ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Implementation of Object Detection Algorithms in the Inventory of Technical Infrastructure, Case Study of Utility Poles Detection
 
More details
Hide details
1
Department of Geodesy, Faculty of Geoengineering, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland
 
 
Submission date: 2024-10-29
 
 
Final revision date: 2024-12-23
 
 
Acceptance date: 2025-01-22
 
 
Online publication date: 2025-02-10
 
 
Publication date: 2025-02-10
 
 
Corresponding author
Mateusz Paweł Czyrzniak   

Geoengineering, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn
 
 
Civil and Environmental Engineering Reports 2025;35(1):177-189
 
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Roads, bridges, railways, poles, and power lines are one of main elements of technical infrastructure. Their proper condition is essential for ensuring people, goods, and electricity transportation. Inventory is a crucial process for maintaining the health of technical infrastructure. Conducting inventory with traditional surveying techniques, such as Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) or trigonometry, is both time and money consuming. In recent years, modern remote sensing techniques like LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) and aerial and ground based imaging have been employed for inventory purposes. These methods enable data collection over large areas, reducing both the time and cost of measurement processes. Data from these devices is often processed in conjunction with artificial intelligence algorithms that assist in processing large data sets. This paper aims to introduce deep learning (DL) algorithms for inventory purposes using object detection with utility poles as a case study. The research was conducted using empirical data. A key element in training a DL model is the optimal selection of hyperparameters. During the study, ten models were trained, and their performance was compared based on selected metrics. For this study, a dataset of 1,736 original utility pole images was used. To augment the data, new images were created through rotation and mirroring. The best model achieved the following results: Precision = 98.82%, Recall = 97.29%, F1-score = 98.05%, mAP50 = 97.92%, mAP75 = 89.93%. The performance of the model gives a solid base for further implementation of DL object detection techniques for inventory of technical infrastructure.
REFERENCES (36)
1.
Sharifisoraki, Z et al. 2023. Monitoring Critical Infrastructure Using 3D LiDAR Point Clouds. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., 11, 314-336.
 
2.
Soilán, M et al. 2019. Review of laser scanning technologies and their applications for road and railway infrastructure monitoring. MDPI Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, 4(4), 58.
 
3.
Mohan, A and Poobal, S 2018. Crack detection using image processing: A critical review and analysis. Alexandria Engineering Journal 57(2), 787-798.
 
4.
Schlögl, M et al. 2022. Remote Sensing Techniques for Bridge Deformation Monitoring at Millimetric Scale: Investigating the Potential of Satellite Radar Interferometry, Airborne Laser Scanning and Ground-Based Mobile Laser Scanning. PFG - Journal of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Geoinformation Science 90(4), 391-411.
 
5.
Pepe, M et al. 2022. Data for 3D reconstruction and point cloud classification using machine learning in cultural heritage environment. Data Brief 42, 108250.
 
6.
Grilli, E, Menna, F and Remondino, F 2017. A Review of Point Clouds Segmentation and Classification Algorithms. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences XLII-2/W3, 339–344.
 
7.
Balado, J et al. 2019. Road environment semantic segmentation with deep learning from mls point cloud data. Sensors (Switzerland) 19(16), 3466.
 
8.
Fukano, K and Masuda, H 2015. Detection and Classification of Pole-Like Objects from Mobile Mapping Data. ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences II-3/W5, 57–64.
 
9.
Zhi-Hua, Z 2021. Machine_Learning. Singapore: Springer Nature.
 
10.
Awad, M and Khanna, R 2015. Support Vector Machines for Classification. In: Awad, M and Khanna, R (ed) Efficient Learning Machines: Theories, Concepts, and Applications for Engineers and System Designers Berkeley, CA: Apress, 39-66.
 
11.
Parmar, A, Katariya, R and Patel, V 2019. A Review on Random Forest: An Ensemble Classifier. International Conference on Intelligent Data Communication Technologies and Internet of Things (ICICI), Springer International Publishing, 758-763.
 
12.
Abu Alfeilat, HA et al. 2019. Effects of Distance Measure Choice on K-Nearest Neighbor Classifier Performance: A Review. Big Data 7(4), 221-248.
 
13.
LeCun, Y, Bengio, Y and Hinton, G 2015. Deep learning. Nature 521(7553), 436-444.
 
14.
Wu, Y and Feng, J. 2018. Development and Application of Artificial Neural Network. Wirel Pers Commun 102(2), 1645-1656.
 
15.
Agatonovic-Kustrin, S and Beresford, R 2000. Basic concepts of artificial neural network (ANN) modeling and its application in pharmaceutical research. J Pharm Biomed Anal 22(5), 717-727.
 
16.
Gu, J et al. 2018. Recent advances in convolutional neural networks. Pattern Recognit 77, 354-377.
 
17.
Sun, M et al. 2017. Learning Pooling for Convolutional Neural Network. Neurocomputing 224, 96-104.
 
18.
Basha, SHS et al. 2020. Impact of fully connected layers on performance of convolutional neural networks for image classification. Neurocomputing 378, 112-119.
 
19.
Phung and Rhee 2019. A High-Accuracy Model Average Ensemble of Convolutional Neural Networks for Classification of Cloud Image Patches on Small Datasets. Applied Sciences 9, 4500.
 
20.
Redmon, J et al. 2016. You Only Look Once: Unified, Real-Time Object Detection. ArXiv.
 
21.
Sohan, M, Sai Ram, T and Rami Reddy CHV 2024. A Review on YOLOv8 and Its Advancements. In: Jacob, IJ, Piramuthu, S and Falkowski-Gilski, P (ed) Data Intelligence and Cognitive Informatics. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 529-545.
 
22.
Lin, TY et al. 2015. Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Context. ArXiv.
 
23.
Yang, L and Shami, A 2020. On hyperparameter optimization of machine learning algorithms: Theory and practice. Neurocomputing 415, 295-316.
 
24.
Chilimbi, T et al. 2014. Project Adam: Building an Efficient and Scalable Deep Learning Training System. 11th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI 14), , CO: USENIX Association, Broomfield, 571-582.
 
25.
Zhang, J 2019. Gradient Descent based Optimization Algorithms for Deep Learning Models Training. ArXiv.
 
26.
Wu, Y et al. 2019. Demystifying Learning Rate Policies for High Accuracy Training of Deep Neural Networks. IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data), 1971-1980.
 
27.
Yang, J and Wang, F 2020. Auto-Ensemble: An Adaptive Learning Rate Scheduling Based Deep Learning Model Ensembling. IEEE Access, 8, 217499–217509.
 
28.
Bai, Y et al. 2021. Understanding and Improving Early Stopping for Learning with Noisy Labels. In: Ranzato, M et al. (ed) Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. Curran Associates, Inc., 24392-24403.
 
29.
Kandel and Castelli, M 2020. The effect of batch size on the generalizability of the convolutional neural networks on a histopathology dataset. ICT Express, 6(4), 312-315.
 
30.
Xing, C et al. 2018. A Walk with SGD. ArXiv.
 
31.
Zhou, P 2024. Towards Understanding Convergence and Generalization of AdamW. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell, 46(9), 6486-6493.
 
32.
Rezatofighi, H et al. 2019. Generalized Intersection Over Union: A Metric and a Loss for Bounding Box Regression. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 658-666.
 
33.
Powers, DMW and Ailab Evaluation: From Precision, Recall And F-Measure To Roc, Informedness, Markedness & Correlation.
 
34.
Chicco, D and Jurman, G 2020. The advantages of the Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) over F1 score and accuracy in binary classification evaluation. BMC Genomics 21(1), 6.
 
35.
Henderson, P and Ferrari, V 2017. End-to-end training of object class detectors for mean average precision. ArXiv.
 
36.
Padilla, R, Netto, SL and Silva, EAB 2020. A Survey on Performance Metrics for Object-Detection Algorithms. International Conference on Systems, Signals and Image Processing (IWSSIP), 237-242.
 
eISSN:2450-8594
ISSN:2080-5187
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top