Rapid Debris-Volume Estimation from Post-Hurricane Aerial Imagery
Authors: Kooshan Amini, Jamie Ellen Padgett, Guha Balakrishnan
Organizations: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Rice University, Houston, TX, USA. · Ken Kennedy Institute, Rice University, Houston, TX, USA. · Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Rice University, Houston, TX, USA.
Hurricane debris removal is planned, contracted, and federally reimbursed on the basis of volume estimates, yet operational practice still relies on parametric forecasts with 41-90% documented over-estimation or on truck-load tallies that arrive only after hauling begins. We present DebrisHeightNet, a segmentation-conditioned monocular debris-height network that estimates spatially explicit debris volume from a single pass of post-event aerial RGB imagery, the kind of survey routinely flown within days of a hurricane landfall. We train only a lightweight 1.08 M-parameter head on top of two frozen vision foundation models. This head regresses height from a Depth Anything V2 backbone, conditioned on the debris segmentation of CLIPSeg-debris from our prior work. Because no post-hurricane debris-height ground truth exists, we synthesize the training target by confidence-weighted LiDAR-monocular fusion (CW-LMF), designed to suppress non-debris LiDAR returns. This fused target is a constructed supervision signal rather than ground truth, so we corroborate it against external references rather than claiming it as truth. A region-level power-law calibration, driven by each region's low-density debris fraction, converts model volume into an estimate of the reported hauled debris with quantified uncertainty. Across ten regions spanning five hurricanes and three states, the uncalibrated model agrees with an independent uncrewed-aerial-vehicle (UAV) survey of the training region at Spearman ρ=0.87 and lands within 30% of the reported record where the Hazus and FEMA-hybrid parametric forecasts over-predict it by 2.7-4.8×. Deployment requires no LiDAR, no ground access, and no second flight, so the method can produce spatially explicit volume estimates wherever single-pass post-event imagery is flown.
Figures & tables
Setting
Value
Optimization
Optimizer
AdamW (weight decay 0.005)
Learning-rate schedule
OneCycleLR, max LR 7×10−5
Batch size
48
Epochs
2000
Mixed precision
enabled (AMP)
TABLE I: Training configuration of DebrisHeightNet.
Region
Area (km 2 )
N grids (ROI / debris)
DHN (m 3 )
Reported (median, m 3 )
Rep./DHN
Hurricane Ian – Lee County, FL (2022)
Pine Island
80.80
32,320 / 5,603
227,931
442,576
1.94
Estero Island ∗
7.95
3,178 / 2,154
239,343
187,868
0.78
San Carlos Is.
1.74
697 / 427
60,919
100,122
1.64
Captiva Island
8.52
3,406 / 299
5,951
52,186
8.77
Iona Nbhd.
39.55
15,821 / 4,941
218,090
342,667
1.57
TABLE II: Ten-region comparison of uncalibrated DebrisHeightNet (DHN) volume with per-region reported hauled-debris records. Reported: median of the region’s reconciled estimates (sources in Supplementary Table S2 ). Rep./DHN: reported-to-model multiplier. N grids: full-ROI / debris-bearing cells. Volumes in m 3 .
Fig. 8: UAV cross-check at Estero Island. (a) Per-cell DHN versus drone-SfM volume on reference-valid cells ( n=1,740 ; log–log). (b) Aggregate volume on the common footprint for the drone reference, DHN, raw post-event LiDAR, and the CW-LMF fused target, by debris class, with the acquisition timeline (landfall Sep 28; NOAA imagery Sep 30; LiDAR Oct 11–20, 99% of returns on Oct 11–13; drone survey Oct 20–23).
Region
NOAA ERI flight
Post-event LiDAR
LiDAR
Pre-event DEM
Target
Cov.
(days post)
(NOAA DC ID; lag)
CRS
(ID, year, res.)
CRS
%
Hurricane Ian (2022) – Florida a
Pine Island
20220930d (2 d)
USACE; DC 9651 (11–24 d)
6346
USGS FL SW (9049, 2018, 1 m)
26917
0.0
Estero Island
20220930d (2 d)
USACE; DC 9651 (11–24 d)
6346
USGS FL SW (9049, 2018, 1 m)
26917
100.0
San Carlos Is.
20220930d (2 d)
USACE; DC 9651 (11–24 d)
6346
USGS FL SW (9049, 2018, 1 m)
26917
99.8
Captiva Island
20220930a (2 d)
USACE; DC 9651 (11–24 d)
6346
USGS FL SW (9049, 2018, 1 m)
26917
100.0
TABLE S1: Region and data provenance: NOAA Emergency Response Imagery (ERI) flight, post-event LiDAR campaign, pre-event DEM, coordinate reference systems (CRS; EPSG codes), and realized fused-LiDAR coverage of the debris cells.
Region
Reported
Source span
n
Scope
Veg.
Source category
Citation
(median, m 3 )
(m 3 )
%
(primary record)
Hurricane Ian (2022)
Pine Island
442,576
349,962–535,189
2
roi
58.1
Lee Co. public records (per-truck)
Lee Cty. records
Estero Island a
187,868
75,995–4,408,553
3
roi
3.5
Lee Co. public records (per-truck)
Lee Cty. records
San Carlos Is.
100,122
—
1
roi
0.7
Lee Co. public records (per-truck)
Lee Cty. records
Captiva Island
52,186
—
1
roi
69.0
Lee Co. public records (per-truck)
Lee Cty. records
TABLE S2: Reported-debris reference sources. Reported (median): the per-region value used in Table II . Source span: min–max across all catalogued sources. n : number of reconciled estimates. Scope, Veg. %, source category, and citation describe each region’s primary record.
When a large disaster strikes, responders need a map of which buildings are damaged within hours. The models that do well on public benchmarks assume matched before-and-after imagery and a training set drawn from similar past events, and neither is usually available for a new disaster in its first day. We present HASTE (High-speed Assessment and Satellite Tracking for Emergencies), a no-code web platform that lets analysts who are not machine learning engineers produce per-building damage maps from post-disaster satellite imagery. HASTE implements two methods that share one interface. The first requires the user to label polygons over the post-disaster scene, trains a small semantic segmentation model on that single scene, runs it over the whole image, and joins the per-pixel output to existing building footprints. The second embeds every footprint with a pretrained vision model, requires the user to label a handful of buildings, and fits a logistic regression in the browser that scores the rest of the scene in seconds. We describe the platform, both methods, and the engineering that supports them. We also report preliminary experiments on xBD showing that foundation-model embeddings pooled over footprints separate damaged from intact buildings using post-disaster imagery alone, matching a fully supervised ResNet-50 baseline with a twentieth of its labels. HASTE and its predecessors have supported more than thirty real-world disaster responses since 2023, spanning earthquakes, hurricanes, cyclones, floods, wildfires, and tornadoes, delivering results to humanitarian partners within hours to days of imagery becoming available. We close with the directions we think are most promising, including vision-language assessment, active learning, and damage models for roads and other infrastructure. HASTE is open source at https://github.com/microsoft/haste.
Caleb Robinson, Anthony Ortiz, Simone Fobi Nsutezo +8
Accurate quantification of the physical exposure area of beach litter, rather than simple item counts, is essential for credible ecological risk assessment of marine debris. However, automated UAV-based monitoring predominantly relies on bounding-box detection, which systematically overestimates the planar area of irregular litter objects. To address this geometric limitation, we develop PLAS-Net (Pixel-level Litter Area Segmentor), an instance segmentation framework that extracts pixel-accurate physical footprints of coastal debris. Evaluated on UAV imagery from a monsoon-driven pocket beach in Koh Tao, Thailand, PLAS-Net achieves a mAP_50 of 58.7% with higher precision than eleven baseline models, demonstrating improved mask fidelity under complex coastal conditions. To illustrate how the accuracy of the masking affects the conclusions of environmental analysis, we conducted three downstream demonstrations: (i) power-law fitting of normalized plastic density (NPD) to characterize fragmentation dynamics; (ii) area-weighted ecological risk index (ERI) to map spatial pollution hotspots; and (iii) source composition analysis revealing the abundance-area paradox: fishing gear constitutes a small proportion of the total number of items, but has the largest physical area per unit item. Pixel-level area extraction can provide more valuable information for coastal monitoring compared to methods based solely on counting.
Yongying Liu, Jiaqi Wang, Jian Song +6
Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Japan · Department of Urban Informatics, Shenzhen University, China
Validation of flood models, used to support risk mitigation strategies, remains challenging due to limited observations during extreme events. High-frequency, high-resolution optical imagery (~3 m), such as PlanetScope, offers new opportunities for flood mapping, although applications remain limited by cloud cover and the lack of labeled training data during disasters. To address this, we develop a flood mapping framework that integrates PlanetScope optical imagery with topographic features using machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) algorithms. A Random Forest model was applied to expert-annotated flood masks to generate training labels for DL models, U-Net. Two U-Net models with ResNet18 backbone were trained using optical imagery only (4 bands) and optical imagery combined with Height Above Nearest Drainage (HAND) and topographic slope (6 bands). Hurricane Ida (September 2021), which caused catastrophic flooding across the eastern United States, including the New York City metropolitan area, was used as an example to evaluate the framework. Results demonstrate that the U-Net model with topographic features achieved very close performance to the optical-only configuration (F1=0.92 and IoU=0.85 by both modeling scenarios), indicating that HAND and slope provide only marginal value to inundation extent detection. The proposed framework offers a scalable and label-efficient approach for mapping inundation extent that enables modeling under data-scarce flood scenarios.
Azizbek Nuriddinov, Ebrahim Ahmadisharaf, Mohammad Reza Alizadeh
Department of Civil Engineering, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA · Dept. of Biosystems & Agricultural Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA