ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Combining the YOLOv4 Deep Learning Model with UAV Imagery Processing Technology in the Extraction and Quantization of Cracks in Bridges.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Methodologies for Remote Bridge Inspection-Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Deep Learning for Structural Health Monitoring: Data, Algorithms, Applications, Challenges, and Trends.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Computer Vision-Based Bridge Inspection and Monitoring: A Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- MFF-YOLO: An Accurate Model for Detecting Tunnel Defects Based on Multi-Scale Feature Fusion.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bridges are often at risk due to the effects of natural disasters, such as earthquakes and typhoons. Bridge inspection assessments normally focus on cracks. However, numerous concrete structures with cracked surfaces are highly elevated or over water, and is not easily accessible to a bridge inspector. Furthermore, poor lighting under bridges and a complex visual background can hinder inspectors in their identification and measurement of cracks. In this study, cracks on bridge surfaces were photographed using a UAV-mounted camera. A YOLOv4 deep learning model was used to train a model for identifying cracks; the model was then employed in object detection. To perform the quantitative crack test, the images with identified cracks were first converted to grayscale images and then to binary images the using local thresholding method. Next, the two edge detection methods, Canny and morphological edge detectors were applied to the binary images to extract the edges of the cracks and obtain two types of crack edge images. Then, two scale methods, the planar marker method, and the total station measurement method, were used to calculate the actual size of the crack edge image. The results indicated that the model had an accuracy of 92%, with width measurements as precise as 0.22 mm. The proposed approach can thus enable bridge inspections and obtain objective and quantitative data.
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.