MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Automated Scanning of Concrete Structures for Crack Detection and Assessment Using a Drone

2022· article· en· W4318003278 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE 21st international Ccnference on Sciences and Techniques of Automatic Control and Computer Engineering (STA) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
FundersUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
KeywordsDroneComputer scienceSAFERSoftwareMotion planningReal-time computingCivil infrastructurePath (computing)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionEngineeringRobotComputer securityConstruction engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles are becoming more accessible, opening the way to monitoring and inspecting civil infrastructure, even in challenging and dynamic environments. Indeed, using UAV s contributes to safer, faster and more accurate inspections, often beyond what the human being can detect. This paper proposes a path-planning method for an autonomous scan mission using a UAV with an onboard camera for concrete structure inspection. The main objectives are ensuring maximum coverage of the structure and collecting and transmitting images to estimate the extent of damage caused by cracks. The proposed solution is integrated and evaluated using the Software-In-the-Loop Simulation. The results show that the proposed algorithm allows robust scanning with the least energy dissipated by batteries during the mission.

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.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.377
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.253 · 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