MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395685082 · doi:10.3390/jimaging10050100

DepthCrackNet: A Deep Learning Model for Automatic Pavement Crack Detection

2024· article· en· W4395685082 on OpenAlexafffund
Alireza Saberironaghi, Jing Ren

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Imaging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSegmentationFeature extractionBoosting (machine learning)Convolution (computer science)Deep learningProcess (computing)Identification (biology)Pattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Data miningComputer visionArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detecting cracks in the pavement is a vital component of ensuring road safety. Since manual identification of these cracks can be time-consuming, an automated method is needed to speed up this process. However, creating such a system is challenging due to factors including crack variability, variations in pavement materials, and the occurrence of miscellaneous objects and anomalies on the pavement. Motivated by the latest progress in deep learning applied to computer vision, we propose an effective U-Net-shaped model named DepthCrackNet. Our model employs the Double Convolution Encoder (DCE), composed of a sequence of convolution layers, for robust feature extraction while keeping parameters optimally efficient. We have incorporated the TriInput Multi-Head Spatial Attention (TMSA) module into our model; in this module, each head operates independently, capturing various spatial relationships and boosting the extraction of rich contextual information. Furthermore, DepthCrackNet employs the Spatial Depth Enhancer (SDE) module, specifically designed to augment the feature extraction capabilities of our segmentation model. The performance of the DepthCrackNet was evaluated on two public crack datasets: Crack500 and DeepCrack. In our experimental studies, the network achieved mIoU scores of 77.0% and 83.9% with the Crack500 and DeepCrack datasets, 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations21
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ImagingSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207