MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981493332 · doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2019.102959

Self-reconfigurable façade-cleaning robot equipped with deep-learning-based crack detection based on convolutional neural networks

2019· article· en· W2981493332 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAutomation in Construction · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersSingapore University of Technology and Design
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkProcess (computing)RobotArtificial intelligenceDeep learningComputer scienceModular designSet (abstract data type)Machine visionArtificial neural networkSimulationComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite advanced construction technologies that are unceasingly filling the city-skylines with glassy high-rise structures, maintenance of these shining tall monsters has remained a high-risk labor-intensive process. Thus, nowadays, utilizing façade-cleaning robots seems inevitable. However, in case of navigating on cracked glass, these robots may cause hazardous situations. Accordingly, it seems necessary to equip them with crack-detection system to eventually avoid cracked area. In this study, benefitting from convolutional neural networks developed in TensorFlow™, a deep-learning-based crack detection approach is introduced for a novel modular façade-cleaning robot. For experimental purposes, the robot is equipped with an on-board camera and the live video is loaded using OpenCV. The vision-based training process is fulfilled by applying two different optimizers utilizing a sufficiently generalized data-set. Data augmentation techniques and also image pre-processing also apply as a part of process. Simulation and experimental results show that the system can hit the milestone on crack-detection with an accuracy around 90%. This is satisfying enough to replace human-conducted on-site inspections. In addition, a thorough comparison between the performance of optimizers is put forward: Adam optimizer shows higher precision, while Adagrad serves more satisfying recall factor, however, Adam optimizer with the lowest false negative rate and highest accuracy has a better performance. Furthermore, proposed CNN's performance is compared to traditional NN and the results provide a remarkable difference in success level, proving the strength of CNN.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.174 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it