Developing the quality assurance thresholds for screening automated pavement condition data using prediction interval methods

References

• Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), 2018. Network-level pavement condition data quality management program. Arizona, Phoenix: ADOT.
   Google Scholar
• Arkansas Deprtament of Transportation (ARDOT), 2018. System information and research division - pavement performance data quality management program. Little Rock, Arkansas: ARDOT.
   Google Scholar
• ASTM, 2010. Standard practice for preparing precision and bias statements for test methods for construction materials.
   Google Scholar
• Caltrans, 2018. Pavement condition survey - data quality management plan. Los Angeles, California: Caltrans.
   Google Scholar
• Chambon, S., and Moliard, J.-M., 2011. Automatic road pavement assessment with image processing: review and comparison. International Journal of Geophysics, 2021, 1–19.
   Google Scholar
• Davison, A.C., and Hinkley, D.V., 1997. Bootstrap methods and their application. Cambridge, England: Cambridge university press.
   Google Scholar
• Efron, B., and Tibshirani, R.J., 1994. An introduction to the bootstrap. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC press.
   Google Scholar
• Errouissi, R., et al., 2015. Bootstrap prediction interval estimation for wind speed forecasting. IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE) IEEE, 2015, 1919–1924.
   Google Scholar
• Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), 2021. Highway performance monitoring system. Gainesville, Florida: Data Quality Management Plan for Pavement Condition Data Collection.
   Google Scholar
• Kargah-Ostadi, N., et al., 2017. Evaluation framework for automated pavement distress identification and quantification applications. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2639 (1), 46–54.
   Google Scholar
• Mcghee, K.H., 1998. A guide to evaluating pavement distress through the use of video images. Richmond, Virginia: Virginia Department of Transportation, Maintenance Division.
   Google Scholar
• Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT), 2013. Request for proposals (rfp): pavement management system data collection. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma: ODOT.
   Google Scholar
• Ong, G.P., Noureldin, S., and Sinha, K.C., 2009. Methodology to evaluate quality of pavement surface distress data collected by automated techniques. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2093 (1), 3–11.
   Google Scholar
• Pearson, K., 1895. Notes on regression and inheritance in the case of two parents. Proceedings of the royal society of London, 58, 240–242. K Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Pierce, L.M., Mcgovern, G., and Zimmerman, K.A., 2013. Practical guide for quality management of pavement condition data collection.
   Google Scholar
• Pierce, L.M., and Weitzel, N.D., 2019a. Automated pavement condition surveys.
   Google Scholar
• Pierce, L.M., and Weitzel, N.D., 2019b. Nchrp synthesis 531: automated pavement condition surveys. Washington DC: Transportation Research Board.
   Google Scholar
• Serigos, Pedro A., et al., 2014. Field evaluation of automated distress measuring equipment. Austin, Texas: TxDOT.
   Google Scholar
• Serigos, P.A., et al., 2016. Evaluation of 3d automated systems for the measurement of pavement surface cracking. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 142 (6), 05016003.
   Google Scholar
• Tao, J., et al., 2021. Data quality assessment of automated pavement cracking measurements in Mississippi. International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology, 14 (2), 117–128.
   Google Scholar
• Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), 2015. Pavement management information system rater’s manual. Texas Department of Transportation.
   Google Scholar
• Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), 2018. Quality management plan for pavement data collection. Austin, Texas: TxDOT.
   Google Scholar
• Timm, D.H., and Mcqueen, J.M., 2004. A study of manual vs. automated pavement condition surveys. Montgomery, Alabama, EE. UU: Auburn University.
   Google Scholar
• Zakeri, H., Nejad, F.M., and Fahimifar, A., 2017. Image based techniques for crack detection, classification and quantification in asphalt pavement: a review. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 24 (4), 935–977.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, A., et al., 2016. Efficient system of cracking-detection algorithms with 1-mm 3d-surface models and performance measures. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 30 (6), 04016020.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, A., et al., 2017. Automated pixel-level pavement crack detection on 3D asphalt surfaces using a deep-learning network. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 32 (10), 805–819.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, A., et al., 2019. Automated pixel-level pavement crack detection on 3D asphalt surfaces with a recurrent neural network. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 34 (3), 213–229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, K.A., 2017. Pavement management systems: putting data to work. Washington D.C.: Transportation Research Board, 0309389836.
   Google Scholar