MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122915047 · doi:10.15353/jcvis.v6i1.3557

Real-time Quantitative Visual Inspection using Extended Reality

2021· article· en· W3122915047 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Zaid Abbas Al‐Sabbag, Jason Paul Connelly, Chul Min Yeum, Sriram Narasimhan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Vision and Imaging Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHeadsetComputer scienceComputer visionPolygon meshArtificial intelligenceVirtual realityAugmented realityProcess (computing)PixelWorkflowComputer graphics (images)Triangulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we propose a technique for quantitative visual inspection that can quantify structural damage using extended reality (XR). The XR headset can display and overlay graphical information on the physical space and process the data from the built-in camera and depth sensor. Also, the device permits accessing and analyzing image and video stream in real-time and utilizing 3D meshes of the environment and camera pose information. By leveraging these features for the XR headset, we build a workflow and graphic interface to capture the images, segment damage regions, and evaluate the physical size of damage. A deep learning-based interactive segmentation algorithm called f-BRS was deployed to precisely segment damage regions through the XR headset. A ray-casting algorithm is implemented to obtain 3D locations corresponding to the pixel locations of the damage region on the image. The size of the damage region is computed from the 3D locations of its boundary. The performance of the proposed method is demonstrated through a field experiment at an in-service bridge where spalling damage is present at its abutment. The experiment shows that the proposed method provides sub-centimeter accuracy for the size estimation.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational Vision and Imaging SystemsSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207