MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084483561 · doi:10.1021/acscentsci.0c00460

Computer Vision for Recognition of Materials and Vessels in Chemistry Lab Settings and the Vector-LabPics Data Set

2020· article· en· W3084483561 on OpenAlexaff
Sagi Eppel, Haoping Xu, Mor Bismuth, Alán Aspuru‐Guzik

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Central Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMineral Processing and Grinding
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchVector InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersDefense Advanced Research Projects Agency
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Convolutional neural networkTask (project management)Data setSegmentationSupport vector machinePattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningComputer visionEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents a machine learning approach for the computer vision-based recognition of materials inside vessels in the chemistry lab and other settings. In addition, we release a data set associated with the training of the model for further model development. The task to learn is finding the region, boundaries, and category for each material phase and vessel in an image. Handling materials inside mostly transparent containers is the main activity performed by human and robotic chemists in the laboratory. Visual recognition of vessels and their contents is essential for performing this task. Modern machine-vision methods learn recognition tasks by using data sets containing a large number of annotated images. This work presents the Vector-LabPics data set, which consists of 2187 images of materials within mostly transparent vessels in a chemistry lab and other general settings. The images are annotated for both the vessels and the individual material phases inside them, and each instance is assigned one or more classes (liquid, solid, foam, suspension, powder, ...). The fill level, labels, corks, and parts of the vessel are also annotated. Several convolutional nets for semantic and instance segmentation were trained on this data set. The trained neural networks achieved good accuracy in detecting and segmenting vessels and material phases, and in classifying liquids and solids, but relatively low accuracy in segmenting multiphase systems such as phase-separating liquids.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.007

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations68
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Central ScienceSame topicMineral Processing and GrindingFrench-language works237,207