A Deep Learning Model for Striae Identification in End Images of Float Glass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For float glass, there is a correlation between the striae in end image and the manufacturing process. If clearly understood, the correlation helps to optimize and fine-tune the manufacturing process of float glass. This paper attempts to extract the striae from the end image of float glass with deep learning (DL) neural network (NN). For this purpose, an image segmentation model was established based on improved U-Net, a fully convolutional network (FCN), and used to accurately divide the glass liquid on the end image into different layers. Firstly, the improved U-Net model was constructed to extract the striae from each liquid layer on the end image. Next, the activation function and convolutional mode of the improved U-Net model were optimized to enhance the segmentation accuracy and shorten the training/prediction time. Finally, the proposed model was tested on the float glass production line of Hebei CSG Glass Co., Ltd. The test results show that our model achieved an accuracy of 94%. The research findings lay a solid basis for striae identification on end image of float glass, and provide guidance for optimization and fine-tuning of float glass manufacturing process.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".