Concrete Bridge Defects Identification and Localization Based on Classification Deep Convolutional Neural Networks and Transfer Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventional practices of bridge visual inspection present several limitations, including a tedious process of analyzing images manually to identify potential damages. Vision-based techniques, particularly Deep Convolutional Neural Networks, have been widely investigated to automatically identify, localize, and quantify defects in bridge images. However, massive datasets with different annotation levels are required to train these deep models. This paper presents a dataset of more than 6900 images featuring three common defects of concrete bridges (i.e., cracks, efflorescence, and spalling). To overcome the challenge of limited training samples, three Transfer Learning approaches in fine-tuning the state-of-the-art Visual Geometry Group network were studied and compared to classify the three defects. The best-proposed approach achieved a high testing accuracy (97.13%), combined with high F1-scores of 97.38%, 95.01%, and 97.35% for cracks, efflorescence, and spalling, respectively. Furthermore, the effectiveness of interpretable networks was explored in the context of weakly supervised semantic segmentation using image-level annotations. Two gradient-based backpropagation interpretation techniques were used to generate pixel-level heatmaps and localize defects in test images. Qualitative results showcase the potential use of interpretation maps to provide relevant information on defect localization in a weak supervision framework.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".