Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tribology International
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/triboint

Prediction of wear performance of ZK60 / CeO2 composites using machine

learning models
Fatih Aydin a, *, Rafet Durgut b, Mustafa Mustu c, Bilge Demir c
a
TOBB Technical Sciences Vocational School, Karabuk University, Karabuk, Turkey
b
Department of Computer Engineering, Bandirma Onyedi Eylul University, Bandirma, Turkey
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Karabuk University, Karabuk, Turkey

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

Keywords: In this study, ZK60 magnesium matrix composites were produced with different content of CeO2 (0.25, 0.5 and 1
ZK60/CeO2 composites wt%) by hot pressing. The wear behaviour of the samples was investigated under loads of 5 N, 10 N, 20 N and 30
Wear N, at sliding speeds of 75 mm/s, 110 mm/s and 145 mm/s. The worn surfaces, wear debris, and counterface
Machine learning
material was analysed to reveal the wear mechanisms. Five machine learning algorithms were established to
Worn surface
compare their prediction abilities of wear behaviour on a limited dataset measured under different test opera­
tions. The hyperparameter tuning phase of each model was conducted to provide a fair comparison. The pre­
diction results were examined under various statistical measures. In the light of prediction results, the superior
model was determined.

1. Introduction strength and ductility than micro-reinforcements [39,42,43].

Magnesium (Mg) has excellent potential to be used to reduce emis­
sions in the aerospace and automotive industries due to its low density,
good machinability, excellent vibration damping capacity, and recy­
clability [1–3] However, there are important disadvantages, such as low
elastic modulus, poor wear resistance, and high corrosion rate, which
make using Mg difficult [4,5]. To overcome these problems, different
particle reinforcements are added to the Mg alloy matrix, and the
development of different properties of these composites is reported [6,
7]. In the literature, different reinforcement particles such as borides
(TiB2 [8–11], ZrB2 [12–14], carbides (B4C [15–17], SiC [18–20], TiC
[21,22]), oxides (Al2O3 [23,24], TiO2 [25,26]) nitrides (TiN [27,28], BN
[29,30]), carbonaceous materials (GNPs [31,32], CNT [33,34]), and
waste materials (eggshell [35,36], fly ash[37,38]) have been widely
used for Mg matrix composites.
In recent years, CeO2 has emerged as a promising reinforcement
element for Mg matrix composite materials, thanks to its high hardness,
thermal stability, and super wear resistance [39–41]. Researchers
generally prefer nano reinforcement particles at low content to
micro-supplements at high reinforcement content. This is because low
content nano-reinforcements do not negatively affect the material den­
sity and are reported to provide properties such as higher specific
When the literature studies were examined, a limited number of
studies were found on Mg / CeO2 composites. In one of those studies,
Mallick et al.[43] investigated the mechanical properties, damping ca­
pacity and ignition resistance of pure Mg / CeO2 (0.5, 1 and 1.5 vol%)
composites produced by powder metallurgy. It was reported that the
microhardness, damping capacity and ignition resistance of pure Mg
increased with increasing CeO2 content. Kujur et al. [44] studied the
corrosion and mechanical performance of pure Mg, Mg / 1 CeO2,
Mg-0.5Zn / 1.0CeO2 nanocomposite manufactured by powder metal­
lurgy. They reported that the compressive strength of composite mate­
rials is higher than that of pure Mg. Also, the best corrosion resistance
was reported for Mg / 1CeO2 composite. Gupta et al. [39] investigated
the effect of 2 wt% CeO2 particle size (submicron, micron, and nano) on
the mechanical and flammability properties of Mg produced by dis­
integrated melt deposition. The best mechanical properties and ignition
temperature was reported for nanoparticle addition.
Machine Learning (ML), a branch of artificial intelligence, has been
used as a preliminary and key element over the course of two decades in
different fields. Even if the foundations of ML has studied in computer
science and maths, the applications of ML have widened to several fields
biology [45], chemistry [46], and manufacturing [47]. The integration
of ML and material science has provided two main advantages; 1)

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: fatih.aydin@karabuk.edu.tr (F. Aydin).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2022.107945
Received 17 June 2022; Received in revised form 20 July 2022; Accepted 22 September 2022
Available online 26 September 2022
0301-679X/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
F. Aydin et al.
predicting the output measurement (such as wear rate [48], tensile
strength [49], and hardness [50] etc.) and 2) defining the complex-order
correlation between the input variables. Even though ML methods de­
mand a high volume of data, they also provide promising results with a
relatively small set of data. Traditional ML models (Random Forest,
Decision Tree, Support Vector Machines, and so on) have the ability to
predict output measurement parameters with high accuracy [51–53].
Machine learning is highly important in predicting the wear perfor­
mance of Mg matrix composites due to its outstanding success in pre­
dicting the results of time-consuming and costly experiments. Based on
the literature studies, no study was detected on the prediction of the
wear behaviour of ZK60 / CeO2 composites. The scope of this study is to
study the prediction of wear performance of ZK60 / CeO2 composites by
different machine learning models (Support Vector Regressor, Random
Forest, Multi-Layer Perceptron, Extreme Gradient Boosting and Decision
Tree). For this reason, ZK60 / CeO2 composites (0.25, 0.5 and 1 wt%)
were produced through powder metallurgy. The wear performance of
the samples was evaluated for sliding speeds of 75 mm/s, 110 mm/s and
145 mm/s under load of 5, 10, 20, 30 and 40 N. The worn surfaces,
counter-face materials, and wear debris were investigated to understand
the dominant wear mechanism for specific wear conditions. The five
machine learning algorithms were developed to predict the wear per­
formance of the samples.
2. Experimental study
ZK60 Mg alloy and CeO2 powders were chosen as matrix and rein­
forcement materials, respectively. The chemical composition of the
matrix material is (wt%): 5.65 Zn, 0.43 Zr and Mg balance. ZK60 powder
size is about 48 µm, CeO2 (purity 99.8%) powders are 100 nm. The raw
materials were supplied by Nanografi Co. Ltd, Turkey. Fig. 1 shows the
SEM images of the ZK60 and CeO2 powders.
Three different weight (wt%) fractions, 0.25%, 0.5%, 1% CeO2, were
used to produce the composites. The volume percentage (vol%) of the
CeO2 particulates were calculated as 0.51%, 1.04% and 2.15%,
respectively. The mixed powders were 12.5 g for each production.
Initially, CeO2 nanopowders were added to ethyl alcohol, and an ul­
trasonic vibration device was used to separate possible agglomerated
particles. Then, in order to obtain a homogeneous mixture, ZK60 matrix
powders were added to the CeO2 powders after ultrasonic vibration
treatment and mixed at 180 ◦ C in a vacuum distillation process. The
alcohol, which has a low boiling point (78.3 ◦ C), was removed from the
mixture by evaporation under the influence of temperature. The pro­
duction process steps are depicted in Fig. 2.
The powder mixture obtained after the last mixing process was
poured into the graphite mould. The production was carried out with an
atmosphere-controlled hot pressing furnace (MSE_1200). The hot-
pressing parameters were 1 hr time, 525 ◦ C temperature, and 45 MPa
pressure. All productions were carried out under an argon atmosphere.
Fig. 1. SEM images of the powders a)ZK60 and b) CeO2.
2
Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945
The produced composite samples are approximately 32 mm in diameter
and 8 mm in height.
Hardness measurement tests were performed using a Vickers hard­
ness test machine (Qness, Q10A+) under a 1 kg load. Seven measure­
ments were taken from each sample, and the average value of these
measurements was evaluated as the final hardness result.
Density measurements were made with a Kern electronic balance
with an accuracy of 0.1 mg. The actual and relative densities of the
samples were measured using the Archimedes principle. The samples
were first weighed in air and then in distilled water. The relevant for­
mula used in the calculation is given below [54,55]:
ma
ρ= ρ (1)
ma − mw w
where; ρ is the density of specimen (g/cm3), ma is the mass of specimen
in the air, mw is the mass of the specimen in water and ρw is the density of
the water.
The phases formed during the production of ZK60 matrix composites
were detected by an X-ray diffraction machine (XRD, Rigaku Ultima IV)
ranging between 10◦ and 90◦ with a scanning rate of 2◦ min− 1 (2θ Bragg
angle). Microstructure inspections were made by using scanning elec­
tron microscopy SEM (Carl Zeiss Ultra Plus) equipped with an energy-
dispersive spectrometer (EDS) (Bruker X Flash 6/10).
The wear behaviour of Mg/CeO2 nanocomposites was studied on a
reciprocating tribometer device (UTS, T10/T20) under dry sliding
conditions. The parameters for wear tests are 5, 10, 20, 30, and 40 N
loads and 75, 110, and 145 mm/s sliding speed. The sliding distance was
100 m. The counter-face material was AISI 420 stainless steel ball. After
wear tests were completed, the wear cross-sectional area (mm2) of the
samples was measured with a high accuracy Mitutoyo SJ-410 device.
The volume loss (mm3) was found by multiplying the cross-sectional
area by the stroke distance. To detect wear mechanisms, worn sur­
faces, wear debris, and counter-face materials were analysed using SEM.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Density and microstructure characterization
The density results of the ZK60 alloy and ZK60 / CeO2 composites are
given in Table 1. It can be seen that the experimental density values of
the samples are very close to the theoretical density values. This shows
the manufacturability of ZK60/ CeO2 composites by hot pressing as the
near net shape method. The maximum relative density was obtained for
the ZK60 alloy (99.89%). The relative density of the samples decreases
with increasing CeO2 content. The decrease in relative density, which
means increased porosity, can be attributed to the existence of ceramic
nanoparticles with a high melting point, which impedes compressibility
and worsens consolidation [56,57]. The increasing porosity for Mg
matrix composites was reported with increasing CeO2 content by Gupta
F. Aydin et al. Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945

Fig. 2. The schematic representation of production steps.

et al. It was also reported that the total porosity ratio is less than 1.5%
Table 1
[39,43]. In this case, it is seen that the density results of this study and
Density results of the samples.
the results in the literature are consistent.
Material Theoretical density Experimental density Relative Fig. 3 shows the SEM micrographs of the samples. It is well seen that
(g/cm3) (g/cm3) density (%)
the microstructure images of the samples have no discernible defect and
ZK60 alloy 1.830 1.828 99.89 microporosity.The yellow and red arrows indicate the intermetallic
ZK60 / 0.25 1.843 1.840 99.83 phase and the nanoparticles, respectively. The intermetallic phases are
CeO2
ZK60 / 0.5 1.857 1.851 99.67
clearly seen in Fig. 3a (for enlarged image). It can be said that these
CeO2 precipitates are Mg-Zn intermetallic compounds due to the high Mg and
ZK60 / 1 1.884 1.857 98.56 Zn content in the alloy. The formation of Mg-Zn intermetallics was re­
CeO2 ported by Banijamali et al. for the ZK60 alloy [58]. The agglomeration of
CeO2 nanoparticles can be seen for all composite materials regardless of

Fig. 3. SEM images of the samples a) ZK60, b) ZK60 / 0.25 CeO2, c) ZK60 / 0.5 CeO2 and d) ZK60 / 1 CeO2.

3
F. Aydin et al.
CeO2 content. The agglomeration of nanoparticles in the composite
structure is stated by the high surface area of these particles [59]. In the
literature, agglomeration of nanoparticles was reported for the Mg /
2CeO2 composite [39].
Fig. 4 demonstrates the EDS outputs of the ZK60 alloy. The analysis
of the 1st zone contains a significant amount of Mg and a low amount of
Zn. This result verifies the chemical composition of the ZK60 alloy.
According to the analysis of the white particles (area 2), the high amount
of Mg and Zn confirms that these particles are Mg-Zn intermetallic
compounds. It can also be seen MgO formation (area 3) due to the
presence of high content of O for the structure. The presence of MgO was
reported for the Mg matrix composites in the literature. The oxide for­
mation is related to high chemical activity between Mg and O [15,60,
61].
Fig. 5 shows the elemental mapping of ZK60 / 1 CeO2. These maps
show the distribution of elements Mg, O, Zn and Ce for the scanned area.
The result shows that most of the area consists of Mg. Ce accumulation in
the area indicated by the yellow arrows proves the presence of CeO2 in
these regions. It can also be seen that the distribution of O at grain
boundaries is high. The presence of Zn was also proved in some areas.
Fig. 6 shows the XRD patterns of the ZK60 alloy and ZK60 / CeO2
composites. The analysis verified the presence of Mg phases (Card
Number: 03–065–3365) for all samples. The peak of the MgZn2 phase
(Card Number: 03–065–3578) is also clearly visible for unreinforced
alloy and composite materials. The EDS and XRD analysis confirmed the
existence of Mg-Zn intermetallic (Fig. 4). No peak associated with CeO2
was found for composite materials. CeO2 peaks cannot be detected in full
continuous scanning because of the low CeO2 content in the composite
materials [29,62]. Gupta et al. reported that no CeO2 peaks were
Fig. 4. EDS analysis of ZK60 alloy.
4
Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945
observed in the XRD analysis of the Mg / 2CeO2 composite [39]. The
fixed time scanning method was applied between 2θ equal to 27.5–29.5.
The step width and counting time were determined as 0.05◦ and 60 s,
respectively. The CeO2 peak (Card Number: 03–065–2975) was detected
at 2θ equal to 28.4, which is given inset of Fig. 6.
3.2. Hardness and wear test results
The hardness values of the produced samples are given in Table 2. It
is seen that the hardness of the samples increases with increasing CeO2
content. The maximum hardness was obtained for the ZK60 / 1CeO2
sample (74.9 HV). The hardness increment for ZK60 / 0.25 CeO2, ZK60 /
0.5 CeO2, and ZK60 / 1 CeO2 was 5.4%, 8.3% and, 13.3%, respectively.
The increment in hardness in composite materials is associated with the
resistance of CeO2 particles against indentation [63]. Another important
reason for the increase in hardness is that the reinforcement particles
prevent dislocation movement [64].
Fig. 7 shows the volume loss graph versus loads for different sliding
speeds. From the graphs, it is well seen that the volume loss decreases
with increasing CeO2 content for all sliding speeds and loads. The
maximum wear resistance (the lowest volume loss) was obtained for the
ZK60 / 1 CeO2 sample. For example, the volume loss of the ZK60 alloy
was noted to be 1.44 (mm3), which decreased to 1.01(mm3) for the ZK60
/ 1 CeO2 under load of 40 N and sliding speed of 75 mm/s. For a sliding
speed of 145 mm/s and under the load of 40 N, the volume loss of ZK60
/ 1 CeO2 was 17.9% lower than unreinforced ZK60 alloy. In the litera­
ture, the increase in wear performance for metal matrix composite
materials are explained by different mechanisms. The resistance of the
reinforcement elements with high hardness in the structure of composite
F. Aydin et al. Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945

Fig. 5. EDS elemental mapping analysis of ZK60 / 1 CeO2.

Table 2
Hardness results of the samples.
Material Hardness (HV1) Hardness increment (%)

ZK60 alloy 66.1 ± 1.2 –

ZK60 / 0.25 CeO2 69.7 ± 1.7 5.4
ZK60 / 0.5 CeO2 71.6 ± 1.8 8.3
ZK60 / 1 CeO2 74.9 ± 2.0 13.3

HV1: Vickers hardness at 1 kgf load.

materials to wear damage is one of the essential wear increase mecha­

nisms [65,66]. It is stated that the reinforcement particles act as a
load-bearing component [67]. The decrease in the contact area between
the metal matrix and the steel counter-face is another important reason
for improving tribological performance [68]. For the Fig. 7, it can be
clearly seen that the volume loss of all samples increases with increasing
applied load. It was reported that increasing the applied load worsens
the wear performance with higher deformation, as it increases the
contact pressure and leads to an increase in the contact area among the
surfaces [65,69]. It was also stated that the increase in applied load leads
to an increase in wear rate due to the ploughing mechanism [70]. In the
literature, there are many studies in which the wear rate increases with
increasing load. In one of those studies, Narayanasamy et al. [70] re­
Fig. 6. XRD pattern of the samples a) ZK60, b) ZK60 / 0.25 CeO2, c) ZK60 / 0.5
ported that the wear rate increased for all wear conditions of pure Mg
CeO2 and d)ZK60 / 1 CeO2.
and Mg/ZnO nanocomposite with increasing load. Banijamali et al. [58]
investigated the wear behaviour ZK60 and ZK60 / 3 wt% Y alloys under
loads of 5, 20, 40 and 60 N. They reported that the increased applied

5
F. Aydin et al.
Fig. 7. Volume loss graphs versus load under different sliding speeds a) 75 mm/s, b) 110 mm/s and, c) 140 mm/s.
load leads to a significant increase in wear rate for both samples. Turan
et al. [71] also reported that the wear rate of Mg / MWCNT (0.25 and
0.5 wt%) nanocomposites rises with increasing loads (from 10 N to
40 N).
Fig. 8 shows the volume loss graph versus sliding speeds for different
loads. From the graphs, it is seen that the volume loss decreases for all
materials with the increase of the sliding speed for all loads in general.
For example, under load of 40 N, the volume loss of the ZK60 / 1 CeO2
for sliding speed of 75 mm/s, 110 mm/s, 145 mm/s was noted to be
1.01 (mm3), 0.86 (mm3), 0.73 (mm3), respectively. As an exception, a
different trend was observed under 5 and 10 N loads. In the transition
from 75 mm/s to 110 mm/s, the volume loss first increases, and after
110 mm/s, the volume loss decreases (except for ZK60 under the load of
10 N). Increasing the sliding speed increases the strain rate and surface
hardness, and increasing surface hardness improves the wear perfor­
mance by reducing the contact area [72]. Similar findings were reported
by several researchers. In one of those studies, Shen et al. [73] investi­
gated the wear behaviour of AZ31 and AZ31 / SiC (1 vol%) nano­
composite under loads of 10, 20 and 30 N, for sliding speeds of 0.1, 0.2
and 0.5 m/s. They reported that the wear rates of the samples decreased
when sliding velocity increases. Gupta et al. [74] reported that the wear
rate of the AZ31 / Al2O3 nanocomposite decreases with increasing
sliding speeds (from 1 m/s to 10 m/s). They claimed that the
micro-cutting effect under low sliding velocity, the removed material is
higher than that of high sliding velocity. Aydin et al. [29] also reported
that the wear rate of the Mg / BN nanocomposite was reduced with
increasing sliding speed (from 80 mm/s to 180 mm/s). Unlike the above
literature studies, Zhou et al. [75] reported a different wear behaviour
for the AZ91 alloy at low load and different sliding speeds. They
6
Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945
reported that the wear rate increased up to sliding speed of 0.1 mm/s
and decreased after this value. The authors attributed this to the fact that
the heat generated by the friction between the matrix material and the
counter material significantly affects the wear process. They claimed
that the high friction coefficient at low sliding speed is the result of
abrasion between soft and hard contact surfaces. However, increased
sliding speed leads to increase in contact temperature and oxidation of
the surface. As a result, the friction and wear rate decreases due to
oxidation of the surface. The findings of the study of Zhou et al. is
consistent with the result of the wear test under low load for this study
(Fig. 8a).
The effect of CeO2 content on wear behaviour can also be seen in
Fig. 8. It can be clearly seen that the volume loss decreases with
increasing CeO2 content under all loads and sliding speeds. For example,
the volume loss of ZK60 / 1 CeO2 composite under the load of 5 N for a
sliding speed of 75 mm/s was 43.9% lower than ZK60 alloy. Under high
load (40 N), the volume loss of the ZK60 alloy was noted to be 1.44
(mm3), which decreased to 1.01 (mm3) for the 1 wt% CeO2 content at a
sliding speed of 75 mm/s. This result showed that the addition of CeO2
nanoparticles significantly improved wear resistance under both low
and high loads. The excellent wear resistance can be attributed to the
high hardness of composite materials (Table 2) with the presence of
nano-CeO2 particles [74]. The wear results of this study are in accor­
dance with Archard’s law. It was stated the materials with high hardness
have higher tribological performance [76]. Several researchers have
reported that Mg matrix composites have superior wear performance
with the addition of nanoreinforcements. Behnamian et al. [16] inves­
tigated the tribological behaviour of ZK60 / MWCNTs /B4C hybrid
composites and reported that the wear rate of the composites decreases
F. Aydin et al.
Fig. 8. Volume loss graphs versus sliding speed under different loads a) 5 N, b) 10 N, c) 20 N, d) 30 N, and e) 40 N.
with enhancing MWCNTs content. The wear rate for 0, 0.1, 0.5 and 1
MWCNT under load of 80 N was noted to be 0.0027 (mm3/N.m), 0.0025
(mm3/N.m), 0.0023(mm3/N.m), and 0.0022(mm3/N.m), respectively.
The increase in wear resistance was attributed to the decreasing COF due
to the presence of self-lubricating MWCNTs. Thirugnanasambandham
et al. [77] studied the wear behaviour AZ91 / SiC nanocomposites under
loads of 10, 20, 30 and 40 N for sliding speeds of 0.25, 0.5, and
0.75 m/sec. They reported that the addition of nano SiC particles en­
hances the wear behaviour for all wear conditions. Under load of 40 N,
the wear rate of 0, 2.5, 5 and 7 wt% SiC content was found to be
0.260 mg/m, 0.250 mg/m, 0.240 mg/m, and 0.175 mg/m, respectively
for sliding speed of 0.75 m/sec. They claimed that the presence of SiC
particles resists indentation against counterface material during sliding
7
Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945
motion. Lim et al. [78] also investigated the tribological performance of
Mg / Al2O3 (0.22, 0.66 and 1.11 vol%) and reported that the best wear
performance was obtained for the 1.11 vol% Al2O3 content. They
claimed that the improved wear performance of the composites was
related to the high hardness and strength of the composites. For our
study, the wear performance of the samples improved in all conditions
with increasing nano reinforcement content, and it is understood that
the results of our study are consistent with the results of the studies in
the literature.
Fig. 9 shows the coefficient of friction (COF) graphs of the samples
for different wear conditions. As can be seen, the COF values decrease
with increasing CeO2 content and sliding speed. Conversely, the
increased load leads to an increase in COF values for all samples. For
F. Aydin et al. Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945

Fig. 9. Variation of the COF a-b)ZK60, c-d) ZK60 / 0.25 CeO2, e-f)ZK60 / 0.5 CeO2 and g-h)ZK60 / 1 CeO2.

8
F. Aydin et al.
example, the average COF of the ZK60, ZK60 / 0.25 CeO2, ZK60 / 0.5
CeO2, and ZK60 / 1 CeO2 under loads of 5 and 40 N for sliding speeds of
75 mm/s was noted to be 0.355–0.382, 0.299–0.309, 0.233–0.259, and
0.208–0.212, respectively. For sliding speed of 145 mm/s, the average
COF of the ZK60, ZK60 / 0.25 CeO2, ZK60 / 0.5 CeO2, and ZK60 / 1 CeO2
under loads of 5 and 40 N was calculated as 0.323–0.358, 0.286–0.308,
0.220–0.240, and 0.202–0.210, respectively. In this study, it was un­
derstood that the COF values were inversely proportional to the volume
loss (Figs. 7 and 8). Increasing the reinforcement content in the structure
Fig. 10. Worn surface SEM images of the samples for sliding speed of 75 mm/s (a-b) ZK60 alloy, (c-d) ZK60 / 0.25 CeO2, (e-f) ZK60 / 0.5 CeO2, (g-h) ZK60 / 1 CeO2.
9
Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945
increases the load-bearing capacity and ensures that the Mg matrix gets
less contact. More energy is needed to shear the reinforcement particles,
and this reduces the friction coefficient as the composite surface has
more resistance to friction [79]. Also, the particles on the wear surface
delay the strain hardening and plastic deformation, reducing the friction
of the surfaces in contact [80]. Several researchers have reported that
the COF values decrease with the increase of reinforcement content [16,
71,79,81–83]. In one of those studies, Behnamian et al. [16] reported
that the COF of the ZK60 / 10 B4C / MWCNTs composites decreases with
F. Aydin et al.
increasing MWCNTs content. Under load of 40 N, the average COF for
the 0, 0.1, 0.5 wt% MWCNT content was reported as 0.21, 0.20, 0,18,
respectively. They attributed the decrease in the friction coefficient to
the formation of a carbon film on the surface of the MWCNT particles in
the structure and the solid lubricant effect of this film. Zhu et al. [84]
reported that the COF of Mg / SiC / WS2 hybrid composites decreases
with increasing SiC content. They claimed that the presence of rein­
forcement particles reduced the interfacial friction.
As can be seen in Fig. 9, it is observed that the COF increases with
increasing load, independent of material composition and sliding speed.
The increase in the COF with the increase in load is consistent with the
results of the studies in the literature [16,29,58,79]. The increase in COF
with increasing load was related to the larger amount of plastic defor­
mation [85]. For the worn surface investigations (Figs. 10 and 12), it is
seen that plastic deformation and wear damage increase under high
load. In this study, it is also seen that the COF values of the samples
decrease with increasing sliding speed. In the literature, the decrease in
the COF with the increase in wear rate is attributed to the continuous
delamination of the oxides formed on the surface. High speeds cause
more detachment of the wear surface and large delaminations, reducing
the COF [86]. In addition, it was reported that increasing speed causes
the oxygen entering the metallic interfaces to form an oxide film on the
surface and the friction coefficient decreases [79].
3.3. Worn surface analysis
Worn surface SEM images of the samples for a sliding speed of
75 mm/s are shown in Fig. 10. The deep grooves and wear debris were
present under a load of 5 N (Fig. 10a). The presence of grooves parallel
to the sliding direction indicates the presence of abrasive wear [87]. The
presence of abrasion mechanism at low loads was reported by several
researchers for ZK60 alloy and its composites [16,58,88]. As the load
increases, a large delaminated area and some cracks are noticeable for
ZK60 alloy (Fig. 10b). In delamination wear, cracks are formed when a
Fig. 11. EDS analysis of ZK60 / 0.25 CeO2 under a load of 40 N for a sliding speed of 75 mm/s.
10
Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945
high load initiates shear deformation [89,90]. Similarly, Behnamian
et al. [16] reported that the main wear mechanism was delamination
and oxidation under high load (80 N) for ZK60 / MWCNTs / B4C hybrid
composites. For the worn surface of ZK60 / 0.25 CeO2 composite, some
grooves are present (Fig. 10c). However, the cracks and wear debris are
visible under higher load (Fig. 10d). The scratches can be seen on the
worn surface of ZK60 / 0.5 CeO2 and ZK60 / 1 CeO2 under a load of 5 N
(Fig. 10. e-g). Craters and cracks are observed on the wear surfaces of the
ZK60 / 0.5 CeO2 and ZK60 / 1 CeO2 in the transition from 5 N to 40 N
(Fig. 10 f-h). The formation of craters is the result of delamination wear
[91]. From the worn surface images of the samples for a sliding speed of
75 mm/s under a load of 5 N, with the increasing CeO2 content, the deep
grooves changed to scratches indicate that the surface has suffered less
wear damage. Under the load of 40 N, a largely delaminated area turned
into a crater for the composite material. As a result, it can be seen that
ZK60 / 1 CeO2 has the least wear damage among the samples, which
verifies the results of the volume loss graph (Fig. 7).
Fig. 11 shows the EDS analysis of ZK60 / 0.25 CeO2 under a load of
40 N for a sliding speed of 75 mm/s. The EDS analysis of the 1st zone
and 2nd zone contains a significant amount of Mg and O. This is the
result of the formation of MgO due to the high friction at high load
(40 N) [58]. As a result, it can be said that worn surfaces are covered the
oxidized patches.
Fig. 12 shows the worn surface SEM images of the samples for the
sliding speed of 145 mm/s. The deep grooves are present on the worn
surface of the ZK60 alloy (Fig. 12a). Under the load of 40 N, deep cracks
can be seen on the worn surface. It can be concluded that the abrasion
mechanism was changed to a delamination mechanism under a higher
load. It was reported that the delamination mechanism presents the
where mechanism changed from mild to severe wear [16]. For the worn
surface of ZK60 / 0.25 CeO2, grooves are present under a load of 5 N;
however, several cracks and craters are visible under a load of 40 N
(Fig. 12 c-d). It is well known that the increased load leads to plastic
deformation and delamination [92,93]. For the worn surface of ZK60 /
F. Aydin et al.
Fig. 12. Worn surface SEM images of the samples for sliding speed of 145 mm/s (a-b) ZK60 alloy, (c-d) ZK60 / 0.25 CeO2, (e-f) ZK60 / 0.5 CeO2, (g-h) ZK60 / 1 CeO2.
0.5 CeO2, the presence of scratches is the presence of a mild abrasive
wear mechanism (Fig. 12e). Under higher load, the grooves and wear
debris were present, which shows the presence of abrasive wear
(Fig. 12f). The smooth surface and some scratches can be visible for the
ZK60 / 1 CeO2. It is also seen that the mild grooves are present even at a
high load (Fig. 12h). It can also be seen that the white areas on the worn
surface in Fig. 12h are present. The worn surface images verify the best
11
Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945
tribological performance was obtained for the 1 wt% CeO2 content.
Fig. 13 shows the EDS analysis of the samples for a sliding speed of
145 mm/s. According to the analysis of the region taken from the wear
debris (Fig. 13a), the high Mg and O content confirms that this region is
MgO. It was reported that MgO is formed during wear and fractured
during the test [16]. The presence of high O on worn surfaces for Mg
matrix composites was verified by EDS analyzes by various researchers
F. Aydin et al.
Fig. 13. EDS analysis of the samples for sliding speed of 145 mm/s a) ZK60 / 0.5 CeO2 (5 N) and b) ZK60 / 1 CeO2 (40 N).
[16,58]. For the analysis of area 2 (Fig. 13b), a significant amount of Mg
and a low amount of O were detected. It can not be said that there is
oxidative wear in this region. In Fig. 13b, according to the EDS result
taken from the white area, the presence of very high levels of Mg and Zn
in the structure proves that these regions are Mg-Zn intermetallic com­
pounds. In addition, as a result of the analysis, a significant amount of Ce
was found in the structure. This indicates that the CeO2 particles
12
Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945
remained in the structure after the wear test. For area 2, a significant
amount of Mg (78.42%) was detected after EDS analysis.
SEM images of the wear debris to support the wear mechanisms are
given in Fig. 14. For Fig. 14a, the large and sheet-like remains can be
seen for the ZK60 alloy with a sliding speed of 75 mm/s. This results
from plastic deformation during sliding [94]. For Fig. 14b, the corru­
gated structure can be seen for the wear debris. The reason for the
F. Aydin et al. Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945

Fig. 14. SEM images of wear debris of the samples under load of 40 N a) ZK60–75 mm/s b) ZK60 − 140 mm/s c) ZK60 / 1 CeO2 − 75 mm/s and d) ZK60 / 1 CeO2 -
140 mm/s.

formation of this structure can be attributed to the constant friction
between the matrix and the steel surface [95]. For the wear debris of
composite materials, it can be seen that the size of debris is smaller than
the unreinforced ZK60 alloy, and the debris can be seen as fine and
coarse. This can be attributed to the reduction of the size of the debris
formed by the reinforcement particles with the effect of micro-cutting
[66]. The presence of some plate-like debris also indicates the abra­
sive wear mechanism [95].
Fig. 15 shows the EDS analysis of the wear debris of ZK60 / 1 CeO2
under a load of 40 N for a sliding speed of 140 mm/s. For the wear debris
analysis, a significant amount of Mg (64.36%) and O (29.80%) verifies
the presence of MgO during the wear test. This result is in agreement
with the chemical composition of the wear debris adhering to the wear
surfaces. It was explained above that the surface is oxidised due to
frictional heat, and this layer is broken during wear.
Fig. 16 SEM images of the steel counterpart surface for different wear
conditions. It can be clearly seen that the area of material transferred
into the counter-face ball decreases with increasing sliding speed and
CeO2 content. This can be safely attributed to the presence of rein­
forcement particles (CeO2) which reduce the contact between the steel
counter-face and the Mg matrix [68].
Fig. 17 shows the EDS analysis of the counter-face material of ZK60
alloy. Two different areas were analysed to know the chemical compo­
sition. The analysis of the black area (1st area) consists of a significant
amount of Mg and O. This shows the transfer of the MgO to the steel
counter-face. The analysis of the second area shows the presence of a

Fig. 15. EDS analysis of the wear debris of ZK60 / 1 CeO2 under the load of 40 N for a sliding speed of 140 mm/s.

13
F. Aydin et al. Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945

Fig. 16. SEM images of the steel counterpart surfaces under load of 40 N (a) ZK60–75 mm/s (b) ZK60 / 140 mm/s, c) ZK60 / 1 CeO2 - 75 mm/s and d) ZK60 / 1 CeO2
− 140 mm/s.

Fig. 17. EDS analysis of counter-face material of ZK60 for sliding speed of 75 mm/s under load of 40 N.

14
F. Aydin et al.
high amount of Fe (55.7%), Cr (10.5%), and C (5.3%), which verifies the
chemical composition of steel counter-face material.
4. The methods of Machine Learning models
In this section, the experiment on different supervised machine
learning regression models has been established to create a mapping
function between the input features (sliding speed, CeO2 content and
load) to the output feature (volume loss). The general steps of all pro­
cesses are given in Fig. 18.
Firstly, the collected data from actual experiments are organized and
preprocessed to use in ML algorithms. After that, the data is split
randomly into two parts: named training and validation data, 75% and
25%, respectively. The five different ML models are established and
trained with training data. The training phase is completed with the
cross-validation method to see the robustness of each ML model. 5-folds
cross-validation was done during the training phase in which the
training data was divided into five splits, and each split was used to test
the accuracy of the training phase.
On the other hand, finding the best configuration of the ML model
requires experimentation. The grid search approach with different
configurations of each model is used to accomplish this task. Each model
was tested with cross-validation, and the best configuration was deter­
mined on training data. Consequently, the best estimators were used on
validation data, and the results are presented in this section. To achieve
high accuracy with the ML model, the data must be cleaned and stan­
dardized. For this purpose, the preprocessing has been done with a
standard scaling function (StandartScaler). After preprocessing, all the
input and output features are placed on a similar scale to increase the
prediction performance of ML models.
4.1. ML models
According to recent literature [96], the five most popular and suc­
cessful models, Support Vector Regressor(SVR), Random Forest(RF),
Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP), Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB), and
Decision Tree (DT) have been selected to compare their performance on
the current dataset. Predicting the output value is called regression
because the output measure (volume loss) contains a continuous real
value. All code implementations were performed with Python pro­
gramming languages, and the codes are published under the GitHub
platform1. It is noted that the code contains sci-kit learn libraries [97]
for the machine learning part and seaborn for visualization. Short ex­
planations of the theoretical background of algorithms are explained
below. If the reader is interested in learning more about algorithms, we
encourage them to read a recent literature survey of each algorithm,
including its mathematical background and recent applications [98].
4.1.1. Support Vector Regressor (SVR)
Support Vector Regressor (SVR) is a modified version of the support
vector machine [99] to use in regression [100]. In SVR, the high-order
Fig. 18. General block diagram of the steps involved in the machine learning.
15
Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945
hyperplanes are established to correlate input with desired output
measurement with boundaries. Kernel functions such as radial basis and
linear functions are utilised to construct these hyperplanes to minimise
the generalised error bound. While creating the hyperplanes, two main
parameters, the regularisation parameter and gamma, affect the accu­
racy of the model. According to machine learning and tribology studies,
even if SVR models have the capability of working with a relatively
small dataset, they can increase accuracy levels with provided high
dimensional data [96].
4.1.2. Decision Tree (DT)
The decision tree algorithm consists of nodes and leaves to create a
tree-based structure to predict output data by learning decision rules
from the input dataset. The nodes are responsible for decisions with two
conditions according to input features’ values, whereas the leaf presents
a numerical target value. The most important criteria for making a de­
cision in DT is how to measure the quality of the split. Mean Squared
Error (MSE) and Mean Absolute Error (MAE) functions can be utilised to
split nodes. Although the number of the depth level of the tree increases
the complexity of the model, it might cause an overfitting problem,
which means high accuracy on the training data with memorising the
input but low accuracy on the test data [101].
4.1.3. Random Forest (RF)
Random forest is another supervised machine learning model. Even
if it is proposed for classification problems, it is also powerful for
regression problems. The random forest algorithm is the ensemble
method which consists of randomised decision trees. Different decision
trees are trained with the sample drawn from data from the training set.
The parameter of the number of trees in the forest (n_estimators) de­
termines how many trees will be generated during the training process
[102]. The other model parameters are inherited from the DT model.
4.1.4. Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB)
Extreme Gradient Boosting is another tree-based supervised machine
learning model to predict the output measure from the input measures.
It also consists of decision trees like the RF model. One main difference
between them is creating the process of the decision trees, which are
generated using different training data samples. While each tree is
generated independently from the forest in RF, the tree generation
process is done serially to improve the accuracy of the previous trees,
which is called boosting process. Also, XGB uses a different regularisa­
tion function (L2) than traditional Gradient Boosting models. XGB
learning parameter called eta determines how much the existing trees
will be affected after a new tree is established [103].
4.1.5. Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP)
Multi-Layer Perceptron, a general term for k-hidden layers of Arti­
ficial Neural Networks, is a powerful and well-known supervised ma­
chine learning model. MLP consists of three main layers; input, hidden
and output. Input layers connect the input measures to the model, and
F. Aydin et al. Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945

hidden layers, which comprise hidden nodes, create a mapping between

∑
n
the input and output layer. Each node in the model has an activation |yi − ŷi |
function to calculate the unit’s output by taking the input data from the MAE = i=1 (5)
n
previous layer and conveying them to the next layer. The calculated loss
value of each node is transferred to the connected nodes calculated ac­ As clearly seen in Eq. 2, if the model perfectly fits the data R2 value
cording to the regularisation term (alpha) [104]. will be 1 whereas the others will be 0. R2 more informative to explain the
variation in data than the other three quantities. Because RMSE, MSE
4.2. Hyperparameter tuning represent the squared errors between actual and predicted output values
and they are monotonically related. Furthermore, MAE presents the
In order to determine the best configuration of each ML model, the mean value of the absolute error between the actual and predicted
parameter tuning phase has been established. The configuration settings output values and it is more robust to outlier data [106,107].
of each model are given in Table 3. Because each model has different Table 4 presents the performance results of best-configured models
tuning parameters, the parameter subset combinations have been in terms of R2, RMSE, MSE and MAE. Because the training has been done
configured separately. with cross-validation, the mean values and standard deviations have
After the hyperparameter tuning phase has been completed, the best been presented. According to Table 4, the most accurate and robust
configuration for each model has been determined. According to test model is DT with the mean R2 value and the standard deviation, 0.8580
results, the best configuration of SVR is; regularisation parameter C is and 0.0220 respectively. On the other hand, the worst model MLP on the
100, rbf kernel, and the coefficient gamma is 0.001. Best configuration given test dataset with 0.8064 mean R2 value. RF also produced
of RF is; max_features of split (MF) is 2, the minimum number of leaf competitive results compared with DT on the test dataset.
node (MSL) is 1, and the number of decision trees in the forest (NE) is Table 5 presents the performance metrics R2, RMSE, MSE and MAE of
100. The best configuration of MLP consists of with relu activation each model in volume loss prediction. It is reported that R2 of a model
function with 0.01 alpha value, and (10,1) hidden layer sizes. The best can be accepted between 0.7 and 0.9. However, if the R2 value of the
configuration of XGB consists of 0.6 learning rate (eta) and 50 trees in model is more than 0.9, the model is considered excellent [96]. Ac­
the estimator. The best configuration of DT; splitting criteria is absolu­ cording to Table 5, the R2 metric on the validation data set varied from
te_error with the maximum value of depth level 8, and MSL is 1. 0.8078 to 0.9973. The lowest R2 value is provided by SVR, whereas the
In order to compare the performances of the ML models, four highest R2 value is by XGB. While RF and DT compete with XGB results,
different metrics R2, RMSE, MSE and MAE was used in this study. R2 is MLP and SVR provide less accurate results. The error metrics support the
the coefficient of determination which used to score regression function, ordering of the R2 metric because XGB predicted the output measure­
and it is calculated as follows [65,90,105]: ment with significantly low error. Interestingly, tree-based ML models
(RF, XGB, DT) produced more successful results than high-order models
∑
n
(yi − ŷi )2 (SVR, ML). A possible explanation for this might be that the data set is
2
R = ∑
n
i=1
(2) relatively small and low dimensional. Therefore, one of the several
(yi − y)2 possible reasons is the overfitting problem which occurs with insuffi­
i=1
cient data and generalisation inability [108]. The main drawback of the
tree-based methods is that recreation and recalculation are required
Where n is the number of tests, yi presents real measured output value,
when new data is added to the current model, which affects all previous.
ŷi predicted output value and y is the mean value of real measured
Fig. 19 shows the output prediction of each regressor and actual
values. RMSE is the root mean squared error, and it is calculated as
experimental volume loss. It is clearly seen that RF(b), XGB (d) and DT
follows:
(e) predicted volume loss satisfactorily. However, SVR (a) and MLP (c)
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
√∑
√n performed poorly on the validation data set. The error range of SVR and
√ (yi − ŷi )2 MLP is significantly wider than RF, XGB and DT.
√
RMSE = i=1 (3) Fig. 20 shows the feature importance of input variables (load, CeO2
n
content, and sliding speed) for the estimation of the volume loss by
MSE is the mean squared (quadratic) error between the real and the different ML models. From the Fig. 20, it can be seen that each variable
predicted values, and it is calculated as follows: has an impact on the volume loss prediction. However, the load was the
∑
n most influential variable on the prediction. In the literature, it was re­
(yi − ŷi )2 ported in some studies that the load has the most significant effect on the
MSE = i=1
(4) prediction of wear rate with machine learning [65,96]. On the other
n
hand, CeO2 content and sliding speed were calculated as other important
MAE is the mean absolute error between the real and the predicted variables.
values, and it is calculated as follows:
5. Conclusions

In the current study, ZK60 matrix composites reinforced by CeO2

Table 3 (0.25, 0.5 and 1 wt%) nanoparticles were successfully manufactured by
Hyper-tuning parameter subset of models. hot pressing and the wear performance and wear mechanism of the
Model Parameters samples were studied. Five different machine learning models were
name created to predict the wear performance of the samples. The significant
RF MF = {2,3}, MSL = {3,4,5}, results were as follows:
NE = {10, 20, 50, 100}
DT S= {MSE, MAE}, MD= {1,5,7,10}, MSL= {3,4,5}, MWFL= {0.1, 0.2, • A slight reduction was detected in the relative density of the pro­
0.5}
duced specimens by increasing CeO2 content. The maximum porosity
SVR kernel= {rbf, linear}, gamma= {1e-3, 1e-4}, C= {1,10,100}
MLP HLS= {(5,1), (10,1), (15,1), (5,2), (10,2), (15,2)}, (1.44%) was obtained for the ZK60 / 1 CeO2 composite. The hardness
AF = {relu, tanh, logistic}, alpha= {0.001, 0.01, 0.035, 0.1} results showed that the hardness was noted to be 66.1 for ZK60 alloy,
XGB Eta = {0.1, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6} which increased to 74.9 for the 1 wt% CeO2 content.
NE= {10, 20, 50, 100}

16
F. Aydin et al. Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945

Table 4
The comparative performance results of ML models in terms of performance metrics on test data.
Metric R2 RMSE MSE MAE

ML model Mean STD Mean STD Mean STD Mean STD

SVR 0.8182 0.0944 0.3769 0.1903 0.1783 0.1868 0.3050 0.1761

RF 0.8499 0.0594 0.3517 0.1497 0.1461 0.1376 0.2891 0.1121
MLP 0.8064 0.0502 0.4090 0.1337 0.1851 0.1050 0.3414 0.1073
XGB 0.8278 0.0941 0.3753 0.1958 0.1792 0.1766 0.3081 0.1457
DT 0.8580 0.0220 0.3477 0.1109 0.1332 0.0912 0.2691 0.0919

of 40 N. From the worn surface images, less worn and damaged

Table 5
surfaces were observed by increasing CeO2 content.
The comparative performance results of ML models in terms of performance
• The prediction ability of five different machine learning algorithms
metrics on validation data.
was tested under the real experimental dataset.
ML Model R2 RMSE MSE MAE
• Tree based decision algorithms shown best performance on the
SVR 0.8078 0.3917 0.1534 0.2571 dataset. Decision Tree algorithm predicted the test and validation
RF 0.9778 0.1331 0.0177 0.0930 measurements with high accuracy, %85% and 99% respectively.
MLP 0.8188 0.3803 0.1446 0.2312
• The importance levels of the input features were explicited with
XGB 0.9973 0.0466 0.0022 0.0136
DT 0.9918 0.0809 0.0065 0.0209 three ML algorithms. It is observed that the prediction of volume loss
measurement mostly affected by the load parameter.

• The microstructure characterization shows the agglomeration of Note: The code has been published under GitHub and available at
CeO2 nanoparticles for the composite materials. The XRD analysis https://github.com/rafetdurgut/ML-Wear.
verifies the presence of Mg, MgZn2 and CeO2 phases.
• The volume loss was decreased by increasing CeO2 content for all
Declaration of Competing Interest
load and sliding speeds.
• Under a load of 5 N, the abrasion was identified as a wear mecha­
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
nism; however, abrasion and delamination were present under a load
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.

Fig. 19. The comparison of the actual and predicted volume loss by ML models.

17
F. Aydin et al.
Fig. 20. The feature importance of variables for the prediction of volume loss.
Data availability
We have shared the link of the codes in our manuscript.
References
[1] Nie KB, Wang XJ, Deng KK, Hu XS, Wu K. Magnesium matrix composite
reinforced by nanoparticles – a review. J Magnes Alloy 2021;9:57–77. https://
doi.org/10.1016/J.JMA.2020.08.018.
[2] Ma G, Xiao H, Ye J, He Y. Research status and development of magnesium matrix
composites. Mater Sci Technol 2020;36:645–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/
02670836.2020.1732610.
[3] Elmensouri G, Kara İH, Ahlatci H, Türen Y. Wear resistance of sheet magnesium
alloy AZ31 with micro arc oxidation coatings after shot peening. Met Sci Heat
Treat 2021;63:426–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11041-021-00706-5.
[4] Abazari S, Shamsipur A, Bakhsheshi-Rad HR, Ismail AF, Sharif S, Razzaghi M,
et al. Carbon Nanotubes (CNTs)-Reinforced Magnesium-Based Matrix
Composites: A Comprehensive Review. Materials 2020;13:4421. https://doi.org/
10.3390/MA13194421.
[5] Sankaranarayanan S, Gupta M. Review on mechanical properties of magnesium
(nano)composites developed using energy efficient microwaves. Powder Metall
2015;58:183–92. https://doi.org/10.1179/1743290115Y.0000000009.
[6] Singh N, Belokar RM. Tribological behavior of aluminum and magnesium-based
hybrid metal matrix composites: A state-of-art review. Mater Today: Proc 2021;
44:460–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MATPR.2020.09.757.
[7] Anand N, Senthil Kumaran S. Development and influence of tribomechanical
properties on magnesium based hybrid metal matrix composites-a review. Mater
Res Express 2020;7(3):036520. https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/AB7D08.
[8] Aydin F, Sun Y. Investigation of wear behaviour and microstructure of hot-
pressed TiB2 particulate-reinforced magnesium matrix composites. Can Metall Q
2018;57:455–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/00084433.2018.1478491.
[9] Wang Y, Wang HY, Xiu K, Wang HY, Jiang QC. Fabrication of TiB2 particulate
reinforced magnesium matrix composites by two-step processing method. Mater
Lett 2006;60:1533–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MATLET.2005.11.065.
[10] Zhou H, Zhang C, Han B, Qiu J, Qin S, Gao K, et al. Microstructures and
Mechanical Properties of Nanocrystalline AZ31 Magnesium Alloy Powders with
Submicron TiB2 Additions Prepared by Mechanical Milling. Crystals 2020;10:
550. https://doi.org/10.3390/CRYST10060550.
[11] Meher A, Mahapatra MM, Samal P, Vundavilli PR. Modeling the abrasive wear
behavior of in-situ synthesized magnesium RZ5/TiB2 metal matrix composites:
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part E: J Process Mech
Eng 2022;236(4):1500–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/09544089211065532.
[12] Ren Z, Zhang XG, Sui L, Zhang T, Pang L, Jin JZ. Fabrication of ZrB2 particles
reinforced AZ31 magnesium matrix composite by powder metallurgy and
subsequent hot extrusion. Mater Res Innov 2010;14:206–9. https://doi.org/
10.1179/143307510×12719005364422.
[13] Jiangjing W, YZ, SZ, GC, ZZ. . Effects of in-situ ZrB 2 particle on grain refinement
of ZrB 2/AZ91D magnesium matrix composite. China Foundry 2012;9(1). 〈http
s://eds.p.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer〉.
[14] Lu L, Lim CYH, Yeong WM. Effect of reinforcements on strength of Mg9%Al
composites. Compos Struct 2004;66:41–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
COMPSTRUCT.2004.04.019.
[15] Aydin F, Sun Y, Ahlatci H, Turen Y. Investigation of Microstructure, Mechanical
and Wear Behaviour of B4C Particulate Reinforced Magnesium Matrix
Composites by Powder Metallurgy. Trans Indian Inst Met 2018;71:873–82.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12666-017-1219-2.
18
Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945
[16] Behnamian Y, Serate D, Aghaie E, Zahiri R, Tolentino Z, Niazi H, et al.
Tribological behavior of ZK60 magnesium matrix composite reinforced by hybrid
MWCNTs/B4C prepared by stir casting method. Tribol Int 2022;165:107299.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRIBOINT.2021.107299.
[17] Banijamali SM, Palizdar Y, Nekouee KA, Najafi S, Shariat Razavi M. Effect of B4C
reinforcement and hot rolling on microstructure and mechanical properties of
WE43 magnesium matrix composite. Proc Inst Mech Eng, Part L: J Mater: Des
Appl 2022. https://doi.org/10.1177/14644207221085939.
[18] Subramani M., Huang S.J., Borodianskiy K. Effect of SiC Nanoparticles on AZ31
Magnesium Alloy. Materials 2022, Vol 15, Page 1004 2022;15:1004. https://doi.
org/10.3390/MA15031004.
[19] Khatkar SK, Verma R, Sumankant, Kharb SS, Thakur A, Sharma R. Optimization
and Effect of Reinforcements on the Sliding Wear Behavior of Self-Lubricating
AZ91D-SiC-Gr Hybrid Composites. Silicon 2020;13(5):1461–73. https://doi.org/
10.1007/S12633-020-00523-0.
[20] Vijayabhaskar S, Rajmohan T, Vignesh TK, Venkatakrishnan H. Effect of nano SiC
particles on properties and characterization of Magnesium matrix nano
composites. Mater Today: Proc 2019;16:853–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
MATPR.2019.05.168.
[21] Xiu K, Wang HY, Sui HL, Wang Y, Xu CL, Wang JG, et al. The sliding wear
behavior of TiCp/AZ91 magnesium matrix composites. J Mater Sci 2006;41:
7052–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10853-006-0946-2/.
[22] Aydin F, Sun Y, Emre Turan M. Influence of TiC content on mechanical, wear and
corrosion properties of hot-pressed AZ91/TiC composites. J Compos Mater 2020;
54:141–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998319860570.
[23] Azizieh M, Larki AN, Tahmasebi M, Bavi M, Alizadeh E, Kim HS. Wear Behavior
of AZ31/Al2O3 Magnesium Matrix Surface Nanocomposite Fabricated via
Friction Stir Processing. J Mater Eng Perform 2018;27:2010–7. https://doi.org/
10.1007/S11665-018-3277-Y.
[24] Lu D, Jiang Y, Zhou R. Wear performance of nano-Al2O3 particles and CNTs
reinforced magnesium matrix composites by friction stir processing. Wear 2013;
305:286–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WEAR.2012.11.079.
[25] Jayabharathy S, Mathiazhagan P. Investigation of mechanical and wear
behaviour of AZ91 magnesium matrix hybrid composite with TiO2/graphene.
Mater Today: Proc 2020;27:2394–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
MATPR.2019.09.142.
[26] Rahmani K, Nouri A, Wheatley G, Malekmohammadi H, Bakhtiari H, Yazdi V.
Determination of tensile behavior of hot-pressed Mg–TiO2 and Mg–ZrO2
nanocomposites using indentation test and a holistic inverse modeling technique.
J Mater Res Technol 2021;14:2107–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
JMRT.2021.07.090.
[27] Gnanavelbabu A, Surendran KTS, Loganathan P, Vinothkumar E. Effect of ageing
temperature on the corrosion behaviour of UHTC particulates reinforced
magnesium composites fabricated through ultrasonic assisted squeeze casting
process. J Alloy Compd 2021;856:158173. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
JALLCOM.2020.158173.
[28] Zavaliy IY, Berezovets V v, Oshchapovsky I v, Zasadnyy TM. Mg–TiN and Mg–ZrN
Nanocomposites as Efficient Materials for the Accumulation and Generation of
Hydrogen. Mater Sci 2021;57:53–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11003-021-
00514-5.
[29] Aydin F, Turan ME. The Effect of Boron Nitride on Tribological Behavior of Mg
Matrix Composite at Room and Elevated Temperatures. J Tribology 2020:142.
https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4044858/975356.
[30] Sankaranarayanan S, Sabat RK, Jayalakshmi S, Suwas S, Almajid A, Gupta M. Mg/
BN nanocomposites: Nano-BN addition for enhanced room temperature tensile
and compressive response. J Compos Mater 2015;49:3045–55. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0021998314559278.
[31] Sun Y, Cevik E, Turen Y, Ahlatci H, Turan ME, Aydin F, et al. Influence of GNPs
and B4C reinforcements on mechanical, thermal and wear properties of
magnesium matrix composite produced by powder metallurgy. J Compos Mater
2021;55:3881–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/00219983211031641.
[32] Zhao R, Pei J, Du W, Zhao Z, Zhang L, Gao J, et al. Fabrication of magnesium-
coated graphene and its effect on the microstructure of reinforced AZ91
magnesium-matrix composites. Adv Compos Hybrid Mater 2022;5:504–12.
https://doi.org/10.1007/S42114-021-00336-8.
[33] Tsukamoto H. Enhanced mechanical properties of carbon nanotube-reinforced
magnesium composites with zirconia fabricated by spark plasma sintering:
Https://DoiOrg/101177/0021998321993917 2021;55:2503–12. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0021998321993917.
[34] Sathish T, Mohanavel V, Velmurugan P, Alfarraj S, al Obaid S, Sureshkumar S,
et al. Evaluation of MWCNT Particles-Reinforced Magnesium Composite for
Mechanical and Catalytic Applications. Bioinorg Chem Appl 2022;2022:1–13.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/7773185.
[35] Demirdal S, Aydın F. The influence of low-cost eggshell on the wear and
electrochemical corrosion behaviour of novel pure Mg matrix composites. Mater
Chem Phys 2022;277:125520. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
MATCHEMPHYS.2021.125520.
[36] Ramanujam N, Muthukumaran S, Nagesawara Rao B, Ramarao M,
Mangrulkar AL, Ashraff Ali KS, et al. Experimental Investigations on Mechanical
Properties of AZ31/Eggshell Particle-Based Magnesium Composites. Adv Mater
Sci Eng 2022:2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4883764.
[37] Dinaharan I, Vettivel SC, Balakrishnan M, Akinlabi ET. Influence of processing
route on microstructure and wear resistance of fly ash reinforced AZ31
magnesium matrix composites. J Magnes Alloy 2019;7:155–65. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.JMA.2019.01.003.
F. Aydin et al.
[38] Yu SR, Huang ZQ. Dry Sliding Wear Behavior of Fly Ash Cenosphere/AZ91D Mg
Alloy Composites. J Mater Eng Perform 2014;23:3480–8. https://doi.org/
10.1007/S11665-014-1157-7.
[39] Parande G, Tun KS, Neo HJN, Gupta M. An Investigation into the Effect of Length
Scale (Nano to Micron) of Cerium Oxide Particles on the Mechanical and
Flammability Response of Magnesium. J Mater Eng Perform 2022:1–13. https://
doi.org/10.1007/S11665-022-06943-W.
[40] Chen HI, Chang HY. Synthesis and characterization of nanocrystalline cerium
oxide powders by two-stage non-isothermal precipitation. Solid State Commun
2005;133:593–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SSC.2004.12.020.
[41] Xue YJ, Jia XZ, Zhou YW, Ma W, Li JS. Tribological performance of Ni–CeO2
composite coatings by electrodeposition. Surf Coat Technol 2006;200:5677–81.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SURFCOAT.2005.08.002.
[42] Tun KS, Jayaramanavar P, Nguyen QB, Chan J, Kwok R, Gupta M. Investigation
into tensile and compressive responses of Mg–ZnO composites. Mater Sci Technol
2012;28:582–8. https://doi.org/10.1179/1743284711Y.0000000108.
[43] Kujur MS, Manakari V, Parande G, Tun KS, Mallick A, Gupta M. Enhancement of
thermal, mechanical, ignition and damping response of magnesium using nano-
ceria particles. Ceram Int 2018;44:15035–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
CERAMINT.2018.05.133.
[44] Kujur MS, Deshpande A, Mallick A, Gupta M. Development of rare-earth oxide
reinforced magnesium nanocomposites targeting biomedical applications. Mater
Today: Proc 2020;33:5414–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MATPR.2020.03.135.
[45] Tarca AL, Carey VJ, Chen X-W, Romero R, Dra S. Education machine learning and
its applications to biology. PLoS Comput Biol 2007;3(6). https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030116.
[46] Artrith N, Butler KT, Coudert FX, Han S, Isayev O, Jain A, et al. Best practices in
machine learning for chemistry. Nat Chem 2021;13(6):505–8. https://doi.org/
10.1038/s41557-021-00716-z.
[47] Meng L, McWilliams B, Jarosinski W, Park HY, Jung YG, Lee J, et al. Machine
learning in additive manufacturing: a review. JOM 2020;72:2363–77. https://
doi.org/10.1007/S11837-020-04155-Y.
[48] Thankachan T, Soorya Prakash K, Kavimani V, Silambarasan SR. Machine
learning and statistical approach to predict and analyze wear rates in copper
surface composites. Met Mater Int 2021;27:220–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/
S12540-020-00809-3.
[49] Liu J, Zhang Y, Zhang Y, Kitipornchai S, Yang J. Machine learning assisted
prediction of mechanical properties of graphene/aluminium nanocomposite
based on molecular dynamics simulation. Mater Des 2022;213:110334. https://
doi.org/10.1016/J.MATDES.2021.110334.
[50] Swetlana S, Khatavkar N, Singh AK. Development of Vickers hardness prediction
models via microstructural analysis and machine learning. J Mater Sci 2020;55:
15845–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10853-020-05153-W.
[51] Ulas M, Aydur O, Gurgenc T, Ozel C. Surface roughness prediction of machined
aluminum alloy with wire electrical discharge machining by different machine
learning algorithms. J Mater Res Technol 2020;9(6):12512–24. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.JMRT.2020.08.098.
[52] Wu D, Jennings C, Terpenny J, Gao RX, Kumara S. A comparative study on
machine learning algorithms for smart manufacturing: tool wear prediction using
random forests. J Manuf Sci Eng, Trans ASME 2017;139(7). https://doi.org/
10.1115/1.4036350.
[53] Alagarsamy S v, Balasundaram R, Ravichandran M, Mohanavel V, Karthick A,
Devi SS. Taguchi approach and decision tree algorithm for prediction of wear rate
in zinc oxide-filled AA7075 matrix composites. Surf Topogr: Metrol Prop 2021;9
(3):035005. https://doi.org/10.1088/2051-672X/AC0F34.
[54] Prasad DS, Shoba C, Ramanaiah N. Investigations on mechanical properties of
aluminum hybrid composites. J Mater Res Technol 2014;3:79–85. https://doi.
org/10.1016/J.JMRT.2013.11.002.
[55] Singh N, Mir IUH, Raina A, Anand A, Kumar V, Sharma SM. Synthesis and
tribological investigation of Al-SiC based nano hybrid composite. Alex Eng J
2018;57:1323–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AEJ.2017.05.008.
[56] Rahimian M, Parvin N, Ehsani N. The effect of production parameters on
microstructure and wear resistance of powder metallurgy Al–Al2O3 composite.
Mater Des 2011;32:1031–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MATDES.2010.07.016.
[57] Aydın F. Investigation of Elevated Temperature Wear Behavior of Al 2024-BN
Composites using Statistical Techniques. J Mater Eng Perform 2021;30:8560–78.
https://doi.org/10.1007/S11665-021-06011-9.
[58] Banijamali SM, Shariat Razavi M, Palizdar Y, Najafi S, Sheikhani A, Torkamani H.
Experimental and Simulation Study on Wear Behavior of ZK60 Alloy with 3 wt%
Yttrium Addition. J Mater Eng Perform 2022;31:4721–34. https://doi.org/
10.1007/S11665-022-06585-Y.
[59] Nieto A, Yang H, Jiang L, Schoenung JM. Reinforcement size effects on the
abrasive wear of boron carbide reinforced aluminum composites. Wear 2017;
390–391:228–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WEAR.2017.08.002.
[60] Jiang QC, Wang HY, Ma BX, Wang Y, Zhao F. Fabrication of B4C particulate
reinforced magnesium matrix composite by powder metallurgy. J Alloy Compd
2005;386:177–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JALLCOM.2004.06.015.
[61] Liu J, Zhao K, Zhang M, Wang Y, An L. High performance heterogeneous
magnesium-based nanocomposite. Mater Lett 2015;143:287–9. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.MATLET.2014.12.099.
[62] Turan ME, Aydin F. Improved elevated temperature mechanical properties of
graphene-reinforced pure aluminium matrix composites. Mater Sci Technol (U
Kingd) 2020;36:1092–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/02670836.2020.1753933.
[63] Haghshenas M, Islam R, Wang Y, Cheng YT, Gupta M. Depth sensing indentation
of magnesium/boron nitride nanocomposites. J Compos Mater 2019;53:1751–63.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998318808358.
19
Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945
[64] Turan ME, Aydin F. Wear and corrosion properties of low-cost eggshell-reinforced
green AZ91 matrix composites. Can Metall Q 2022;61:155–71. https://doi.org/
10.1080/00084433.2022.2035634.
[65] Aydin F. The investigation of the effect of particle size on wear performance of
AA7075/Al2O3 composites using statistical analysis and different machine
learning methods. Adv Powder Technol 2021;32:445–63. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.APT.2020.12.024.
[66] Shaikh MBN, Arif S, Aziz T, Waseem A, Shaikh MAN, Ali M. Microstructural,
mechanical and tribological behaviour of powder metallurgy processed SiC and
RHA reinforced Al-based composites. Surf Interfaces 2019;15:166–79. https://
doi.org/10.1016/J.SURFIN.2019.03.002.
[67] Anandajothi M, Vinod B. Tribological Behavior of Magnesium Hybrid Composite:
Effect of Amorphous Silica-Solid Waste Reinforcement Particles to Reduce
Material Cost. 2020 14:1 Silicon 2020;14:47–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/
S12633-020-00769-8.
[68] Yao-hui L, Jun D, Si-rong Y, Wei W. High temperature friction and wear
behaviour of Al2O3 and/or carbon short fibre reinforced Al–12Si alloy
composites. Wear 2004;256:275–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1648(03)
00387-9.
[69] Radhika N, Subramanian R, Prasat SV, Anandavel B. Dry sliding wear behaviour
of aluminium/alumina/graphite hybrid metal matrix composites. Ind Lubr
Tribology 2012;64:359–66. https://doi.org/10.1108/00368791211262499/
FULL/PDF.
[70] Selvam B, Marimuthu P, Narayanasamy R, Anandakrishnan V, Tun KS, Gupta M,
et al. Dry sliding wear behaviour of zinc oxide reinforced magnesium matrix
nano-composites. Mater Des 2014;58:475–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
MATDES.2014.02.006.
[71] Turan ME, Sun Y, Aydın F, Akgul Y. Influence of multi-wall carbon nanotube
content on dry and corrosive wear performances of pure magnesium. J Compos
Mater 2018;52(23):3127–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998318762294.
[72] Subramanian C. Effects of sliding speed on the unlubricated wear behaviour of Al-
12.3wt%Si alloy. Wear 1991;151:97–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1648
(91)90349-Y.
[73] Shen M, Zhu X, Han B, Ying T, Jia J. Dry sliding wear behaviour of AZ31
magnesium alloy strengthened by nanoscale SiCp. J Mater Res Technol 2022;16:
814–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JMRT.2021.12.048.
[74] Shanthi M, Nguyen QB, Gupta M. Sliding wear behaviour of calcium containing
AZ31B/Al2O3 nanocomposites. Wear 2010;269:473–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/
J.WEAR.2010.04.034.
[75] Aung NN, Zhou W, Lim LEN. Wear behaviour of AZ91D alloy at low sliding
speeds. Wear 2008;265:780–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WEAR.2008.01.012.
[76] Archard JF. Contact and rubbing of flat surfaces. J Appl Phys 1953;24:981–8.
https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1721448.
[77] Thirugnanasambandham T, Chandradass J, Kannan TTM. Influence of load and
sliding speed on wear behavior of AZ91E magnesium alloy nanocomposite by dry
sliding. Mater Today: Proc 2021;45:6553–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
MATPR.2020.11.459.
[78] Lim CYH, Leo DK, Ang JJS, Gupta M. Wear of magnesium composites reinforced
with nano-sized alumina particulates. Wear 2005;259:620–5. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.WEAR.2005.02.006.
[79] Karthik A, Srinivasan SA, Karunanithi R, Kumaresh Babu SP, Jain VKS. Influence
of CeO2 reinforcement on microstructure, mechanical and wear behaviour of
AA2219 squeeze cast composites. J Mater Res Technol 2021;14:797–807. https://
doi.org/10.1016/J.JMRT.2021.06.056.
[80] Farhat ZN, Ding Y, Northwood DO, Alpas AT. Effect of grain size on friction and
wear of nanocrystalline aluminum. Mater Sci Eng: A 1996;206:302–13. https://
doi.org/10.1016/0921-5093(95)10016-4.
[81] Kavimani V, Prakash KS, Starvin MS, Kalidas B, Viswamithran V, Arun SR. Tribo-
Surface Characteristics and Wear Behaviour of SiC@r-GO/Mg Composite Worn
under Varying Control Factor. Silicon 2019;12(1):29–39. https://doi.org/
10.1007/S12633-019-0095-2.
[82] Su J, Teng J, Xu Z, Li Y. Corrosion-wear behavior of a biocompatible magnesium
matrix composite in simulated body fluid. Friction 2020;10(1):31–43. https://
doi.org/10.1007/S40544-020-0361-8.
[83] Aydin F, Sun Y. Microstructure and Wear of a Sintered Composite with a
Magnesium Alloy AZ91 Matrix Reinforced with ZrO2 Particles. Met Sci Heat Treat
2019;61:325–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11041-019-00424-Z.
[84] Zhu J, Qi J, Guan D, Ma L, Dwyer-Joyce R. Tribological behaviour of self-
lubricating Mg matrix composites reinforced with silicon carbide and tungsten
disulfide. Tribology Int 2020;146:106253. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
TRIBOINT.2020.106253.
[85] Aatthisugan I, Razal Rose A, Selwyn Jebadurai D. Mechanical and wear behaviour
of AZ91D magnesium matrix hybrid composite reinforced with boron carbide and
graphite. J Magnes Alloy 2017;5:20–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
JMA.2016.12.004.
[86] Taltavull C, Torres B, López AJ, Rams J. Dry sliding wear behavior of AM60B
magnesium alloy. Wear 2013;301:615–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
WEAR.2012.11.039.
[87] Habibnejad-Korayem M, Mahmudi R, Ghasemi HM, Poole WJ. Tribological
behavior of pure Mg and AZ31 magnesium alloy strengthened by Al2O3 nano-
particles. Wear 2010;268:405–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
WEAR.2009.08.031.
[88] Homepage J, Abdi S, Ardestani M, Tamizifar M, Abbasi A. Wear Performance of
As-Cast and Heat Treated ZK60 Mg Alloy Under Different Applied Loads. Iran J
Mater Form 2022;9:47–54. https://doi.org/10.22099/IJMF.2022.42285.1204.
F. Aydin et al.
[89] Jeyasimman D, Narayanasamy R, Ponalagusamy R, Anandakrishnan V,
Kamaraj M. The effects of various reinforcements on dry sliding wear behaviour
of AA 6061 nanocomposites. Mater Des 2014;64:783–93. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.MATDES.2014.08.039.
[90] AYDIN F, DURGUT R. Estimation of wear performance of AZ91 alloy under dry
sliding conditions using machine learning methods. Trans Nonferrous Met Soc
China 2021;31:125–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1003-6326(20)65482-6.
[91] Nguyen QB, Sim YHM, Gupta M, Lim CYH. Tribology characteristics of
magnesium alloy AZ31B and its composites. Tribology Int 2015;82:464–71.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRIBOINT.2014.02.024.
[92] Turan ME, Aydin F, Sun Y, Zengin H, Akinay Y. Wear resistance and tribological
properties of GNPs and MWCNT reinforced AlSi18CuNiMg alloys produced by stir
casting. Tribology Int 2021;164:107201. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
TRIBOINT.2021.107201.
[93] Toptan F, Kerti I, Rocha LA. Reciprocal dry sliding wear behaviour of B4Cp
reinforced aluminium alloy matrix composites. Wear 2012;290–291:74–85.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WEAR.2012.05.007.
[94] Singh J. Fabrication characteristics and tribological behavior of Al/SiC/Gr hybrid
aluminum matrix composites: A review. Friction 2016;4(3):191–207. https://doi.
org/10.1007/S40544-016-0116-8.
[95] Kumar S, Panwar RS, Pandey OP. Effect of dual reinforced ceramic particles on
high temperature tribological properties of aluminum composites. Ceram Int
2013;39:6333–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CERAMINT.2013.01.059.
[96] Hasan MS, Wong T, Rohatgi PK, Nosonovsky M. Analysis of the friction and wear
of graphene reinforced aluminum metal matrix composites using machine
learning models. Tribology Int 2022;170:107527. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
TRIBOINT.2022.107527.
[97] Pedregosa Fabianpedregosa F, Michel V, Grisel Oliviergrisel O, Blondel M,
Prettenhofer P, Weiss R, et al. Scikit-learn: machine learning in python. J Mach
Learn Res 2011;12:2825–30.
20
Tribology International 177 (2023) 107945
[98] Marian M, Tremmel S. Current trends and applications of machine learning in
tribology—a review. Lubricants 2021;Vol 9:86. https://doi.org/10.3390/
LUBRICANTS9090086.
[99] Cortes C, Vapnik V, Saitta L. Support-vector networks. Mach Learn 1995;20(3):
273–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00994018.
[100] Awad M, Khanna R. Support vector regression. Effic Learn Mach 2015:67–80.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4302-5990-9_4.
[101] Breiman L, Friedman JH, Olshen RA, Stone CJ. Classification and regression trees.
Classif Regres Trees 2017:1–358. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315139470.
[102] Breiman L. Random forests. Mach Learn 2001;45(1):5–32. https://doi.org/
10.1023/A:1010933404324.
[103] Chen T., He T. xgboost: eXtreme Gradient Boosting n.d.
[104] Hinton GE. Connectionist learning procedures. Machine Learn. 1990;3:555–610.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-051055-2.50029-8.
[105] He Z, Shi T, Xuan J, Li T. Research on tool wear prediction based on temperature
signals and deep learning. Wear 2021;478–479:203902. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.WEAR.2021.203902.
[106] Chicco D, Warrens MJ, Jurman G. The coefficient of determination R-squared is
more informative than SMAPE, MAE, MAPE, MSE and RMSE in regression
analysis evaluation. PeerJ Comput Sci 2021;7:1–24. https://doi.org/10.7717/
PEERJ-CS.623/SUPP-1.
[107] Najjar IMR, Sadoun AM, Alsoruji GS, Elaziz MA, Wagih A. Predicting the
mechanical properties of Cu–Al2O3 nanocomposites using machine learning and
finite element simulation of indentation experiments. Ceram Int 2022;48:
7748–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CERAMINT.2021.11.322.
[108] Matrenin P, Safaraliev M, Dmitriev S, Kokin S, Eshchanov B, Rusina A. Adaptive
ensemble models for medium-term forecasting of water inflow when planning
electricity generation under climate change. Energy Rep 2022;8:439–47. https://
doi.org/10.1016/J.EGYR.2021.11.112.