Multi-level feature fusion in densely connected deep-learning architecture and depth-first search for crack segmentation on images collected with smartphones
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cracks are important signs of degradation in existing infrastructure systems. Automatic crack detection and segmentation plays a key role in developing smart infrastructure systems. However, this field has been challenging over the last decades due to irregular shape of the cracks and complex illumination conditions. This article proposes a novel deep-learning architecture for crack segmentation at pixel-level. In this architecture, one convolutional layer is densely connected to multiple other layers in a feed-forward fashion. Max pooling layers are used to reduce the dimensions of the features, and transposed convolution layers are used for multi-level feature fusion. A depth-first search–based algorithm is applied as post-processing tool to remove isolated pixels and improve the accuracy. The method is tested on two previously published data sets. It can reach 92.02%, 91.13%, and 91.58% for the first data set, and 92.17%, 91.61%, and 91.89% for the second data set for precision, recall, and F1 score, respectively. The performance of the proposed method outperforms other state-of-the-art methods. At the end of the article, the influence of feature fusion methods and transfer learning are also discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it