The Improvement of Automated Crack Segmentation on Concrete Pavement with Graph Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crack is a common concrete pavement distress that will deteriorate into severe problems without timely repair, which means the automated detection of pavement crack is essential for pavement maintenance. However, automatic crack detection and segmentation remain challenging due to the complex pavement condition. Recent research on pavement crack detection based on deep learning has laid a good foundation for automated crack segmentation, but there can still be improvements. This paper proposes an automatic concrete pavement crack segmentation framework with enhanced graph network branch. First, the nodes of the graph and nodes’ attributions are generated based on the image dividing. The edges of the graph are determined based on Gaussian distribution. Then, the graph from the image is input into the graph branch. The graph feature map of the graph branch output is fused with the image feature map of the encoder and then enters the decoder to recover the image resolution to obtain the crack segmentation result. Finally, the method is tested on a self-built 3D concrete pavement crack dataset. The proposed method achieves the highest F1 and IoU (Intersection over Union) in the comparison experiments. And the graph branch addition improves 0.08 on F1 and 0.06 on IoU compared with U-Net.
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".