MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997724457 · doi:10.1177/1475921719896813

Multi-level feature fusion in densely connected deep-learning architecture and depth-first search for crack segmentation on images collected with smartphones

2020· article· en· W2997724457 on OpenAlexaff
Qipei Mei, Mustafa Gül

Bibliographic record

VenueStructural Health Monitoring · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSegmentationFeature (linguistics)PoolingConvolutional neural networkDeep learningConvolution (computer science)Pattern recognition (psychology)Layer (electronics)Set (abstract data type)Precision and recallData setKey (lock)Transfer of learningComputer visionArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations68
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStructural Health MonitoringSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207