PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 30, 2026Sensors1 citationsOpen Access

Ground Penetrating Radar for Subsurface Utility Detection: Methods, Challenges, and Future Directions

View Full Paper
SGSijie GaoDHDa Hu

Key Points

  • The review aims to highlight the challenges of detecting subsurface utilities with GPR and propose future strategies for improvement.
  • Performed bibliometric analysis on GPR application trends in urban utility mapping.
  • Identified challenges including event–utility mismatch and synthetic–field domain gap.
  • Proposed solutions such as multi-sensor fusion and hybrid datasets for enhanced detection accuracy.
  • Identified that most current GPR methods are limited to event-level detection, impacting utility mapping accuracy.
  • Highlighted the need for new models that account for soil variability and acquisition differences.
  • Recommended a shift towards utility-level inference to improve the reliability of GPR outputs.

Abstract

Ground-penetrating radar (GPR) has applications across many domains, including archaeology, mining, and infrastructure inspection. This review is specifically focused on urban subsurface utility mapping, where accurate detection of buried pipelines, cables, and conduits is critical for excavation safety and infrastructure management. Within this scope, two major barriers are identified: event–utility mismatch and the synthetic–field domain gap. Bibliometric analysis shows increasing reliance on deep learning, yet most methods remain limited to event-level hyperbola detection rather than utility-level inference. In real urban environments, radar responses are often affected by orientation-dependent signatures, clutter, overlapping reflections, and non-utility anomalies, making detected events difficult to map directly to physical infrastructure. In parallel, models trained on synthetic data frequently show limited field generalization because simulated radargrams do not fully reproduce soil heterogeneity, acquisition variability, and system artifacts. The review argues that future progress in urban utility mapping requires a shift toward utility-level reasoning supported by multi-sensor fusion, physics-guided learning, hybrid simulation–field datasets, and uncertainty-aware interpretation. Such advances are essential for making GPR outputs more reliable and actionable in urban engineering practice.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Gao et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69f2f2221e5f7920c63879aahttps://doi.org/10.3390/s26092708
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Underground utility inspection using ground penetrating radar2024 · 1 citations
  2. 2Subsurface utility detection using ground penetrating radar and electromagnetic locator – a comparative study2024 · 2 citations
  3. 3Multicriteria Statistical Optimization of GPR Survey and Processing for Underground Utility Mapping: Case Study of the Leica DS2000 System2026
  4. 4Automatic classification of underground utilities in Urban Areas: A novel method combining ground penetrating radar and image processing2024 · 4 citations
  5. 5Suitability of Ground-Penetrating Radar in Texas: Best Practices and Lessons Learned2025