MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166704954 · doi:10.1109/nafips.2006.365494

A Neuro-fuzzy Approach to Machine Vision Based Parts Inspection

2006· article· en· W2166704954 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jonathan Killing, Brian Surgenor, Chris K. Mechefske

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Centres of ExcellenceConcordia UniversityUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsMachine visionComputer scienceAutomotive industryArtificial intelligenceProcess (computing)CLIPSFuzzy logicTruckComputer visionNeuro-fuzzyMachine learningFuzzy control systemEngineeringAutomotive engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper documents progress on a project whose objective is to improve the performance of a machine vision based parts inspection system through the development and testing of robust neuro-fuzzy based algorithms. An inspection problem faced by a Canadian automotive parts manufacturer is being used as a case study. The problem involves a vision system that is being used to confirm the placement of metal fastening clips on a structural member that supports a truck dash panel. It took the manufacturer over 8 months to tune their commercial machine vision system to detect missing clips. It is hypothesized that a neuro-fuzzy based approach could provide for faster tuning of their vision system. Preliminary results show strong performance of the neuro-fuzzy system and a new algorithm is being developed on this basis to automatically learn the inspection process from a series of training images

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207