Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 852

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Automatic Pixel‐Level Crack Detection and Measurement Using Fully Convolutional Network

Open access
Yang, Xincong, Li, Heng, Yu, Yantao, Luo, Xiaochun, Huang, Ting, Yang, Xu·2018·Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering

Abstract

The spatial characteristics of cracks are significant indicators to assess and evaluate the health of existing buildings and infrastructures. However, the current manual crack description method is time consuming and labor consuming. To improve the efficiency of crack inspection, advanced computer vision‐based techniques have been utilized to detect cracks automatically at image level and grid‐cell level. But existing crack detections are of (high specificity) low generality and inefficient, in terms that conventional approaches are unable to identify and measure diverse cracks concurrently at pixel level. Therefore, this research implements a novel deep learning technique named fully convolutional network (FCN) to address this problem. First, FCN is trained by feeding multiple types of cracks to semantically identify and segment pixel‐wise cracks at different scales. Then, the predicted crack segmentations are represented by single‐pixel width skeletons to quantitatively measure the morphological features of cracks, providing valuable crack indicators for assessment in practice, such as crack topology, crack length, max width, and mean width. To validate the prediction, the predicted segmentations are compared with recent advanced method for crack recognition and ground truth. For crack segmentation, the accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score are 97.96%, 81.73%, 78.97%, and 79.95%, respectively. For crack length, the relative measurement error varies from −48.03% to 177.79%, meanwhile that ranges from −13.27% to 24.01% for crack width. The results show that FCN is feasible and sufficient for crack identification and measurement. Although the accuracy is not as high as CrackNet because of three types of errors, the prediction has been increased to pixel level and the training time has been dramatically decreased to several per cents of previous methods due to the novel end‐to‐end structure of FCN, which combines typical convolutional neural networks and deconvolutional layers.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/mice.12412

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 51 references

Cited by

See all 852

Metadata

Authors
Yang, X., Li, H., Yu, Y., Luo, X., Huang, T., & Yang, X.
Venue
Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-08-29
Volume
33
Issue
12
Pages
1090-1109
ISSN
  • 1093-9687 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-8667
OpenAlex
W2889494142
Cited by
852
References
51
FWCI
46.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Automatic Pixel‐Level Crack Detection and Measurement Using Fully Convolutional Network. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/mice.12412
The paper
Yang, X., Li, H., Yu, Y., Luo, X., Huang, T., & Yang, X. (2018). Automatic Pixel‐Level Crack Detection and Measurement Using Fully Convolutional Network. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1111/mice.12412

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.