Aerial Footage Analysis Using Computer Vision for Efficient Detection of Points of Interest Near Railway Tracks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Object detection is a fundamental part of computer vision, with a wide range of real-world applications. It involves the detection of various objects in digital images or video. In this paper, we propose a proof of concept usage of computer vision algorithms to improve the maintenance of railway tracks operated by Via Rail Canada. Via Rail operates about 500 trains running on 12,500 km of tracks. These tracks pass through long stretches of sparsely populated lands. Maintaining these tracks is challenging due to the sheer amount of resources required to identify the points of interest (POI), such as growing vegetation, missing or broken ties, and water pooling around the tracks. We aim to use the YOLO algorithm to identify these points of interest with the help of aerial footage. The solution shows promising results in detecting the POI based on unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) images. Overall, we achieved a precision of 74% across all POI and a mean average precision @ 0.5 (mAP @ 0.5) of 70.7%. The most successful detection was the one related to missing ties, vegetation, and water pooling, with an average accuracy of 85% across all three POI.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".