1793, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-010-0481-5.
[61] G. Dhiman, V. Kumar, Seagull optimization algorithm: Theory and its applications
for large-scale industrial engineering problems, Knowl.-Based Syst. 165 (2019)
169–196.
[62] M. Li, B.L. Lu, Emotion classification based on gamma-band EEG, in: Proceedings of
the 31st Annual international Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and
Biology Society: Engineering the Future of BioMedicine, 2009, https://doi.org/
10.1109/IEMBS.2009.5334139.
[63] Y. Qiu J. Zhou M. Khandelwal H. Yang P. Yang C. Li Performance evaluation of
hybrid WOA-XGBoost 2021 Engineering with Computers GWO-XGBoost and BO-
XGBoost models to predict blast-induced ground vibration 10.1007/s00366-021-
01393-9.
[64] S. Wold, K. Esbensen, P. Geladi, Principal component analysis Chemometrics and
intelligent laboratory systems 2, IEEE Conference on Emerging Technologies &
Factory Automation Efta 2 (2) (1987) 704–706.
[65] J.D. Rodríguez, A. Pérez, J.A. Lozano, Sensitivity Analysis of k-Fold Cross
Validation in Prediction Error Estimation, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell.
32 (3) (2010) 569–575, https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2009.187.
15
Construction and Building Materials 346 (2022) 128483
[66] S. Mirjalili, A.H. Gandomi, S.Z. Mirjalili, S. Saremi, H. Faris, S.M. Mirjalili, Salp
Swarm Algorithm: A bio-inspired optimizer for engineering design problems, Adv.
Eng. Softw. 114 (2017) 163–191, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
advengsoft.2017.07.002.
[67] P.G. Asteris, A.D. Skentou, A. Bardhan, P. Samui, P.B. Lourenço, Soft computing
techniques for the prediction of concrete compressive strength using Non-
Destructive tests, Constr. Build. Mater. 303 (2021) 124450.
[68] A. Bardhan, R. Biswas, N. Kardani, M. Iqbal, P. Samui, M.P. Singh, P.G. Asteris,
A novel integrated approach of augmented grey wolf optimizer and ANN for
estimating axial load carrying-capacity of concrete-filled steel tube columns,
Constr. Build. Mater. 337 (2022) 127454.
[69] M. Kumar, V. Kumar, R. Biswas, P. Samui, M.R. Kaloop, M. Alzara, A.M. Yosri,
Hybrid ELM and MARS-Based Prediction Model for Bearing Capacity of Shallow
Foundation, Processes 10 (5) (2022), https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10051013.
[70] N. Kardani, A. Bardhan, P. Samui, M. Nazem, P.G. Asteris, A. Zhou, Predicting the
thermal conductivity of soils using integrated approach of ANN and PSO with
adaptive and time-varying acceleration coefficients, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 173 (2022)
107427.
[71] A. Bardhan, A. GuhaRay, S. Gupta, B. Pradhan, C. Gokceoglu, A novel integrated
approach of ELM and modified equilibrium optimizer for predicting soil
compression index of subgrade layer of Dedicated Freight Corridor, Transp.
Geotech. 32 (2022) 100678.
[72] A. Bardhan, N. Kardani, A. GuhaRay, A. Burman, P. Samui, Y. Zhang, Hybrid
ensemble soft computing approach for predicting penetration rate of tunnel boring
machine in a rock environment. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical,
Engineering. 13 (6) (2021) 1398–1412.
[73] A. Bardhan, N. Kardani, A.K. Alzoùbi, B. Roy, P. Samui, A.H. Gandomi, Novel
integration of extreme learning machine and improved Harris hawks optimization
with particle swarm optimization-based mutation for predicting soil consolidation
parameter. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical, Engineering. (2022).
[74] K. Zorlu, C. Gokceoglu, F. Ocakoglu, H.A. Nefeslioglu, S. Acikalin, Prediction of
uniaxial compressive strength of sandstones using petrography-based models, Eng.
Geol. 96 (3–4) (2008) 141–158, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2007.10.009.
[75] C.-C. Chang, C.-J. Lin, LIBSVM: A Library for support vector machines, ACM Trans.
Intell. Syst. Technol. 2 (3) (2011) 1–27.
[76] K.E. Taylor, Summarizing multiple aspects of model performance in a single
diagram, Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres 106 (7) (2001)
7183–7192, https://doi.org/10.1029/2000JD900719.