MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407847668 · doi:10.1016/j.aei.2025.103224

Deep learning-based rebar detection and instance segmentation in images

2025· article· en· W4407847668 on OpenAlexafffund
Tao Sun, Yi Shao

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Engineering Informatics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Neural Network Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersHunan UniversityPrecast/Prestressed Concrete InstituteMcGill University
KeywordsRebarArtificial intelligenceSegmentationDeep learningComputer scienceComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)Image segmentationEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• A high-quality image benchmark is developed for rebar detection and segmentation. • The dataset covers two types of rebars under various shooting views and placement patterns. • The comparison test provides the basis for selecting deep learning models. • Six data augmentation strategies are discussed to improve the best models. • Three downstream tasks in real-world scenarios validate the developed model. Automated rebar cage assembly and quality inspection rely on reliable rebar perception. Recent studies have explored image-based rebar perception via object detection and instance segmentation algorithms. However, existing models are limited across various scenarios, especially with different rebar categories, arrangement patterns, and camera views, which limits their application. This is primarily attributed to the absence of a benchmark considering these factors. This study introduces an image benchmark designed for the effective training and selection of rebar detection and instance segmentation algorithms. It is the first to encompass two types of commonly used rebars, multiple camera views, and various rebar placement patterns at different assembly phases in a single dataset. Six object detection methods and four instance segmentation methods are evaluated to assess the applicability of the state-of-the-art methods. Additionally, a new shape-prior-based post-processing method is developed to address the merged detection problem in clustering. The experiment shows that Deformable DETR and Mask2Former achieved the highest bounding box mAP (80.4) and mask mAP (66.3) respectively. The Simple Copy-Paste technique was introduced, improving the mask mAP of Mask2Former by 2.8 points. Finally, the developed model was validated in the real-world scenarios of three downstream tasks. Notably, in the rebar spacing measurement task, the proposed post-processing method improves Mask2Former by increasing its bounding box mAP by 18.0 and mask mAP by 2.4.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
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

Citations23
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Engineering InformaticsSame topicAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207