MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229459020 · doi:10.18280/ts.390210

Vision Based Crack Detection in Concrete Structures Using Cutting-Edge Deep Learning Techniques

2022· article· en· W4229459020 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nirmala Paramanandham, Deepali Koppad, A Sasithradevi

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNondestructive testingComputer scienceEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkProcess (computing)Deep learningTransfer of learningResidualStructural engineeringEdge detectionReinforced concretePattern recognition (psychology)Image processingImage (mathematics)EngineeringAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concrete crack detection is the process of inspecting the concrete structures. If the defects present in any structures could not be detected in time, it may have a severe impact. The cracks can be detected using destructive as well as non-destructive testing (NDT) techniques. This article presents image based NDT techniques for detecting the concrete cracks using the cutting edge deep learning techniques. NDT is the process of analysing the materials, components, structures etc. without causing any damage to it. In this paper, a transfer learning technique is proposed for detecting the cracks in the concrete structures. A dataset of 40000 images of concrete which is collected from METU Campus is analysed in NVIDIA Tesla V100 12 GB GPU servers using various recent deep learning techniques and the results are tabulated. Performance of four pre trained network architectures such as Alexnet, VGG16, VGG19 and ResNet-50 is assessed for categorizing the images. From the results, it is revealed that the residual neural network technique is successful in detecting the cracks with high accuracy and less complexity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207