Defect contrast enhancement imaging for rail surface inspection with neural network and structured light
Source abstract
Abstract
Optical inspection for rail surfaces usually suffers from low defect contrast and measurement errors due to the significant variation in surface reflectivity or gloss and harsh environment. This paper regards the measurement error region such as overexposure/underexposure and data loss as a special cause for low contrast, namely, the contrast value is zero. To improve the defect contrast, this paper proposes a structured light (SL) illumination method and an unsupervised measurement-informed neural network (MeaNet). Quantitative relationships between the proposed SL parameters (e.g. gradient, period) and typical defect characteristics (e.g. crack width, crack orientation, rail surface reflectivity) are investigated. MeaNet additively fuses new information from input images and embeds defect a priori information, achieving two to three times of contrast improvement for cracks than state-of-the-art methods. Meanwhile, MeaNet generates a defect image showing only defect texture for an extremely high defect contrast. This method can be easily extended to other surface inspection applications.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection · Surface Roughness and Optical Measurements · Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Huazhong University of Science and Technology
China Belt and Road Joint Lab on Measurement and Control Technology
Sichuan University
King Mongkut’s University of Technology North Bangkok (KMUTNB)
Kalimantan Institute of Technology (ITK)
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China · Young Elite Scientists Sponsorship Program by CAST · Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities · CCF-Baidu Open Fund · Science and Technology Innovation Project in Hubei Province
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/J.JMSY.2021.05.00810.1016/J.JMSY.2021.05.008 ↗
2. 10.1080/10589759.2024.239320310.1080/10589759.2024.2393203 ↗
3. 10.1080/10589759.2024.243303810.1080/10589759.2024.2433038 ↗
4. 10.1080/10589759.2024.235722910.1080/10589759.2024.2357229 ↗
5. 10.1109/TIM.2022.322453110.1109/TIM.2022.3224531 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.vibspec.2025.10378610.1016/j.vibspec.2025.103786 ↗
7. 10.1109/TMECH.2022.316741210.1109/TMECH.2022.3167412 ↗
8. 10.1109/TMECH.2020.302461310.1109/TMECH.2020.3024613 ↗
9. 10.1109/TIM.2020.303930110.1109/TIM.2020.3039301 ↗
10. 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.301712510.1109/ACCESS.2020.3017125 ↗
11. Rusu M, Roberts C, Kent S. The use of laser based trolley for railway switch and crossing inspection. International Journal of COMADEM. 2012;16(4):13–23.
12. Sysyn M, Nabochenko O, Kovalchuk V, et al. Improvement of inspection system for common crossings by track side monitoring and prognostics. Struct Monit Maint. 2019;6(3):219–235.
13. 10.1109/TIM.2019.290994010.1109/TIM.2019.2909940 ↗
14. 10.1109/TIM.2020.304089010.1109/TIM.2020.3040890 ↗
15. 10.1109/TIM.2018.280383010.1109/TIM.2018.2803830 ↗
16. 10.1080/10589759.2024.241990610.1080/10589759.2024.2419906 ↗
17. 10.1109/JSEN.2014.235303210.1109/JSEN.2014.2353032 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.measurement.2020.10777110.1016/j.measurement.2020.107771 ↗
19. 10.1109/TIA.2021.305960510.1109/TIA.2021.3059605 ↗
20. 10.1109/TIE.2020.301374810.1109/TIE.2020.3013748 ↗
21. 10.1109/TIM.2017.278403910.1109/TIM.2017.2784039 ↗
22. 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.281331910.1109/ACCESS.2018.2813319 ↗
23. 10.1109/TII.2020.300439710.1109/TII.2020.3004397 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.optlastec.2013.02.00410.1016/j.optlastec.2013.02.004 ↗
25. 10.1109/TITS.2020.299249510.1109/TITS.2020.2992495 ↗
26. 10.1109/TITS.2020.300491810.1109/TITS.2020.3004918 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.ijleo.2020.16434910.1016/j.ijleo.2020.164349 ↗
28. 10.1109/JSEN.2017.276185810.1109/JSEN.2017.2761858 ↗
29. 10.1007/s10921-016-0370-810.1007/s10921-016-0370-8 ↗
30. 10.1109/TITS.2021.305863510.1109/TITS.2021.3058635 ↗
31. 10.1109/TIA.2018.283260610.1109/TIA.2018.2832606 ↗
32. 10.1109/JIOT.2017.266407210.1109/JIOT.2017.2664072 ↗
33. 10.1109/TIM.2019.296256210.1109/TIM.2019.2962562 ↗
34. 10.1109/TMECH.2017.278388810.1109/TMECH.2017.2783888 ↗
35. 10.1109/TMECH.2021.310015010.1109/TMECH.2021.3100150 ↗
36. 10.1109/TMECH.2020.304176810.1109/TMECH.2020.3041768 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2016.05.01110.1016/j.polymertesting.2016.05.011 ↗
38. 10.1109/TIE.2012.218887510.1109/TIE.2012.2188875 ↗
39. 10.1109/TIM.2020.297545410.1109/TIM.2020.2975454 ↗
40. 10.1109/TIM.2018.285395810.1109/TIM.2018.2853958 ↗
41. 10.1109/TII.2020.304519610.1109/TII.2020.3045196 ↗
42. 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.305551210.1109/ACCESS.2021.3055512 ↗