%20(1).png)

Build it up
You are kindly requested to revise your manuscript and submit the updated version to PFDM 2025 before 15-06-2025.
Below, you will find all relevant review comments from:
-
Scientific Committee,
-
Track Leaders,
-
The Editorial Team
Please consider these carefully in preparing your revised manuscript.Once your revisions are complete, you may submit the updated version using the submission link provided at the bottom of this page.We appreciate your contributions and look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Machine Learning-Aided Mechanical Characterization of Cementitiously Stabilized Lateritic Soil for Structural Applications in Road Construction
Reviewer's feedback:
The manuscript presents a hybrid machine learning approach for predicting the unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of cement-stabilized lateritic soil, which demonstrates a certain degree of innovation by combining SAO and DAOA with a Naïve Bayes model. The integration of advanced optimization techniques into geotechnical modeling is commendable and relevant for sustainable infrastructure development. However, the manuscript lacks sufficient detail regarding the dataset used. The number of samples, data distribution, and preprocessing steps are not clearly described, making it difficult to assess the robustness and representativeness of the training and testing processes. Additionally, the generalization capability of the proposed model is not discussed, especially with regard to its applicability to other soil types or varying environmental conditions. These omissions raise concerns about the reliability and transferability of the proposed methodology.
Editorial Decision for Conference Proceedings:
It is recommended that authors follow the template, as it already provides a clear structure. Suitable for conference publication.
Track Leader’s Comments (if any):
Please note that some of the track leader’s comments are intended as feedback for future improvements
Interesting study highlighting the hybrid ML model’s advantages in optimizing parameters and mitigating overfitting, offering a scalable, cost-effective alternative for UCS prediction
Nothing new ito UCS testing; however, the ML application is a good addition to the testing regime
Applied framework is clear and logical for the tests
Figure 4's caption should be corrected on page 3
I suggest that the authors remove the statement on page 4: "The model’s high accuracy and efficiency make it a valuable tool for sustainable infrastructure development". It falls out of the sky. Certainly not relevant for the paper.