• Laser & Optoelectronics Progress
  • Vol. 59, Issue 4, 0410004 (2022)
Qifan Fu1、2, ming Lu1、2, Zhiyi Zhang1, Li Ji1, and Huaze Ding1、*
Author Affiliations
  • 1Key Laboratory of Wireless Sensor Network and Communication, Shanghai Institute of Microsystem and Information Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 201800, China
  • 2University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100864, China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.3788/LOP202259.0410004 Cite this Article Set citation alerts
    Qifan Fu, ming Lu, Zhiyi Zhang, Li Ji, Huaze Ding. Water Level Monitoring Method Based on Semantic Segmentation[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2022, 59(4): 0410004 Copy Citation Text show less
    Structure of improved DeepLabv3+ model
    Fig. 1. Structure of improved DeepLabv3+ model
    Residual structure of ResNet
    Fig. 2. Residual structure of ResNet
    Residual structure with attention mechanism
    Fig. 3. Residual structure with attention mechanism
    Structure of edge refinement module
    Fig. 4. Structure of edge refinement module
    Effect comparison of edge refinement module before and after modification. (a) Original image; (b) before correction; (c) after correction
    Fig. 5. Effect comparison of edge refinement module before and after modification. (a) Original image; (b) before correction; (c) after correction
    Image of water level scale taken. (a) Scale of water level is not clear; (b) calibration cannot be observed
    Fig. 6. Image of water level scale taken. (a) Scale of water level is not clear; (b) calibration cannot be observed
    Effect comparison of different semantic segmentation algorithms on water scale segmentation. (a) Original image; (b) ground truth; (c) U-Net; (d) PSPNet; (e) DeepLabv3+; (f) proposed algorithm
    Fig. 7. Effect comparison of different semantic segmentation algorithms on water scale segmentation. (a) Original image; (b) ground truth; (c) U-Net; (d) PSPNet; (e) DeepLabv3+; (f) proposed algorithm
    Horizontal plane detection effect comparison of different algorithms. (a) Original image; (b) algorithm 1; (c) algorithm 2; (d) proposed algorithm
    Fig. 8. Horizontal plane detection effect comparison of different algorithms. (a) Original image; (b) algorithm 1; (c) algorithm 2; (d) proposed algorithm
    Test results of algorithm under different extreme environmental conditions. (a) Low light environment; (b) strong light environment; (c) foreign body occlusion; (d) blurred water level scales images; (e) calm and clear reflection of water; (f) nighttime water level scale images
    Fig. 9. Test results of algorithm under different extreme environmental conditions. (a) Low light environment; (b) strong light environment; (c) foreign body occlusion; (d) blurred water level scales images; (e) calm and clear reflection of water; (f) nighttime water level scale images
    AlgorithmmIoU /%IoU /%MPA /%
    SegNet89.6381.8792.01
    U-Net92.7786.9194.46
    RefineNet93.5888.6395.36
    PSPNet95.3191.8997.98
    BiSeNet95.5792.3798.12
    DeepLabv3+95.9693.2698.69
    Proposed algorithm97.1895.0399.22
    Table 1. Performance comparison of different semantic segmentation algorithms for water level scale segmentation
    Edge refinementcSEsSEmIoU /%MPA /%
    95.9698.69
    96.2798.75
    96.6498.93
    96.8699.03
    96.7198.86
    96.8598.92
    97.0299.14
    97.1899.22
    Table 2. Experimental results of ablation by introducing channel attention, spatial attention, and edge thinning module
    AlgorithmPixel errorPixel error rate /%
    SegNet13.383.18
    U-Net8.042.09
    RefineNet7.962.02
    PSPNet5.941.38
    BiSeNet6.631.55
    DeepLabv3+5.481.22
    Proposed algorithm3.730.76
    Table 3. Horizontal detection effect comparison of semantic segmentation algorithm
    AlgorithmPixel errorPixel error rate /%
    Algorithm 151.4711.03
    Algorithm 214.613.72
    Proposed algorithm3.730.76
    Table 4. Comparison of horizontal detection effects of different water level measurement algorithms
    MomentManual reading /mAlgorithmic reading /mError /mMomentManual reading /mAlgorithmic reading /mError /m
    0:000.8630.8670.00412:000.8080.8140.006
    1:000.8510.850-0.00113:000.7950.7980.003
    2:000.8480.8520.00414:000.7860.7920.006
    3:000.8450.8500.00515:000.7890.7940.005
    4:000.8370.8460.00916:000.7930.7980.005
    5:000.8340.830-0.00417:000.8100.807-0.003
    6:000.8280.819-0.00918:000.8130.8180.005
    7:000.8180.813-0.00519:000.8150.809-0.006
    8:000.8210.820-0.00120:000.8310.822-0.009
    9:000.8220.8270.00521:000.8480.834-0.014
    10:000.8260.819-0.00722:000.8620.856-0.006
    11:000.8030.800-0.00323:000.8640.846-0.018
    Table 5. Comparison and analysis of water level read by algorithm and manual
    Qifan Fu, ming Lu, Zhiyi Zhang, Li Ji, Huaze Ding. Water Level Monitoring Method Based on Semantic Segmentation[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2022, 59(4): 0410004
    Download Citation