MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392265612 · doi:10.1061/aomjah.aoeng-0021

3D Dense Reconstruction for Structural Defect Quantification

2024· article· en· W4392265612 on OpenAlexafffund
Rishabh Bajaj, Zaid Abbas Al‐Sabbag, Chul Min Yeum, Sriram Narasimhan

Bibliographic record

VenueASCE OPEN Multidisciplinary Journal of Civil Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputational biologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent advancements in vision-based visual inspection enable the identification, localization, and quantification of damage on structures. However, existing damage quantification methods are limited to measuring one- or two-dimensional attributes such as length or area, which is insufficient for certain damage types such as spalling that require depth in addition to in-plane measurements, as outlined in inspection manuals. To address this limitation, we propose utilizing image-based dense 3D reconstruction to perform full 3D quantifications to assess damages for concrete structure inspections. The proposed method is applied to quantify spalling damage in 3D to compute volumetric loss and maximum depth of the damage in line with bridge inspection manuals. Our approach involves using a convolutional neural network-based interactive segmentation algorithm to accurately segment spalling boundaries from images. Structure-from-motion and multiview stereo algorithms are then applied to generate a detailed 3D point cloud reconstruction of the spalling using multiple images. From this point cloud, a 3D mesh representation of the spalling is created for precise quantification. To validate our proposed technique, we conducted laboratory and field experiments to capture images and interactively segment the damage. The results demonstrate the effectiveness and reliability of our approach for 3D damage quantification in structure inspections.

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 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 score0.337
Threshold uncertainty score0.834

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.277
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASCE OPEN Multidisciplinary Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207