An Automated Machine-Learning Approach for Road Pothole Detection Using Smartphone Sensor Data
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
Road surface monitoring and maintenance are essential for driving comfort, transport safety and preserving infrastructure integrity. Traditional road condition monitoring is regularly conducted by specially designed instrumented vehicles, which requires time and money and is only able to cover a limited proportion of the road network. In light of the ubiquitous use of smartphones, this paper proposes an automatic pothole detection system utilizing the built-in vibration sensors and global positioning system receivers in smartphones. We collected road condition data in a city using dedicated vehicles and smartphones with a purpose-built mobile application designed for this study. A series of processing methods were applied to the collected data, and features from different frequency domains were extracted, along with various machine-learning classifiers. The results indicated that features from the time and frequency domains outperformed other features for identifying potholes. Among the classifiers tested, the Random Forest method exhibited the best classification performance for potholes, with a precision of 88.5% and recall of 75%. Finally, we validated the proposed method using datasets generated from different road types and examined its universality and robustness.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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