Recognition and Classification of Concrete Cracks under Strong Interference Based on Convolutional Neural Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes the UmNet model based on convolutional neutral network (CNN), aiming to improve the ability to recognize and classify concrete cracks in a background complicated by construction seams and seepage traces. The model was derived from the famous CNN AlexNet. Without changing the receptive field, large convolutional kernels were replaced with small ones to reduce the parameters, deepen the network, and increase nonlinear transforms. Next, convolutional block attention module (CBAM) was introduced to highlight the key information in images and focus on high-weight channels. Finally, Bayesian network (BN) layer and L2 regularization were added, and the number of nodes in fully connected layer were reduced. A series of comparative experiments were carried out on three datasets D, P, and W. The results show that the proposed UmNet surpassed AlexNet in the recognition accuracy on D, P, and W by 3.74%, 3.17%, and 5.74%, respectively, and reduced the number of parameters by 75.04%. Therefore, our model is an effective means to recognize and classify of concrete cracks under strong interference.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".