ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Wavelet Scattering and Neural Networks for Railhead Defect Identification.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate and automatic railhead inspection is crucial for the operational safety of railway systems. Deep learning on visual images is effective in the automatic detection of railhead defects, but either intensive data requirements or ignoring defect sizes reduce its applicability. This paper developed a machine learning framework based on wavelet scattering networks (WSNs) and neural networks (NNs) for identifying railhead defects. WSNs are functionally equivalent to deep convolutional neural networks while containing no parameters, thus suitable for non-intensive datasets. NNs can restore location and size information. The publicly available rail surface discrete defects (RSDD) datasets were analyzed, including 67 Type-I railhead images acquired from express tracks and 128 Type-II images captured from ordinary/heavy haul tracks. The ultimate validation accuracy reached 99.80% and 99.44%, respectively. WSNs can extract implicit signal features, and the support vector machine classifier can improve the learning accuracy of NNs by over 6%. Three criteria, namely the precision, recall, and F-measure, were calculated for comparison with the literature. At the pixel level, the developed approach achieved three criteria of around 90%, outperforming former methods. At the defect level, the recall rates reached 100%, indicating all labeled defects were identified. The precision rates were around 75%, affected by the insignificant misidentified speckles (smaller than 20 pixels). Nonetheless, the developed learning framework was effective in identifying railhead defects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.