A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.

04

Civil structural health monitoring and machine learning:

a comprehensive review

Asraar Anjum, Meftah Hrairi*

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, International Islamic University Malaysia, P.O.
Box 10, 50728, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
[email protected] and [email protected]

Abdul Aabid
Department of Engineering Management, College of Engineering, Prince Sultan University, PO BOX 66833, Riyadh 11586,
Saudi Arabia
[email protected], http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4355-9803

Norfazrina Yatim
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, International Islamic University Malaysia, P.O.
Box 10, 50728, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
[email protected]

Maisarah Ali
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, International Islamic University Malaysia, P.O. Box 10, 50728, Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia
[email protected]

Citation: Anjum, A., Hrairi, M., Aabid, A.,

Yatim, N., Ali, M., Civil structural health
monitoring and machine learning: a
comprehensive review, Frattura ed Integrità
Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59.

Received: 02.01.2024
Accepted: 08.04.2024
Published: 17.04.2024
Issue: 07.2024

Copyright: © 2024 This is an open access

article under the terms of the CC-BY 4.0,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution,
and reproduction in any medium, provided
the original author and source are credited.

KEYWORDS. Concrete structures, Machine learning, Electromechanical

impedance, Damage detection, Damage repair.

43
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

INTRODUCTION

M anual visual inspection is the primary approach for assessing the condition of civil infrastructure, ensuring it
meets safety and serviceability standards. This process, carried out by qualified inspectors or structural engineers,
involves identifying defects like cracks, damage, corrosion, and more in elements such as beams, columns,
bridges, and roads [1]. It is conducted at regular intervals or following disasters to prevent accidents resulting from
inadequate inspection. The gathered data helps predict future conditions, aids investment planning, and optimizes resource
allocation for maintenance and repairs, ensuring ongoing infrastructure functionality.
Civil structures are vital for the global economy and people's daily lives but are aging and facing significant wear [2,3].
Replacing them is impractical due to cost and resource constraints. Engineers have developed strategies to enhance safety
and structural integrity [4]. In the past decade, the adoption of computer vision methods in civil engineering has surged,
thanks to affordable, high-quality visual sensing technology. This progress is evident in integrating computer vision modules
in modern structural health monitoring (SHM) frameworks [5].
In computer science, SHM data analysis aims to transform sensor data into meaningful information and knowledge about
structures. This knowledge is crucial for various applications, including life-cycle management and lifetime forecasting [6].
Two main approaches are used to assess the structural condition of civil engineering structures: physics-based and data-
driven methods [7]. Physics-based methods create models based on the structure's physical characteristics and compare
them with sensor data [8], demanding significant processing resources [9]. On the other hand, AI, which found early success
in fields like robotics and data mining [10], has gained traction in civil engineering [11], offering knowledge-based systems,
fuzzy logic algorithms, and artificial neural networks (ANNs) [12,13]. ML, a subset of AI, is also increasingly adopted,
enhancing accuracy by understanding data structures and fitting them into models.
This review focuses on the increasing integration of machine learning and soft computing in civil engineering, specifically
emphasizing energy efficiency and cost-effectiveness. It introduces this emerging trend and highlights its significance in
addressing contemporary challenges. The section on machine learning explains its core principles and applicability in civil
engineering contexts, including optimization and predictive analysis. The review explores the role of ML in SHM for
concrete structures and its synergy. The critical analysis section delves into practical issues and challenges when
implementing these techniques, offering insights into real-world applications. Investigations are categorized based on
concrete types, structure types, and investigation methodologies. In conclusion, the review concisely summarizes its
implications for promoting energy-efficient solutions and discusses potential future research directions in this dynamic field.

MACHINE LEARNING

M L forms the technological foundation for data mining, extracting implicit information from data [14]. While ML
primarily focuses on prediction based on known features from training data, traditional regression analysis on
experimental data is considered a rudimentary ML application. Still, it often fails in the discussed context due to
its deviation from structural mechanics principles and limited applicability, resulting in overfitting. In contrast, the proposed
techniques align with findings from structural mechanics investigations suitable for code-based design, offering a wealth of
universally accepted, large-scale data ideal for modern data mining. Though their inner workings remain mysterious, these
techniques can be validated using equilibrium equations and structural mechanics concepts, broadening their potential
audience to practical engineers and academics. ML tools are provided to enhance SHM system capabilities and offer
innovative solutions. This review aims to clarify the boundaries of ML relevant to contemporary SHM systems, thoroughly
examining ML pipelines and providing summary tables and figures of popular techniques and algorithms. The future of
SHM systems involves extensive sensing and big data processing in infrastructure [15]. More in-depth discussions can be
found in critical references [16], and Miorelli et al. [17] comprehensively discussed managed learning methods for
classification and regression applied to SHM issues (Fig. 1).
The system effectively combines physics-based and data-driven approaches by generating various training datasets from a
calibrated FE model, conducting pretraining on a deep learning (DL) network, and transferring its learned knowledge to
real-world monitoring and testing scenarios. Its efficacy is demonstrated in a challenging scenario involving the vibration-
based identification of conditions in steel frame structures with bolted connection damage. The findings indicate that despite
the training data originating from a different domain with distinct label types, the pretraining process enables learning
intrinsic physics. As a result, transfer learning yields noticeable enhancements, with the accuracy of condition identification
improving from 81.8% to 89.1% [18]. Similarly, for accessing the health state of another frame structure, the comparative

44
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

and robustness evaluations are conducted, illustrating that the proposed method surpasses several machine learning and
deep learning-based techniques such as time-series feature extractions, self-learning, graph neural network, and machine
learning algorithms in terms of accuracy and resilience to noise and missing data [19]. The project centers on creating a real-
time prediction model for structural health monitoring in case of shield tunnel structures. This model incorporates spatial
and temporal correlations and external load data through an autoencoder network (ATENet) using SHM data. The
autoencoder mechanism processes raw monitoring data from various spatial positions to obtain high-level representations.
A recurrent neural network is also utilized to analyze the temporal correlation within the time series data of Form [20].
Moreover, four classification algorithms for SHM were introduced, leveraging the principles of the SVM algorithm. A
laboratory experiment on a bridge structure at Western Sydney University aimed to validate these findings. The results were
then compared with those of the standard SVM to assess the effectiveness of the proposed algorithms [21]. Also, numerical
data is simulated, and real-world data from the KW51 bridge is utilized to evaluate its efficacy. A refined approach to
assessing damage involves using an Exponentially Weighted Moving Average (EWMA) filter and a control chart-based
threshold mechanism tools to help differentiate between structures in good condition and those experiencing gradual
deterioration. This flexible method can be tailored to different monitoring setups and environmental factors. It remains
reliable under changing operational conditions. The findings confirm that this approach can detect damage effectively even
with a few sensors, thus offering a valuable means to improve bridge safety [22]. A method for multiclass classification of
acceleration data gathered from an actual bridge is suggested, employing a recursive and easily understandable decision tree
framework. The feature vectors utilized to train the random forest classifiers are determined based on comparable statistical
features, simplifying the interpretation of the classifier models. This proposed framework demonstrates an ability to
accurately classify non-anomalous (i.e., normal) time series within the test dataset, achieving an accuracy of 98% [23].
Acoustic emission (AE) simulates events using a pencil lead break as the source. Three models, including ANN and 1D and
2D convolutional neural networks, are trained and tested with AE signals generated by pencil lead break sources. The
intention is that the DL methodology outlined will aid in the creation of a real-time monitoring system for rail inspection
utilizing AE [24]. The analysis focuses on CNN-segmentation models trained using stochastic gradient descent (SGD) and
adaptive moment estimation. These models are trained with varying learning rates—0.1, 0.01, and 0.0001—and evaluated
across multiple metrics, including accuracy, intersection over union, precision, recall, and F1-score for concrete crack
detection. InceptionV3 emerges as the top performer for defect classification, achieving an accuracy of 91.98% when
utilizing the RMSprop optimizer. Specifically, the EfficientNetB3-based U-Net model stands out for crack segmentation,
boasting an impressive F1 score of 95.66%. Meanwhile, the InceptionV3-based U-Net model excels in spalling
segmentation, achieving an F1 score of 89.43%, surpassing the performance of all other algorithms [25].

Machine learning in civil structures applications

Over the last five years, several studies have been reported using ML algorithms. Therefore, in this section, previous work
has been overviewed, and some information has been provided, considering the objectives, methodologies, outcomes, and
challenges. ML was used to investigate many purposes apart from damage detection and repair studies. The other purposes
have included measuring the quality, strength, optimum size, crack damages, optimum parameters, mechanical properties,
and many other civil structures.
Zhu and Brilakis [26] employed a similar approach to assess the impact of cracks on concrete surfaces. Likewise, the same
methodology was utilized to measure the surface roughness of concrete structures [27] and predict bridge cracks [28].
Furthermore, ML algorithms, including neural networks and 3D visualizations, were employed to quantify cracks and detect
changes [29]. Another automated technique for detecting concrete fracture patterns from images was presented by analyzing
structural and non-structural cracks, categorizing them as isolated or map patterns [30].
Karbassi et al. [31] employed a regression model with C4.5 decision tree algorithms to predict damage in RC buildings
during future earthquake scenarios. Another two-phase decision tree method was developed based on seismic characteristics
and structural features to detect damage in RC buildings [32]. RC structures have been a primary focus in civil applications
for early prediction and long-term deflection estimation through data-driven ML models. These models were created and
tested using an experimental dataset, employing the stratified 10-fold cross-validation technique [33]. Additionally, an ML
model based on the observational corrosion-induced crack width distribution was used to establish a probabilistic
assessment of the flexural loading capacity of existing RC structures [34].
An ML algorithm and image processing were employed to estimate internal loads like shear and moment loads in RC
beams/slabs based on surface crack pattern images, allowing for quantitative damage and load level assessment in structures
[35]. Additionally, an ML-based prediction model was used to assess the performance of RC concrete as a repair material
for conventional concrete structures [36]. Further optimization models for RC structures have been developed, including a
discrete gravitational search method and a metamodeling framework for reliability-based design optimization [37]. Specific

45
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

ML algorithms, such as ANN models, were utilized to predict the residual flexural strength of corroded RC beams [38].
ANN models were also applied to compute reduction factors to estimate the moment of inertia effectiveness in shape
memory alloy RC beams [39]. To expedite the accurate design of RC columns and bridge piers, various ML-based functions
were introduced. ANNs, in combination with well-constructed extensive training sets, can produce models with design
accuracy that surpass traditional design charts and approach iterative section analysis techniques. This technique
outperforms conventional design algorithms while maintaining stability, as demonstrated in a computational performance
comparison [40].

Figure 1. Classification of Algorithms for Statistical Model Development in SHM.

An ML method was implemented for automated crack detection in a concrete bridge, using a robust multifeatured classifier
tailored for spatial adjustments. Results were displayed using a robotic bridge scanning system, effectively locating potential
break areas even in noisy conditions and computing spatially customized visual characteristics [41]. Accurate anticipation of
hygrothermal activity in concrete is crucial to making informed service-life extension decisions. An ANN-based
hygrothermal prediction model was developed for assessing the temporal hygrothermal state in surface-protected concrete
façade components [42]. Furthermore, ML techniques were employed to predict the shear strength and behavior of RC
beams reinforced with externally bonded FRP sheets [43]. Existing shear design models for FRP-reinforced concrete
structures tend to be overly conservative, increasing construction costs. An updated teeth model accounting for FRP
reinforcement was optimized using a genetic algorithm and a database of longitudinally strengthened thin beams with FRP
rebars, yielding a more accurate shear equation [44]. A model-free damage detection system based on ML approaches was
also created for a simulated railway concrete bridge using a three-dimensional FE model [45].
This method analyses data collected from a structure in different states through a piezoelectric sensor network [46]. In the
literature, an ML-based backbone curve model for RC columns subjected to cyclic loading reversals was found and utilized
for predicting RC column strength [47]. ML was also employed for fracture mode categorization based on unlabelled
acoustic emission waveform characteristics [48]. Additionally, when combined with unmanned aerial vehicles, an ML-based
model enhanced the automation level of concrete infrastructure inspection by detecting surface fractures. This was achieved
using a deep learning convolutional neural network (CNN) image classification technique to create the crack detection
model [49]. Various crack models are illustrated in Fig. 2.
It was employed in a regression model for crack development and propagation to validate ML's applicability using inspection
data from a concrete bridge. This process involves algorithm selection, innovative model development, and data analysis
[50]. ML was also used to assess the condition rating of a concrete bridge through the analysis of impact echo data [51].

46
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

Using multiple non-destructive tests, a random forest-based assessment approach was applied to detect internal defects in
RC structures [52]. ML was similarly found in applications like load-carrying capacity estimation and failure mode modelling
of beam-column joint connections [53], rapid seismic damage assessment of bridge portfolios [54], and degree of concrete
hydration [55]. Moreover, ML has contributed to the creation of three hybrid algorithms aimed at predicting the mechanical
properties of plastic concrete samples with varying geometries [56], forecasting the self-healing capacity of bacteria-based
concrete [57], and improving honeycomb detection in concrete through data aggregation [58].

Figure 2. Crack detection in a concrete structure and classification [49]. Reprinted under the Creative Commons (CC) License (CC BY
4.0).

Stentoumis et al. [59] explored the 2D identification and 3D modeling of concrete tunnel fractures through visual cues,
proposing a novel detection methodology to address shortcomings in existing crack evaluation methods. Significant
advancements in this area encompass the integration of a hybrid technique for CNN detector initialization, adapting a
modified census transformation for stereo matching, and combining two cutting-edge optimization approaches.
Furthermore, a predictive model for assessing the tensile breakout capacity of concrete fastening systems was established,
leveraging machine learning techniques, including Gaussian process regression (GPR) and support vector regression (SVR).
[60]. These same ML techniques were applied to create a model for estimating building repair time, considering weight
assignment methods and concrete strength [61]. Additionally, other ML methods, such as multilayer perceptron, gradient
boosting regressor, extreme gradient boosting, and fuzzy-analytical hierarchy process, were utilized in case-based reasoning.
Lastly, a prediction model was tested for the flexural strength of natural pozzolana and limestone-mixed concrete [62].
In civil engineering challenges, ML has played a pivotal role in analyzing complex problems using various algorithms,
including ANN, regression, and random forest [63]. The effectiveness of MOGP (multi-objective genetic programming) is
exemplified in simulating a demanding civil engineering issue: the long-term creep of concrete. The MOGP-derived creep
model is noted for its simplicity, user-friendliness, and superior accuracy compared to previous prediction models [68].
Additionally, a collaborative ML-optimization technique is under development to improve the update of finite element
models for civil engineering structures [64]. An ensemble ML model is employed to estimate corrosion initiation time in
embedded steel-reinforced self-compacting concrete [65]. In civil engineering, ML has been applied to estimate seismic
building structural types [66] and develop a carbonation prediction model for reinforced concrete [67].
Furthermore, the feasibility of using Support Vector Machines (SVM) to forecast the fresh characteristics of self-compacting
concrete was explored. Some studies have utilized a sample numerical example to illustrate and visualize the risk-based
active learning process, which was then applied to the Z24 Bridge benchmark. The case study findings reveal that risk-based
active learning by a statistical classifier can significantly enhance decision-making processes for better outcomes [68].

Machine learning and SHM reinforced concrete structures.

Supervised Learning (SL) involves using labeled data to teach the machine about the characteristics associated with the
provided labels, making it suitable for training models to address regression and classification challenges. For example, in
the field of SHM, supervised learning can be utilized to identify and assess the type and severity of damage [69]. On the
other hand, unsupervised learning focuses on unlabelled data, where datasets lack clear outputs but follow general patterns

47
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

that can be summarized based on specific trends. The goal here is to obtain accurate and well-predicted results by the end
of the process [2]. Recently, ML algorithms have demonstrated significant promise in SHM applications within structural
engineering. These techniques are increasingly applied to detect damage in historic structures. Although ML was initially
used for different designs and material properties of concrete, its application to legacy structures is relatively recent. Some
of the most cutting-edge applications of ML techniques are being directly and indirectly employed in the context of historic
buildings. Damage detection in concrete structures with impedance data and ML has been proven effective in optimizing
the model [70]. Detecting surface-level damage on architectural landmarks is fundamental in structural engineering
assessment. CNNs, a type of deep learning network, excel at tasks beyond the capabilities of simple ANNs, such as image
classification. A typical CNN architecture comprises multiple convolutional blocks and a fully connected layer. Filters or
kernels are employed to extract essential features for classification, such as edges and boundaries. Applying these filters with
unique weight vectors across the image generates feature maps. CNN models are trained using various photos of the
monument under different conditions, including varying lighting, shadows, and more [71]. The classification of ML is
depicted in Fig. 3.
The SHM is an imaginative strategy for scholarly calculations to cross, mixing modern sensor advancements with a look at
foundational strength issues [72]. Factual model creation is worried about the execution of calculations that utilize the
extricated highlights to gauge the degree of the harmed structure. These calculations can be characterized into two classes.
These calculations test factual circulations of deliberate or determined highlights to improve the harm discovery measure.
A more extensive and more far-reaching conversation can be found [16,73], two critical writings for all individuals chipping
away at SHM. In some studies, unsupervised learning was used to detect the presence and location of damage in specific
experiments.
In contrast, supervised learning was used to identify the kind and severity of damage in SHM investigations [74].
Albuthbahak et al. [75] have demonstrated using supervised learning models to estimate concrete compressive strength
using ultrasonic pulse velocity and mix factors. Lu et al. [76] proposed a robust technique for condition evaluation of real-
life concrete structures for identifying tiny fractures at an early stage of development, which uses an unsupervised learning
one-class support vector machine. A clustering method for bridge SHM [77] is shown in Fig. 4.

Figure 3. ML types with commonly adopted algorithms.

Various ML models, such as ANNs, SVM, decision trees, and evolutionary algorithms, can be applied to predict the
mechanical properties of concrete [78]. ML is a technology widely used in pattern recognition, data extraction, natural
language processing, and other areas, with three main types: supervised, unsupervised, and reinforcement learning. Among
these, a multilayer perceptron-based feedforward neural network is a common choice for supervised learning. At the same

48
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

time, support vector machines represent a standard optimization technique for specific types of single-layer networks [79].
However, this research focuses on detecting and repairing concrete structures through PZT-based EMI techniques.

Behaviour
Bridge Data Outliers Removal Characterization

Feature Signals
Extraction Processing

Figure 4. Diagram illustrating the suggested clustering-based strategy for SHM.

An IoT-based fiber Bragg grating (FBG) sensing method is applied for experimental validation to estimate the strain
distribution profile at the bonding zone of the base plate from a central location [80]. EMI strategies offer cost-effective
solutions for damage detection in various structures, with mathematical results validated through experiments or existing
literature findings [81]. With the continuous advancements in composite technology, the complexity of components is on
the rise, making the assurance of structural integrity increasingly critical and demanding effective and reliable non-destructive
evaluation (NDE) techniques [82]. In the construction industry, building structures are widespread, but assessing the health
state of truss structures under operational conditions remains challenging due to their diverse and structurally complex
nature. An EMI technique is introduced to measure impedance spectra using PZT elements, accompanied by implementing
a backpropagation neural network as a potent non-linear transformation tool to evaluate structural health [83].
Concrete structure cracking has a detrimental impact on performance and represents a significant durability concern. To
maintain structural reliability and performance, promptly identifying and repairing cracks is crucial. This research focuses
on vision-based crack detection systems that leverage deep convolutional neural networks to achieve superior classification
rates in identifying and categorizing fractures [84]. Deep learning algorithms were also employed for crack recognition on
concrete surfaces [85], and a multiscale and adversarial learning-based semi-supervised semantic segmentation approach was
utilized to detect cracks in concrete structures [86].

CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF RELEVANT STUDIES

I n this section, based on the existing work and its summarization, considering three possible aspects: objective,
methodology, and outcome, a critical analysis is provided. For this, some review contents have been repeated to explore
the research gap with an overview. Generally, ML is a computer-based investigation that does not require any practical
work, and the researchers Koch et al. [1] explored the review based on computer vision damage detection in concrete
structures. Additionally, they highlighted the concrete condition assessment. A similar idea of review work by changing the
main object Almeida et al. [87] illustrated the several SHM statistical methodologies for the damage/crack detection in civil
concrete structures. Several studies have been reported in ML-based SHM [2,69,88]; in each, there is a change in the defined
problem and structure and the aim of the work, such as review based on challenges and opportunities [89] and application
of ANNs and CNT/concrete composites [90]. Next to the ML, deep learning with SHM was also explored well by
researchers in civil infrastructures [91].
Coming to an ML-based review, Taffese and Sistonen [92] reviewed the service life assessment and durability of civil
concrete structures, focusing on recent studies and future work. Similarly, ML review has been performed considering
specific problems of concrete structures such as crack pattern detection [93], model-based damage detection in bridges [94],
concrete strength prediction [95], energy harvesting [96], and damage detection [97]. An image analysis method was also
employed to determine the crack variation with a crack parameter such as width and length in reinforced concrete structures
[98]. ML with an impedance-based technique for concrete infrastructure health monitoring and several studies in civil
engineering have been explored well by previous researchers [99].
These previous reviews proved that numerous works have been done using a soft computing approach, and each of them
shows that this can be a cost-effective method in determining health conditions, crack damage propagation, crack detection,
crack prediction in damaged civil structures, and for healthy structures monitoring purposes. Some of the challenges
researchers face in performing ML techniques are explored below. Fig. 5 illustrates the use of ML algorithms for different
civil structures over the last years in percent. The data has been plotted based on the present investigation and review work
considering different application purposes. Moreover, the mL algorithms are employed for case studies, but the chart shows
the overall use of ML work for investigation in civil engineering applications/structures.

49
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

Figure 5. These are the types of concrete structures used in the ML approach in the last seven years.

Practical issues
Beams are the primary structural elements in reinforced concrete structures, bearing lateral loads applied to the structure's
axis. These beams experience sustained loads, leading to deflection and, eventually, the development of cracks. Typically,
these cracks initially appear in the tensile zones of the beams before extending into the compression zones. Flexural fractures
in beams occur when the tensile strain reaches its critical point, typically when the bending moment surpasses the moment
capacity. The stress that has built up in the concrete is released through these fractures, which may spread further with
continued pressure. The crack width limitations may differ depending on the kind of structure. The reinforcements'
performance, stiffness, ductility, and corrosion are all affected by fractures in concrete. Crack control is essential for the
structure's effective operation because cracks appear on all concrete structures, signifying a loss of strength. There are two
types of cracks: structural and non-structural. Typically, structural fractures occur early on because of design flaws or poor
building methods—the internal tensions produced in the material utilized cause non-structural cracks [100].
Synchronizing planned and actual construction operations is a significant challenge in building engineering. To address this
challenge, a database containing comparable processes in similar environmental conditions can be valuable for estimating
essential process parameters like time, cost, and quality. While the available data may not be sufficient for ML applications,
case-based reasoning within a hybrid advisory system can bridge the gap between rule-based reasoning and machine learning
by drawing inferences from parallels with completed processes [101]. Predicting deflections in RC members is a complex
task, as it involves nonlinear interactions among various factors, including mechanical properties of steel and concrete,
cracking, and bond-slip between reinforcement and concrete. This complexity makes accurate deflection predictions for RC
structures throughout their service life challenging [102]. When not addressed early in the design stage, long-term deflections
in RC structures may result in delayed damage to non-structural components. Therefore, it is crucial to calculate these
deflections during the initial design phase [103]. The width, length, type, and number of fractures in reinforced concrete
structures significantly impact their deterioration levels and carrying capacity [104]. As a result, assessing fractures in concrete
structures is critical for inspection, diagnosis, maintenance, and predicting the safety life of the structure. Visual inspection
of cracks needs more incredible skill and specialized knowledge and is laborious, time-consuming, and subjective. Numerous
issues have been raised regarding developing testing setups and data collection systems in different concrete structures for
various applications.

CHALLENGES, LIMITATIONS AND RESEARCH GAP

M L is part of AI studies and has been utilized in numerous applications. ML is used to investigate innumerable
data-driven purposes, and it needs a lot of information for training and testing. But, in this study, we have

50
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

elaborated on some of the primary challenges in ML algorithms that are needed for civil engineering concrete structures.
 ML is classified mainly into supervised and unsupervised learning types and has several algorithms. Hence, knowing
suitable algorithms based on the problem defined in concrete structures is vital.
 Experimentation in civil engineering requires more time, such as curing concrete blocks for testing purposes and
collecting data for specific algorithms, which needs more time.
 When cracked structures are used, data optimization for health monitoring studies with the ML approach needs a
high range of megapixel cameras to capture the crack length and thickness at different ranges, predict the damage
propagation, and use other optimization methods.
 Based on the literature, it has also been noted that ML is utilized for different concrete structures such as buildings,
roads, bridges, etc., and each has been predicted using ML algorithms. However, this required maximum
information, and literature shows that in some cases, data has been collected from more than 1000 test data sets
[88], and an average of 500-1000 data has been found in more studies [60,105].
 In recent studies, deep learning algorithms have become popular in many engineering applications, and this has
been utilized in civil concrete structures in recent years [49,84,85].
 Large datasets are needed for training and testing ML models, which can be time-consuming and resource-intensive
to collect, especially for high-resolution crack detection in concrete structures.
 Adapting ML models to handle diverse environmental conditions, varying surface geometries, and different
materials is crucial for universal applicability and effectiveness in real-world scenarios.
 The enhancement of automation levels in defect identification and condition assessment to reduce human input
and improve reliability and safety assessments.
Additionally, some of the other challenges have been found in experimental studies of civil structures considering ML-based
work.
 To enable integrated condition evaluation of civil infrastructure, comprehensively identifying, measuring, and
analyzing interacting defect patterns simultaneously is difficult to measure [1].
 Generalize existing detection models to handle environmental circumstances, such as shifting illumination
conditions, varied surface geometries and materials, and different camera positions and distances effectively and
universally.
 To raise the level of automation from inadequate defect identification to advanced defect and condition assessment,
reduce the quantity of human user input.
Based on the comprehensive review conducted in this work, the research gap centers on the challenges and limitations (Tab.
1) of existing ML and soft computing methods in civil engineering for SHM and damage assessment. Despite the notable
advancements and the application of various ML algorithms to enhance prediction accuracy, cost-effectiveness, and
efficiency in civil engineering projects, several key challenges remain unaddressed.
Addressing these gaps requires interdisciplinary collaboration, improved data standardization protocols, and continuous
learning in ML and soft computing fields among civil engineers. Further research is recommended to develop more robust,
adaptable, and efficient ML models for civil engineering applications, focusing on reducing computational demands and
aligning with sustainability goals.
The additional information on the research gap emphasizes the importance of developing ML models that are accurate but
also interpretable and transparent in their decision-making processes. This is crucial for their acceptance and trustworthiness
in critical civil engineering applications. Moreover, integrating machine learning with traditional civil engineering practices
remains a significant challenge, requiring methodological innovations and educational curriculum changes to equip future
engineers with the necessary skills. This review also points out the need for more comparative studies that evaluate the
performance of different ML algorithms in various civil engineering tasks to guide practitioners in choosing the most
appropriate method for their specific needs. Lastly, there is a sign for more interdisciplinary research that leverages advances
in sensor technology, data analytics, and computational power to address the complex and dynamic nature of civil
engineering projects.
The review uniquely integrates ML and soft computing in civil engineering, focusing on enhancing energy efficiency and
cost-effectiveness. Unlike previous reviews, it offers a comprehensive exploration of ML-based methods and their synergy
with soft computing techniques like fuzzy logic and the design of experiments. It critically examines practical challenges in
implementing these technologies and navigates emerging research directions, synthesizing advanced artificial intelligence for
new researchers. This review stands out by combining a variety of case examples, showcasing the versatility of ML and soft
computing in structural reinforcement applications, and addressing integration difficulties, making it a valuable guide for
the field.

51
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

Application of ML-based concrete structures

Over the last six years, ML has become popular in non-information technologies such as aerospace, civil and mechanical
engineering. When we focussed on civil infrastructure work, several examples were found in recent years that used the
concept of ML-based algorithms. However, this review extracted all the civil structure examples with different algorithms
used by the previous researchers.
When considering application-based work for civil structures, most work has been found to determine the optimum
methods to solve the defined problems in concrete highways.
 Type of concrete: Applications based on the kind of concrete have been found to have variations in different
mechanical and structural properties. Some of the significant ML were used considering the type of concrete:
reinforced concrete, non-reinforced concrete, concrete with CFRP, and composite concrete.
 Type of structures: Even though ML algorithms are also used in different types of civil structures to predict
outcomes in healthy and unhealthy structures. Some of the civil structures in which ML and data-driven approaches
are used are as follows: highways, buildings, columns, beams, bricks, brides, and other concrete models/blocks.
 Type of investigations: ML is used to investigate different purposes in civil structures for damaged and undamaged
structures. Some of them have been considered necessary in this review, listed as damaged prediction, crack
detections, healthy monitoring conditions, crack repair/control, suitable concrete model, optimum properties,
parametric investigation, concrete structures design/model, etc.

ML algorithms have been used in tremendous studies with no limit in real-life applications. The algorithms fit any
work/discipline. Indeed, this review is limited to civil infrastructures and structural models. Also, this review considered
different approaches apart from ML-based algorithms to extract the soft computing method in civil engineering fields.

Structure type Focus Technique adopted Outcome Limitations References

A deep learning
model is developed
to classify images as Crack detection
Deep learning Rajadurai and Kang
Concrete surface Crack detection cracked or not problems on the
algorithms [84] and Le et al. [85]
cracked, particularly surface
those taken on
concrete surfaces.
A detection It is necessary to
algorithm and introduce a crack
A semi-supervised learning method detection algorithm
semantic have been developed that is both highly
Concrete structure Detect concrete segmentation for segmenting crack accurate and
Shim et al. [86]
surface cracks approach based on areas in images, efficient, as it will
multiscale and particularly those enhance the
adversarial learning. that can occur in dependability of
underground structural safety
concrete structures. assessments.
Various alternatives
such as optimization
The results indicate
techniques, hybrid
ML algorithms-ELM, that ANFIS-M2
Concrete structures- Prediction of concrete models, and
SVM, MLR. enhanced prediction Malami et al. [106]
cored samples carbonation depth ensemble models
Fuzzy logic-ANSIF accuracy and model
may be applied to
performance.
improve the model's
performance.
Structural designers
and practitioners can
employ the tool to
It is limited to the
Experimental and achieve robust
Reinforced concrete flexural crack
Crack characterization data-driven numeric serviceability-based Das et al. [100]
structures-RC beams behavior of RC
study designs for
beams.
reinforced concrete
members and
systems.

52
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

When photos
captured at sunset
and moonlight were
Finding fractures in It was acknowledged
processed to
concrete roadways that illumination
investigate the K. Hacıefendioğlu
under different Pre-trained Faster R- effects.
Concrete roads impact of and H. B. Başağa
shooting, weather, CNN deep learning On was relatively
illumination quality [107]
and lighting high for crack
on crack detection, it
circumstances detection.
became apparent
that not all cracks
were detectable.
The dataset is still
Quick and accurate minute and a more
bridge crack extensive dataset
identification and could significantly
box confinement for YOLOv5 with image
Concrete bridge quantification were increase the L. Yu et al. [108]
crack detection processing technique
achieved based on suggested
the actual algorithm's accuracy
engineering dataset. in real-world
applications.
The framework
successfully
Despite the lack of
determined the
time-dependent grid damaged condition
Framework for structure's health
environment and a data, the SCAN
10-story, 10-bay novelty detection for state with average K. A. Eltouny and
novel spatiotemporal design effectively
building damage localization in accuracy rates for X. Liang [109]
composite uses deep learning
massive constructions damage detection
autoencoder network and LSTM units.
and localization of
93% and 85%,
respectively.
To determine the
sensitivity of the
After accumulation suggested indicator
noise, the suggested to the total number
Identify structural Slime mould
Beam and a bar approach can of modes considered S. Tiachacht et al.
damage and structural algorithm and marine
planar truss accurately forecast in the analysis, single [110]
health monitoring predators’ algorithm
the damage's and multiple damage
position and extent. scenarios are
analysed using
various modes.
It is possible to Because the cracks
3D damage
significantly increase were not 3D rebuilt,
Damage localization segmentation and
Reinforced concrete the effectiveness of cracks in concrete
and quantifying quantification C. Yuan et al. [111]
column civil inspection work smaller than 10 mm
concrete damage model based on Mask
and the safety of could not be
R-CNN
inspection functions. detected.
Table 1: Overview and limitations in recent (2018-2022) studies of concrete structures.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

C ivil engineering has witnessed a substantial surge in research concerning integrating machine learning algorithms
and other soft computing methods. This exploration has delved into the core advantages of machine learning,
strategies for enhancing its applicability and precision, and techniques for reducing computational demands.
Machine learning algorithms have garnered substantial attention for their potential to identify, analyze, and even rehabilitate
damage in civil engineering structures. We stand at the precipice of a technological transformation where artificial
intelligence is poised to revolutionize structural health monitoring and asset management for aging civil structures. Within
this paper, we have conducted a comprehensive review, discussion, and analysis of the principal approaches and algorithms
featured in the open literature. We intend to provide readers with accessible insights into the extensive body of research in
this domain through detailed tables, shedding light on the field's status.
Moreover, we have not shied away from highlighting these approaches' practical challenges and limitations, aiming to
establish best practices for their utilization. We underscore the pressing need for further investigation by identifying existing

53
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

knowledge gaps. As a result of this critical evaluation, engineers will be better equipped to make informed decisions
regarding integrating machine learning algorithms and soft computing methods in civil and structural engineering.
Several vital recommendations emerge based on the comprehensive discussion and analysis of machine learning in civil
engineering. Firstly, interdisciplinary collaboration is essential, fostering partnerships between civil engineers, computer
scientists, and data scientists, allowing for innovation and knowledge sharing. Implementing data standardization protocols
is crucial to ensure data compatibility and consistency, enabling more effective data aggregation and analysis. Continuous
learning and professional development in machine learning and soft computing should be promoted among civil engineers,
ensuring they stay updated with the latest advancements to apply these technologies effectively. Additionally, ethical and
privacy concerns related to data collection and machine learning applications must be addressed. Encouraging open data
sharing within the civil engineering community is necessary for facilitating research, model development, and knowledge
exchange. Sustainability should be a central focus, aligning machine learning applications with global efforts to reduce the
environmental impact of infrastructure projects. Finally, developing machine learning models for risk assessment and
predictive maintenance can aid in the proactive management of aging infrastructure, enhancing its reliability, safety, and
sustainability.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

T he author Asraar Anjum acknowledges the support of the TFW2020 scheme of Kulliyyah of Engineering,
International Islamic University Malaysia.

REFERENCES

[1] Koch, C., Georgieva, K., Kasireddy, V., Akinci, B., Fieguth, P. (2015). A review on computer vision based defect
detection and condition assessment of concrete and asphalt civil infrastructure, Adv. Eng. Informatics, 29(2), pp. 196–
210, DOI: 10.1016/j.aei.2015.01.008.
[2] Flah, M., Nunez, I., Ben Chaabene, W., Nehdi, M.L. (2020). Machine Learning Algorithms in Civil Structural Health
Monitoring: A Systematic Review, Arch. Comput. Methods Eng., (0123456789), DOI: 10.1007/s11831-020-09471-9.
[3] Zingoni, A. (2020). Structural health monitoring and damage detection, Prog. Struct. Eng. Mech. Comput., 01096, pp.
145–166, DOI: 10.1201/9781482284423-18.
[4] Karballaeezadeh, N., Mohammadzadeh S, D., Shamshirband, S., Hajikhodaverdikhan, P., Mosavi, A., Chau, K. wing.
(2019). Prediction of remaining service life of pavement using an optimized support vector machine (case study of
Semnan–Firuzkuh road), Eng. Appl. Comput. Fluid Mech., 13(1), pp. 188–198, DOI: 10.1080/19942060.2018.1563829.
[5] Zaurin, R., Catbas, F.N. (2010). Integration of computer imaging and sensor data for 912 structural health monitoring
of bridges, Smart Mater. Struct., 9(1).
[6] Smarsly, K., Hartmann, D., Law, K.H. (2013). A computational framework for life-cycle management of wind turbines
incorporating structural health monitoring, Struct. Heal. Monit., 12(4), pp. 359–376, DOI: 10.1177/1475921713493344.
[7] Farrar, C.R., Lieven, N.A.J. (2007). Damage prognosis: The future of structural health monitoring, Philos. Trans. R. Soc.
A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci., 365(1851), pp. 623–632, DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2006.1927.
[8] An, D., Kim, N.H., Choi, J.H. (2013).Options for Prognostics Methods: A review of data-driven and physics-based
prognostics. 54th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, pp. 1–
19.
[9] Dragos, K., Smarsly, K. (2015). Embedding numerical models into wireless sensor nodes for structural health
monitoring, Struct. Heal. Monit. 2015 Syst. Reliab. Verif. Implement. - Proc. 10th Int. Work. Struct. Heal. Monit.
IWSHM 2015, 2, pp. 327–334, DOI: 10.12783/shm2015/43.
[10] Wu, X. (2004). Data mining: Artificial intelligence in data analysis, Proc. - IEEE/WIC/ACM Int. Conf. Web Intell. WI
2004, (Icdm), pp. 7, DOI: 10.1109/wi.2004.10000.
[11] Adams, J. a. (2001). Multiagent Systems : A Modern Approach to Distributed Artificial Intelligence A Review, AI Mag.,
22(2), pp. 105–108.
[12] Omar, T., Nehdi, M. (2016).Valuation of NDT techniques for concrete bridge decks using fuzzy analytical hierarchy
process. 2016 Annual Conference of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineering, p. 10.
[13] Amezquita-Sanchez, J.P., Adeli, H. (2016). Signal Processing Techniques for Vibration-Based Health Monitoring of

54
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

Smart Structures, Arch. Comput. Methods Eng., 23(1), pp. 1–15, DOI: 10.1007/s11831-014-9135-7.
[14] Witten, I.H., Frank, E. (1999). Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques with Java
Implementations (The Morgan Kaufmann Series in Data Management Systems), 31, pp. 371.
[15] Malekloo, A., Ozer, E., AlHamaydeh, M., Girolami, M. (2022). Machine learning and structural health monitoring
overview with emerging technology and high-dimensional data source highlights, Struct. Heal. Monit., 21(4), pp. 1906–
1955, DOI: 10.1177/14759217211036880.
[16] Güemes, A., Fernandez-Lopez, A., Pozo, A.R., Sierra-Pérez, J. (2020). Structural health monitoring for advanced
composite structures: A review, J. Compos. Sci., 4(13), pp. 15, DOI: 10.1142/q0114.
[17] Miorelli, R., Kulakovskyi, A., Chapuis, B., D’Almeida, O., Mesnil, O. (2021). Supervised learning strategy for
classification and regression tasks applied to aeronautical structural health monitoring problems, Ultrasonics, 113, pp.
106372, DOI: 10.1016/j.ultras.2021.106372.
[18] Bao, N., Zhang, T., Huang, R., Biswal, S., Su, J., Wang, Y. (2023). A Deep Transfer Learning Network for Structural
Condition Identification with Limited Real-World Training Data, Struct. Control Heal. Monit., pp. 18,
DOI:10.1155/2023/8899806.
[19] Dang, V.H., Nguyen, T.T. (2023). Robust Vibration Output-only Structural Health Monitoring Framework Based on
Multi-modal Feature Fusion and Self-learning, Period. Polytech. Civ. Eng., 67(2), pp. 416–430,
DOI: 10.3311/PPci.21756.
[20] Tan, X., Chen, W., Zou, T., Yang, J., Du, B. (2023). Real-time prediction of mechanical behaviors of underwater shield
tunnel structure using machine learning method based on structural health monitoring data, J. Rock Mech. Geotech.
Eng., 15(4), pp. 886–895, DOI: 10.1016/j.jrmge.2022.06.015.
[21] Noori Hoshyar, A., Rashidi, M., Yu, Y., Samali, B. (2023). Proposed Machine Learning Techniques for Bridge Structural
Health Monitoring: A Laboratory Study, Remote Sens., 15(8), DOI: 10.3390/rs15081984.
[22] Sarwar, M.Z., Cantero, D. (2024). Probabilistic autoencoder-based bridge damage assessment using train-induced
responses, Mech. Syst. Signal Process., 208, pp. 111046, DOI: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2023.111046.
[23] Samudra, S., Barbosh, M., Sadhu, A. (2023). Machine Learning-Assisted Improved Anomaly Detection for Structural
Health Monitoring, Sensors, 23(7), DOI: 10.3390/s23073365.
[24] Mahajan, H., Banerjee, S. (2023). Acoustic emission source localisation for structural health monitoring of rail sections
based on a deep learning approach, Meas. Sci. Technol., 34(4), DOI: 10.1088/1361-6501/acb002.
[25] Arafin, P., Billah, A.M., Issa, A. (2024). Deep learning-based concrete defects classification and detection using semantic
segmentation, Struct. Heal. Monit., 23(1), pp. 383–409, DOI: 10.1177/14759217231168212.
[26] Zhu, Z., Brilakis, I. (2010). Machine Vision-Based Concrete Surface Quality Assessment, J. Constr. Eng. Manag., 136(2),
pp. 210–218, DOI: 10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000126.
[27] Valikhani, A., Jaberi Jahromi, A., Pouyanfar, S., Mantawy, I.M., Azizinamini, A. (2021). Machine learning and image
processing approaches for estimating concrete surface roughness using basic cameras, Comput. Civ. Infrastruct. Eng.,
36(2), pp. 213–226, DOI: 10.1111/mice.12605.
[28] Kalbhor, S., Nikam, M., Mhase, D., Malphedwar, L. (2021). Bridge Crack Prediction by using machine learning, Int.
Res. J. Mod. Eng. Technol. Sci., (04), pp. 1854–1861.
[29] Adhikari, R.S., Moselhi, O., Bagchi, A. (2014). Image-based retrieval of concrete crack properties for bridge inspection,
Autom. Constr., 39, pp. 180–194, DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2013.06.011.
[30] Liu, Y., Yeoh, J.K.W. (2021). Automated crack pattern recognition from images for condition assessment of concrete
structures, Autom. Constr., 128, pp. 103765, DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103765.
[31] Karbassi, A., Mohebi, B., Rezaee, S., Lestuzzi, P. (2014). Damage prediction for regular reinforced concrete buildings
using the decision tree algorithm, Comput. Struct., 130, pp. 46–56, DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruc.2013.10.006.
[32] Karbassi, A., Mohebi, B., Rezaee, S., Lestuzzi, P. (2013).Damage predicting algorithms for regular RC structures. DACH
Tagung-Aktuelle Themen des Erdbedeningenieurwesens, pp. 1–9.
[33] Pham, A.D., Ngo, N.T., Nguyen, T.K. (2021). Machine learning for predicting long-term deflections in reinforce
concrete flexural structures, J. Comput. Des. Eng., 7(1), pp. 95–106, DOI: 10.1093/JCDE/QWAA010.
[34] Zhang, M., Akiyama, M., Shintani, M., Xin, J., Frangopol, D.M. (2021). Probabilistic estimation of flexural loading
capacity of existing RC structures based on observational corrosion-induced crack width distribution using machine
learning, Struct. Saf., 91, pp. 102098, DOI: 10.1016/j.strusafe.2021.102098.
[35] Davoudi, R., Miller, G.R., Kutz, J.N. (2017). Computer vision based inspection approach to predict damage state and
load level for RC members, Struct. Heal. Monit., Real-Time Mater. State Aware. Data-Driven Saf. Assur. - Proc. 11th
Int. Work. Struct. Heal. Monit. IWSHM 2017, 2, pp. 3155–62, DOI: 10.12783/shm2017/14225.
[36] Jiao, P., Roy, M., Barri, K., Zhu, R., Ray, I., Alavi, A.H. (2019). High-performance fiber reinforced concrete as a repairing
material to normal concrete structures: Experiments, numerical simulations and a machine learning-based prediction

55
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

model, Constr. Build. Mater., 223, pp. 1167–1181, DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.07.312.

[37] Khatibinia, M., Salajegheh, E., Salajegheh, J., Fadaee, M.J. (2013). Reliability-based design optimization of reinforced
concrete structures including soil-structure interaction using a discrete gravitational search algorithm and a proposed
metamodel, Eng. Optim., 45(10), pp. 1147–1165, DOI: 10.1080/0305215X.2012.725051.
[38] Imam, A., Anifowose, F., Azad, A.K. (2015). Residual Strength of Corroded Reinforced Concrete Beams Using an
Adaptive Model Based on ANN, Int. J. Concr. Struct. Mater., 9(2), pp. 159–172, DOI: 10.1007/s40069-015-0097-4.
[39] Elbahy, Y.I., Nehdi, M., Youssef, M.A. (2010). Artificial neural network model for deflection analysis of superelastic
shape memory alloy reinforced concrete beams, Can. J. Civ. Eng., 37(6), pp. 855–865, DOI: 10.1139/L10-039.
[40] Charalampakis, A.E., Papanikolaou, V.K. (2021). Machine learning design of R/C columns, Eng. Struct., 226(October
2020), pp. 111412, DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111412.
[41] Prasanna, P., Dana, K.J., Gucunski, N., Basily, B.B., La, H.M., Lim, R.S., Parvardeh, H. (2016). Automated Crack
Detection on Concrete Bridges, IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng., 13(2), pp. 591–599,
DOI: 10.1109/TASE.2014.2354314.
[42] Taffese, W.Z., Sistonen, E. (2016). Neural network based hygrothermal prediction for deterioration risk analysis of
surface-protected concrete façade element, Constr. Build. Mater., 113, pp. 34–48,
DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.03.029.
[43] Abuodeh, O.R., Abdalla, J.A., Hawileh, R.A. (2020). Prediction of shear strength and behavior of RC beams
strengthened with externally bonded FRP sheets using machine learning techniques, Compos. Struct., 234, pp. 111698,
DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.111698.
[44] Machial, R., Rteil, A., Alam, M.S. (2012).Modified Tooth Model Shear Equation for Economic and Durable Reinforced
Concrete Structures. CICE 2012, pp. 1–6.
[45] [45] Neves, A.C., González, I., Leander, J., Karoumi, R. (2017). Structural health monitoring of bridges: a model-free
ANN-based approach to damage detection, J. Civ. Struct. Heal. Monit., 7(5), pp. 689–702, DOI: 10.1007/s13349-017-
0252-5.
[46] Tibaduiza, D., Torres-Arredondo, M.Á., Vitola, J., Anaya, M., Pozo, F. (2018). A Damage Classification Approach for
Structural Health Monitoring Using Machine Learning, Complexity, DOI: 10.1155/2018/5081283.
[47] Luo, H., Paal, S.G. (2018). Machine Learning–Based Backbone Curve Model of Reinforced Concrete Columns
Subjected to Cyclic Loading Reversals, J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 32(5), pp. 04018042,
DOI: 10.1061/(asce)cp.1943-5487.0000787.
[48] Das, A.K., Suthar, D., Leung, C.K.Y. (2019). Machine learning based crack mode classification from unlabeled acoustic
emission waveform features, Cem. Concr. Res., 121, pp. 42–57, DOI: 10.1016/j.cemconres.2019.03.001.
[49] Silva, W.R.L. da., Lucena, D.S. de. (2018). Concrete Cracks Detection Based on Deep Learning Image Classification,
Proceedings, 2(8), pp. 489, DOI: 10.3390/icem18-05387.
[50] Okazaki, Y., Okazaki, S., Asamoto, S., Chun, P. jo. (2020). Applicability of machine learning to a crack model in concrete
bridges, Comput. Civ. Infrastruct. Eng., 35(8), pp. 775–792, DOI: 10.1111/mice.12532.
[51] Sengupta, A., Ilgin Guler, S., Shokouhi, P. (2021). Interpreting Impact Echo Data to Predict Condition Rating of
Concrete Bridge Decks: A Machine-Learning Approach, J. Bridg. Eng., 26(8), pp. 04021044,
DOI: 10.1061/(asce)be.1943-5592.0001744.
[52] Chun, P. jo., Ujike, I., Mishima, K., Kusumoto, M., Okazaki, S. (2020). Random forest-based evaluation technique for
internal damage in reinforced concrete featuring multiple nondestructive testing results, Constr. Build. Mater., 253, pp.
119238, DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119238.
[53] Alwanas, A.A.H., Al-Musawi, A.A., Salih, S.Q., Tao, H., Ali, M., Yaseen, Z.M. (2019). Load-carrying capacity and mode
failure simulation of beam-column joint connection: Application of self-tuning machine learning model, Eng. Struct.,
194(May), pp. 220–229, DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.05.048.
[54] Mangalathu, S., Hwang, S.H., Choi, E., Jeon, J.S. (2019). Rapid seismic damage evaluation of bridge portfolios using
machine learning techniques, Eng. Struct., 201, pp. 109785, DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.109785.
[55] Bangaru, S.S., Wang, C., Hassan, M., Jeon, H.W., Ayiluri, T. (2019). Estimation of the degree of hydration of concrete
through automated machine learning based microstructure analysis – A study on effect of image magnification, Adv.
Eng. Informatics, 42, pp. 100975, DOI: 10.1016/j.aei.2019.100975.
[56] Tavana Amlashi, A., Ghanizadeh, A.R., Abbaslou, H., Alidoust, P. (2019). Developing three hybrid machine learning
algorithms for predicting the mechanical properties of plastic concrete samples with different geometries, AUT J. Civ.
Eng., 0(1), pp. 37–54.
[57] Zhuang, X., Zhou, S. (2019). The prediction of self-healing capacity of bacteria-based concrete using machine learning
approaches, Comput. Mater. Contin., 59(1), pp. 57–77, DOI: 10.32604/cmc.2019.04589.
[58] Völker, C., Shokouhi, P. (2015). Data aggregation for improved honeycomb detection in concrete using machine

56
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

learning–based algorithms. International Symposium Non-Destructive Testing in Civil Engineering (NDT-CE), p. 8.

[59] Stentoumis, C., Protopapadakis, E., Doulamis, A., Doulamis, N. (2016). A holistic approach for inspection of civil
infrastructures based on computer vision techniques, Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. - ISPRS
Arch., 41(July), pp. 131–138, DOI: 10.5194/isprsarchives-XLI-B5-131-2016.
[60] Spyridis, P., Olalusi, O.B. (2021). Predictive modelling for concrete failure at anchorages using machine learning
techniques, Materials (Basel)., 14(1), pp. 1–22, DOI: 10.3390/ma14010062.
[61] Nguyen, H., Vu, T., Vo, T.P., Thai, H.T. (2021). Efficient machine learning models for prediction of concrete strengths,
Constr. Build. Mater., 266, pp. 120950, DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120950.
[62] Wang, X.Y. (2020). Prediction of flexural strength of natural pozzolana and limestone blended concrete using machine
learning based models, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng., 784(1), DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/784/1/012005.
[63] Gandomi, A.H., Sajedi, S., Kiani, B., Huang, Q. (2016). Genetic programming for experimental big data mining: A case
study on concrete creep formulation, Autom. Constr., 70, pp. 89–97, DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2016.06.010.
[64] Naranjo-Pérez, J., Infantes, M., Fernando Jiménez-Alonso, J., Sáez, A. (2020). A collaborative machine learning-
optimization algorithm to improve the finite element model updating of civil engineering structures, Eng. Struct., 225,
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.111327.
[65] Salami, B.A., Rahman, S.M., Oyehan, T.A., Maslehuddin, M., Al Dulaijan, S.U. (2020). Ensemble machine learning
model for corrosion initiation time estimation of embedded steel reinforced self-compacting concrete, Meas. J. Int.
Meas. Confed., 165, pp. 108141, DOI: 10.1016/j.measurement.2020.108141.
[66] Geiß, C., Aravena Pelizari, P., Marconcini, M., Sengara, W., Edwards, M., Lakes, T., Taubenböck, H. (2015). Estimation
of seismic building structural types using multi-sensor remote sensing and machine learning techniques, ISPRS J.
Photogramm. Remote Sens., 104, pp. 175–188, DOI: 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2014.07.016.
[67] Taffese, W.Z., Sistonen, E., Puttonen, J. (2015). CaPrM: Carbonation prediction model for reinforced concrete using
machine learning methods, Constr. Build. Mater., 100, pp. 70–82, DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.09.058.
[68] Hughes, A.J., Bull, L.A., Gardner, P., Barthorpe, R.J., Dervilis, N., Worden, K. (2022). On risk-based active learning for
structural health monitoring, Mech. Syst. Signal Process., 167, pp. 1–30, DOI: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2021.108569.
[69] Kurian, B., Liyanapathirana, R. (2020). Machine Learning Techniques for Structural Health Monitoring, Lect. Notes
Mech. Eng., pp. 3–24, DOI: 10.1007/978-981-13-8331-1_1.
[70] Anjum, A., Hrairi, M., Aabid, A., Yatim, N., Ali, M. (2024). Damage detection in concrete structures with impedance
data and machine learning, Bull. Polish Acad. Sci. Tech. Sci., 149178, DOI: 10.24425/bpasts.2024.149178.
[71] Mishra, M. (2021). Machine learning techniques for structural health monitoring of heritage buildings: A state-of-the-
art review and case studies, J. Cult. Herit., 47, pp. 227–245, DOI: 10.1016/j.culher.2020.09.005.
[72] Ihn, J., Chang, F. (2008). Pitch-catch Active Sensing Methods in Structural Health Monitoring for Aircraft Structures,
Struct. Heal. Monit., 7(1), pp. 5–15, DOI: 10.1177/1475921707081979.
[73] Martinez-Luengo, M., Kolios, A., Wang, L. (2016). Structural health monitoring of offshore wind turbines: A review
through the Statistical Pattern Recognition Paradigm, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 64, pp. 91–105,
DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.085.
[74] Nick, W., Shelton, J., Asamene, K., Esterline, A. (2015). A study of supervised machine learning techniques for structural
health monitoring, CEUR Workshop Proc., 1353, pp. 133–138.
[75] Albuthbahak, O.M., Hiswa, A.A.M.R. (2019). Prediction of concrete compressive strength using supervised machine
learning models through ultrasonic pulse velocity and mix parameters, Rev. Rom. Mater. Rom. J. Mater., 49(2), pp. 232–
243.
[76] Alamdari, M.M., Khoa, N.L.D., Runcie, P., Mustapha, S., Dackermann, U., Li, J., Nguyen, V.V., Gu, X.
(2014).Application of unsupervised support vector machine for condition assessment of concrete structures.
International Conference on Performance-based and Life-cycle Structural Engineering, pp. 182–189.
[77] Diez, A., Khoa, N.L.D., Makki Alamdari, M., Wang, Y., Chen, F., Runcie, P. (2016). A clustering approach for structural
health monitoring on bridges, J. Civ. Struct. Heal. Monit., 6(3), pp. 429–445, DOI: 10.1007/s13349-016-0160-0.
[78] Ben Chaabene, W., Flah, M., Nehdi, M.L. (2020). Machine learning prediction of mechanical properties of concrete:
Critical review, Constr. Build. Mater., 260, pp. 119889, DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119889.
[79] He, M., Wang, Y., Ram Ramakrishnan, K., Zhang, Z. (2020). A comparison of machine learning algorithms for
assessment of delamination in fiber-reinforced polymer composite beams, Struct. Heal. Monit.,
DOI: 10.1177/1475921720967157.
[80] Mohapatra, A.G., Talukdar, J., Mishra, T.C., Anand, S., Jaiswal, A., Khanna, A., Gupta, D. (2022). Fiber Bragg grating
sensors driven structural health monitoring by using multimedia-enabled iot and big data technology, Multimed. Tools
Appl., 81(24), pp. 34573–34593, DOI: 10.1007/s11042-021-11565-w.
[81] Djemana, M., Hrairi, M., Al Jeroudi, Y. (2017). Using Electromechanical Impedance and Extreme Learning Machine to

57
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

Detect and Locate Damage in Structures, J. Nondestruct. Eval., 36(2), pp. 1–10, DOI: 10.1007/s10921-017-0417-5.
[82] Na, S., Lee, H.K. (2013). Neural network approach for damaged area location prediction of a composite plate using
electromechanical impedance technique, Compos. Sci. Technol., 88, pp. 62–68,
DOI: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2013.08.019.
[83] He, C., Yang, S., Liu, Z., Wu, B. (2014). Damage Localization and Quantification of Truss Structure Based on
Electromechanical Impedance Technique and Neural Network, Shock Vib., pp. 9, DOI: 10.1155/2014/727404.
[84] Rajadurai, R.S., Kang, S.T. (2021). Automated vision-based crack detection on concrete surfaces using deep learning,
Appl. Sci., 11(11), DOI: 10.3390/app11115229.
[85] Le, T.T., Nguyen, V.H., Le, M.V. (2021). Development of deep learning model for the recognition of cracks on concrete
surfaces, Appl. Comput. Intell. Soft Comput., DOI: 10.1155/2021/8858545.
[86] Shim, S., Kim, J., Cho, G.C., Lee, S.W. (2020). Multiscale and adversarial learning-based semi-supervised semantic
segmentation approach for crack detection in concrete structures, IEEE Access, 8, pp. 170939–170950,
DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3022786.
[87] Almeida, V.A., Figueiras, J.A., Farrar, C.R., Rebelo, S., Caetano, E.D.S. (2010).Damage Identification in Civil
Engineering Infrastructure under Operational and Environmental Conditions A dissertation submitted in satisfaction
of the requirements of the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Civil Engineering by. University of Porto.
[88] Smarsly, K., Dragos, K., Wiggenbrock, J. (2016). Machine learning techniques for structural health monitoring, 8th Eur.
Work. Struct. Heal. Monit. EWSHM 2016, 2, pp. 1522–31.
[89] Yuan, F.-G., Zargar, S.A., Chen, Q., Wang, S. (2020). Machine learning for structural health monitoring: challenges and
opportunities. Sensors and Smart Structures Technologies for Civil, Mechanical, and Aerospace Systems 2020, 1137903,
p. 2.
[90] Kekez, S., Kubica, J. (2020). Connecting concrete technology and machine learning: Proposal for application of ANNs
and CNT/concrete composites in structural health monitoring, RSC Adv., 10(39), pp. 23038–23048,
DOI: 10.1039/d0ra03450a.
[91] Azimi, M., Eslamlou, A.D., Pekcan, G. (2020). Data-driven structural health monitoring and damage detection through
deep learning: State-ofthe- art review, Sensors (Switzerland), 20(10), pp. 2778, DOI: 10.3390/s20102778.
[92] Taffese, W.Z., Sistonen, E. (2017). Machine learning for durability and service-life assessment of reinforced concrete
structures: Recent advances and future directions, Autom. Constr., 77, pp. 1–14, DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2017.01.016.
[93] Sanchez, L.A. (2017). A system for crack pattern detection, characterization and diagnosis in concrete structures by
means of image processing and machine learning techniques. Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya.
[94] Moughty, J.J., Casas, J.R. (2017). A state of the art review of modal-based damage detection in bridges: Development,
challenges, and solutions, Appl. Sci., 7(5), DOI: 10.3390/app7050510.
[95] Kulkarni, P., Londhe, S.N. (2018). Concrete strength prediction using artificial neural network and genetic programming,
Chall. J. Concr. Res. Lett., 9(3), pp. 75, DOI: 10.20528/cjcrl.2018.03.002.
[96] Aabid, A., Raheman, A., Ibrahim, Y.E., Anjum, A., Hrairi, M., Parveez, B., Parveen, N., Zayan, J.M. (2021). A Systematic
Review of Piezoelectric Materials and Energy Harvesters for Industrial Applications, Sensors, 21, pp. 1–28,
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/s21124145.
[97] Silva, M.F.M. Da. (2017).Machine learning algorithms for damage detection in structures under changing normal
conditions. Federal University of Pará.
[98] Yang, Y. Sen., Wu, C. lin., Hsu, T.T.C., Yang, H.C., Lu, H.J., Chang, C.C. (2018). Image analysis method for crack
distribution and width estimation for reinforced concrete structures, Autom. Constr., 91(May 2017), pp. 120–132,
DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2018.03.012.
[99] Aabid, A., Khan, S.A., Ahmed, M., Baig, A., Reddy, A.R. (2021). Investigation of Flow Growth in a Duct Flows for
Higher Area Ratio, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng., 1057(012052), pp. 10,
DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/1057/1/012052.
[100] Das, S., Dutta, S., Adak, D., Majumdar, S. (2021). On the crack characterization of reinforced concrete structures:
Experimental and data-driven numerical study, Structures, 30, pp. 134–145,
DOI: 10.1016/j.istruc.2020.12.069.
[101] Aneta, K., Jerzy, P. (2013). Abductive and deductive approach in learning from examples method for technological
decisions making, Procedia Eng., 57, pp. 583–588, DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.2013.04.074.
[102] Gribniak, V., Cervenka, V., Kaklauskas, G. (2013). Deflection prediction of reinforced concrete beams by design
codes and computer simulation, Eng. Struct., 56, pp. 2175–2186, DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.08.045.
[103] Marí, A.R., Bairán, J.M., Duarte, N. (2010). Long-term deflections in cracked reinforced concrete flexural members,
Eng. Struct., 32(3), pp. 829–842, DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.12.009.
[104] Shan, B., Zheng, S., Ou, J. (2016). A stereovision-based crack width detection approach for concrete surface

58
 A. Anjum et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 43-59; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.04

assessment, KSCE J. Civ. Eng., 20(2), pp. 803–812, DOI: 10.1007/s12205-015-0461-6.

[105] Chen, W., Xu, J., Dong, M., Yu, Y., Elchalakani, M., Zhang, F. (2021). Data-driven analysis on ultimate axial strain
of FRP-confined concrete cylinders based on explicit and implicit algorithms, Compos. Struct., 268, pp. 113904,
DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.113904.
[106] Malami, S.I., Anwar, F.H., Abdulrahman, S., Haruna, S.I., Ali, S.I.A., Abba, S.I. (2021). Implementation of hybrid
neuro-fuzzy and self-turning predictive model for the prediction of concrete carbonation depth: A soft computing
technique, Results Eng., 10, pp. 100228, DOI: 10.1016/j.rineng.2021.100228.
[107] Hacıefendioğlu, K., Başağa, H.B. (2022). Concrete Road Crack Detection Using Deep Learning-Based Faster R-
CNN Method, Iran. J. Sci. Technol. - Trans. Civ. Eng., 46(2), pp. 1621–1633, DOI: 10.1007/s40996-021-00671-2.
[108] Yu, L., He, S., Liu, X., Jiang, S., Xiang, S. (2022). Intelligent Crack Detection and Quantification in the Concrete
Bridge: A Deep Learning-Assisted Image Processing Approach, Adv. Civ. Eng., DOI: 10.1155/2022/1813821.
[109] Eltouny, K.A., Liang, X. (2022). Large-scale structural health monitoring using composite recurrent neural networks
and grid environments, Comput. Civ. Infrastruct. Eng., DOI: 10.1111/mice.12845.
[110] Tiachacht, S., Khatir, S., Thanh, C. Le., Rao, R.V., Mirjalili, S., Abdel Wahab, M. (2022). Inverse problem for
dynamic structural health monitoring based on slime mould algorithm, Eng. Comput., 38(s3), pp. 2205–2228,
DOI: 10.1007/s00366-021-01378-8.
[111] Yuan, C., Xiong, B., Li, X., Sang, X., Kong, Q. (2022). A novel intelligent inspection robot with deep stereo vision
for three-dimensional concrete damage detection and quantification, Struct. Heal. Monit., 21(3), pp. 788–802,
DOI: 10.1177/14759217211010238.

59