MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392505527 · doi:10.1061/9780784484449.050

Depth Completion from Sparse 3D Maps for Automated Defect Quantification

2022· article· en· W4392505527 on OpenAlex
Jake McLaughlin, Alexander Thoms, Nicholas Charron, Sriram Narasimhan

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueLifelines 2022 · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCompletion (oil and gas wells)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For lifeline systems, routine visual inspections play a vital role in gathering structure-level data to inform asset maintenance strategies. Current research has shown that data repeatability and objectivity may be enhanced with computer vision and robotics, whereby manual collection, cataloguing, and quantification of defects is automated. For instance, low-cost lidar sensors integrated with a robotic platform can collect 3D geometric information of a structure via simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM), with image data fusion allowing for defect measurement. While low-cost lidars provide a fast and inexpensive way of obtaining defect measurements, maps they produce often lack the density required for accurate quantification. To remedy this, we combine depth completion enhanced point cloud data from a lidar with labelled image data to extract a more complete surface estimate in physical scale. Given a 3D map, image data with known camera poses, and camera intrinsic calibrations, our approach first transforms the 3D map to a depth map (within camera frame) through ray casting. Depth maps are then densified using a depth completion algorithm that employs image processing techniques tailored to suit sparse lidar map data. Lastly, the combination of labeled defect images and dense depth maps is exploited to extract high-resolution area measurements for defects such as spalls and delaminations. The accuracy of our method has been assessed by comparing results to those obtained from non-depth completed data and to ground truth measurements obtained using a high-resolution monocular camera with manual scale input to each image. Using a data set containing six concrete area defects, our method was shown to reduce error, on average, by 14.2%, with depth completed results having an average area error of 5.3% from the ground truth. Our results show that depth completion on sparse 3D maps can be effective in fine-scale defect quantification, providing a more complete assessment of lifeline system condition using affordable sensors.

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 score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.597

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.222 · 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