MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Structural damage detection of wind turbine based on YOLO11

2025· article· en· W4410738355 on OpenAlexaff
Abdelhak Mehadjbia, Fouad Slaoui-Hasnaoui

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Detection Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbineWind powerComputer scienceEngineeringAerospace engineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional methods for visually examining wind turbines have numerous constraints and frequently fall short of guaranteeing optimal outcomes. Flaws or impairments on wind turbine blades diminish the lifespan and energy production efficiency of the turbine, while also escalating monitoring inaccuracies, safety hazards, and maintenance expenses. The automated assessment of wind turbines via deep learning has become a powerful and efficient method for tackling quality control challenges in the industrial sector, particularly through object detection methods using the YOLO versions that improves the detection of minor objects. Consequently, this research suggests identifying wind turbine faults through the latest version of YOLO (YOLO11) lightweight model that was released in 2024, which includes enhancements in YOLO’s series network effectiveness, precision, and real-time object detection features. YOLO11 incorporates an improved backbone and neck architecture, introducing components like the C3k2 (Cross Stage Partial with kernel size 2) block, SPPF (Spatial Pyramid Pooling - Fast), and C2PSA (Convolutional block with Parallel Spatial Attention), which enhance feature extraction and lead to higher precision, allowing the model to achieve better computational efficiency without compromising accuracy. Defect detection on wind turbines is challenging because there is a high similarity between the defects and the structure itself, but also the very small size of the defects on the structure may not be detected. Through the results obtained but also by comparing our findings with the studies already done, in this article we have demonstrated that YOLO11 is capable of detecting several defects at the same time with precision. In consequence our model can assist in improving wind turbines inspection.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Measurement and Detection MethodsFrench-language works237,207