MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022779370 · doi:10.25103/jestr.132.15

Multi-Characteristic Parameter Classification Algorithm of Cracks on Bridge Substructures

2020· article· en· W3022779370 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaoqiang Jia, Yidong Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Science and Technology Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersEducation Department of Shaanxi ProvinceWeinan Normal University
KeywordsAlgorithmArtificial neural networkBridge (graph theory)SubstructureIdentification (biology)Computer scienceProjection (relational algebra)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Structural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The forms of bridge cracks vary widely, but the automatic classification and identification of the effects of these cracks are difficult to achieve. Many recognition systems developed all over the world are based on recognition results and carry out human-machine dialogues. These systems rely on the manual recognition of crack types, but the manual approach not only has a low working efficiency but also a high error rate. In this study, a classification algorithm for cracks on bridge substructures based on multi-characteristic parameters was proposed to accurately identify cracks on concrete bridges and objectively and accurately evaluate the state of the bridge cracks. The geometric characteristics of the cracks in the substructure were extracted, and the projection vector, crack area, distribution density, and Euler number were obtained. Projection and wavelet denoising algorithms were used to first distinguish the linear cracks from the network cracks, and the number of holes in the crack image was employed as a parameter to further determine the crack type. Then, the Euler number was introduced to retain the image characteristic when the image required to be changed. Finally, the back propagation (BP) neural network system was used to achieve an accurate crack classification. This study was verified by experiments. Results demonstrate that the classification algorithm can effectively identify four types of cracks, namely, transverse, longitudinal, reflective, and meshed cracks. In the identification of transverse, longitudinal, and reflective cracks, the corresponding classification accuracies in this study were 12%, 3%, and 4% higher than the classification algorithm with the canny operator. This study can meet the requirements of crack classification accuracy in practical engineering and provide a scientific reference for the maintenance of bridges.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering Science and Technology ReviewSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207