journal article·2026-01-14Open access

StyleSPADE: Realistic Image Augmentation for Robust Infrastructure Crack Segmentation via Ensemble Learning

Jaeung Sim, Menas Kafatos, Seung Hee Kim, Yangwon Lee

Applied Sciences· Volume 16· Issue 2

Abstract

The rapid deterioration of global infrastructure necessitates precise and automated crack detection technologies for proactive maintenance. However, deep learning-based segmentation models often suffer from a scarcity of diverse, high-quality labeled datasets. This study proposes StyleSPADE, a novel conditional image generation model that integrates semantic masks and style images to synthesize realistic crack data with diverse background textures while preserving precise geometric morphology. To validate the effectiveness of the generated data, we conducted extensive semantic segmentation tasks using Transformer-based (Mask2Former, Swin-UPerNet) and CNN-based (K-Net) models. Experimental results demonstrate that StyleSPADE-based augmentation significantly outperforms baseline models, achieving a Crack IoU of 0.6376 and an F1-score of 0.7586. Furthermore, we implemented a Stacking Ensemble strategy combining high-recall and high-precision models, which further improved performance to a Crack IoU of 0.6452. Our findings confirm that StyleSPADE effectively mitigates the data scarcity problem and enhances the robustness of crack detection in complex environmental conditions. This framework contributes to improving the efficiency and safety of infrastructure management by enabling reliable damage assessment in data-limited environments.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring · Advanced Neural Network Applications · Asphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Major of Geomatics Engineering, Division of Earth Environmental System Sciences, Pukyong National University, Busan 48513, Republic of Korea

Institute for Earth, Computing, Human and Observing (ECHO), Chapman University, Orange, CA 92866, USA

Funding

Ministry of Interior and Safety · Ministry of Education (MOE) and the Busan Metropolitan City, Republic of Korea · National Research Foundation (NRF), Korea

References (45)

Show source-provided references
1. Alexander, L. (2025). Safety Protocols in the Operation of Aging Infrastructure.
2. Han, D. (2021). Heterogeneous deterioration process and risk of deficiencies of aging bridges for transportation asset management. Sustainability, 13.10.3390/su13137094 ↗
3. Kim, H.J., Seong, Y.H., Han, J.W., Kwon, S.H., and Kim, C.Y. (2023). Demonstrating the test procedure for preventive maintenance of aging concrete bridges. Infrastructures, 8.10.3390/infrastructures8030054 ↗
4. Bridge bottom crack detection and modeling based on faster R-CNN and BIM10.1049/ipr2.12976 ↗
5. Harb, S., Achanccaray, P., Maboudi, M., and Gerke, M. (2024). Multi-temporal crack segmentation in concrete structure using deep learning approaches. arXiv.10.5194/isprs-annals-X-G-2025-341-2025 ↗
6. Automatic concrete infrastructure crack semantic segmentation using deep learning10.1016/j.autcon.2023.104950 ↗
7. A review of crack research in concrete structures based on data-driven and intelligent algorithms10.1016/j.istruc.2025.108800 ↗
8. Qayyum, W., Ehtisham, R., Bahrami, A., Mir, J., Khan, Q.U.Z., Ahmad, A., and Özkılıç, Y.O. (2023). Predicting characteristics of cracks in concrete structure using convolutional neural network and image processing. Front. Mater., 10.10.3389/fmats.2023.1210543 ↗
9. Bridge service life and impact of maintenance events on the structural state index
10. Hopper, T., Manafpour, A., and Radlinska, A. (2015). Bridge Deck Cracking: Effects on In-Service Performance, Prevention, and Remediation.
11. A pre-failure narrow concrete cracks dataset for engineering structures damage classification and segmentation10.1038/s41597-023-02839-z ↗
12. Kaveh, H., and Alhajj, R. (2024). Recent advances in crack detection technologies for structures: A survey of 2022–2023 literature. Front. Built Environ., 10.10.3389/fbuil.2024.1321634 ↗
13. Yuan, Q., Shi, Y., and Li, M. (2024). A review of computer vision-based crack detection methods in civil infrastructure: Progress and challenges. Remote Sens., 16.10.3390/rs16162910 ↗
14. Mondal, T.G., and Chen, G. (2022). Artificial intelligence in civil infrastructure health monitoring—Historical perspectives, current trends, and future visions. Front. Built Environ., 8.10.3389/fbuil.2022.1007886 ↗
15. Hamishebahar, Y., Guan, H., So, S., and Jo, J. (2022). A comprehensive review of deep learning-based crack detection approaches. Appl. Sci., 12.10.3390/app12031374 ↗
16. König, J., Jenkins, M., Mannion, M., Barrie, P., and Morison, G. (2022). What’s cracking? A review and analysis of deep learning methods for structural crack segmentation, detection and quantification. arXiv.
17. Xiang, X., Hu, H., Ding, Y., Zheng, Y., and Wu, S. (2023). GC-YOLOv5s: A lightweight detector for UAV road crack detection. Appl. Sci., 13.10.3390/app131911030 ↗
18. Building construction crack detection with BCCD YOLO enhanced feature fusion and attention mechanisms10.1038/s41598-025-05665-y ↗
19. GCN-based pavement crack detection using mobile LiDAR point clouds10.1109/TITS.2021.3099023 ↗
20. Perez, F., Vasconcelos, C., Avila, S., and Valle, E. (2018, January 16). Data augmentation for skin lesion analysis. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Computer-Assisted and Robotic Endoscopy, Granada, Spain.10.1007/978-3-030-01201-4_33 ↗
21. From classification to segmentation with explainable AI: A study on crack detection and growth monitoring10.1016/j.autcon.2024.105497 ↗
22. Wang, Z., Yang, J., Jiang, H., and Fan, X. (2020). CNN training with twenty samples for crack detection via data augmentation. Sensors, 20.10.3390/s20174849 ↗
23. Buslaev, A., Iglovikov, V.I., Khvedchenya, E., Parinov, A., Druzhinin, M., and Kalinin, A.A. (2020). Albumentations: Fast and flexible image augmentations. Information, 11.10.3390/info11020125 ↗
24. Explaining the effect of data augmentation on image classification tasks
25. Taylor, L., and Nitschke, G. (2018, January 18–21). Improving deep learning with generic data augmentation. Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI), Bengaluru, India.10.1109/SSCI.2018.8628742 ↗
26. Yu, G., Zhou, X., and Chen, X. (2024). VDCrackGAN: A generative adversarial network with transformer for pavement crack data augmentation. Appl. Sci., 14.10.3390/app14177907 ↗
27. CrackGAN: Pavement crack detection using partially accurate ground truths based on generative adversarial learning10.1109/TITS.2020.2990703 ↗
28. A data augmentation method for pavement crack detection based on super-resolution and denoising diffusion probabilistic models10.1111/mice.70050 ↗
29. Li, J., Ma, X., and Shi, Y. (2025). Multi-Label Conditioned Diffusion for Cardiac MR Image Augmentation and Segmentation. Bioengineering, 12.10.3390/bioengineering12080812 ↗
30. Filipovski, D., and Gievska, S. (2022, January 12). SemanticStyleGAN: Generative Image Inpainting Using Style-Based Generator. Proceedings of the International Conference on ICT Innovations, Skopje, North Macedonia.10.1007/978-3-031-04206-5_4 ↗
31. Weed image augmentation by controlnet-added stable diffusion for multi-class weed detection10.1016/j.compag.2025.110123 ↗
32. Efficient semantic image synthesis via class-adaptive normalization
33. Yue, X., Zhang, Y., Zhao, S., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A., Keutzer, K., and Gong, B. (November, January 27). Domain randomization and pyramid consistency: Simulation-to-real generalization without accessing target domain data. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), Seoul, Republic of Korea.
34. Global and local texture randomization for synthetic-to-real semantic segmentation10.1109/TIP.2021.3096334 ↗
35. (2025, July 26). Crack Segmentation Dataset. Available online: https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/lakshaymiddha/crack-segmentation-dataset.
36. Training of semantic segmentation model for crack analysis of tunnel concrete lining
37. (2025, July 26). Crack Computer Vision Model. Available online: https://universe.roboflow.com/university-bswxt/crack-bphdr.
38. Park, T., Liu, M.Y., Wang, T.C., and Zhu, J.Y. (2019, January 16–20). Semantic Image Synthesis with Spatially-Adaptive Normalization. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Long Beach, CA, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2019.00244 ↗
39. Wang, P., Li, Y., and Vasconcelos, N. (2021, January 19–25). Rethinking and Improving the Robustness of Image Style Transfer. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Nashville, TN, USA.10.1109/CVPR46437.2021.00019 ↗
40. Shi, Y., Yang, X., Wan, Y., and Shen, X. (2022, January 18–24). SemanticStyleGAN: Learning Compositional Generative Priors for Controllable Image Synthesis and Editing. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), New Orleans, LA, USA.10.1109/CVPR52688.2022.01097 ↗
41. Zhang, L., Rao, A., and Agrawala, M. (2023, January 2–6). Adding Conditional Control to Text-to-Image Diffusion Models. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), Paris, France.10.1109/ICCV51070.2023.00355 ↗
42. Cheng, B., Misra, I., Schwing, A.G., Kirillov, A., and Girdhar, R. (2022, January 18–24). Masked-Attention Mask Transformer for Universal Image Segmentation. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), New Orleans, LA, USA.10.1109/CVPR52688.2022.00135 ↗
43. Liu, Z., Lin, Y., Cao, Y., Hu, H., Wei, Y., Zhang, Z., Lin, S., and Guo, B. (2021, January 11–17). Swin Transformer: Hierarchical Vision Transformer Using Shifted Windows. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), Montreal, QC, Canada.10.1109/ICCV48922.2021.00986 ↗
44. Unified Perceptual Parsing for Scene Understanding10.1007/978-3-030-01228-1_26 ↗
45. K-Net: Towards Unified Image Segmentation