Computer-Aided Approach for Rapid Post-Event Visual Evaluation of a Building Façade
Bibliographic record
Abstract
After a disaster strikes an urban area, damage to the façades of a building may produce dangerous falling hazards that jeopardize pedestrians and vehicles. Thus, building façades must be rapidly inspected to prevent potential loss of life and property damage. Harnessing the capacity to use new vision sensors and associated sensing platforms, such as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) would expedite this process and alleviate spatial and temporal limitations typically associated with human-based inspection in high-rise buildings. In this paper, we have developed an approach to perform rapid and accurate visual inspection of building façades using images collected from UAVs. An orthophoto corresponding to any reasonably flat region on the building (e.g., a façade or building side) is automatically constructed using a structure-from-motion (SfM) technique, followed by image stitching and blending. Based on the geometric relationship between the collected images and the constructed orthophoto, high-resolution region-of-interest are automatically extracted from the collected images, enabling efficient visual inspection. We successfully demonstrate the capabilities of the technique using an abandoned building of which a façade has damaged building components (e.g., window panes or external drainage pipes).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".