PERPUSTAKAAN BIG

  • Beranda
  • Informasi
  • Berita
  • Bantuan
  • Area Pustakawan
  • Area Anggota
  • Pilih Bahasa :
    Bahasa Arab Bahasa Bengal Bahasa Brazil Portugis Bahasa Inggris Bahasa Spanyol Bahasa Jerman Bahasa Indonesia Bahasa Jepang Bahasa Melayu Bahasa Persia Bahasa Rusia Bahasa Thailand Bahasa Turki Bahasa Urdu
Image of Pavement distress detection using terrestrial laser scanning point clouds – Accuracy evaluation and algorithm comparison

Text

Pavement distress detection using terrestrial laser scanning point clouds – Accuracy evaluation and algorithm comparison

Ziyi Feng - Nama Orang; Aimad El Issaoui - Nama Orang; Matti Lehtomaki - Nama Orang; Matias Ingman - Nama Orang; Harri Kaartinen - Nama Orang; Antero Kukko - Nama Orang; Joona Savela - Nama Orang; Hannu Hyyppa - Nama Orang; Juha Hyypp - Nama Orang;

In this paper, we compared five crack detection algorithms using terrestrial laser scanner (TLS) point clouds. The methods are developed based on common point cloud processing knowledge in along- and across-track profiles, surface fitting or local pointwise features, with or without machine learning. The crack area and volume were calculated from the crack points detected by the algorithms. The completeness, correctness, and F1 score of each algorithm were computed against manually collected references. Ten 1-m-by-3.5-m plots containing 75 distresses of six distress types (depression, disintegration, pothole, longitudinal, transverse, and alligator cracks) were selected to explain variability of distresses from a 3-km-long-road. For crack detection at plot level, the best algorithm achieved a completeness of up to 0.844, a correctness of up to 0.853, and an F1 score of up to 0.849. The best algorithm’s overall (ten plots combined) completeness, correctness, and F1 score were 0.642, 0.735, and 0.685 respectively. For the crack area estimation, the overall mean absolute percentage errors (MAPE) of the two best algorithms were 19.8% and 20.3%. In the crack volume estimation, the two best algorithms resulted in 19.3% and 14.5% MAPE. When the plots were grouped based on crack detection complexity, in the ‘easy’ category, the best algorithm reached a crack area estimation MAPE of 8.9%, while for crack volume estimation, the MAPE obtained from the best algorithm was 0.7%.


Ketersediaan
10621.3678Perpustakaan BIG (Eksternal Harddisk)Tersedia
Informasi Detail
Judul Seri
ISPRS Open Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing
No. Panggil
621.3678
Penerbit
Amsterdam : Elsevier., 2022
Deskripsi Fisik
13 hlm PDF, 4.179 KB
Bahasa
Inggris
ISBN/ISSN
1872-8235
Klasifikasi
621.3678
Tipe Isi
text
Tipe Media
-
Tipe Pembawa
-
Edisi
Vol.3, January 2022
Subjek
Point Cloud
Terrestrial laser scanning
Pavement
Road
Crack
Distress
Info Detail Spesifik
-
Pernyataan Tanggungjawab
-
Versi lain/terkait

Tidak tersedia versi lain

Lampiran Berkas
  • Pavement distress detection using terrestrial laser scanning point clouds – Accuracy evaluation and algorithm comparison
    In this paper, we compared five crack detection algorithms using terrestrial laser scanner (TLS) point clouds. The methods are developed based on common point cloud processing knowledge in along- and across-track profiles, surface fitting or local pointwise features, with or without machine learning. The crack area and volume were calculated from the crack points detected by the algorithms. The completeness, correctness, and F1 score of each algorithm were computed against manually collected references. Ten 1-m-by-3.5-m plots containing 75 distresses of six distress types (depression, disintegration, pothole, longitudinal, transverse, and alligator cracks) were selected to explain variability of distresses from a 3-km-long-road. For crack detection at plot level, the best algorithm achieved a completeness of up to 0.844, a correctness of up to 0.853, and an F1 score of up to 0.849. The best algorithm’s overall (ten plots combined) completeness, correctness, and F1 score were 0.642, 0.735, and 0.685 respectively. For the crack area estimation, the overall mean absolute percentage errors (MAPE) of the two best algorithms were 19.8% and 20.3%. In the crack volume estimation, the two best algorithms resulted in 19.3% and 14.5% MAPE. When the plots were grouped based on crack detection complexity, in the ‘easy’ category, the best algorithm reached a crack area estimation MAPE of 8.9%, while for crack volume estimation, the MAPE obtained from the best algorithm was 0.7%.
    Other Resource Link
Komentar

Anda harus masuk sebelum memberikan komentar

PERPUSTAKAAN BIG
  • Informasi
  • Layanan
  • Pustakawan
  • Area Anggota

Tentang Kami

Perpustakaan Badan Informasi Geospasial (BIG) adalah sebuah perpustakaan yang berada di bawah Badan Informasi Geospasial Indonesia. Perpustakaan ini memiliki koleksi yang berkaitan dengan informasi geospasial, termasuk peta, data geospasial, dan literatur terkait. Selengkapnya

Cari

masukkan satu atau lebih kata kunci dari judul, pengarang, atau subjek

Donasi untuk SLiMS Kontribusi untuk SLiMS?

© 2025 — Senayan Developer Community

Ditenagai oleh SLiMS
Pilih subjek yang menarik bagi Anda
  • Batas Wilayah
  • Ekologi
  • Fotogrametri
  • Geografi
  • Geologi
  • GIS
  • Ilmu Tanah
  • Kartografi
  • Manajemen Bencana
  • Oceanografi
  • Penginderaan Jauh
  • Peta
Icons made by Freepik from www.flaticon.com
Pencarian Spesifik