“…References Models Inputs Number of Samples Majdi and Beiki [30] GA-ANN UCS, GSI, RQD, ρ, n, NJ 120 Dehghan et al [29] ANN V p , Is (50) , R n , n 30 Khandelwal and Singh [31] ANN UCS, BTS 120 Ocak and Seker [32] ANN UCS, γ 195 Armaghani et al [17] ANFIS ρ, V p , content of Qtz, Kpr, Plg, and Bi 45 Bejarbaneh et al [33] ANN Is (50) , V p , R n 96 Saedi et al [34] ANFIS BPI, BTS, V p , Is (50) 120 Rezaei [35] MFIS H, ρ, n, DI 50 Yang et al [36] Bayesian I S(50) , R n , V p , n, UCS 71 Acar and Kaya [26] LS-SVM V p , γ, Is (50) , BTS 575 Cao et al [23] XGBoost-firefly ρ, V p , content of Qtz, Kpr, Plg, Bi 45 Pappalardo and Mineo [27] ANN n, γ, V p , E dyn , UCS / Meng and Wu [24] RF PF, SF, IAF, TF, NF / Abdi et al [25] RF n, ρ, V p , Id In comparison to other methods, ML approaches can yield dependable results by establishing the nonlinear relationship between input and output variables [37,38]. It is a promising method for estimating the E of rock.…”