Sanjay Kumar

Dr. Sanjay Kumar

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

9Years (2018-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
29 January 2018 in Structural Concrete
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
SCS. Jeeva Chithambaram
S. Jeeva Chithambaram
SKSanjay Kumar
Sanjay Kumar
MPMadan M. Prasad
Madan M. Prasad
DADibyendu Adak
Dibyendu Adak

1 July 2019 in Construction and Building Materials
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SCS. Jeeva Chithambaram
S. Jeeva Chithambaram
SKSanjay Kumar
Sanjay Kumar
MPM.M. Prasad
M.M. Prasad

22 December 2023 in Journal of Building Engineering
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ASAnasuya Sahu
Anasuya Sahu
SKSanjay Kumar
Sanjay Kumar
ASA.K.L. Srivastava
A.K.L. Srivastava
BPBheem Pratap
Bheem Pratap

15 August 2023 in Materials Today: Proceedings
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SKSanjay Kumar
Sanjay Kumar
ASAnasuya Sahu
Anasuya Sahu
ASA.K.L Srivastava
A.K.L Srivastava

21 May 2026 in Materials
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
IPIndra Kumar Pandey
Indra Kumar Pandey
SKSanjay Kumar
Sanjay Kumar
BPBrajkishor Prasad
Brajkishor Prasad
PKPRAMOD KUMAR
PRAMOD KUMAR
Mizan AhmedMizan Ahmed
Mizan Ahmed
Ardalan B. HusseinArdalan B. Hussein
Ardalan B. Hussein
This study investigates the prediction of carbon emissions from fly ash and ground granulated blast furnace slag-based geopolymer concrete (GPC) using advanced ensemble machine learning (ML) techniques. Although ML has been extensively utilized to model GPC’s mechanical performance, its application in estimating environmental impacts, specifically carbon emissions, is limited. The research employs six ensemble ML models, such as random forest, gradient boosting, extreme gradient boosting (XGB), CatBoost, and light gradient boosting machine (LGBM), including versions optimized using ant colony optimization (ACO). Among them, the ACO-enhanced XGB model demonstrated the highest predictive accuracy with a coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.97, with low prediction errors (MAE = 3.92, RMSE = 6.17). However, cross-validation and uncertainty analyses indicate that the performance differences among top models are relatively small. Conversely, LGBM exhibited the least predictive reliability. Feature importance analysis revealed that curing parameters, specifically initial curing time, curing temperature, and the dosage of dry sodium hydroxide, had the most influence on carbon emissions. To evaluate model robustness and interpretability, Monte Carlo simulation and Gaussian white noise analyses were conducted. Results confirmed that CatBoost and ACO–gradient boosting (ACO-GB) demonstrated greater stability under varying and noisy conditions, whereas XGB-based models, although highly accurate, were comparatively more sensitive to input variability. Overall, the research establishes a data-driven, efficient framework for quantifying carbon emissions in GPC, highlighting the importance of evaluating both predictive accuracy and model robustness, advancing sustainable material design through intelligent modelling.

31 December 2018
Verified
Book Chapter
Closed access
PDF file
SCS. Jeeva Chithambaram
S. Jeeva Chithambaram
SKSanjay Kumar
Sanjay Kumar
MPM. M. Prasad
M. M. Prasad