AnoNet: Weakly Supervised Anomaly Detection in Textured Surfaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Humans can easily detect a defect (anomaly) because it is different or salient when compared to the surface it resides on. Today, manual human visual inspection is still the norm because it is difficult to automate anomaly detection. Neural networks are a useful tool that can teach a machine to find defects. However, they require a lot of training examples to learn what a defect is and it is tedious and expensive to get these samples. We tackle the problem of teaching a network with a low number of training samples with a system we call AnoNet. AnoNet's architecture is similar to CompactCNN with the exceptions that (1) it is a fully convolutional network and does not use strided convolution; (2) it is shallow and compact which minimizes over-fitting by design; (3) the compact design constrains the size of intermediate features which allows training to be done without image downsizing; (4) the model footprint is low making it suitable for edge computation; and (5) the anomaly can be detected and localized despite the weak labelling. AnoNet learns to detect the underlying shape of the anomalies despite the weak annotation as well as preserves the spatial localization of the anomaly. Pre-seeding AnoNet with an engineered filter bank initialization technique reduces the total samples required for training and also achieves state-of-the-art performance. Compared to the CompactCNN, AnoNet achieved a massive 94% reduction of network parameters from 1.13 million to 64 thousand parameters. Experiments were conducted on four data-sets and results were compared against CompactCNN and DeepLabv3. AnoNet improved the performance on an average across all data-sets by 106% to an F1 score of 0.98 and by 13% to an AUROC value of 0.942. AnoNet can learn from a limited number of images. For one of the data-sets, AnoNet learnt to detect anomalies after a single pass through just 53 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".