Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39820575›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Comparative analysis of deep learning models for crack detection in buildings.

S Siva Rama Krishnan, M K Nalla Karuppan, Adil O Khadidos, Alaa O Khadidos, Shitharth Selvarajan, Saarthak Tandon, Balamurugan Balusamy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

S Siva Rama KrishnanSchool of Computer Science and Information Systems, Vellore Institute of Technology, Katpadi, Vellore, 632014, Tamilnadu, India.
M K Nalla KaruppanBalaji Institute Modern Management, Sri Balaji University, Pune, 411033, India.
Adil O KhadidosDepartment of Information Technology, Faculty of Computing and Information Technology, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Alaa O KhadidosDepartment of Information Systems, Faculty of Computing and Information Technology, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Shitharth SelvarajanDepartment of Computer Science, Kebri Dehar University, Kebri Dehar, Ethiopia. ShitharthS@kdu.edu.et.
Saarthak TandonSchool of Computer Science and Information Systems, Vellore Institute of Technology, Katpadi, Vellore, 632014, Tamilnadu, India.
Balamurugan BalusamyStudent Engagement, Shiv Nadar University, Delhi-NCR, 201314, Delhi, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Life-time of the buildings is generally challenged by the act of nature. In-spite of the fact that the constructions provide minimum guarantee on quality and durability, certain mismatch in the composition of the materials, stress on the building, and chemical or physical imbalance of the materials, lead to surface crack. Cracks are also generated due to the shuffle of climatic conditions, which leads to the contraction and expansion of the building surfaces, and other damages. The guarantee on building safety and serviceability depends on how these buildings are successfully assessed and maintained. The development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques, provide favourable solutions in-order to handle, manage and solve building cracks, through analysis using deep image neural network models, that perform classification of the building with crack images. As a result, a critical challenge for many civil engineering applications is the precise, quick, and automated identification of cracks on structural surfaces is addressed with the solutions provided by the deep image neural networks. In this research, we tackle the research gap and data scarcity by developing and curating a novel deep learning image processing for detecting cracks in brickwork. We also train and validate several deep learning models to classify brickwork images as either cracked or normal. The dataset of the proposed work contains 24,000 images which are classified through binary classes. These classes are generated for crack and non-crack images. The various parameters such as Batch size, Pooling, Activation functions Learning-rate, Kernel-Size, Normalization, and Optimizers are used for the evaluation of the model. The proposed work performs a comparative analysis of four deep image models such as Inception V3, VGG-16, RESNET-50 VGG-19, Inception ResNetV2 and CNN-RES MLP. With the analysis of all these models, the Inception V3 provides the best of all with the accuracy value of 99.98%. The InceptionV3 tops the Precision value of 99.99% and RESNET-50 tops the Recall value of 99.98%. The IncpetionV2 provided the best of the Region of Convergence value of 0.9999 which is the best among all the models for reliable and stable performance.

Indexed as

Building cracksCNNInceptionV2ResNetInception V3ResNet-50VGG-16

Identifiers

PMID39820575
PMCPMC11739511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.