Content annotation in images from outdoor construction jobsites using YOLO V8 and Swin transformer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Digital visual data, such as images and videos, are valuable sources of information for various construction engineering and management purposes. Advances in low-cost image-capturing and storing technologies, along with the emergence of artificial intelligence methods have resulted in a considerable increase in using digital imaging in construction sites. Despite these advances, these rich data sources are not typically used to their full potential because they are processed and documented subjectively, and several valuable contents could be overlooked. Semantic content analysis and annotation of the images could enhance retrieval and application of the relevant instances in large databases. This research proposes an ensemble approach to use deep learning-based object recognition, pixel-level segmentation, and text classification for medium-level (ongoing activities) and high-level (project type) annotation of still images from various outdoor construction scenes. The proposed method can annotate images with and without construction actors, i.e. equipment and workers. The experimental results have shown the potential of this approach in annotating construction activities with an 82% overall recall rate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".