Yayın: Deep Learning for Automated Sewer Defect Detection: Benchmarking YOLO and RT-DETR on the Istanbul Dataset
| dc.contributor.author | Ogurlu, Mustafa | |
| dc.contributor.author | Bayram, Bulent | |
| dc.contributor.author | Kulavuz, Bahadir | |
| dc.contributor.author | Bakirman, Tolga | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-06-27T15:23:53Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2025 | |
| dc.description.abstract | The inspection and maintenance of urban sewer infrastructure remain critical challenges for megacities, where conventional manual inspection approaches are labor-intensive, time-consuming, and prone to human error. Although deep learning has been increasingly applied to sewer inspection, the field lacks both a publicly available large-scale dataset and a systematic evaluation of CNN and transformer-based models on real sewer footage. The primary aim of this study is to systematically evaluate and compare state-of-the-art deep learning architectures for automated sewer defect detection using a newly introduced dataset. We present the Istanbul Sewer Defect Dataset (ISWDS), comprising 13,491 expert-annotated images collected from Istanbul's wastewater network and covering eight defect categories that account for approximately 90% of reported failures. The scientific novelty of this work lies in both the introduction of the ISWDS and the first systematic benchmarking of YOLO (v8/11/12) and RT-DETR (v1/v2) architectures under identical protocols on real sewer inspection footage. Experimental results demonstrate that RT-DETR v2 achieves the best performance (F1: 79.03%, Recall: 81.10%), significantly outperforming the best YOLO variant. While transformer-based architectures excel in detecting partially occluded defects and complex operational conditions, YOLO models provide computational efficiency advantages for resource-constrained deployments. Furthermore, a QGIS-based inspection tool integrating the best-performing models was developed to enable real-time video analysis and automated reporting. Overall, this study highlights the trade-offs between accuracy and efficiency, demonstrating that RT-DETR v2 is most suitable for server-based processing. In contrast, compact YOLO variants are more appropriate for edge deployment. | en |
| dc.description.uri | https://doi.org/10.3390/app152011096 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.3390/app152011096 | |
| dc.identifier.eissn | 2076-3417 | |
| dc.identifier.issue | 20 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14981/70492 | |
| dc.identifier.volume | 15 | |
| dc.identifier.wos | 001602573200001 | |
| dc.language.iso | eng | |
| dc.publisher | MDPI | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL | |
| dc.rights | openAccess | |
| dc.subject | deep learning | |
| dc.subject | sewer defect detection | |
| dc.subject | object detection | |
| dc.subject | YOLO | |
| dc.subject | RT-DETR | |
| dc.subject | infrastructure inspection | |
| dc.subject | CLASSIFICATION | |
| dc.subject | NETWORKS | |
| dc.subject | Chemistry | |
| dc.subject | Engineering | |
| dc.subject | Materials Science | |
| dc.subject | Physics | |
| dc.title | Deep Learning for Automated Sewer Defect Detection: Benchmarking YOLO and RT-DETR on the Istanbul Dataset | |
| dc.type | Article | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| local.import.source | WOS |