Scientific Reports (Jun 2024)

A robust self-supervised approach for fine-grained crack detection in concrete structures

  • Muhammad Sohaib,
  • Md Junayed Hasan,
  • Mohd Asif Shah,
  • Zhonglong Zheng

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-63575-x
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 14, no. 1
pp. 1 – 20

Abstract

Read online

Abstract This work addresses a critical issue: the deterioration of concrete structures due to fine-grained cracks, which compromises their strength and longevity. To tackle this problem, experts have turned to computer vision (CV) based automated strategies, incorporating object detection and image segmentation techniques. Recent efforts have integrated complex techniques such as deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) and transformers for this task. However, these techniques encounter challenges in localizing fine-grained cracks. This paper presents a self-supervised 'you only look once' (SS-YOLO) approach that utilizes a YOLOv8 model. The novel methodology amalgamates different attention approaches and pseudo-labeling techniques, effectively addressing challenges in fine-grained crack detection and segmentation in concrete structures. It utilizes convolution block attention (CBAM) and Gaussian adaptive weight distribution multi-head self-attention (GAWD-MHSA) modules to accurately identify and segment fine-grained cracks in concrete buildings. Additionally, the assimilation of curriculum learning-based self-supervised pseudo-labeling (CL-SSPL) enhances the model's ability when applied to limited-size data. The efficacy and viability of the proposed approach are demonstrated through experimentation, results, and ablation analysis. Experimental results indicate a mean average precision (mAP) of at least 90.01%, an F1 score of 87%, and an intersection over union threshold greater than 85%. It is evident from the results that the proposed method yielded at least 2.62% and 4.40% improvement in mAP and F1 values, respectively, when tested on three diverse datasets. Moreover, the inference time taken per image is 2 ms less than that of the compared methods.

Keywords