Computer vision for infrastructure
Instance segmentation and field-collected imagery for more precise pavement distress assessment.
Research portfolio · Computer vision & multimodal evaluation
I work on applied computer vision and multimodal model evaluation, with a secondary focus on benchmarking methodology for foundation models. I care about evaluation rigor: how task framing, prompt sensitivity, and metric selection change what we conclude about a model, and how conclusions survive the shift from controlled evaluation to deployment.
$research --focus→computer vision for infrastructure
Open to research collaborations and graduate study.
01 / Statement
My current work spans two projects. SLAPBench is the first structured benchmark for evaluating multimodal large language models on biometric image analysis. The pavement distress project builds instance-segmentation systems for real-world infrastructure assessment from field-collected imagery.
Across both, the question I keep returning to is whether an evaluation result means what it appears to mean. SLAPBench shows that a single change of prompt can collapse a verifier to near-total false acceptance while the same model separates classes almost perfectly under a different framing. The pavement work shows that pixel-level metrics and bounding-box metrics can tell different stories about the same predictions.
My goal is to develop evaluation frameworks and vision systems whose conclusions are reproducible and meaningful in low-resource, real-world contexts.
Instance segmentation and field-collected imagery for more precise pavement distress assessment.
Benchmarks that reveal how prompting changes model behavior on demanding visual verification tasks.
Reliability, failure modes, and subgroup fairness in fingerprint verification with multimodal models.
02 / Papers
Two arXiv preprints. Each entry has a one-line takeaway, the headline numbers, the abstract, my role, and a BibTeX entry.
Prompting decides whether a multimodal model collapses on fingerprint verification; the model decides how well it can discriminate once the prompt lets it.
Four-finger SLAP images are the standard biometric capture format at US border entry points, yet no benchmark existed to test whether multimodal large language models can reason about them. SLAPBench builds 7,832 exhaustive pairs from NIST SD302b (176 mated, 7,656 non-mated) and evaluates InternVL3-8B, Qwen2.5-VL-7B, Qwen3-VL-8B, Gemma-3-12B, and Claude Opus 4.8 under zero-shot, task-description, and similarity-scoring prompts. Task-description prompting collapses every open-source model to near-total false acceptance; similarity scoring removes the collapse and exposes large differences in discrimination between models. The paper adds matched-resolution and demographic fairness probes over gender, race, and age, and treats a perfect AUC from one model as a diagnostic result because the dataset cannot rule out near-duplicate detection for mated pairs.
My role. First author. Designed the benchmark and protocol, ran all experiments, wrote the paper, and released the code and data.
@misc{pyakurel2026slapbench,
title = {SLAPBench: Benchmarking Multimodal Large Language Models for Four-Finger SLAP Fingerprint Verification},
author = {Pyakurel, Bibesh and Murshed, M. G. Sarwar},
year = {2026},
eprint = {2607.15517},
archivePrefix = {arXiv},
primaryClass = {cs.CV},
doi = {10.48550/arXiv.2607.15517},
url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.15517}
}Mask R-CNN with a ResNet-101 FPN backbone segments field-collected pavement distress well enough to recover crack area to within 0.006 points of ground truth.
The paper presents a Mask R-CNN instance-segmentation system for pixel-level pavement distress assessment, evaluated on the custom UWGB-StreetCrack dataset of field-collected images covering longitudinal, transverse, and alligator cracks plus potholes. Among the backbones compared, ResNet-101 FPN performed best with 84.23% precision, 90.04% recall, and 87.04% F1 under the paper's bounding-box matching protocol. Aggregate predicted crack-area fraction was 2.164% against 2.170% ground truth. A CSPDarknet53-based YOLO comparison reached 27.5% precision and 20.7% recall on the same data.
My role. Second author. Trained and compared the backbone variants, curated and annotated the dataset, and contributed to the write-up.
@misc{dewick2026pavement,
title = {Pixel-Level Pavement Distress Assessment Using Instance Segmentation},
author = {Dewick, Logan and Pyakurel, Bibesh and Yang, Kong Pheng and Choudhury, Nazim and Murshed, M. G. Sarwar},
year = {2026},
eprint = {2605.26095},
archivePrefix = {arXiv},
primaryClass = {cs.CV},
doi = {10.48550/arXiv.2605.26095},
url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.26095}
}03 / Research experience
University of Wisconsin–Green Bay, Dept. of Computer Science · Advisor: Prof. Md Golam Sarwar Murshed
WiSys Technology Foundation · Advisor: Prof. Md Golam Sarwar Murshed
University of Wisconsin–Green Bay · Advisor: Prof. Md Golam Sarwar Murshed
04 / Teaching
05 / Tools
Coursework: Artificial Intelligence · Linear Algebra and Matrix Theory · Introductory Statistics · Data Structures · Discrete Mathematics · Database Design & Management · Cloud Computing · Computer Architecture · Advanced Software Design · Theory of Programming Languages
06 / Connect
If you work on computer vision, multimodal evaluation, or benchmarking methodology and want to talk, email is the fastest way to reach me.
· GitHub · United States