MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367680609 · doi:10.1177/14759217231168212

Deep learning-based concrete defects classification and detection using semantic segmentation

2023· article· en· W4367680609 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

VenueStructural Health Monitoring · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryLakehead University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkSegmentationDeep learningPattern recognition (psychology)Histogram of oriented gradientsContextual image classificationMachine learningClassifier (UML)Image segmentationHistogramImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Visual damage detection of infrastructure using deep learning (DL)-based computational approaches can facilitate a potential solution to reduce subjectivity yet increase the accuracy of the damage diagnoses and accessibility in a structural health monitoring (SHM) system. However, despite remarkable advances with DL-based SHM, the most significant challenges to achieving the real-time implication are the limited available defects image databases and the selection of DL networks depth. To address these challenges, this research has created a diverse dataset with concrete crack (4087) and spalling (1100) images and used it for damage condition assessment by applying convolutional neural network (CNN) algorithms. CNN-classifier models are used to identify different types of defects and semantic segmentation for labeling the defect patterns within an image. Three CNN-based models-Visual Geometry Group (VGG)19, ResNet50, and InceptionV3 are incorporated as CNN-classifiers. For semantic segmentation, two encoder-decoder models, U-Net and pyramid scene parsing network architecture are developed based on four backbone models, including VGG19, ResNet50, InceptionV3, and EfficientNetB3. The CNN-classifier models are analyzed on two optimizers-stochastic gradient descent (SGD), root mean square propagation (RMSprop), and learning rates-0.1, 0.001, and 0.0001. However, the CNN-segmentation models are analyzed for SGD and adaptive moment estimation, trained with three different learning rates-0.1, 0.01, and 0.0001, and evaluated based on accuracy, intersection over union, precision, recall, and F1-score. InceptionV3 achieves the best performance for defects classification with an accuracy of 91.98% using the RMSprop optimizer. For crack segmentation, EfficientNetB3-based U-Net, and for spalling segmentation, IncenptionV3-based U-Net model outperformed all other algorithms, with an F1-score of 95.66 and 89.43%, respectively.

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 score0.295
Threshold uncertainty score0.821

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.272 · 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