This study investigates the application of machine learning (ML) techniques to predict thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) mass-loss data of medium-density fibreboard (MDF) waste under oxidative and pyrolytic conditions. Thermal decomposition provides a potential alternative to landfilling by reducing harmful additives and redistributing nitrogen-containing species among char, condensable products, and gases. Experimental data were obtained at four heating rates (5, 10, 15, and 20 °C/min) from room temperature to 600–800 °C. Five regression models were evaluated, with Linear Regression (LinReg) and Partial Least Squares Regression (PLSR) serving as baseline linear models, and k -Nearest Neighbors ( k -NN), Random Forest (RF), and Gradient Boosting Regression (GBR) applied as the main nonlinear models. The key contribution of this work is the comparison of five regression models for MDF-waste TGA prediction under oxidative and pyrolytic environments across 3 different scenario-based data splits. Three modeling scenarios were evaluated using graphical tuning and Bayesian optimization. Scenario 1, based on a randomized 80/20 split of the complete dataset, is interpreted as an interpolation baseline. Scenario 2, which involved training on 5 and 10 °C/min and testing on 15 and 20 °C/min, provided the most credible heating-rate-transfer configuration, with the selected GBR models achieving test R² values of 0.989 for oxidation and 0.997 for pyrolysis. Scenario 3 which involved training on 5 °C/min and testing on 10, 15 and 20 °C/min, showed weaker curve-level alignment, particularly in the char-oxidation and terminal residual-mass regions. These results indicate that tree-based models, supported by Bayesian optimization, can provide an effective computational approach for MDF thermal-degradation prediction under the studied conditions, although model applicability remains material and condition-specific and is limited to the investigated MDF waste, atmospheres, heating rates, and experimental conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mansoori et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: