MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111553838 · doi:10.1155/2020/8515213

Pavement Crack Detection and Segmentation Method Based on Improved Deep Learning Fusion Model

2020· article· en· W3111553838 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Problems in Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaUniversity of WaterlooNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSegmentationConvolutional neural networkComputer scienceHyperparameterArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Identification (biology)Structural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pavement damage is the main factor affecting road performance. Pavement cracking, a common type of road damage, is a key challenge in road maintenance. In order to achieve an accurate crack classification, segmentation, and geometric parameter calculation, this paper proposes a method based on a deep convolutional neural network fusion model for pavement crack identification, which combines the advantages of the multitarget single-shot multibox detector (SSD) convolutional neural network model and the U-Net model. First, the crack classification and detection model is applied to classify the cracks and obtain the detection confidence. Next, the crack segmentation network is applied to accurately segment the pavement cracks. By improving the feature extraction structure and optimizing the hyperparameters of the model, pavement crack classification and segmentation accuracy were improved. Finally, the length and width (for linear cracks) and the area (for alligator cracks) are calculated according to the segmentation results. Test results show that the recognition accuracy of the pavement crack identification method for transverse, longitudinal, and alligator cracks is 86.8%, 87.6%, and 85.5%, respectively. It is demonstrated that the proposed method can provide the category information for pavement cracks as well as the accurate positioning and geometric parameter information, which can be used directly for evaluating the pavement condition.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score0.702

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.208 · 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