MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221020147 · doi:10.3390/app12062983

Automated Graffiti Detection: A Novel Approach to Maintaining Historical Architecture in Communities

2022· article· en· W4221020147 on OpenAlexaff
Jongseong Choi, Lazaros Toumanidis, Chul Min Yeum, Charalampos Z. Patrikakis, Ali Lenjani, Xiaoyu Liu, Panagiotis Kasnesis, Ricardo Ortiz, Ning‐Jun Jiang, Shirley J. Dyke

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeNational Research Foundation of KoreaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGraffitiComputer scienceOrthophotoTourismArtificial intelligenceArchitectureProcess (computing)Set (abstract data type)Data scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graffiti is common in many communities and even affects our historical and heritage structures. This leads to a decrease in the revenue associated with commercial activities or services (e.g., shops, restaurants, residences), and potentially reduces tourism in a region. Visual data, in the form of photographs, is becoming an efficient mechanism to record information. Photographs can be quickly captured, and are already frequently posted online by ordinary citizens (e.g., tourists, residents, visitors). Exploiting image data through automation and computer vision provides a new opportunity to simplify the current manual graffiti-monitoring processes, enabling automated detection, localization, and quantification of such markings. In this study, we developed a vision-based graffiti-detection technique using a convolutional neural network. Images collected from historical structures of interest within a community can be utilized to automatically inspect for graffiti markings. In the case in which citizens collect and contribute data, there is a high degree of duplication and repetition, and potentially a lack of GPS information. These hinder the direct use of the images for automating the process. To address these challenges, we built high-resolution, single-view façade images (orthophotos) before applying our robust graffiti detector. The robust graffiti detector was built using a database with 1022 images of damaged or contaminated structures gathered during a recent European Union project, entitled “Safeguarding Cultural Heritage through Technical and Organisational Resources Management” (STORM). A total of 818 images were used for training (10% of the training set was randomly chosen for the validation set), achieving 88% accuracy among the remaining 204 samples for testing. Using the trained detector, the technique developed was demonstrated using data collected from the Church of Agios Nikolaos (Leontariou), Kantza, Greece.

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.631
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207