ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Comparative Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Efficiency of Computational Methods in the Detection of Asbestos Cement in Hyperspectral Images.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Experimental Testing, Manufacturing and Numerical Modelling of Composite and Sandwich Structures (Second Edition).Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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
Abstract
Among the existing challenges in the field of hyperspectral imaging, the need to optimize memory usage and computational capacity in material detection methods stands out, given the vast amount of data associated with the hundreds of reflectance bands. In line with this, this article proposes a comparative study on the effectiveness and efficiency of five computational methods for detecting composite material asbestos cement (AC) in hyperspectral images: correlation, spectral differential similarity (SDS), Fourier phase similarity (FPS), area under the curve (AUC), and decision trees (DT). The novelty lies in the comparison between the first four methods, which represent the spectral proximity method and a machine learning method, such as DT. Furthermore, SDS and FPS are novel methods proposed in the present document. Given the accuracy that detection methods based on supervised learning have demonstrated in material identification, the results obtained from the DT model were compared with the percentage of AC detected in a hyperspectral image of the Manga neighborhood in the city of Cartagena by the other four methods. Similarly, in terms of computational efficiency, a 20 × 20 pixel region with 380 bands was selected for the execution of multiple repetitions of each of the five computational methods considered, in order to obtain the average processing time of each method and the relative efficiency of the methods with respect to the method with the best effectiveness. The decision tree (DT) model achieved the highest classification accuracy at 99.4%, identifying 11.44% of asbestos cement (AC) pixels in the reference image. However, the correlation method, while detecting a lower percentage of AC pixels (9.72%), showed the most accurate visual performance and had no spectral overlap, with a 1.4% separation between AC and non-AC pixels. The SDS method was the most computationally efficient, running 23.85 times faster than the DT model. The proposed methods and results can be applied to other hyperspectral imaging tasks involving material identification in urban environments, especially when balancing accuracy and computational efficiency is essential.
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.