2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.dib.2018.11.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

SDNET2018: An annotated image dataset for non-contact concrete crack detection using deep convolutional neural networks

Abstract: SDNET2018 is an annotated image dataset for training, validation, and benchmarking of artificial intelligence based crack detection algorithms for concrete. SDNET2018 contains over 56,000 images of cracked and non-cracked concrete bridge decks, walls, and pavements. The dataset includes cracks as narrow as 0.06 mm and as wide as 25 mm. The dataset also includes images with a variety of obstructions, including shadows, surface roughness, scaling, edges, holes, and background debris. SDNET2018 will be useful for… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
98
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 204 publications
(113 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
98
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Among the 40,000 images, 20,000 images corresponded to cracked and intact images each. Another image data set provided by the Utah State University (USU) was used, the data in which were recorded uses a 16 MP Nikon camera [34]. The data consisted of 54 bridge images, 72 concrete wall images, and 104 pavement images.…”
Section: Concrete Crack Image Data For Deep Learning a Crack Imagementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Among the 40,000 images, 20,000 images corresponded to cracked and intact images each. Another image data set provided by the Utah State University (USU) was used, the data in which were recorded uses a 16 MP Nikon camera [34]. The data consisted of 54 bridge images, 72 concrete wall images, and 104 pavement images.…”
Section: Concrete Crack Image Data For Deep Learning a Crack Imagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…To train the segmentation neural network to realize pixellevel classification, labeled images are required to identify the exact crack region in the image. The image data set provided by Dorafshan et al could be used to develop a classification algorithm [34]; however, for the purpose of the present study, labeled images were required to be prepared. To this end, the LEAR Image Annotation Tool [35] was used, as shown in Fig.…”
Section: B Labeled Imagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Various studies have been done on vision-based crack recognition methods, especially for concrete [2], bridge, road or the surfaces of buildings, however, less for ground cracks. No matter which kinds of cracks, they are all long and narrow, as well as only distribute in a limited parts of an image, which shows a problem of imbalance related to the number of the pixels of the crack and background.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The number of images collected depends on a number of factors, but it is commonly in the several thousands. For instance, SDNET2018 [21], with more than 56,000 labeled images of concrete structures, covers three small lab-made bridge decks, walls of a building, and several paved sidewalks, which are significantly smaller than common inspected infrastructures in practice. Manual identification of flaws in such large image sets is time consuming and prone to inaccuracy because of inspector fatigue or human error [22][23][24][25][26].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%