THE RESULT
What the data shows
The largest computed metric is 51.72 for (28.0, 56.0]; the smallest is 18.52 for (0.0, 7.0]. Metric: median_strength (MPa).
Mix compositions differ across ages; this is not a longitudinal estimate of strength gain.
| age band | samples | median strength | p25 | p75 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (0.0, 7.0] | 262 | 18.52 | 12.66 | 30.24 |
| (14.0, 28.0] | 425 | 33.76 | 26.23 | 44.39 |
| (28.0, 56.0] | 91 | 51.72 | 39.43 | 62.69 |
| (56.0, 90.0] | 54 | 39.68 | 32.97 | 47.77 |
| (7.0, 14.0] | 62 | 26.54 | 22.37 | 33.62 |
| (90.0, inf] | 136 | 47.34 | 40.52 | 56.53 |
THE METHOD
From source to answer
Prespecified age bands with median, quartiles and sample counts.
The Python source exposes this study’s transformations. The complete project download includes shared preparation and evaluation routines.
THE NEXT DECISION
What follows from the finding
Form a controlled curing-time experiment with comparable mix formulations.
Where the conclusion stops
Laboratory observations do not certify a construction mix. Composition and curing conditions are confounded. Models require independent engineering validation and cannot replace strength testing.
Related studies may reuse observations or holdouts. These are historical analyses; associations and backtests do not demonstrate commercial impact. Further model tuning needs new, untouched evaluation data.