MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Employing Machine Learning and Deep Learning Techniques for Leak Detection Based on Infrared Images of Pipelines

2025· article· W7125584018 on OpenAlexaff
Mihrimah Göknar, Deniz Beştepe, Kashfia Sailunaz, M. Kemal Özdemir, Tansel Ozyer, Mehmet Kaya, Jon Rokne, Reda Alhajj

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeep learningLeak detectionPipeline transportLeakPattern recognition (psychology)Object detection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leakage in pipelines conveying water or hydrocarbon fluids poses significant risks, including injuries, environmental disasters, and economic losses. To mitigate these risks, a preventive and non-destructive inspection method is crucial. This research proposes a hybrid model combining two-steps control: an artificial neural network Multi Layer Perceptron (MLPClassifier) model utilizing metadata and a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) analyzing thermal images for leak detection. Moreover, the severity of leaks is assessed through leak propagation analysis using a time-based image dataset. The analysis of the infrared images dataset, along with the associated metadata, provides valuable information, such as leak detection, pipe failure conditions, and leak propagation assessment. Initially, the model analyzes the background information about the pipes, including factors such as pipe age, material, and installation quality, to identify potential leaking pipes. Subsequently, thermal images of the detected pipes, classified into the category of 'exhibiting pipe failure' based on a predefined threshold, are captured using a thermal camera-equipped drone, eliminating the need for open inspections. These thermal images are then input to the CNN model for potential leak detection. Experimental results demonstrate that the two-steps based hybrid model achieves 94% accuracy with the MLPClassifier model and 96.4% accuracy with the CNN model. This approach offers an effective and reliable solution for non-destructive leak detection in pipeline networks, combining the advantages of both metadata analysis and thermal image processing.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207